| 1. |
- Forouzanfar, Mohammad H, et al.
(författare)
-
Global, regional, and national comparative risk assessment of 79 behavioural, environmental and occupational, and metabolic risks or clusters of risks in 188 countries, 1990-2013 : a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2013.
- 2015
-
Ingår i: The Lancet. - 0140-6736 .- 1474-547X. ; 386:10010, s. 2287-2323
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- BACKGROUND: The Global Burden of Disease, Injuries, and Risk Factor study 2013 (GBD 2013) is the first of a series of annual updates of the GBD. Risk factor quantification, particularly of modifiable risk factors, can help to identify emerging threats to population health and opportunities for prevention. The GBD 2013 provides a timely opportunity to update the comparative risk assessment with new data for exposure, relative risks, and evidence on the appropriate counterfactual risk distribution.METHODS: Attributable deaths, years of life lost, years lived with disability, and disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs) have been estimated for 79 risks or clusters of risks using the GBD 2010 methods. Risk-outcome pairs meeting explicit evidence criteria were assessed for 188 countries for the period 1990-2013 by age and sex using three inputs: risk exposure, relative risks, and the theoretical minimum risk exposure level (TMREL). Risks are organised into a hierarchy with blocks of behavioural, environmental and occupational, and metabolic risks at the first level of the hierarchy. The next level in the hierarchy includes nine clusters of related risks and two individual risks, with more detail provided at levels 3 and 4 of the hierarchy. Compared with GBD 2010, six new risk factors have been added: handwashing practices, occupational exposure to trichloroethylene, childhood wasting, childhood stunting, unsafe sex, and low glomerular filtration rate. For most risks, data for exposure were synthesised with a Bayesian meta-regression method, DisMod-MR 2.0, or spatial-temporal Gaussian process regression. Relative risks were based on meta-regressions of published cohort and intervention studies. Attributable burden for clusters of risks and all risks combined took into account evidence on the mediation of some risks such as high body-mass index (BMI) through other risks such as high systolic blood pressure and high cholesterol.FINDINGS: All risks combined account for 57·2% (95% uncertainty interval [UI] 55·8-58·5) of deaths and 41·6% (40·1-43·0) of DALYs. Risks quantified account for 87·9% (86·5-89·3) of cardiovascular disease DALYs, ranging to a low of 0% for neonatal disorders and neglected tropical diseases and malaria. In terms of global DALYs in 2013, six risks or clusters of risks each caused more than 5% of DALYs: dietary risks accounting for 11·3 million deaths and 241·4 million DALYs, high systolic blood pressure for 10·4 million deaths and 208·1 million DALYs, child and maternal malnutrition for 1·7 million deaths and 176·9 million DALYs, tobacco smoke for 6·1 million deaths and 143·5 million DALYs, air pollution for 5·5 million deaths and 141·5 million DALYs, and high BMI for 4·4 million deaths and 134·0 million DALYs. Risk factor patterns vary across regions and countries and with time. In sub-Saharan Africa, the leading risk factors are child and maternal malnutrition, unsafe sex, and unsafe water, sanitation, and handwashing. In women, in nearly all countries in the Americas, north Africa, and the Middle East, and in many other high-income countries, high BMI is the leading risk factor, with high systolic blood pressure as the leading risk in most of Central and Eastern Europe and south and east Asia. For men, high systolic blood pressure or tobacco use are the leading risks in nearly all high-income countries, in north Africa and the Middle East, Europe, and Asia. For men and women, unsafe sex is the leading risk in a corridor from Kenya to South Africa.INTERPRETATION: Behavioural, environmental and occupational, and metabolic risks can explain half of global mortality and more than one-third of global DALYs providing many opportunities for prevention. Of the larger risks, the attributable burden of high BMI has increased in the past 23 years. In view of the prominence of behavioural risk factors, behavioural and social science research on interventions for these risks should be strengthened. Many prevention and primary care policy options are available now to act on key risks.FUNDING: Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.
|
|
| 2. |
- Kirkegård, J., et al.
