| 1. |
- Beyer, J., et al.
(författare)
-
Maintaining success, reducing treatment burden, focusing on survivorship: highlights from the third European consensus conference on diagnosis and treatment of germ-cell cancer
- 2013
-
Ingår i: Annals of Oncology. - : Elsevier BV. - 1569-8041 .- 0923-7534. ; 24:4, s. 878-888
-
Forskningsöversikt (refereegranskat)abstract
- In November 2011, the Third European Consensus Conference on Diagnosis and Treatment of Germ-Cell Cancer (GCC) was held in Berlin, Germany. This third conference followed similar meetings in 2003 (Essen, Germany) and 2006 (Amsterdam, The Netherlands) [Schmoll H-J, Souchon R, Krege S et al. European consensus on diagnosis and treatment of germ-cell cancer: a report of the European Germ-Cell Cancer Consensus Group (EGCCCG). Ann Oncol 2004; 15: 1377-1399; Krege S, Beyer J, Souchon R et al. European consensus conference on diagnosis and treatment of germ-cell cancer: a report of the second meeting of the European Germ-Cell Cancer Consensus group (EGCCCG): part I. Eur Urol 2008; 53: 478-496; Krege S, Beyer J, Souchon R et al. European consensus conference on diagnosis and treatment of germ-cell cancer: a report of the second meeting of the European Germ-Cell Cancer Consensus group (EGCCCG): part II. Eur Urol 2008; 53: 497-513]. A panel of 56 of 60 invited GCC experts from all across Europe discussed all aspects on diagnosis and treatment of GCC, with a particular focus on acute and late toxic effects as well as on survivorship issues. The panel consisted of oncologists, urologic surgeons, radiooncologists, pathologists and basic scientists, who are all actively involved in care of GCC patients. Panelists were chosen based on the publication activity in recent years. Before the meeting, panelists were asked to review the literature published since 2006 in 20 major areas concerning all aspects of diagnosis, treatment and follow-up of GCC patients, and to prepare an updated version of the previous recommendations to be discussed at the conference. In addition, similar to 50 E-vote questions were drafted and presented at the conference to address the most controversial areas for a poll of expert opinions. Here, we present the main recommendations and controversies of this meeting. The votes of the panelists are added as online supplements.
|
|
| 2. |
|
|
| 3. |
|
|
| 4. |
|
|
| 5. |
- Binotti, M, et al.
(författare)
-
Heart rate assessment using NeoTapAdvancedSupport: a simulation study
- 2019
-
Ingår i: Archives of disease in childhood. Fetal and neonatal edition. - : BMJ. - 1468-2052 .- 1359-2998. ; 104:4, s. F440-F442
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- NeoTapAdvancedSupport (NeoTapAS) is a mobile application, based on a screen tapping method that calculates the heart rate (HR). We aimed to evaluate the accuracy of NeoTapAS in reliably determining HR from auscultation in a high-fidelity simulated newborn resuscitation scenario.MethodsPaediatric residents assessed HR by auscultation plus NeoTapAS in an asphyxiated term infant scenario and orally communicated the estimated HR. An external observer simultaneously documented the actual HR set in the manikin and the communicated HR.ResultsOne hundred and sixty HR measurements were recorded. The agreement between communicated and set HR was good (Cohen’s kappa 0.80, 95% CI 0.72 to 0.87; Bangdiwala’s weighted agreement strength statistic 0.93). Bland-Altman plot showed a mean difference between communicated and set HR values of 1 beats per minute (bpm) (95% agreement limits −9 to 11 bpm).ConclusionNeoTapAS showed a good accuracy in estimating HR and it could be an important resource in settings with limited availability of ECG monitor.
|
|
| 6. |
|
|
| 7. |
- Hook, SM, et al.
(författare)
-
Smartphone app for neonatal heart rate assessment: an observational study
- 2020
-
Ingår i: BMJ paediatrics open. - : BMJ. - 2399-9772. ; 4:1, s. e000688-
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Heart rate (HR) assessment is crucial in neonatal resuscitation, but pulse oximetry (PO) and electrocardiography (ECG) are rarely accessible in low-resource to middle-resource settings. This study evaluated a free-of-charge smartphone application, NeoTap, which records HR with a screen-tapping method bypassing mental arithmetic calculations.MethodsThis observational study was carried out during three time periods between May 2015 and January 2019 in Uganda in three phases. In phase 1, a metronome rate (n=180) was recorded by low-end users (midwives) using NeoTap. In phase 2, HR (n=69) in breathing neonates was recorded by high-end users (paediatricians) using NeoTap versus PO. In phase 3, HR (n=235) in non-breathing neonates was recorded by low-end users using NeoTap versus ECG.ResultsIn high-end users the mean difference was 3 beats per minute (bpm) higher with NeoTap versus PO (95% agreement limits −14 to 19 bpm), with acquisition time of 5 seconds. In low-end users, the mean difference was 6 bpm lower with NeoTap versus metronome (95% agreement limits −26 to 14 bpm) and 3 bpm higher with NeoTap versus ECG in non-breathing neonates (95% agreement limits −48 to 53 bpm), with acquisition time of 2.7 seconds. The agreement between NeoTap and ECG was good in the HR categories of 60–99 bpm and ≥100 bpm; HR <60 bpm had few measurements (kappa index 0.71, 95% CI 0.63 to 0.79).ConclusionHR could be accurately and rapidly assessed using a smartphone application in breathing neonates in a low-resource setting. Clinical assessment by low-end users was less accurate with wider CI but still adds clinically important information in non-breathing neonates. The authors suggest low-end users may benefit from auscultation-focused training. More research is needed to evaluate its feasibility in clinical use.
|
|
| 8. |
|
|
| 9. |
|
|
| 10. |
|
|
