1
|
Moore L, Thakore J, Evans D, Stelfox HT, Razek T, Kortbeek J, Watson I, Evans C, Erdogan M, Engels P, Haas B, Esmail R, Green R, Lampron J, Wiebe M, Clément J, Gezer R, McMillan J, Neveu X, Tardif PA, Coates A, Yanchar NL. Injury outcomes across Canadian trauma systems: a historical cohort study. Can J Anaesth 2023; 70:1350-1361. [PMID: 37386268 DOI: 10.1007/s12630-023-02522-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/15/2022] [Revised: 12/06/2022] [Accepted: 12/13/2022] [Indexed: 07/01/2023] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE Most North American trauma systems have designated trauma centres (TCs) including level I (ultraspecialized high-volume metropolitan centres), level II (specialized medium-volume urban centres), and/or level III (semirural or rural centres). Trauma system configuration varies across provinces and it is unclear how these differences influence patient distributions and outcomes. We aimed to compare patient case mix, case volumes, and risk-adjusted outcomes of adults with major trauma admitted to designated level I, II, and III TCs across Canadian trauma systems. METHODS In a national historical cohort study, we extracted data from Canadian provincial trauma registries on major trauma patients treated between 2013 and 2018 in all designated level I, II, or III TCs in British Columbia, Alberta, Quebec, and Nova Scotia; level I and II TCs in New Brunswick; and four TCs in Ontario. We used multilevel generalized linear models to compare mortality and intensive care unit (ICU) admission and competitive risk models for hospital and ICU length of stay (LOS). Ontario could not be included in outcome comparisons because there were no population-based data from this province. RESULTS The study sample comprised 50,959 patients. Patient distributions in level I and II TCs were similar across provinces but we observed significant differences in case mix and volumes for level III TCs. There was low variation in risk-adjusted mortality and LOS across provinces and TCs but interprovincial and intercentre variation in risk-adjusted ICU admission was high. CONCLUSIONS Our results suggest that differences in the functional role of TCs according to their designation level across provinces leads to significant variations in the distribution of patients, case volumes, resource use, and clinical outcomes. These results highlight opportunities to improve Canadian trauma care and underline the need for standardized population-based injury data to support national quality improvement efforts.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Lynne Moore
- Santé des Populations et Pratiques Optimales en Santé (Traumatologie - Urgence - Soins intensifs), Centre de Recherche du CHU de Québec, Quebec City, QC, Canada.
- Department of Social and Preventive Medicine, Enfant-Jésus Hospital, Université Laval, 1401, 18e rue, local H-012a, Quebec City, QC, G1J 1Z4, Canada.
| | - Jaimini Thakore
- Department of Surgery, The University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada
| | - David Evans
- Department of Surgery, The University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada
| | - Henry T Stelfox
- Department of Critical Care Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada
| | - Tarek Razek
- Department of Surgery, McGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada
| | - John Kortbeek
- Department of Surgery, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada
| | - Ian Watson
- New Brunswick Trauma Program, Saint John, NB, Canada
| | - Christopher Evans
- Kingston Health Sciences Centre, Kingston, ON, Canada
- Department of Emergency Medicine, Queen's University, Kingston, ON, Canada
| | - Mete Erdogan
- Nova Scotia Health Trauma Program, Nova Scotia Health, Halifax, NS, Canada
| | - Paul Engels
- Department of Surgery, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada
| | - Barbara Haas
- Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - Rosmin Esmail
- Trauma Services, Foothills Medical Centre, Alberta Health Services, Calgary, AB, Canada
- Departments of Oncology and Community Health Sciences, O'Brien Institute for Public Health, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada
| | - Robert Green
- Nova Scotia Health Trauma Program, Nova Scotia Health, Halifax, NS, Canada
- Department of Critical Care, Dalhousie University, Halifax, NS, Canada
| | - Jacinthe Lampron
- Division of General Surgery, The Ottawa Hospital, Ottawa, ON, Canada
| | - Micheline Wiebe
- BC Trauma Registry, Provincial Health Services Authority of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada
| | - Julien Clément
- Institut National d'Excellence en Santé et en Services Sociaux, Quebec City, QC, Canada
- Department of Surgery, Université Laval, Quebec City, QC, Canada
| | - Recep Gezer
- Trauma Services BC, Provincial Health Services Authority of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada
| | - Jennifer McMillan
- BC Trauma Registry, Provincial Health Services Authority of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada
| | - Xavier Neveu
- Santé des Populations et Pratiques Optimales en Santé (Traumatologie - Urgence - Soins intensifs), Centre de Recherche du CHU de Québec, Quebec City, QC, Canada
| | - Pier-Alexandre Tardif
- Santé des Populations et Pratiques Optimales en Santé (Traumatologie - Urgence - Soins intensifs), Centre de Recherche du CHU de Québec, Quebec City, QC, Canada
| | - Angela Coates
- Department of Surgery, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada
| | | |
Collapse
|
2
|
Soril LJ, Elshaug AG, Esmail R, Chalkidou K, Gad M, Clement FM. Developing a How-to-Guide for Health Technology Reassessment: "The HTR Playbook". Int J Health Policy Manag 2022; 11:2525-2532. [PMID: 35065545 PMCID: PMC9818092 DOI: 10.34172/ijhpm.2021.180] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/10/2021] [Accepted: 12/28/2021] [Indexed: 01/21/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND To develop a knowledge translation (KT) tool that will provide guidance to stakeholders actively planning or considering implementation of a health technology reassessment (HTR) initiative. METHODS The KT tool is an international and collaborative endeavour between HTR researchers in Canada, Australia, and the United Kingdom. Evidence from a meta-review of documented international HTR experiences and approaches provided the conceptual framing for the KT tool. The purpose, audience, format, and overall scope and content of the tool were established through iterative discussions and consensus. An initial version of the KT tool was beta-tested with an international community of relevant stakeholders (i.e., potential users) at the Health Technology Assessment International 2018 annual meeting. RESULTS An open access workbook, referred to as the HTR playbook, was developed. As a KT tool, the HTR playbook is intended to simplify the complex HTR planning process by navigating users step-by-step through 6 strategic domains: characteristics of the candidate health technology (The Stats and Projections), stakeholders to engage (The Team), potential facilitators and/or barriers within the policy context (The Playing Field), strategic use of different levers and tools (The Offensive Plays), unintended consequences (The Defensive Plays), and metrics and methods for monitoring and evaluation (Winning the Game). CONCLUSION The HTR playbook is intended to enhance a user's ability to successfully complete a HTR by helping them systematically consider the different elements and approaches to achieve the right care for the patient population in question.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Lesley J.J. Soril
- Department of Community Health Sciences, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada
- Health Technology Assessment Unit, O’Brien Institute for Public Health, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada
| | - Adam G. Elshaug
- Centre for Health Policy, Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
- Melbourne Medical School, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
| | - Rosmin Esmail
- Department of Community Health Sciences, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada
- Alberta Health Services, Calgary, AB, Canada
| | - Kalipso Chalkidou
- International Decision Support Initiative, London, UK
- Global Health and Development Group, School of Public Health, Imperial College London, London, UK
| | - Mohamed Gad
- International Decision Support Initiative, London, UK
- Global Health and Development Group, School of Public Health, Imperial College London, London, UK
| | - Fiona M. Clement
- Department of Community Health Sciences, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada
- Health Technology Assessment Unit, O’Brien Institute for Public Health, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Esmail R. The utility of tumour infiltrating lymphocytes as a risk factor for local recurrences of abdominal wall fibromatosis. Pathology 2021. [DOI: 10.1016/j.pathol.2021.05.088] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/21/2022]