(författare)
-
Intra-observer agreements in multidisciplinary team assessments of pancreatic cancer patients
- 2021
-
Ingår i: Journal of Surgical Oncology. - : Wiley. - 0022-4790 .- 1096-9098. ; 124:8, s. 1402-1408
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background and Methods: Treatment strategies for pancreatic cancer patients are made by a multidisciplinary team (MDT) board. We aimed to assess intra-observer variance at MDT boards. Participating units staged, assessed resectability, and made treatment allocations for the same patients as they did two years earlier. We disseminated clinical information and CT images of pancreatic cancer patients judged by one MDT board to have nonmetastatic pancreatic cancer to the participating units. All units were asked to re-assess the TNM stage, resectability, and treatment allocation for each patient. To assess intra-observer variance, we computed %-agreements for each participating unit, defined as low (<50%), moderate (50%–75%), and high (>75%) agreement. Results: Eighteen patients were re-assessed by six MDT boards. The overall agreement was moderate for TNM-stage (ranging from 50%–70%) and resectability assessment (53%) but low for treatment allocation (46%). Agreement on resectability assessments was low to moderate. Findings were similar but more pronounced for treatment allocation. We observed a shift in treatment strategy towards increasing use of neoadjuvant chemotherapy, particularly in patients with borderline resectable and locally advanced tumors. Conclusions: We found substantial intra-observer agreement variations across six different MDT boards of 18 pancreatic cancer patients with two years between the first and second assessment. © 2021 Wiley Periodicals LLC
|
|
| 3. |
- Holmer, H., et al.
(författare)
-
Evaluating the collection, comparability and findings of six global surgery indicators
- 2019
-
Ingår i: British Journal of Surgery. - : Oxford University Press (OUP). - 0007-1323 .- 1365-2168. ; 106:2, s. 138-150
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: In 2015, six indicators were proposed to evaluate global progress towards access to safe, affordable and timely surgical and anaesthesia care. Although some have been adopted as core global health indicators, none has been evaluated systematically. The aims of this study were to assess the availability, comparability and utility of the indicators, and to present available data and updated estimates. Methods: Nationally representative data were compiled for all WHO member states from 2010 to 2016 through contacts with official bodies and review of the published and grey literature, and available databases. Availability, comparability and utility were assessed for each indicator: access to timely essential surgery, specialist surgical workforce density, surgical volume, perioperative mortality, and protection against impoverishing and catastrophic expenditure. Where feasible, imputation models were developed to generate global estimates. Results: Of all WHO member states, 19 had data on the proportion of the population within 2h of a surgical facility, 154 had data on workforce density, 72 reported number of procedures, and nine had perioperative mortality data, but none could report data on catastrophic or impoverishing expenditure. Comparability and utility were variable, and largely dependent on different definitions used. There were sufficient data to estimate that worldwide, in 2015, there were 2 038 947 (i.q.r. 1 884 916–2 281 776) surgeons, obstetricians and anaesthetists, and 266·1 (95 per cent c.i. 220·1 to 344·4) million operations performed. Conclusion: Surgical and anaesthesia indicators are increasingly being adopted by the global health community, but data availability remains low. Comparability and utility for all indicators require further resolution.
|
|
| 4. |
- Søreide, K., et al.
(författare)
-
Immediate and long-term impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on delivery of surgical services
- 2020
-
Ingår i: British Journal of Surgery. - : Oxford University Press (OUP). - 0007-1323 .- 1365-2168. ; 107:10, s. 1250-1261
-
Forskningsöversikt (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: The ongoing pandemic is having a collateral health effect on delivery of surgical care to millions of patients. Very little is known about pandemic management and effects on other services, including delivery of surgery. Methods: This was a scoping review of all available literature pertaining to COVID-19 and surgery, using electronic databases, society websites, webinars and preprint repositories. Results: Several perioperative guidelines have been issued within a short time. Many suggestions are contradictory and based on anecdotal data at best. As regions with the highest volume of operations per capita are being hit, an unprecedented number of operations are being cancelled or deferred. No major stakeholder seems to have considered how a pandemic deprives patients with a surgical condition of resources, with patients disproportionally affected owing to the nature of treatment (use of anaesthesia, operating rooms, protective equipment, physical invasion and need for perioperative care). No recommendations exist regarding how to reopen surgical delivery. The postpandemic evaluation and future planning should involve surgical services as an essential part to maintain appropriate surgical care for the population during an outbreak. Surgical delivery, owing to its cross-cutting nature and synergistic effects on health systems at large, needs to be built into the WHO agenda for national health planning. Conclusion: Patients are being deprived of surgical access, with uncertain loss of function and risk of adverse prognosis as a collateral effect of the pandemic. Surgical services need a contingency plan for maintaining surgical care in an ongoing or postpandemic phase.
