| 1. |
|
|
| 2. |
|
|
| 3. |
|
|
| 4. |
|
|
| 5. |
- Ademuyiwa, Adesoji O., et al.
(author)
-
Determinants of morbidity and mortality following emergency abdominal surgery in children in low-income and middle-income countries
- 2016
-
In: BMJ Global Health. - : BMJ Publishing Group Ltd. - 2059-7908. ; 1:4
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Background: Child health is a key priority on the global health agenda, yet the provision of essential and emergency surgery in children is patchy in resource-poor regions. This study was aimed to determine the mortality risk for emergency abdominal paediatric surgery in low-income countries globally.Methods: Multicentre, international, prospective, cohort study. Self-selected surgical units performing emergency abdominal surgery submitted prespecified data for consecutive children aged <16 years during a 2-week period between July and December 2014. The United Nation's Human Development Index (HDI) was used to stratify countries. The main outcome measure was 30-day postoperative mortality, analysed by multilevel logistic regression.Results: This study included 1409 patients from 253 centres in 43 countries; 282 children were under 2 years of age. Among them, 265 (18.8%) were from low-HDI, 450 (31.9%) from middle-HDI and 694 (49.3%) from high-HDI countries. The most common operations performed were appendectomy, small bowel resection, pyloromyotomy and correction of intussusception. After adjustment for patient and hospital risk factors, child mortality at 30 days was significantly higher in low-HDI (adjusted OR 7.14 (95% CI 2.52 to 20.23), p<0.001) and middle-HDI (4.42 (1.44 to 13.56), p=0.009) countries compared with high-HDI countries, translating to 40 excess deaths per 1000 procedures performed.Conclusions: Adjusted mortality in children following emergency abdominal surgery may be as high as 7 times greater in low-HDI and middle-HDI countries compared with high-HDI countries. Effective provision of emergency essential surgery should be a key priority for global child health agendas.
|
|
| 6. |
|
|
| 7. |
|
|
| 8. |
- Paramasivam, Abinethaa, et al.
(author)
-
The International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health Core Set for deafblindness. Part I : a systematic review of outcome measures
- 2023
-
In: European Journal of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine. - : Edizioni Minerva Medica. - 1973-9087 .- 1973-9095. ; 59:5, s. 615-627
-
Research review (peer-reviewed)abstract
- INTRODUCTION: The International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health (ICF), developed by the World Health Organization, is a classification framework that focuses on the health and functioning of people with disabilities. As part of an ICF Core Set development, four studies need to be conducted, one of which is a systematic review. This study presents part 1 of the systematic review that aims to describe the outcome measures identified in the literature related to functioning in individuals with deafblindness. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: The research team screened articles from eight scientific databases, three journals, and Google Scholar (March 2011 to September 2022). Articles were included if they studied individuals with deafblindness aged 18 and older. Studies that examined genetics or laboratory experiments involving animals were excluded. Data were extracted into a logbook with key descriptors such as study location and design, age of study population, and instruments/outcome measures used, which were further categorized into one of the following types: 1) standardized; 2) patient-reported measures, standardized (PT-S); 3) patient-reported measures, not standardized (PT-not S); 4) health professional, reported measures, standardized (HP-S); 5) Technical measures; 6) other measures (parent-reported standardized and laboratory measures).EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: The review included 147 studies, of which most were conducted in Europe (47.6%) and North America (27.9%). Of the 314 identified outcome measures, 57 were Standardized, 59 were Patient Reported-Standardized (PT-S), 178 were patient reported non-standardized (PT-Not S) variables, 11 were health professional reported, standardized, five were technical, and four were classified as other measures.CONCLUSIONS: Most instruments measured functioning in daily activities and the mental health of individuals with deafblindness. Three deafblind-specific instruments were identified in this study, highlighting the need for more deafblind-specific instruments to be developed and utilized in research.
|
|
| 9. |
|
|
| 10. |
|
|