|
4
|
Esmail R, Hanson HM, Holroyd-Leduc J, Niven DJ, Clement FM. Identification of knowledge translation theories, models or frameworks suitable for health technology reassessment: a survey of international experts. BMJ Open 2021; 11:e042251. [PMID: 34158291 PMCID: PMC8220529 DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2020-042251] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/09/2022] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVE Health technology reassessment (HTR) is a field focused on managing a technology throughout its life cycle for optimal use. The process results in one of four possible recommendations: increase use, decrease use, no change or complete withdrawal of the technology. However, implementation of these recommendations has been challenging. This paper explores knowledge translation (KT) theories, models and frameworks (TMFs) and their suitability for implementation of HTR recommendations. DESIGN Cross-sectional survey. PARTICIPANTS Purposeful sampling of international KT and HTR experts was administered between January and March 2019. METHODS Sixteen full-spectrum KT TMFs were rated by the experts as 'yes', 'partially yes' or 'no' on six criteria: familiarity, logical consistency/plausibility, degree of specificity, accessibility, ease of use and HTR suitability. Consensus was determined as a rating of ≥70% responding 'yes'. Descriptive statistics and manifest content analysis were conducted on open-ended comments. RESULTS Eleven HTR and 11 KT experts from Canada, USA, UK, Australia, Germany, Spain, Italy and Sweden participated. Of the 16 KT TMFs, none received ≥70% rating. When ratings of 'yes' and 'partially yes' were combined, the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research was considered the most suitable KT TMF by both KT and HTR experts (86%). One additional KT TMF was selected by KT experts: Knowledge to Action framework. HTR experts selected two additional KT TMFs: Co-KT framework and Plan-Do-Study-Act cycle. Experts identified three key characteristics of a KT TMF that may be important to consider: practicality, guidance on implementation and KT TMF adaptability. CONCLUSIONS Despite not reaching an overall ≥70% rating on any of the KT TMFs, experts identified four KT TMFs suitable for HTR. Users may apply these KT TMFs in the implementation of HTR recommendations. In addition, KT TMF characteristics relevant to the field of HTR need to be explored further.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Rosmin Esmail
- Department of Community Health Sciences, University of Calgary Cumming School of Medicine, Calgary, Alberta, Canada
- Alberta Health Services, Calgary, Alberta, Canada
- O'Brien Institute for Public Health, Calgary, Alberta, Canada
- Department of Medicine, University of Calgary Cumming School of Medicine, Calgary, Alberta, Canada
| | - Heather M Hanson
- Department of Community Health Sciences, University of Calgary Cumming School of Medicine, Calgary, Alberta, Canada
- Alberta Health Services, Calgary, Alberta, Canada
| | - Jayna Holroyd-Leduc
- Department of Community Health Sciences, University of Calgary Cumming School of Medicine, Calgary, Alberta, Canada
- Alberta Health Services, Calgary, Alberta, Canada
- O'Brien Institute for Public Health, Calgary, Alberta, Canada
- Department of Medicine, University of Calgary Cumming School of Medicine, Calgary, Alberta, Canada
- Hotchkiss Brain Institute, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada
| | - Daniel J Niven
- Department of Community Health Sciences, University of Calgary Cumming School of Medicine, Calgary, Alberta, Canada
- Alberta Health Services, Calgary, Alberta, Canada
- O'Brien Institute for Public Health, Calgary, Alberta, Canada
- Department of Critical Care Medicine, Cummunity School of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada
| | - Fiona M Clement
- Department of Community Health Sciences, University of Calgary Cumming School of Medicine, Calgary, Alberta, Canada
- O'Brien Institute for Public Health, Calgary, Alberta, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Esmail R, Clement FM, Holroyd-Leduc J, Niven DJ, Hanson HM. Characteristics of knowledge translation theories, models and frameworks for health technology reassessment: expert perspectives through a qualitative exploration. BMC Health Serv Res 2021; 21:401. [PMID: 33926430 PMCID: PMC8082625 DOI: 10.1186/s12913-021-06382-8] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/02/2020] [Accepted: 04/13/2021] [Indexed: 12/26/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Health Technology Reassessment (HTR) is a process that systematically assesses technologies that are currently used in the health care system. The process results in four outputs: increase use or decrease use, no change, or de-adoption of a technology. Implementation of these outputs remains a challenge. The Knowledge Translation (KT) field enables to transfer/translate knowledge into practice. KT could help with implementation of HTR outputs. This study sought to identify which characteristics of KT theories, models, and frameworks could be useful, specifically for decreased use or de-adoption of a technology. METHODS A qualitative descriptive approach was used to ascertain the perspectives of international KT and HTR experts on the characteristics of KT theories, models, and frameworks for decreased use or de-adoption of a technology. One-to-one semi-structured interviews were conducted from September to December 2019. Interviews were audio recorded and transcribed verbatim. Themes and sub-themes were deduced from the data through framework analysis using five distinctive steps: familiarization, identifying an analytic framework, indexing, charting, mapping and interpretation. Themes and sub-themes were also mapped to existing KT theories, models, and frameworks. RESULTS Thirteen experts from Canada, United States, United Kingdom, Australia, Germany, Spain, and Sweden participated in the study. Three themes emerged that illustrated the ideal traits: principles that were foundational for HTR, levers of change, and steps for knowledge to action. Principles included evidence-based, high usability, patient-centered, and ability to apply to the micro, meso, macro levels. Levers of change were characterized as positive, neutral, or negative influences for changing behaviour for HTR. Steps for knowledge to action included: build the case for HTR, adapt research knowledge, assess context, select interventions, and assess impact. Of the KT theories, models, and frameworks that were mapped, the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research had most of the characteristics, except ability to apply to micro, meso, macro levels. CONCLUSIONS Characteristics that need to be considered within a KT theory, model, and framework for implementing HTR outputs have been identified. Consideration of these characteristics may guide users to select relevant KT theories, models, and frameworks to apply to HTR projects.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Rosmin Esmail
- Department of Community Health Sciences, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, 3D10 TRW Building, 3280 Hospital Drive NW, Calgary, Alberta, T2N 4Z6, Canada.,Alberta Health Services, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.,O'Brien Institute for Public Health, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.,Department of Medicine, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada
| | - Fiona M Clement
- Department of Community Health Sciences, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, 3D10 TRW Building, 3280 Hospital Drive NW, Calgary, Alberta, T2N 4Z6, Canada.,O'Brien Institute for Public Health, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada
| | - Jayna Holroyd-Leduc
- Department of Community Health Sciences, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, 3D10 TRW Building, 3280 Hospital Drive NW, Calgary, Alberta, T2N 4Z6, Canada.,Alberta Health Services, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.,O'Brien Institute for Public Health, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.,Department of Medicine, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.,Hotchkiss Brain Institute, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada
| | - Daniel J Niven
- Department of Community Health Sciences, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, 3D10 TRW Building, 3280 Hospital Drive NW, Calgary, Alberta, T2N 4Z6, Canada.,Alberta Health Services, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.,O'Brien Institute for Public Health, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.,Department of Critical Care Medicine, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada
| | - Heather M Hanson