|
|
| 5. |
- Yaqub, S., et al.
(författare)
-
Aspirin as secondary prevention in colorectal cancer liver metastasis (ASAC trial): study protocol for a multicentre randomized placebo-controlled trial
- 2021
-
Ingår i: Trials. - London, United Kingdom : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 1745-6215. ; 22:1
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background Colorectal cancer is one the most common cancers in the western world with increasing incidence. Approximately 50% of the patients develop liver metastases. Resection of liver metastases is the treatment of choice although almost half of the resected patients get recurrence in the liver. Methods The ASAC trial is a Scandinavian, multicentre, double-blinded, randomized, placebo-controlled study to determine whether adjuvant treatment with low-dose aspirin (acetylsalicylic acid (ASA)) can improve disease-free survival in patients treated for colorectal cancer liver metastases (CRCLM). Up to 800 patients operated for CRCLM will be randomized to Arm#1 ASA 160 mg once daily or Arm#2 Placebo, for a period of 3 years or until disease recurrence. The patients will be recruited at all major hepatobiliary surgical units in Norway, Sweden and Denmark and have follow-up according to standard of care and the National Guidelines. Discussion The ASAC trial will be the first clinical interventional trial to assess the potential beneficial role of ASA in recurrence of CRCLM and survival. ASA is an inexpensive, well-tolerated and easily accessible drug that will be highly potential as adjuvant drug in secondary prevention of CRCLM if the study shows a beneficial effect. We will also determine the effect of ASA as adjuvant treatment on Health-Related Quality of Life and the cost-effectiveness.
|
|
| 6. |
- Schjørring, O. L., et al.
(författare)
-
Intensive care doctors’ preferences for arterial oxygen tension levels in mechanically ventilated patients
- 2018
-
Ingår i: Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica. - : Wiley. - 0001-5172 .- 1399-6576. ; 62:10, s. 1443-1451
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: Oxygen is liberally administered in intensive care units (ICUs). Nevertheless, ICU doctors’ preferences for supplementing oxygen are inadequately described. The aim was to identify ICU doctors’ preferences for arterial oxygenation levels in mechanically ventilated adult ICU patients. Methods: In April to August 2016, an online multiple-choice 17-part-questionnaire was distributed to 1080 ICU doctors in seven Northern European countries. Repeated reminder e-mails were sent. The study ended in October 2016. Results: The response rate was 63%. When evaluating oxygenation 52% of respondents rated arterial oxygen tension (PaO2) the most important parameter; 24% a combination of PaO2 and arterial oxygen saturation (SaO2); and 23% preferred SaO2. Increasing, decreasing or not changing a default fraction of inspired oxygen of 0.50 showed preferences for a PaO2 around 8 kPa in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, a PaO2 around 10 kPa in patients with healthy lungs, acute respiratory distress syndrome or sepsis, and a PaO2 around 12 kPa in patients with cardiac or cerebral ischaemia. Eighty per cent would accept a PaO2 of 8 kPa or lower and 77% would accept a PaO2 of 12 kPa or higher in a clinical trial of oxygenation targets. Conclusion: Intensive care unit doctors preferred PaO2 to SaO2 in monitoring oxygen treatment when peripheral oxygen saturation was not included in the question. The identification of PaO2 as the preferred target and the thorough clarification of preferences are important when ascertaining optimal oxygenation targets. In particular when designing future clinical trials of higher vs lower oxygenation targets in ICU patients.
|
|
| 7. |
- Vermeulen, Bram D., et al.
