| 1. |
- Bravo, L, et al.
(författare)
-
- 2021
-
swepub:Mat__t
|
|
| 2. |
- Tabiri, S, et al.
(författare)
-
- 2021
-
swepub:Mat__t
|
|
| 3. |
- Khatri, C, et al.
(författare)
-
Outcomes after perioperative SARS-CoV-2 infection in patients with proximal femoral fractures: an international cohort study
- 2021
-
Ingår i: BMJ open. - : BMJ. - 2044-6055. ; 11:11, s. e050830-
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Studies have demonstrated high rates of mortality in people with proximal femoral fracture and SARS-CoV-2, but there is limited published data on the factors that influence mortality for clinicians to make informed treatment decisions. This study aims to report the 30-day mortality associated with perioperative infection of patients undergoing surgery for proximal femoral fractures and to examine the factors that influence mortality in a multivariate analysis.SettingProspective, international, multicentre, observational cohort study.ParticipantsPatients undergoing any operation for a proximal femoral fracture from 1 February to 30 April 2020 and with perioperative SARS-CoV-2 infection (either 7 days prior or 30-day postoperative).Primary outcome30-day mortality. Multivariate modelling was performed to identify factors associated with 30-day mortality.ResultsThis study reports included 1063 patients from 174 hospitals in 19 countries. Overall 30-day mortality was 29.4% (313/1063). In an adjusted model, 30-day mortality was associated with male gender (OR 2.29, 95% CI 1.68 to 3.13, p<0.001), age >80 years (OR 1.60, 95% CI 1.1 to 2.31, p=0.013), preoperative diagnosis of dementia (OR 1.57, 95% CI 1.15 to 2.16, p=0.005), kidney disease (OR 1.73, 95% CI 1.18 to 2.55, p=0.005) and congestive heart failure (OR 1.62, 95% CI 1.06 to 2.48, p=0.025). Mortality at 30 days was lower in patients with a preoperative diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 (OR 0.6, 95% CI 0.6 (0.42 to 0.85), p=0.004). There was no difference in mortality in patients with an increase to delay in surgery (p=0.220) or type of anaesthetic given (p=0.787).ConclusionsPatients undergoing surgery for a proximal femoral fracture with a perioperative infection of SARS-CoV-2 have a high rate of mortality. This study would support the need for providing these patients with individualised medical and anaesthetic care, including medical optimisation before theatre. Careful preoperative counselling is needed for those with a proximal femoral fracture and SARS-CoV-2, especially those in the highest risk groups.Trial registration numberNCT04323644
|
|
| 4. |
|
|
| 5. |
|
|
| 6. |
|
|
| 7. |
|
|
| 8. |
|
|
| 9. |
- Khaleva, E, et al.
(författare)
-
Definitions of non-response and response to biological therapy for severe asthma: a systematic review
- 2023
-
Ingår i: ERJ open research. - : European Respiratory Society (ERS). - 2312-0541. ; 9:3
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Biologics have proven efficacy for patients with severe asthma but there is lack of consensus on defining response. We systematically reviewed and appraised methodologically developed, defined, and evaluated definitions of non-response and response to biologics for severe asthma.MethodsWe searched four bibliographic databases from inception to 15th March 2021 (PROSPERO: CRD42021211249).Two reviewers screened references, extracted data, assessed methodological quality of development, measurement properties of outcome measures and definitions of response based on COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN). Modified GRADE approach and narrative synthesis were undertaken.ResultsThirteen studies reported three composite outcome measures, three measures of asthma symptoms, one asthma control and one quality of life. Only four were developed with patient input; none were composite measures. Studies utilised 17 definitions of response: 10/17 (58.8%) were based on Minimal Clinically Important Difference (MCID) or Minimal Important Difference (MID) and 16/17 (94.1%) had high quality evidence. Results were limited by poor methodology for development process and incomplete reporting of psychometric properties. Most measures rated “very low” to “low” for quality of measurement properties and none met all quality standards.ConclusionThis is the first review to synthesize evidence about definitions of response to biologics for severe asthma. While high quality definitions are available, most are MCIDs or MIDs which may be insufficient to justify continuation of biologics in terms of cost-effectiveness. There remains an unmet need for universally accepted, patient-centred, composite definitions to aid clinical decision making and comparability of responses to biologics.
|
|
| 10. |
- Khaleva, E, et al.
(författare)
-
Development of Core Outcome Measures sets for paediatric and adult Severe Asthma (COMSA)
- 2023
-
Ingår i: The European respiratory journal. - : European Respiratory Society (ERS). - 1399-3003 .- 0903-1936. ; 61:4
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Effectiveness studies with biological therapies for asthma lack standardised outcome measures. The COMSA (Core Outcome Measures sets for paediatric and adult Severe Asthma) working group sought to develop Core Outcome Measures (COM) sets to facilitate better synthesis of data and appraisal of biologics in paediatric and adult asthma clinical studies.MethodsCOMSA utilised a multi-stakeholder consensus process among patients with severe asthma, adult, and paediatric clinicians, pharmaceutical representatives and health regulators from across Europe. Evidence included a systematic review of development, validity, and reliability of selected outcome measures plus a narrative review and a pan-European survey to better understand patients’ and carers’ views about outcome measures. It was discussed using a modified GRADE Evidence to Decision framework. Anonymous voting was conducted using predefined consensus criteria.ResultsBoth adult and paediatric COM sets include forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) as z scores, annual frequency of severe exacerbations and maintenance oral corticosteroid use. Additionally, the paediatric COM set includes the Paediatric Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire, and Asthma Control Test (ACT) or Childhood-ACT while the adult COM includes the Severe Asthma Questionnaire and the Asthma Control Questionnaire-6 (symptoms and rescue medication use reported separately).ConclusionsThis patient-centred collaboration has produced two COM sets for paediatric and adult severe asthma. It is expected that they will inform the methodology of future clinical trials, enhance comparability of efficacy and effectiveness of biological therapies, and help assess their socioeconomic value. COMSA will inform definitions of non-response and response to biological therapy for severe asthma.
|
|
| 11. |
- Khaleva, E, et al.