- Department of Community Health Sciences, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, 3D10 TRW Building, 3280 Hospital Drive NW, Calgary, Alberta, T2N 4Z6, Canada. .,Alberta Health Services, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Esmail R, Hanson HM, Holroyd-Leduc J, Brown S, Strifler L, Straus SE, Niven DJ, Clement FM. Response to letter to the editor. Implement Sci 2020; 15:52. [PMID: 32611360 PMCID: PMC7330961 DOI: 10.1186/s13012-020-01010-1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/02/2020] [Accepted: 06/12/2020] [Indexed: 11/21/2022] Open
Affiliation(s)
- Rosmin Esmail
- Department of Community Health Sciences, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, 3D14A Teaching and Wellness Building, 3280 Hospital Drive NW, Calgary, Alberta, T2N 4Z6, Canada.,Alberta Health Services, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.,O'Brien Institute for Public Health, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.,Department of Medicine, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, Canada
| | - Heather M Hanson
- Department of Community Health Sciences, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, 3D14A Teaching and Wellness Building, 3280 Hospital Drive NW, Calgary, Alberta, T2N 4Z6, Canada.,Alberta Health Services, Calgary, Alberta, Canada
| | - Jayna Holroyd-Leduc
- Department of Community Health Sciences, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, 3D14A Teaching and Wellness Building, 3280 Hospital Drive NW, Calgary, Alberta, T2N 4Z6, Canada.,Alberta Health Services, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.,O'Brien Institute for Public Health, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.,Department of Medicine, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, Canada.,Hotchkiss Brain Institute, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada
| | - Sage Brown
- Department of Community Health Sciences, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, 3D14A Teaching and Wellness Building, 3280 Hospital Drive NW, Calgary, Alberta, T2N 4Z6, Canada.,Health Technology Assessment Unit, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada
| | - Lisa Strifler
- Li Ka Shing Knowledge Institute, St. Michael's Hospital, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.,Institute of Health Policy Management and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Sharon E Straus
- Li Ka Shing Knowledge Institute, St. Michael's Hospital, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.,Department of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Daniel J Niven
- Department of Community Health Sciences, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, 3D14A Teaching and Wellness Building, 3280 Hospital Drive NW, Calgary, Alberta, T2N 4Z6, Canada.,Alberta Health Services, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.,O'Brien Institute for Public Health, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.,Department of Critical Care Medicine, CummingSchool of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada
| | - Fiona M Clement
- Department of Community Health Sciences, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, 3D14A Teaching and Wellness Building, 3280 Hospital Drive NW, Calgary, Alberta, T2N 4Z6, Canada. .,O'Brien Institute for Public Health, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada. .,Health Technology Assessment Unit, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
McLean KA, Ahmed WUR, Akhbari M, Claireaux HA, English C, Frost J, Henshall DE, Khan M, Kwek I, Nicola M, Rehman S, Varghese S, Drake TM, Bell S, Nepogodiev D, McLean KA, Drake TM, Glasbey JC, Borakati A, Drake TM, Kamarajah S, McLean KA, Bath MF, Claireaux HA, Gundogan B, Mohan M, Deekonda P, Kong C, Joyce H, Mcnamee L, Woin E, Burke J, Khatri C, Fitzgerald JE, Harrison EM, Bhangu A, Nepogodiev D, Arulkumaran N, Bell S, Duthie F, Hughes J, Pinkney TD, Prowle J, Richards T, Thomas M, Dynes K, Patel M, Patel P, Wigley C, Suresh R, Shaw A, Klimach S, Jull P, Evans D, Preece R, Ibrahim I, Manikavasagar V, Smith R, Brown FS, Deekonda P, Teo R, Sim DPY, Borakati A, Logan AE, Barai I, Amin H, Suresh S, Sethi R, Bolton W, Corbridge O, Horne L, Attalla M, Morley R, Robinson C, Hoskins T, McAllister R, Lee S, Dennis Y, Nixon G, Heywood E, Wilson H, Ng L, Samaraweera S, Mills A, Doherty C, Woin E, Belchos J, Phan V, Chouari T, Gardner T, Goergen N, Hayes JDB, MacLeod CS, McCormack R, McKinley A, McKinstry S, Milligan W, Ooi L, Rafiq NM, Sammut T, Sinclair E, Smith M, Baker C, Boulton APR, Collins J, Copley HC, Fearnhead N, Fox H, Mah T, McKenna J, Naruka V, Nigam N, Nourallah B, Perera S, Qureshi A, Saggar S, Sun L, Wang X, Yang DD, Caroll P, Doyle C, Elangovan S, Falamarzi A, Perai KG, Greenan E, Jain D, Lang-Orsini M, Lim S, O'Byrne L, Ridgway P, Van der Laan S, Wong J, Arthur J, Barclay J, Bradley P, Edwin C, Finch E, Hayashi E, Hopkins M, Kelly D, Kelly M, McCartan N, Ormrod A, Pakenham A, Hayward J, Hitchen C, Kishore A, Martins T, Philomen J, Rao R, Rickards C, Burns N, Copeland M, Durand C, Dyal A, Ghaffar A, Gidwani A, Grant M, Gribbon C, Gruhn A, Leer M, Ahmad K, Beattie G, Beatty M, Campbell G, Donaldson G, Graham S, Holmes D, Kanabar S, Liu H, McCann C, Stewart R, Vara S, Ajibola-Taylor O, Andah EJE, Ani C, Cabdi NMO, Ito G, Jones M, Komoriyama A, Patel P, Titu L, Basra M, Gallogly P, Harinath G, Leong SH, Pradhan A, Siddiqui I, Zaat S, Ali A, Galea M, Looi WL, Ng JCK, Atkin G, Azizi A, Cargill Z, China Z, Elliot J, Jebakumar R, Lam J, Mudalige G, Onyerindu C, Renju M, Babu VS, Hussain M, Joji N, Lovett B, Mownah H, Ali B, Cresswell B, Dhillon AK, Dupaguntla YS, Hungwe C, Lowe-Zinola JD, Tsang JCH, Bevan K, Cardus C, Duggal A, Hossain S, McHugh M, Scott M, Chan F, Evans R, Gurung E, Haughey B, Jacob-Ramsdale B, Kerr M, Lee J, McCann E, O'Boyle K, Reid N, Hayat F, Hodgson S, Johnston R, Jones W, Khan M, Linn T, Long S, Seetharam P, Shaman S, Smart B, Anilkumar A, Davies J, Griffith J, Hughes B, Islam Y, Kidanu D, Mushaini N, Qamar I, Robinson H, Schramm M, Tan CY, Apperley H, Billyard C, Blazeby JM, Cannon SP, Carse S, Göpfert A, Loizidou A, Parkin J, Sanders E, Sharma S, Slade G, Telfer R, Huppatz IW, Worley E, Chandramoorthy L, Friend C, Harris L, Jain P, Karim MJ, Killington K, McGillicuddy J, Rafferty C, Rahunathan N, Rayne T, Varathan Y, Verma N, Zanichelli D, Arneill M, Brown F, Campbell B, Crozier L, Henry J, McCusker C, Prabakaran P, Wilson R, Asif U, Connor M, Dindyal S, Math N, Pagarkar A, Saleem H, Seth I, Sharma S, Standfield N, Swartbol T, Adamson R, Choi JE, El Tokhy O, Ho W, Javaid NR, Kelly M, Mehdi AS, Menon D, Plumptre I, Sturrock S, Turner J, Warren O, Crane E, Ferris B, Gadsby C, Smallwood J, Vipond M, Wilson V, Amarnath T, Doshi A, Gregory C, Kandiah K, Powell B, Spoor H, Toh C, Vizor R, Common M, Dunleavy K, Harris S, Luo C, Mesbah Z, Kumar AP, Redmond A, Skulsky S, Walsh T, Daly D, Deery L, Epanomeritakis E, Harty M, Kane D, Khan K, Mackey R, McConville J, McGinnity K, Nixon G, Ang A, Kee JY, Leung E, Norman S, Palaniappan SV, Sarathy PP, Yeoh T, Frost J, Hazeldine P, Jones L, Karbowiak M, Macdonald C, Mutarambirwa A, Omotade A, Runkel M, Ryan G, Sawers N, Searle C, Suresh S, Vig S, Ahmad A, McGartland R, Sim R, Song A, Wayman J, Brown R, Chang LH, Concannon K, Crilly C, Arnold TJ, Burgin A, Cadden F, Choy CH, Coleman M, Lim D, Luk J, Mahankali-Rao P, Prudence-Taylor AJ, Ramakrishnan D, Russell J, Fawole A, Gohil J, Green B, Hussain A, McMenamin L, McMenamin L, Tang M, Azmi F, Benchetrit S, Cope T, Haque A, Harlinska A, Holdsworth R, Ivo T, Martin J, Nisar T, Patel A, Sasapu K, Trevett J, Vernet G, Aamir A, Bird C, Durham-Hall A, Gibson W, Hartley J, May N, Maynard V, Johnson S, Wood CM, O'Brien M, Orbell J, Stringfellow TD, Tenters F, Tresidder S, Cheung W, Grant A, Tod N, Bews-Hair M, Lim ZH, Lim SW, Vella-Baldacchino M, Auckburally S, Chopada A, Easdon S, Goodson R, McCurdie F, Narouz M, Radford A, Rea E, Taylor O, Yu T, Alfa-Wali M, Amani L, Auluck I, Bruce P, Emberton J, Kumar R, Lagzouli N, Mehta A, Murtaza A, Raja M, Dennahy IS, Frew K, Given A, He YY, Karim MA, MacDonald E, McDonald E, McVinnie D, Ng SK, Pettit A, Sim DPY, Berthaume-Hawkins SD, Charnley R, Fenton K, Jones D, Murphy C, Ng JQ, Reehal R, Robinson H, Seraj SS, Shang E, Tonks A, White P, Yeo A, Chong P, Gabriel R, Patel N, Richardson E, Symons L, Aubrey-Jones D, Dawood S, Dobrzynska M, Faulkner S, Griffiths H, Mahmood F, Patel P, Perry M, Power A, Simpson R, Ali A, Brobbey P, Burrows A, Elder P, Ganyani R, Horseman C, Hurst P, Mann H, Marimuthu K, McBride S, Pilsworth E, Powers N, Stanier P, Innes R, Kersey T, Kopczynska M, Langasco N, Patel N, Rajagopal R, Atkins B, Beasley W, Lim ZC, Gill A, Ang HL, Williams H, Yogeswara T, Carter R, Fam M, Fong J, Latter J, Long M, Mackinnon S, McKenzie C, Osmanska J, Raghuvir V, Shafi A, Tsang K, Walker L, Bountra K, Coldicutt O, Fletcher D, Hudson S, Iqbal S, Bernal TL, Martin JWB, Moss-Lawton F, Smallwood J, Vipond M, Cardwell A, Edgerton K, Laws J, Rai A, Robinson K, Waite K, Ward J, Youssef H, Knight C, Koo PY, Lazarou A, Stanger S, Thorn C, Triniman MC, Botha A, Boyles L, Cumming S, Deepak S, Ezzat A, Fowler AJ, Gwozdz AM, Hussain SF, Khan S, Li H, Morrell BL, Neville J, Nitiahpapand R, Pickering