(författare)
-
Early diagnosis is associated with improved clinical outcomes in benign esophageal perforation : an individual patient data meta-analysis
- 2021
-
Ingår i: Surgical Endoscopy. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 0930-2794 .- 1432-2218. ; 35:7, s. 3492-3505
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: Time of diagnosis (TOD) of benign esophageal perforation is regarded as an important risk factor for clinical outcome, although convincing evidence is lacking. The aim of this study is to assess whether time between onset of perforation and diagnosis is associated with clinical outcome in patients with iatrogenic esophageal perforation (IEP) and Boerhaave’s syndrome (BS). Methods: We searched MEDLINE, Embase and Cochrane library through June 2018 to identify studies. Authors were invited to share individual patient data and a meta-analysis was performed (PROSPERO: CRD42018093473). Patients were subdivided in early (≤ 24 h) and late (> 24 h) TOD and compared with mixed effects multivariable analysis while adjusting age, gender, location of perforation, initial treatment and center. Primary outcome was overall mortality. Secondary outcomes were length of hospital stay, re-interventions and ICU admission. Results: Our meta-analysis included IPD of 25 studies including 576 patients with IEP and 384 with BS. In IEP, early TOD was not associated with overall mortality (8% vs. 13%, OR 2.1, 95% CI 0.8–5.1), but was associated with a 23% decrease in ICU admissions (46% vs. 69%, OR 3.0, 95% CI 1.2–7.2), a 22% decrease in re-interventions (23% vs. 45%, OR 2.8, 95% CI 1.2–6.7) and a 36% decrease in length of hospital stay (14 vs. 22 days, p < 0.001), compared with late TOD. In BS, no associations between TOD and outcomes were found. When combining IEP and BS, early TOD was associated with a 6% decrease in overall mortality (10% vs. 16%, OR 2.1, 95% CI 1.1–3.9), a 19% decrease in re-interventions (26% vs. 45%, OR 1.9, 95% CI 1.1–3.2) and a 35% decrease in mean length of hospital stay (16 vs. 22 days, p = 0.001), compared with late TOD. Conclusions: This individual patient data meta-analysis confirms the general opinion that an early (≤ 24 h) compared to a late diagnosis (> 24 h) in benign esophageal perforations, particularly in IEP, is associated with improved clinical outcome.
|
|
| 8. |
- Martin, David, et al.
(författare)
-
Defining Major Surgery: A Delphi Consensus Among European Surgical Association (ESA) Members
- 2020
-
Ingår i: World Journal of Surgery. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 0364-2313 .- 1432-2323. ; 44:7, s. 2211-2219
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- © 2020, Société Internationale de Chirurgie. Background: Major surgery is a term frequently used but poorly defined. The aim of the present study was to reach a consensus in the definition of major surgery within a panel of expert surgeons from the European Surgical Association (ESA). Methods: A 3-round Delphi process was performed. All ESA members were invited to participate in the expert panel. In round 1, experts were inquired by open- and closed-ended questions on potential criteria to define major surgery. Results were analyzed and presented back anonymously to the panel within next rounds. Closed-ended questions in round 2 and 3 were either binary or statements to be rated on a Likert scale ranging from 1 (strong disagreement) to 5 (strong agreement). Participants were sent 3 reminders at 2-week intervals for each round. 70% of agreement was considered to indicate consensus. Results: Out of 305 ESA members, 67 (22%) answered all the 3 rounds. Significant comorbidities were the only preoperative factor retained to define major surgery (78%). Vascular clampage or organ ischemia (92%), high intraoperative blood loss (90%), high noradrenalin requirements (77%), long operative time (73%) and perioperative blood transfusion (70%) were procedure-related factors that reached consensus. Regarding postoperative factors, systemic inflammatory response (76%) and the need for intensive or intermediate care (88%) reached consensus. Consequences of major surgery were high morbidity (>30% overall) and mortality (>2%). Conclusion: ESA experts defined major surgery according to extent and complexity of the procedure, its pathophysiological consequences and consecutive clinical outcomes.
|
|
