| 1. |
- Huijben, Jilske A., et al.
(författare)
-
Development of a quality indicator set to measure and improve quality of ICU care for patients with traumatic brain injury
- 2019
-
Ingår i: Critical Care. - : BioMed Central. - 1364-8535 .- 1466-609X. ; 23
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: We aimed to develop a set of quality indicators for patients with traumatic brain injury (TBI) in intensive care units (ICUs) across Europe and to explore barriers and facilitators for implementation of these quality indicators.Methods: A preliminary list of 66 quality indicators was developed, based on current guidelines, existing practice variation, and clinical expertise in TBI management at the ICU. Eight TBI experts of the Advisory Committee preselected the quality indicators during a first Delphi round. A larger Europe-wide expert panel was recruited for the next two Delphi rounds. Quality indicator definitions were evaluated on four criteria: validity (better performance on the indicator reflects better processes of care and leads to better patient outcome), feasibility (data are available or easy to obtain), discriminability (variability in clinical practice), and actionability (professionals can act based on the indicator). Experts scored indicators on a 5-point Likert scale delivered by an electronic survey tool.Results. The expert panel consisted of 50 experts from 18 countries across Europe, mostly intensivists (N=24, 48%) and neurosurgeons (N=7, 14%). Experts agreed on a final set of 42 indicators to assess quality of ICU care: 17 structure indicators, 16 process indicators, and 9 outcome indicators. Experts are motivated to implement this finally proposed set (N=49, 98%) and indicated routine measurement in registries (N=41, 82%), benchmarking (N=42, 84%), and quality improvement programs (N=41, 82%) as future steps. Administrative burden was indicated as the most important barrier for implementation of the indicator set (N=48, 98%).Conclusions: This Delphi consensus study gives insight in which quality indicators have the potential to improve quality of TBI care at European ICUs. The proposed quality indicator set is recommended to be used across Europe for registry purposes to gain insight in current ICU practices and outcomes of patients with TBI. This indicator set may become an important tool to support benchmarking and quality improvement programs for patients with TBI in the future.
|
|
| 2. |
- De Hert, Stefan, et al.
(författare)
-
Pre-operative evaluation of adults undergoing elective noncardiac surgery Updated guideline from the European Society of Anaesthesiology
- 2018
-
Ingår i: European Journal of Anaesthesiology. - : LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS. - 0265-0215 .- 1365-2346. ; 35:6, s. 407-465
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- The purpose of this update of the European Society of Anaesthesiology (ESA) guidelines on the pre-operative evaluation of the adult undergoing noncardiac surgery is to present recommendations based on the available relevant clinical evidence. Well performed randomised studies on the topic are limited and therefore many recommendations rely to a large extent on expert opinion and may need to be adapted specifically to the healthcare systems of individual countries. This article aims to provide an overview of current knowledge on the subject with an assessment of the quality of the evidence in order to allow anaesthesiologists all over Europe to integrate - wherever possible - this knowledge into daily patient care. The Guidelines Committee of the ESA formed a task force comprising members of the previous task force, members of ESA scientific subcommittees and an open call for volunteers was made to all individual active members of the ESA and national societies. Electronic databases were searched from July 2010 (end of the literature search of the previous ESA guidelines on pre-operative evaluation) to May 2016 without language restrictions. A total of 34066 abtracts were screened from which 2536 were included for further analysis. Relevant systematic reviews with meta-analyses, randomised controlled trials, cohort studies, case-control studies and cross-sectional surveys were selected. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system was used to assess the level of evidence and to grade recommendations. The final draft guideline was posted on the ESA website for 4 weeks and the link was sent to all ESA members, individual or national (thus including most European national anaesthesia societies). Comments were collated and the guidelines amended as appropriate. When the final draft was complete, the Guidelines Committee and ESA Board ratified the guidelines.
|
|
| 3. |
|
|
| 4. |
- Trabert, Britton, et al.
(författare)
-
Antibodies Against Chlamydia trachomatis and Ovarian Cancer Risk in Two Independent Populations
- 2019
-
Ingår i: Journal of the National Cancer Institute. - : Oxford University Press. - 0027-8874 .- 1460-2105. ; 111:2, s. 129-136
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: Pelvic inflammatory disease (PID) has been associated with ovarian cancer risk. To clarify the role of Chlamydia trachomatis and other infectious agents in the development of ovarian cancer, we evaluated the association of serologic markers with incident ovarian cancer using a staged approach in two independent populations.Methods: Studies included: 1) a case-control study in Poland (244 ovarian cancers/556 control subjects) and 2) a prospective nested case-control study in the PLCO Cancer Screening Trial (160 ovarian cancers/159 control subjects). Associations of serologic marker levels with ovarian cancer risk at diagnostic as well as higher thresholds, identified in Poland and independently evaluated in PLCO, were estimated using multivariable adjusted logistic regression.Results: In the Polish study, antibodies (based on laboratory cut-point) against the chlamydia plasmid-encoded Pgp3 protein (serological gold standard) were associated with increased ovarian cancer risk (adjusted odds ratio [OR] = 1.63, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.20 to 2.22); when a positive result was redefined at higher levels, ovarian cancer risk was increased (cut-point 2: OR = 2.00, 95% CI = 1.38 to 2.89; cut-point 3 [max OR]: OR = 2.19, 95% CI = 1.29 to 3.73). In the prospective PLCO study, Pgp3 antibodies were associated with elevated risk at the laboratory cut-point (OR = 1.43, 95% CI = 0.78 to 2.63) and more stringent cut-points (cut-point 2: OR = 2.25, 95% CI = 1.07 to 4.71); cut-point 3: OR = 2.53, 95% CI = 0.63 to 10.08). In both studies, antibodies against other infectious agents measured were not associated with risk.Conclusions: In two independent populations, antibodies against prior/current C. trachomatis (Pgp3) were associated with a doubling in ovarian cancer risk, whereas markers of other infectious agents were unrelated. These findings lend support for an association between PID and ovarian cancer.
|
|