O, Sagoo H, Sharma E, Welsh K, Denley S, Khan S, Agarwal M, Al-Saadi N, Bhambra R, Gupta A, Jawad ZAR, Jiao LR, Khan K, Mahir G, Singagireson S, Thoms BL, Tseu B, Wei R, Yang N, Britton N, Leinhardt D, Mahfooz M, Palkhi A, Price M, Sheikh S, Barker M, Bowley D, Cant M, Datta U, Farooqi M, Lee A, Morley G, Amin MN, Parry A, Patel S, Strang S, Yoganayagam N, Adlan A, Chandramoorthy S, Choudhary Y, Das K, Feldman M, France B, Grace R, Puddy H, Soor P, Ali M, Dhillon P, Faraj A, Gerard L, Glover M, Imran H, Kim S, Patrick Y, Peto J, Prabhudesai A, Smith R, Tang A, Vadgama N, Dhaliwal R, Ecclestone T, Harris A, Ong D, Patel D, Philp C, Stewart E, Wang L, Wong E, Xu Y, Ashaye T, Fozard T, Galloway F, Kaptanis S, Mistry P, Nguyen T, Olagbaiye F, Osman M, Philip Z, Rembacken R, Tayeh S, Theodoropoulou K, Herman A, Lau J, Saha A, Trotter M, Adeleye O, Cave D, Gunwa T, Magalhães J, Makwana S, Mason R, Parish M, Regan H, Renwick P, Roberts G, Salekin D, Sivakumar C, Tariq A, Liew I, McDade A, Stewart D, Hague M, Hudson-Peacock N, Jackson CES, James F, Pitt J, Walker EY, Aftab R, Ang JJ, Anwar S, Battle J, Budd E, Chui J, Crook H, Davies P, Easby S, Hackney E, Ho B, Imam SZ, Rammell J, Andrews H, Perry C, Schinle P, Ahmed P, Aquilina T, Balai E, Church M, Cumber E, Curtis A, Davies G, Dennis Y, Dumann E, Greenhalgh S, Kim P, King S, Metcalfe KHM, Passby L, Redgrave N, Soonawalla Z, Waters S, Zornoza A, Gulzar I, Hole J, Hull K, Ishaq H, Karaj J, Kelkar A, Love E, Patel S, Thakrar D, Vine M, Waterman A, Dib NP, Francis N, Hanson M, Ingleton R, Sadanand KS, Sukirthan N, Arnell S, Ball M, Bassam N, Beghal G, Chang A, Dawe V, George A, Huq T, Hussain A, Ikram B, Kanapeckaite L, Khan M, Ramjas D, Rushd A, Sait S, Serry M, Yardimci E, Capella S, Chenciner L, Episkopos C, Karam E, McCarthy C, Moore-Kelly W, Watson N, Ahluwalia V, Barnfield J, Ben-Gal O, Bloom I, Gharatya A, Khodatars K, Merchant N, Moonan A, Moore M, Patel K, Spiers H, Sundaram K, Turner J, Bath MF, Black J, Chadwick H, Huisman L, Ingram H, Khan S, Martin L, Metcalfe M, Sangal P, Seehra J, Thatcher A, Venturini S, Whitcroft I, Afzal Z, Brown S, Gani A, Gomaa A, Hussein N, Oh SY, Pazhaniappan N, Sharkey E, Sivagnanasithiyar T, Williams C, Yeung J, Cruddas L, Gurjar S, Pau A, Prakash R, Randhawa R, Chen L, Eiben I, Naylor M, Osei-Bordom D, Trenear R, Bannard-Smith J, Griffiths N, Patel BY, Saeed F, Abdikadir H, Bennett M, Church R, Clements SE, Court J, Delvi A, Hubert J, Macdonald B, Mansour F, Patel RR, Perris R, Small S, Betts A, Brown N, Chong A, Croitoru C, Grey A, Hickland P, Ho C, Hollington D, McKie L, Nelson AR, Stewart H, Eiben P, Nedham M, Ali I, Brown T, Cumming S, Hunt C, Joyner C, McAlinden C, Roberts J, Rogers D, Thachettu A, Tyson N, Vaughan R, Verma N, Yasin T, Andrew K, Bhamra N, Leong S, Mistry R, Noble H, Rashed F, Walker NR, Watson L, Worsfold M, Yarham E, Abdikadir H, Arshad A, Barmayehvar B, Cato L, Chan-lam N, Do V, Leong A, Sheikh Z, Zheleniakova T, Coppel J, Hussain ST, Mahmood R, Nourzaie R, Prowle J, Sheik-Ali S, Thomas A, Alagappan A, Ashour R, Bains H, Diamond J, Gordon J, Ibrahim B, Khalil M, Mittapalli D, Neo YN, Patil P, Peck FS, Reza N, Swan I, Whyte M, Chaudhry S, Hernon J, Khawar H, O'Brien J, Pullinger M, Rothnie K, Ujjal S, Bhatte S, Curtis J, Green S, Mayer A, Watkinson G, Chapple K, Hawthorne T, Khaliq M, Majkowski L, Malik TAM, Mclauchlan K, En BNW, Parton S, Robinson SD, Saat MI, Shurovi BN, Varatharasasingam K, Ward AE, Behranwala K, Bertelli M, Cohen J, Duff F, Fafemi O, Gupta R, Manimaran M, Mayhew J, Peprah D, Wong MHY, Farmer N, Houghton C, Kandhari N, Khan K, Ladha D, Mayes J, McLennan F, Panahi P, Seehra H, Agrawal R, Ahmed I, Ali S, Birkinshaw F, Choudhry M, Gokani S, Harrogate S, Jamal S, Nawrozzadeh F, Swaray A, Szczap A, Warusavitarne J, Abdalla M, Asemota N, Cullum R, Hartley M, Maxwell-Armstrong C, Mulvenna C, Phillips J, Yule A, Ahmed L, Clement KD, Craig N, Elseedawy E, Gorman D, Kane L, Livie J, Livie V, Moss E, Naasan A, Ravi F, Shields P, Zhu Y, Archer M, Cobley H, Dennis R, Downes C, Guevel B, Lamptey E, Murray H, Radhakrishnan A, Saravanabavan S, Sardar M, Shaw C, Tilliridou V, Wright R, Ye W, Alturki N, Helliwell R, Jones E, Kelly D, Lambotharan S, Scott K, Sivakumar R, Victor L, Boraluwe-Rallage H, Froggatt P, Haynes S, Hung YMA, Keyte A, Matthews L, Evans E, Haray P, John I, Mathivanan A, Morgan L, Oji O, Okorocha C, Rutherford A, Spiers H, Stageman N, Tsui A, Whitham R, Amoah-Arko A, Cecil E, Dietrich A, Fitzpatrick H, Guy C, Hair J, Hilton J, Jawad L, McAleer E, Taylor Z, Yap J, Akhbari M, Debnath D, Dhir T, Elbuzidi M, Elsaddig M, Glace S, Khawaja H, Koshy R, Lal K, Lobo L, McDermott A, Meredith J, Qamar MA, Vaidya A, Acquaah F, Barfi L, Carter N, Gnanappiragasam D, Ji C, Kaminski F, Lawday S, Mackay K, Sulaiman SK, Webb R, Ananthavarathan P, Dalal F, Farrar E, Hashemi R, Hossain M, Jiang J, Kiandee M, Lex J, Mason L, Matthews JH, McGeorge E, Modhwadia S, Pinkney T, Radotra A, Rickard L, Rodman L, Sales A, Tan KL, Bachi A, Bajwa DS, Battle J, Brown LR, Butler A, Calciu A, Davies E, Gardner I, Girdlestone T, Ikogho O, Keelan G, O'Loughlin P, Tam J, Elias J, Ngaage M, Thompson J, Bristow S, Brock E, Davis H, Pantelidou M, Sathiyakeerthy A, Singh K, Chaudhry A, Dickson G, Glen P, Gregoriou K, Hamid H, Mclean A, Mehtaji P, Neophytou G, Potts S, Belgaid DR, Burke J, Durno J, Ghailan N, Hanson M, Henshaw V, Nazir UR, Omar I, Riley BJ, Roberts J, Smart G, Van Winsen K, Bhatti A, Chan M, D'Auria M, Green S, Keshvala C, Li H, Maxwell-Armstrong C, Michaelidou M, Simmonds L, Smith C, Wimalathasan A, Abbas J, Cairns C, Chin YR, Connelly A, Moug S, Nair A, Svolkinas D, Coe P, Subar D, Wang H, Zaver V, Brayley J, Cookson P, Cunningham L, Gaukroger A, Ho M, Hough A, King J, O'Hagan D, Widdison A, Brown R, Brown B, Chavan A, Francis S, Hare L, Lund J, Malone N, Mavi B, McIlwaine A, Rangarajan S, Abuhussein N, Campbell HS, Daniels J, Fitzgerald I, Mansfield S, Pendrill A, Robertson D, Smart YW, Teng T, Yates J, Belgaumkar A, Katira A, Kossoff J, Kukran S, Laing C, Mathew B, Mohamed T, Myers S, Novell R, Phillips BL, Thomas M, Turlejski T, Turner S, Varcada M, Warren L, Wynell-Mayow W, Church R, Linley-Adams L, Osborn G, Saunders M, Spencer R, Srikanthan M, Tailor S, Tullett A, Ali M, Al-Masri S, Carr G, Ebhogiaye O, Heng S, Manivannan S, Manley J, McMillan LE, Peat C, Phillips B, Thomas S, Whewell H, Williams G, Bienias A, Cope EA, Courquin GR, Day L, Garner C, Gimson A, Harris C, Markham K, Moore T, Nadin T, Phillips C, Subratty SM, Brown K, Dada J, Durbacz M, Filipescu T, Harrison E, Kennedy ED, Khoo E, Kremel D, Lyell I, Pronin S, Tummon R, Ventre C, Walls L, Wootton E, Akhtar A, Davies E, El-Sawy D, Farooq M, Gaddah M, Griffiths H, Katsaiti I, Khadem N, Leong K, Williams I, Chean CS, Chudek D, Desai H, Ellerby N, Hammad A, Malla S, Murphy B, Oshin O, Popova P, Rana S, Ward T, Abbott TEF, Akpenyi O, Edozie F, El Matary R, English W, Jeyabaladevan S, Morgan C, Naidu V, Nicholls K, Peroos S, Prowle J, Sansome S, Torrance HD, Townsend D, Brecher J, Fung H, Kazmi Z, Outlaw P, Pursnani K, Ramanujam N, Razaq A, Sattar M, Sukumar S, Tan TSE, Chohan K, Dhuna S, Haq T, Kirby S, Lacy-Colson J, Logan P, Malik Q, McCann J, Mughal Z, Sadiq S, Sharif I, Shingles C, Simon A, Burnage S, Chan SSN, Craig ARJ, Duffield J, Dutta A, Eastwood M, Iqbal F, Mahmood F, Mahmood W, Patel C, Qadeer A, Robinson A, Rotundo A, Schade A, Slade RD, De Freitas M, Kinnersley H, McDowell E, Moens-Lecumberri S, Ramsden J, Rockall T, Wiffen L, Wright S, Bruce C, Francois V, Hamdan K, Limb C, Lunt AJ, Manley L, Marks M, Phillips CFE, Agnew CJF, Barr CJ, Benons N, Hart SJ, Kandage D, Krysztopik R, Mahalingam P, Mock J, Rajendran S, Stoddart MT, Clements B, Gillespie H, Lee S, McDougall R, Murray C, O'Loane R, Periketi S, Tan S, Amoah R, Bhudia R, Dudley B, Gilbert A, Griffiths B, Khan H, McKigney N, Roberts B, Samuel R, Seelarbokus A, Stubbing-Moore A, Thompson G, Williams P, Ahmed N, Akhtar R, Chandler E, Chappelow I, Gil H, Gower T, Kale A, Lingam G, Rutler L, Sellahewa C, Sheikh A, Stringer H, Taylor R, Aglan H, Ashraf MR, Choo S, Das E, Epstein J, Gentry R, Mills D, Poolovadoo Y, Ward N, Bull K, Cole A, Hack J, Khawari S, Lake C, Mandishona T, Perry R, Sleight S, Sultan S, Thornton T, Williams S, Arif T, Castle A, Chauhan P, Chesner R, Eilon T, Kamarajah S, Kambasha C, Lock L, Loka T, Mohammad F, Motahariasl S, Roper L, Sadhra SS, Sheikh A, Toma T, Wadood Q, Yip J, Ainger E, Busti S, Cunliffe L, Flamini T, Gaffing S, Moorcroft C, Peter M, Simpson L, Stokes E, Stott G, Wilson J, York J, Yousaf A, Borakati A, Brown M, Goaman A, Hodgson B, Ijeomah A, Iroegbu U, Kaur G, Lowe C, Mahmood S, Sattar Z, Sen P, Szuman A, Abbas N, Al-Ausi M, Anto N, Bhome R, Eccles L, Elliott J, Hughes EJ, Jones A, Karunatilleke AS, Knight JS, Manson CCF, Mekhail I, Michaels L, Noton TM, Okenyi E, Reeves T, Yasin IH, Banfield DA, Harris R, Lim D, Mason-Apps C, Roe T, Sandhu J, Shafiq N, Stickler E, Tam JP, Williams LM, Ainsworth P, Boualbanat Y, Doull C, Egan E, Evans L, Hassanin K, Ninkovic-Hall G, Odunlami