(författare)
-
Development of Core Outcome Measures sets for paediatric and adult Severe Asthma (COMSA)
- 2023
-
Ingår i: The European respiratory journal. - : European Respiratory Society (ERS). - 1399-3003 .- 0903-1936. ; 61:4
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Effectiveness studies with biological therapies for asthma lack standardised outcome measures. The COMSA (Core Outcome Measures sets for paediatric and adult Severe Asthma) working group sought to develop Core Outcome Measures (COM) sets to facilitate better synthesis of data and appraisal of biologics in paediatric and adult asthma clinical studies.MethodsCOMSA utilised a multi-stakeholder consensus process among patients with severe asthma, adult, and paediatric clinicians, pharmaceutical representatives and health regulators from across Europe. Evidence included a systematic review of development, validity, and reliability of selected outcome measures plus a narrative review and a pan-European survey to better understand patients’ and carers’ views about outcome measures. It was discussed using a modified GRADE Evidence to Decision framework. Anonymous voting was conducted using predefined consensus criteria.ResultsBoth adult and paediatric COM sets include forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) as z scores, annual frequency of severe exacerbations and maintenance oral corticosteroid use. Additionally, the paediatric COM set includes the Paediatric Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire, and Asthma Control Test (ACT) or Childhood-ACT while the adult COM includes the Severe Asthma Questionnaire and the Asthma Control Questionnaire-6 (symptoms and rescue medication use reported separately).ConclusionsThis patient-centred collaboration has produced two COM sets for paediatric and adult severe asthma. It is expected that they will inform the methodology of future clinical trials, enhance comparability of efficacy and effectiveness of biological therapies, and help assess their socioeconomic value. COMSA will inform definitions of non-response and response to biological therapy for severe asthma.
|
|
| 12. |
- Rattu, A, et al.
(författare)
-
Identifying and appraising outcome measures for severe asthma: a systematic review
- 2023
-
Ingår i: The European respiratory journal. - : European Respiratory Society (ERS). - 1399-3003 .- 0903-1936. ; 61:4
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Valid outcome measures are imperative to evaluate treatment response, yet the suitability of existing endpoints for severe asthma is unclear. This review aimed to identify outcome measures for severe asthma and appraise the quality of their measurement properties.MethodsA literature search was performed to identify “candidate” outcome measures published between 2018–2020 (PROSPERO, CRD42020204437). A modified Delphi exercise was conducted to select “key” outcome measures within healthcare professional, patient, pharmaceutical, and regulatory stakeholder groups. Initial validation studies for “key” measures were rated against modified quality criteria from COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN). The evidence was discussed at multi-stakeholder meetings to ratify “priority” outcome measures. Subsequently, four bibliographic databases were searched from inception to identify development and validation studies for these endpoints. Two reviewers screened records, extracted data, assessed their methodological quality, and graded the evidence according to COSMIN.Results96 outcome measures were identified as “candidates”, 55 as “key”, and 24 as “priority” for severe asthma; including clinical, healthcare utilisation, quality of life, asthma control, and composite. 32 studies reported measurement properties of 17 “priority” endpoints from the latter three domains. Only SAQ and C-ACT were developed with input from severe asthma patients. The certainty of evidence was “low” to “very low” for most “priority” endpoints across all measurement properties, and none fulfilled all quality standards.ConclusionOnly two outcome measures had robust developmental data for severe asthma. This review informed development of core outcome measures sets for severe asthma.
|
|
| 13. |
- Rattu, A, et al.
(författare)
-
Identifying and appraising outcome measures for severe asthma: a systematic review
- 2023
-
Ingår i: The European respiratory journal. - : European Respiratory Society (ERS). - 1399-3003 .- 0903-1936. ; 61:4
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Valid outcome measures are imperative to evaluate treatment response, yet the suitability of existing endpoints for severe asthma is unclear. This review aimed to identify outcome measures for severe asthma and appraise the quality of their measurement properties.MethodsA literature search was performed to identify “candidate” outcome measures published between 2018–2020 (PROSPERO, CRD42020204437). A modified Delphi exercise was conducted to select “key” outcome measures within healthcare professional, patient, pharmaceutical, and regulatory stakeholder groups. Initial validation studies for “key” measures were rated against modified quality criteria from COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN). The evidence was discussed at multi-stakeholder meetings to ratify “priority” outcome measures. Subsequently, four bibliographic databases were searched from inception to identify development and validation studies for these endpoints. Two reviewers screened records, extracted data, assessed their methodological quality, and graded the evidence according to COSMIN.Results96 outcome measures were identified as “candidates”, 55 as “key”, and 24 as “priority” for severe asthma; including clinical, healthcare utilisation, quality of life, asthma control, and composite. 32 studies reported measurement properties of 17 “priority” endpoints from the latter three domains. Only SAQ and C-ACT were developed with input from severe asthma patients. The certainty of evidence was “low” to “very low” for most “priority” endpoints across all measurement properties, and none fulfilled all quality standards.ConclusionOnly two outcome measures had robust developmental data for severe asthma. This review informed development of core outcome measures sets for severe asthma.
|
|
| 14. |
|
|
| 15. |
|
|
| 16. |
|
|
| 17. |
|
|
| 18. |
|
|
| 19. |
|
|