W, Shergill M, Traish M, Cummings D, Kershaw S, Ong J, Reid F, Toellner H, Alwandi A, Amer M, George D, Haynes K, Hughes K, Peakall L, Premakumar Y, Punjabi N, Ramwell A, Sawkins H, Ashwood J, Baker A, Baron C, Bhide I, Blake E, De Cates C, Esmail R, Hosamuddin H, Kapp J, Nguru N, Raja M, Thomson F, Ahmed H, Aishwarya G, Al-Huneidi R, Ali S, Aziz R, Burke D, Clarke B, Kausar A, Maskill D, Mecia L, Myers L, Smith ACD, Walker G, Wroe N, Donohoe C, Gibbons D, Jordan P, Keogh C, Kiely A, Lalor P, McCrohan M, Powell C, Foley MP, Reynolds J, Silke E, Thorpe O, Kong JTH, White C, Ali Q, Dalrymple J, Ge Y, Khan H, Luo RS, Paine H, Paraskeva B, Parker L, Pillai K, Salciccioli J, Selvadurai S, Sonagara V, Springford LR, Tan L, Appleton S, Leadholm N, Zhang Y, Ahern D, Cotter M, Cremen S, Durrigan T, Flack V, Hrvacic N, Jones H, Jong B, Keane K, O'Connell PR, O'sullivan J, Pek G, Shirazi S, Barker C, Brown A, Carr W, Chen Y, Guillotte C, Harte J, Kokayi A, Lau K, McFarlane S, Morrison S, Broad J, Kenefick N, Makanji D, Printz V, Saito R, Thomas O, Breen H, Kirk S, Kong CH, O'Kane A, Eddama M, Engledow A, Freeman SK, Frost A, Goh C, Lee G, Poonawala R, Suri A, Taribagil P, Brown H, Christie S, Dean S, Gravell R, Haywood E, Holt F, Pilsworth E, Rabiu R, Roscoe HW, Shergill S, Sriram A, Sureshkumar A, Tan LC, Tanna A, Vakharia A, Bhullar S, Brannick S, Dunne E, Frere M, Kerin M, Kumar KM, Pratumsuwan T, Quek R, Salman M, Van Den Berg N, Wong C, Ahluwalia J, Bagga R, Borg CM, Calabria C, Draper A, Farwana M, Joyce H, Khan A, Mazza M, Pankin G, Sait MS, Sandhu N, Virani N, Wong J, Woodhams K, Croghan N, Ghag S, Hogg G, Ismail O, John N, Nadeem K, Naqi M, Noe SM, Sharma A, Tan S, Begum F, Best R, Collishaw A, Glasbey J, Golding D, Gwilym B, Harrison P, Jackman T, Lewis N, Luk YL, Porter T, Potluri S, Stechman M, Tate S, Thomas D, Walford B, Auld F, Bleakley A, Johnston S, Jones C, Khaw J, Milne S, O'Neill S, Singh KKR, Smith R, Swan A, Thorley N, Yalamarthi S, Yin ZD, Ali A, Balian V, Bana R, Clark K, Livesey C, McLachlan G, Mohammad M, Pranesh N, Richards C, Ross F, Sajid M, Brooke M, Francombe J, Gresly J, Hutchinson S, Kerrigan K, Matthews E, Nur S, Parsons L, Sandhu A, Vyas M, White F, Zulkifli A, Zuzarte L, Al-Mousawi A, Arya J, Azam S, Yahaya AA, Gill K, Hallan R, Hathaway C, Leptidis I, McDonagh L, Mitrasinovic S, Mushtaq N, Pang N, Peiris GB, Rinkoff S, Chan L, Christopher E, Farhan-Alanie MMH, Gonzalez-Ciscar A, Graham CJ, Lim H, McLean KA, Paterson HM, Rogers A, Roy C, Rutherford D, Smith F, Zubikarai G, Al-Khudairi R, Bamford M, Chang M, Cheng J, Hedley C, Joseph R, Mitchell B, Perera S, Rothwell L, Siddiqui A, Smith J, Taylor K, Wright OW, Baryan HK, Boyd G, Conchie H, Cox L, Davies J, Gardner S, Hill N, Krishna K, Lakin F, Scotcher S, Alberts J, Asad M, Barraclough J, Campbell A, Marshall D, Wakeford W, Cronbach P, D'Souza F, Gammeri E, Houlton J, Hall M, Kethees A, Patel R, Perera M, Prowle J, Shaid M, Webb E, Beattie S, Chadwick M, El-Taji O, Haddad S, Mann M, Patel M, Popat K, Rimmer L, Riyat H, Smith H, Anandarajah C, Cipparrone M, Desai K, Gao C, Goh ET, Howlader M, Jeffreys N, Karmarkar A, Mathew G, Mukhtar H, Ozcan E, Renukanthan A, Sarens N, Sinha C, Woolley A, Bogle R, Komolafe O, Loo F, Waugh D, Zeng R, Crewe A, Mathias J, Mills A, Owen A, Prior A, Saunders I, Baker A, Crilly L, McKeon J, Ubhi HK, Adeogun A, Carr R, Davison C, Devalia S, Hayat A, Karsan RB, Osborne C, Scott K, Weegenaar C, Wijeyaratne M, Babatunde F, Barnor-Ahiaku E, Beattie G, Chitsabesan P, Dixon O, Hall N, Ilenkovan N, Mackrell T, Nithianandasivam N, Orr J, Palazzo F, Saad M, Sandland-Taylor L, Sherlock J, Ashdown T, Chandler S, Garsaa T, Lloyd J, Loh SY, Ng S, Perkins C, Powell-Chandler A, Smith F, Underhill R. Perioperative intravenous contrast administration and the incidence of acute kidney injury after major gastrointestinal surgery: prospective, multicentre cohort study. Br J Surg 2020; 107:1023-1032. [PMID: 32026470 DOI: 10.1002/bjs.11453] [Citation(s) in RCA: 16] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/25/2019] [Revised: 09/21/2019] [Accepted: 11/08/2019] [Indexed: 01/14/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND This study aimed to determine the impact of preoperative exposure to intravenous contrast for CT and the risk of developing postoperative acute kidney injury (AKI) in patients undergoing major gastrointestinal surgery. METHODS This prospective, multicentre cohort study included adults undergoing gastrointestinal resection, stoma reversal or liver resection. Both elective and emergency procedures were included. Preoperative exposure to intravenous contrast was defined as exposure to contrast administered for the purposes of CT up to 7 days before surgery. The primary endpoint was the rate of AKI within 7 days. Propensity score-matched models were adjusted for patient, disease and operative variables. In a sensitivity analysis, a propensity score-matched model explored the association between preoperative exposure to contrast and AKI in the first 48 h after surgery. RESULTS A total of 5378 patients were included across 173 centres. Overall, 1249 patients (23·2 per cent) received intravenous contrast. The overall rate of AKI within 7 days of surgery was 13·4 per cent (718 of 5378). In the propensity score-matched model, preoperative exposure to contrast was not associated with AKI within 7 days (odds ratio (OR) 0·95, 95 per cent c.i. 0·73 to 1·21; P = 0·669). The sensitivity analysis showed no association between preoperative contrast administration and AKI within 48 h after operation (OR 1·09, 0·84 to 1·41; P = 0·498). CONCLUSION There was no association between preoperative intravenous contrast administered for CT up to 7 days before surgery and postoperative AKI. Risk of contrast-induced nephropathy should not be used as a reason to avoid contrast-enhanced CT.
Collapse
|
8
|
Esmail R, Hanson HM, Holroyd-Leduc J, Brown S, Strifler L, Straus SE, Niven DJ, Clement FM. A scoping review of full-spectrum knowledge translation theories, models, and frameworks. Implement Sci 2020; 15:11. [PMID: 32059738 PMCID: PMC7023795 DOI: 10.1186/s13012-020-0964-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 61] [Impact Index Per Article: 15.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/08/2019] [Accepted: 01/06/2020] [Indexed: 11/30/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Application of knowledge translation (KT) theories, models, and frameworks (TMFs) is one method for successfully incorporating evidence into clinical care. However, there are multiple KT TMFs and little guidance on which to select. This study sought to identify and describe available full-spectrum KT TMFs to subsequently guide users. Methods A scoping review was completed. Articles were identified through searches within electronic databases, previous reviews, grey literature, and consultation with KT experts. Search terms included combinations of KT terms and theory-related terms. Included citations had to describe full-spectrum KT TMFs that had been applied or tested. Titles/abstracts and full-text articles were screened independently by two investigators. Each KT TMF was described by its characteristics including name, context, key components, how it was used, primary target audience, levels of use, and study outcomes. Each KT TMF was also categorized into theoretical approaches as process models, determinant frameworks, classic theories, implementation theories, and evaluation frameworks. Within each category, KT TMFs were compared and contrasted to identify similarities and unique characteristics. Results Electronic searches yielded 7160 citations. Additional citations were identified from previous reviews (n = 41) and bibliographies of included full-text articles (n = 6). Thirty-six citations describing 36 full-spectrum were identified. In 24 KT TMFs, the primary target audience was multi-level including patients/public, professionals, organizational, and financial/regulatory. The majority of the KT TMFs were used within public health, followed by research (organizational, translation, health), or in multiple contexts. Twenty-six could be used at the individual, organization, or policy levels, five at the individual/organization levels, three at the individual level only, and two at the organizational/policy level. Categorization of the KT TMFs resulted in 18 process models, eight classic theories, three determinant frameworks, three evaluation frameworks, and four that fit more than one category. There were no KT TMFs that fit the implementation theory category. Within each category, similarities and unique characteristics emerged through comparison. Conclusions A systematic compilation of existing full-spectrum KT TMFs, categorization into different approaches, and comparison has been provided in a user-friendly way. This list provides options for users to select from when designing KT projects and interventions. Trial registration A protocol outlining the methodology of this scoping review was developed and registered with PROSPERO (CRD42018088564).
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Rosmin Esmail
- Department of Community Health Sciences, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, 3D14A Teaching and Wellness Building, 3280 Hospital Drive NW, Calgary, Alberta, T2N 4Z6, Canada.,Alberta Health Services, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.,O'Brien Institute for Public Health, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.,Department of Medicine, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, Canada
| | - Heather M Hanson
- Department of Community Health Sciences, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, 3D14A Teaching and Wellness Building, 3280 Hospital Drive NW, Calgary, Alberta, T2N 4Z6, Canada.,Alberta Health Services, Calgary, Alberta, Canada
| | - Jayna Holroyd-Leduc
- Department of Community Health Sciences, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, 3D14A Teaching and Wellness Building, 3280 Hospital Drive NW, Calgary, Alberta, T2N 4Z6, Canada.,Alberta Health Services, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.,O'Brien Institute for Public Health, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.,Department of Medicine, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, Canada.,Hotchkiss Brain Institute, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada
| | - Sage Brown
- Department of Community Health Sciences, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, 3D14A Teaching and Wellness Building, 3280 Hospital Drive NW, Calgary, Alberta, T2N 4Z6, Canada.,Health Technology Assessment Unit, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada
| | - Lisa Strifler
- Li Ka Shing Knowledge Institute, St. Michael's Hospital, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.,Institute of Health Policy Management and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Sharon E Straus
- Li Ka Shing Knowledge Institute, St. Michael's Hospital, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.,Department of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Daniel J Niven
- Department of Community Health Sciences, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, 3D14A Teaching and Wellness Building, 3280 Hospital Drive NW, Calgary, Alberta, T2N 4Z6, Canada.,Alberta Health Services, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.,O'Brien Institute for Public Health, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.,Department of Critical Care Medicine, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada
| | - Fiona M Clement
- Department of Community Health Sciences, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, 3D14A Teaching and Wellness Building, 3280 Hospital Drive NW, Calgary, Alberta, T2N 4Z6, Canada. .,O'Brien Institute for Public Health, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada. .,Health Technology Assessment Unit, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Mador B, Fuselli P, Choudhary D, Bokhari F, Tanenbaum B, Tze N, Wong TH, Grant I, Sahi S, Tanenbaum B, Figueira S, Knight H, Grant I, Beno S, Moore L, Macpherson A, Laverty C, Watson I, Watson I, Laverty C, Bérubé M, Cowan S, Homer K, Bouderba S, Soltana K, Fransblow L, Fransblow L, Bérubé M, Gonthier C, Bryson A, Bokhari F, Rados A, Courval V, Masales C, Trust MD, Hogan J, Warriner Z, Lalande A, Chung D, Tanenbaun B, Kuper T, Mckee J, Bratu I, Makish A, Versolatto A, Ramagnano S, Mehrnoush V, Kang D, Moore L, Schellenberg M, LeBreton M, Javidan AP, Schwartz G, Doucet J, Cunningham A, Clarke R, Paradis T, Beamish I, Hilsden R, Raizman I, Green R, Green R, Green R, Esmail R, Moon J(J, Cheng V, Brisson A, Beno S, Heck C, Koeck E, Schneider P, Bal C, Ko YM(D, Martinez M, Kim D, Tierney J, Emigh B, Lie J, Tierney J, MacLean A, Milton L, Bradley N, Kim M, White J, Harris I, Tekian A, Babul S, Cowle S, Turcotte K, Dhillon R, Chadha K, Fu CY, Bajan F, Welsh S, Kaminsky M, Dennis A, Starr F, Butler C, Messer T, Poulakidas S, Ramagnano S, Grushka J, Beckett A, Filteau C, Larocque J, Nadkarni N, Chua WC, Loo L, Ang ASH, Iau PTC, Goo JTT, Chan KC, Adam TN, Seow DCC, Ng YS, Malhotra R, Chan AWM, Matchar DB, Van Nguyen H, Ong MEH, Lampron J, Bougie A, Brown C, Patel A, Edwards L, Spitz K, Ramagnano S, Lampron J, Nucete M, Lindsey S, Lampron J, Figueira S, Matar M, Michael D, Rosenfield D, Harvey G, Jessa K, Tardif PA, Mercier E, Berthelot S, Lecky F, Cameron P, Archambault P, Tien H, Beckett A, Nathens A, Luz LTD, Benjamin S, Chisholm A, Benjamin S, Chisholm A, Tien H, Beckett A, Nathens A, Luz LTD, Pasquotti T, Klassen B, Brisson A, Tze N, Fawcett V, Tsang B, Kabaroff A, Verhoeff K, Turner S, Kim M, Widder S, Fung C, Widder S, Kim M, Moore L, Lecky F, Lawrence T, Soltana K, Mansour T, Moore L, Bouderba S, Turgeon A, Krouchev R, Mercier E, Friedman D, Souranis A, Slapcoff L, Friedman D, Fakir MB, Turcotte V, Valiquette MP, Bernard F, Giroux M, Côté MÈ, Gagné A, Dollé S, Gélinas C, Belcaïd A, Truchon C, Moore L, Clément J, Pelletier LP, Ivkov V, Gamble K, Constable L, Haegert J, Bajani F, Fu CY, Welsh S, Kaminsky M, Dennis A, Starr F, Messer T, Butler C, Tatebe L, Poulakidas S, Thauvette D, Engels P, Klassen B, Coates A, De Silva S, Schellenberg M, Biswas S, Inaba K, Cheng V, Warriner Z, Love B, Demetriades D, Schellenberg M, Inaba K, Trust MD, Love B, Cheng V, Strumwasser A, Demetriades D, Joos E, Dawe P, Hameed M, Evans D, Garraway N, Gawaziuk J, Cristall N, Logsetty S, Ramagnano S, Federman N, Murphy P, Parry N, Leeper R, McBeth P, Wachs J, Hamilton D, Ball C, Gillman L, Kirkpatrick A, Dulai S, Falconer C, McLachlin M, Armstrong A, Parry N, Vogt K, Shi Q, Coates A, Engels P, Rice T, Nathens A, Naidu D, Brubacher J, Chan H, Erdelyi S, Kubasiak J, Bokhari F, Kaminsky M, Lauzier F, Tardif PA, Lamontagne F, Chassé M, Stelfox HT, Kortbeek J, Lessard-Bonaventure P, Truchon C, Turgeon A, Cheng V, Inaba K, Foran C, Warriner Z, Trust MD, Clark D, Demetriades D, Levesque K, Lampron J, Nathens A, Tien H, Luz LTD, Jing R, McFarlan A, Liu M, Sander B, Fowler R, Rizoli S, Ferrada P, Murthi S, Nirula R, Edwards S, Cantrell E, Han J, Haase D, Singleton A, Birkas Y, Casola G, Coimbra R, Condron M, Schreiber M, Azarow K, Hamilton N, Long W, Maxwell B, Jafri M, Whitman L, Wilson H, Wong H, Grushka J, Razek T, Fata P, Deckelbaum D, Kawaja K, Beckett A, Razek T, Deckelbaum D, Grushka J, Fata P, Beckett A, Lund M, Leeper R, Conn LG, Strauss R, Haas B, Beckett A, Nathens A, Tien H, Callum J, Luz LTD, Higgins S, Coles J, Erdogan M, Coles J, Higgins S, Erdogan M, Erdogan M, Kureshi N, Fenerty L, Thibault-Halman G, Walling S, Clarke DB, Vis C, Nosworthy S, Razek T, Boulanger N, Deckelbaum D, Grushka J, Fata P, Beckett A, Khwaja K, Schellenberg M, Inaba K, Warriner Z, Trust MD, Matsushima K, Lam L, Demetriades D, Lakha N, Wong H, McLauchlin L, Ashe CS, Logie SA, Lenton-Brym T, Rosenfield D, McDowall D, Wales P, Principi T, Mis J, Kaminsky M, Bokhari F, Rahbar E, Cotton B, Bryan P, MacGillivray S, Thompson G, Wishart I, Hameed M, Joos E, Evans D, Garraway N, Dawe P, Wild J, Widom K, Torres D, Blansfield J, Shabahang M, Dove J, Fluck M, Hameed M, Roux L, Nicol A, Schulenberg L, Fredericks C, Messer T, Starr F, Dennis A, Bokhari F, Kaminsky M, Teixeira P, Coopwood B, Aydelotte J, Cardenas T, Ali S, Brown C, Dawe P, Fredericks C, Matta LD, Messer T, Starr F, Dennis A, Kaminsky M, Bokhari F, Jiang HY, Yoon J, Kim M, Widder S, Hameed M, Wray C, Agarwal A, Harvin J. 2019 Trauma Association of Canada Annual Scientific Meeting Abstracts. Can J Surg 2019; 62:S3-S35. [PMID: 31091053 DOI: 10.1503/cjs.008619] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/01/2022] Open
|
10
|
Esmail R, Hanson H, Holroyd-Leduc J, Niven DJ, Clement F. Knowledge translation and health technology reassessment: identifying synergy. BMC Health Serv Res 2018; 18:674. [PMID: 30165846 PMCID: PMC6117899 DOI: 10.1186/s12913-018-3494-y] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/28/2018] [Accepted: 08/23/2018] [Indexed: 11/17/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Health Technology Reassessment (HTR) is an emerging field that shifts the focus from traditional methods of technology adoption to managing technology throughout its lifecycle. HTR is a mechanism to improve patient care and system efficiency through a reallocation of resources away from low-value care towards interventions and technologies that are high value. To achieve this, the outputs of HTR and its recommendations must be translated into practice. The evolving field of knowledge translation (KT) can provide guidance to improve the uptake of evidence-informed policies and recommendations resulting from the process of HTR. This paper argues how the theories, models and frameworks from KT could advance the HTR process. Discussion First, common KT theories, models and frameworks are presented. Second, facilitators and barriers to KT within the context of HTR are summarized from the literature. Facilitators and barriers to KT include ensuring a solid research evidence-base for the technology under reassessment, assessing the climate and context, understanding the social an political context, initiating linkage and exchange, having a structured HTR Process, adequate resources, and understanding the roles of researchers, knowledge users, and stakeholders can enhance knowledge translation of HTR outputs. Third, three case examples at the individual (micro), organizational (meso), and policy (macro) levels are used to illustrate to describe how a KT theory, model or framework could be applied to a HTR project. These case studies show how selecting and applying KT theories, models and frameworks can facilitate the implementation of HTR recommendations. Conclusion HTR and KT are synergistic processes that can be used to optimize technology use throughout its lifecycle. We argue that the application of KT theories, models and frameworks, and the assessment of barriers and facilitators to KT can facilitate translation of HTR recommendations into practice.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Rosmin Esmail
- Department of Community Health Sciences, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, 3D14A Teaching and Wellness Building, 3280 Hospital Drive NW, Calgary, Alberta, T2N 4N1, Canada.,Alberta Health Services, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.,O'Brien Institute for Public Health, University of Calgary, Calgary, Canada
| | - Heather Hanson
- Department of Community Health Sciences, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, 3D14A Teaching and Wellness Building, 3280 Hospital Drive NW, Calgary, Alberta, T2N 4N1, Canada.,Alberta Health Services, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.,O'Brien Institute for Public Health, University of Calgary, Calgary, Canada
| | - Jayna Holroyd-Leduc
- Department of Community Health Sciences, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, 3D14A Teaching and Wellness Building, 3280 Hospital Drive NW, Calgary, Alberta, T2N 4N1, Canada.,Alberta Health Services, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.,O'Brien Institute for Public Health, University of Calgary, Calgary, Canada.,Department of Medicine, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, Canada.,Hotchkiss Brain Institute, University of Calgary, Calgary, Canada
| | - Daniel J Niven
- Department of Community Health Sciences, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, 3D14A Teaching and Wellness Building, 3280 Hospital Drive NW, Calgary, Alberta, T2N 4N1, Canada.,Alberta Health Services, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.,O'Brien Institute for Public Health, University of Calgary, Calgary, Canada.,Department of Critical Care Medicine, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, Canada
| | - Fiona Clement
- Department of Community Health Sciences, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, 3D14A Teaching and Wellness Building, 3280 Hospital Drive NW, Calgary, Alberta, T2N 4N1, Canada. .,O'Brien Institute for Public Health, University of Calgary, Calgary, Canada. .,Health Technology Assessment Unit, University of Calgary, Calgary, Canada.
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Slaughter SE, Zimmermann GL, Nuspl M, Hanson HM, Albrecht L, Esmail R, Sauro K, Newton AS, Donald M, Dyson MP, Thomson D, Hartling L. Classification schemes for knowledge translation interventions: a practical resource for researchers. BMC Med Res Methodol 2017; 17:161. [PMID: 29207955 PMCID: PMC5718087 DOI: 10.1186/s12874-017-0441-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 11] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/31/2017] [Accepted: 11/22/2017] [Indexed: 01/20/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND As implementation science advances, the number of interventions to promote the translation of evidence into healthcare, health systems, or health policy is growing. Accordingly, classification schemes for these knowledge translation (KT) interventions have emerged. A recent scoping review identified 51 classification schemes of KT interventions to integrate evidence into healthcare practice; however, the review did not evaluate the quality of the classification schemes or provide detailed information to assist researchers in selecting a scheme for their context and purpose. This study aimed to further examine and assess the quality of these classification schemes of KT interventions, and provide information to aid researchers when selecting a classification scheme. METHODS We abstracted the following information from each of the original 51 classification scheme articles: authors' objectives; purpose of the scheme and field of application; socioecologic level (individual, organizational, community, system); adaptability (broad versus specific); target group (patients, providers, policy-makers), intent (policy, education, practice), and purpose (dissemination versus implementation). Two reviewers independently evaluated the methodological quality of the development of each classification scheme using an adapted version of the AGREE II tool. Based on these assessments, two independent reviewers reached consensus about whether to recommend each scheme for researcher use, or not. RESULTS Of the 51 original classification schemes, we excluded seven that were not specific classification schemes, not accessible or duplicates. Of the remaining 44 classification schemes, nine were not recommended. Of the 35 recommended classification schemes, ten focused on behaviour change and six focused on population health. Many schemes (n = 29) addressed practice considerations. Fewer schemes addressed educational or policy objectives. Twenty-five classification schemes had broad applicability, six were specific, and four had elements of both. Twenty-three schemes targeted health providers, nine targeted both patients and providers and one targeted policy-makers. Most classification schemes were intended for implementation rather than dissemination. CONCLUSIONS Thirty-five classification schemes of KT interventions were developed and reported with sufficient rigour to be recommended for use by researchers interested in KT in healthcare. Our additional categorization and quality analysis will aid in selecting suitable classification schemes for research initiatives in the field of implementation science.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Gabrielle L. Zimmermann
- Alberta SPOR SUPPORT Unit KT Platform, Edmonton, Canada
- University of Calgary, Calgary, Canada
| | - Megan Nuspl
- Alberta SPOR SUPPORT Unit KT Platform, Edmonton, Canada
| | - Heather M. Hanson
- University of Calgary, Calgary, Canada
- Alberta Health Services, Calgary, Canada
| | | | - Rosmin Esmail
- University of Calgary, Calgary, Canada
- Alberta Health Services, Calgary, Canada
| | | | | | | | | | | | - Lisa Hartling
- University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada
- Alberta SPOR SUPPORT Unit KT Platform, Edmonton, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Abstract
BACKGROUND Many people with low back pain (LBP) become frequent users of healthcare services in their attempt to find treatments that minimise the severity of their symptoms. Back School consists of a therapeutic programme given to groups of people that includes both education and exercise. However, the content of Back School has changed over time and appears to vary widely today. This review is an update of a Cochrane review of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating the effectiveness of Back School. We split the Cochrane review into two reviews, one focusing on acute and subacute LBP, and one on chronic LBP. OBJECTIVES The objective of this systematic review was to determine the effect of Back School on pain and disability for adults with chronic non-specific LBP; we included adverse events as a secondary outcome. In trials that solely recruited workers, we also examined the effect on work status. SEARCH METHODS We searched for trials in the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, two other databases and two trials registers to 15 November 2016. We also searched the reference lists of eligible papers and consulted experts in the field of LBP management to identify any potentially relevant studies we may have missed. We placed no limitations on language or date of publication. SELECTION CRITERIA We included only RCTs and quasi-RCTs evaluating pain, disability, and/or work status as outcomes. The primary outcomes for this update were pain and disability, and the secondary outcomes were work status and adverse events. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS Two review authors independently performed the 'Risk of bias' assessment of the included studies using the 'Risk of bias' assessment tool recommended by The Cochrane Collaboration. We summarised the results for the short-, intermediate-, and long-term follow-ups. We evaluated the overall quality of evidence using the GRADE approach. MAIN RESULTS For the outcome pain, at short-term follow-up, we found very low-quality evidence that Back School is more effective than no treatment (mean difference (MD) -6.10, 95% confidence interval (CI) -10.18 to -2.01). However, we found very low-quality evidence that there is no significant difference between Back School and no treatment at intermediate-term (MD -4.34, 95% CI -14.37 to 5.68) or long-term follow-up (MD -12.16, 95% CI -29.14 to 4.83). There was very low-quality evidence that Back School reduces pain at short-term follow-up compared to medical care (MD -10.16, 95% CI -19.11 to -1.22). Very low-quality evidence showed there to be no significant difference between Back School and medical care at intermediate-term (MD -9.65, 95% CI -22.46 to 3.15) or long-term follow-up (MD -5.71, 95% CI -20.27 to 8.84). We found very low-quality evidence that Back School is no more effective than passive physiotherapy at short-term (MD 1.96, 95% CI -9.51 to 13.43), intermediate-term (MD -16.89, 95% CI -66.56 to 32.79), or long-term follow-up (MD -12.86, 95% CI -61.22 to 35.50). There was very low-quality evidence that Back School is no better than exercise at short- term follow-up (MD -2.06, 95% CI -14.58 to 10.45). There was low-quality evidence that Back School is no better than exercise at intermediate-term (MD -4.46, 95% CI -19.44 to 10.52) and long-term follow-up (MD 4.58, 95% CI -0.20 to 9.36).For the outcome disability, we found very low-quality evidence that Back School is no more effective than no treatment at intermediate-term (MD -5.92, 95% CI -12.08 to 0.23) and long-term follow-up (MD -7.36, 95% CI -22.05 to 7.34); medical care at short-term (MD -1.19, 95% CI -7.02 to 4.64) and long-term follow-up (MD -0.40, 95% CI -7.33 to 6.53); passive physiotherapy at short-term (MD 2.57, 95% CI -15.88 to 21.01) and intermediate-term follow-up (MD 6.88, 95% CI -4.86 to 18.63); and exercise at short-term (MD -1.65, 95% CI -8.66 to 5.37), intermediate-term (MD 1.57, 95% CI -3.86 to 7.00), and long-term follow-up (MD 4.54, 95% CI -4.44 to 13.52). We found very low-quality evidence of a small difference between Back School and no treatment at short-term follow-up (MD -3.38, 95% CI -6.70 to -0.05) and medical care at intermediate-term follow-up (MD -6.34, 95% CI -10.89 to -1.79). Still, at long-term follow-up there was very low-quality evidence that passive physiotherapy is better than Back School (MD 9.60, 95% CI 3.65 to 15.54).Few studies measured adverse effects. The results were reported as means without standard deviations or group size was not reported. Due to this lack of information, we were unable to statistically pool the adverse events data. Work status was not reported. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS Due to the low- to very low-quality of the evidence for all treatment comparisons, outcomes, and follow-up periods investigated, it is uncertain if Back School is effective for chronic low back pain. Although the quality of the evidence was mostly very low, the results showed no difference or a trivial effect in favour of Back School. There are myriad potential variants on the Back School approach regarding the employment of different exercises and educational methods. While current evidence does not warrant their use, future variants on Back School may have different effects and will need to be studied in future RCTs and reviews.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Patrícia Parreira
- Sydney Medical School, The University of SydneyMusculoskeletal Division, The George Institute for Global HealthSydneyAustralia
| | - Martijn W Heymans
- VU University Medical CenterDepartment of Epidemiology and BiostatisticsPO Box 7057AmsterdamNetherlands1007 MB
| | - Maurits W van Tulder
- VU University AmsterdamDepartment of Health Sciences, Faculty of Earth and Life SciencesPO Box 7057Room U454AmsterdamNetherlands1007 MB
| | - Rosmin Esmail
- Alberta Health ServicesHealth Technology Assessment and Adoption, Research, Innovation and Analytics PortfolioCalgaryABCanada
| | - Bart W Koes
- Erasmus Medical CenterDepartment of General PracticePO Box 2040RotterdamNetherlands3000 CA
| | - Nolwenn Poquet
- Sydney Medical School, The University of SydneyMusculoskeletal Division, The George Institute for Global HealthSydneyAustralia
| | - Chung‐Wei Christine Lin
- Sydney School of Public Health, The University of SydneyMusculoskeletal Health SydneyLevel 10, North, King George V Building, Royal Prince Alfred Hospital (C39)SydneyNew South WalesAustralia2050
| | - Christopher G Maher
- The University of SydneySchool of Public Health, Sydney Medical SchoolSydneyAustralia
| | | |
Collapse
|
13
|
Sevick LK, Esmail R, Tang K, Lorenzetti DL, Ronksley P, James M, Santana M, Ghali WA, Clement F. A systematic review of the cost and cost-effectiveness of electronic discharge communications. BMJ Open 2017; 7:e014722. [PMID: 28674136 PMCID: PMC5734286 DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2016-014722] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/15/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND The transition between acute care and community care can be a vulnerable period in a patients' treatment due to the potential for postdischarge adverse events. The vulnerability of this period has been attributed to factors related to the miscommunication between hospital-based and community-based physicians. Electronic discharge communication has been proposed as one solution to bridge this communication gap. Prior to widespread implementation of these tools, the costs and benefits should be considered. OBJECTIVE To establish the cost and cost-effectiveness of electronic discharge communications compared with traditional discharge systems for individuals who have completed care with one provider and are transitioning care to a new provider. METHODS We conducted a systematic review of the published literature, using best practices, to identify economic evaluations/cost analyses of electronic discharge communication tools. Inclusion criteria were: (1) economic analysis and (2) electronic discharge communication tool as the intervention. Quality of each article was assessed, and data were summarised using a component-based analysis. RESULTS One thousand unique abstracts were identified, and 57 full-text articles were assessed for eligibility. Four studies met final inclusion criteria. These studies varied in their primary objectives, methodology, costs reported and outcomes. All of the studies were of low to good quality. Three of the studies reported a cost-effectiveness measure ranging from an incremental daily cost of decreasing average discharge note completion by 1 day of $0.331 (2003 Canadian), a cost per page per discharge letter of €9.51 and a dynamic net present value of €31.1 million for a 5-year implementation of the intervention. None of the identified studies considered clinically meaningful patient or quality outcomes. DISCUSSION Economic analyses of electronic discharge communications are scarcely reported, and with inconsistent methodology and outcomes. Further studies are needed to understand the cost-effectiveness and value for patient care.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Laura K Sevick
- The Department Community Health Sciences, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada
| | - Rosmin Esmail
- The Department Community Health Sciences, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada
- Department of Health Technology Assessment and Adoption, Alberta Health Services, Calgary, Alberta, Canada
| | - Karen Tang
- The Department Community Health Sciences, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada
| | - Diane L Lorenzetti
- The Department Community Health Sciences, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada
- Institute of Health Economics, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
| | - Paul Ronksley
- The Department Community Health Sciences, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada
- O’Brien Institute for Public Health, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada
| | - Matthew James
- The Department Community Health Sciences, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada
- O’Brien Institute for Public Health, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada
- Department of Medicine, University of Calgary, Alberta, Calgary, Canada
| | - Maria Santana
- The Department Community Health Sciences, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada
- O’Brien Institute for Public Health, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada
- Medical Ward of the 21stCentury, University of Calgary, Alberta, Calgary, Canada
| | - William A Ghali
- The Department Community Health Sciences, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada
- O’Brien Institute for Public Health, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada
- Department of Medicine, University of Calgary, Alberta, Calgary, Canada
- Medical Ward of the 21stCentury, University of Calgary, Alberta, Calgary, Canada
| | - Fiona Clement
- The Department Community Health Sciences, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada
- O’Brien Institute for Public Health, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
14
|
Abstract
BACKGROUND Since the introduction of the Swedish back school in 1969, back schools have frequently been used for treating people with low-back pain (LBP). However, the content of back schools has changed and appears to vary widely today. In this review we defined back school as a therapeutic programme given to groups of people, which includes both education and exercise. This is an update of a Cochrane review first published in 1999, and updated in 2004. For this review update, we split the review into two distinct reviews which separated acute from chronic LBP. OBJECTIVES To assess the effectiveness of back schools on pain and disability for people with acute or subacute non-specific LBP. We also examined the effect on work status and adverse events. SEARCH METHODS We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, PubMed and two clinical trials registers up to 4 August 2015. We also checked the reference lists of articles and contacted experts in the field of research on LBP. SELECTION CRITERIA We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) or quasi-RCTs that reported on back school for acute or subacute non-specific LBP. The primary outcomes were pain and disability. The secondary outcomes were work status and adverse events. Back school had to be compared with another treatment, a placebo (or sham or attention control) or no treatment. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS We used the 2009 updated method guidelines for this Cochrane review. Two review authors independently screened the references, assessed the quality of the trials and extracted the data. We set the threshold for low risk of bias, a priori, as six or more of 13 internal validity criteria and no serious flaws (e.g. large drop-out rate). We classified the quality of the evidence into one of four levels (high, moderate, low or very low) using the adapted Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. We contacted study authors for additional information. We collected adverse effects information from the trials. MAIN RESULTS The search update identified 273 new references, of which none fulfilled our inclusion criteria. We included four studies (643 participants) in this updated review, which were all included in the previous (2004) update. The quality of the evidence was very low for all outcomes. As data were too clinically heterogeneous to be pooled, we described individual trial results. The results indicate that there is very low quality evidence that back schools are no more effective than a placebo (or sham or attention control) or another treatment (physical therapies, myofascial therapy, joint manipulations, advice) on pain, disability, work status and adverse events at short-term, intermediate-term and long-term follow-up. There is very low quality evidence that shows a statistically significant difference between back schools and a placebo (or sham or attention control) for return to work at short-term follow-up in favour of back school. Very low quality evidence suggests that back school added to a back care programme is more effective than a back care programme alone for disability at short-term follow-up. Very low quality evidence also indicates that there is no difference in terms of adverse events between back school and myofascial therapy, joint manipulation and combined myofascial therapy and joint manipulation. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS It is uncertain if back schools are effective for acute and subacute non-specific LBP as there is only very low quality evidence available. While large well-conducted studies will likely provide more conclusive findings, back schools are not widely used interventions for acute and subacute LBP and further research into this area may not be a priority.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Nolwenn Poquet
- Sydney Medical School, The University of SydneyMusculoskeletal Division, The George Institute for Global HealthPO Box M201Missenden RoadSydneyAustraliaNSW 2050
| | - Chung‐Wei Christine Lin
- Sydney Medical School, The University of SydneyMusculoskeletal Division, The George Institute for Global HealthPO Box M201Missenden RoadSydneyAustraliaNSW 2050
| | - Martijn W Heymans
- VU University Medical CenterDepartment of Epidemiology and BiostatisticsPO Box 7057AmsterdamNetherlands1007 MB
| | - Maurits W van Tulder
- VU University AmsterdamDepartment of Health Sciences, Faculty of Earth and Life SciencesPO Box 7057Room U454AmsterdamNetherlands1007 MB
| | - Rosmin Esmail
- Alberta Health ServicesHealth Technology Assessment and Adoption, Research, Innovation and Analytics PortfolioCalgaryABCanada
| | - Bart W Koes
- Erasmus Medical CenterDepartment of General PracticePO Box 2040RotterdamNetherlands3000 CA
| | - Christopher G Maher
- Sydney Medical School, The University of SydneyThe George Institute for Global HealthPO Box M201Missenden RoadSydneyNSWAustralia2050
| | | |
Collapse
|
15
|
Poquet N, Lin CW, Heymans M, van Tulder M, Koes B, Esmail R, Maher C. Back schools for acute and sub-acute non-specific low-back pain: update of a Cochrane review. Physiotherapy 2015. [DOI: 10.1016/j.physio.2015.03.2153] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/26/2022]
|
16
|
Craighead P, Shea–Budgell M, Nation J, Esmail R, Evans A, Parliament M, Oliver T, Hagen N. Hyperbaric oxygen therapy for late radiation tissue injury in gynecologic malignancies. Curr Oncol 2011; 18:220-7. [PMID: 21980249 PMCID: PMC3185899 DOI: 10.3747/co.v18i5.767] [Citation(s) in RCA: 31] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/15/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Late radiation tissue injury is a serious complication of radiotherapy for patients with gynecologic malignancies. Strategies for managing pain and other clinical features have limited efficacy; however, hyperbaric oxygen therapy (HBO(2)) may be an effective option for some patients. METHODS In a systematic review of the literature, the Ovid medline, embase, Cochrane Library, National Guidelines Clearinghouse, and Canadian Medical Association Infobase databases were searched to June 2009 for clinical practice guidelines, systematic reviews, randomized controlled trials, or other relevant evidence. Studies that did not evaluate soft tissue necrosis, cystitis, proctitis, bone necrosis, and other complications were excluded. RESULTS Two randomized trials, eleven nonrandomized studies, and five supporting documents comprise the evidence base. In addition, information on the harms and safety of treatment with HBO(2) were reported in three additional sources. There is modest direct evidence and emerging indirect evidence that the use of HBO(2) is broadly effective for late radiation tissue injury of the pelvis in women treated for gynecologic malignancies. CONCLUSIONS Based on the evidence and expert consensus opinion, HBO(2) is likely effective for late radiation tissue injury of the pelvis, with demonstrated efficacy specifically for radiation damage to the anus and rectum;the main indication for HBO(2) therapy in gynecologic oncology is in the management of otherwise refractory chronic radiation injury;HBO(2) may provide symptomatic benefit in certain clinical settings (for example, cystitis, soft-tissue necrosis, and osteonecrosis); andHBO(2) may reduce the complications of gynecologic surgery in patients undergoing surgical removal of necrosis.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- P. Craighead
- Department of Oncology, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB
- Alberta Health Services Cancer Care, Calgary, AB
| | | | - J. Nation
- Department of Oncology, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB
- Alberta Health Services Cancer Care, Calgary, AB
| | - R. Esmail
- Alberta Health Services Cancer Care, Guideline Utilization Resource Unit, Calgary, AB
| | - A.W. Evans
- Hyperbaric Medicine Unit, Toronto General Hospital, and Department of Anesthesia, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON
| | - M. Parliament
- Alberta Health Services Cancer Care, Calgary, AB
- Department of Oncology, and Alberta Health Services Cancer Care, Edmonton, AB
| | - T.K. Oliver
- Capacity Enhancement Program, Canadian Partnership Against Cancer, Hamilton, ON
- Department of Oncology, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON
| | - N.A. Hagen
- Department of Oncology, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB
- Alberta Health Services Cancer Care, Calgary, AB
| |
Collapse
|
17
|
Hagen NA, Craighead P, Esmail R. An integrated, population-based framework for knowledge management for cancer control. ACTA ACUST UNITED AC 2010; 13:44-9. [PMID: 20523153 DOI: 10.12927/hcq.2010.21815] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/26/2022]
Abstract
Cancer control organizations commonly refer to the critical role of clinical practice guidelines to support the best possible cancer care. But how can a cancer care program ensure the systematic implementation of those guidelines? The goals of this article are to describe the process of developing a cancer control system driven by knowledge management, to highlight the key elements of this system and to foster discussion on the implementation of such frameworks. In order to promote best cancer practices within an expanded radiation service model for the province of Alberta, we developed an integrated conceptual framework for knowledge management. We identified six key elements of a knowledge management framework for the cancer program: evidence-based provincial guidelines, funding decisions, harmonized care pathways, targeted knowledge transfer projects, performance measurement and feedback to the system. We are establishing a process to characterize the explicit linkages and accountabilities between each of these elements as part of a broader cancer care quality agenda. We will implement the framework to support the start-up of the first of three new radiation treatment services in the province. The basic elements of a guidelines-supported cancer care system are not in doubt; how to unambiguously engage them within an integrated care system remains an area of intense interest.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Neil A Hagen
- Provincial clinical teams, Alberta Health Services Cancer Care, Calgary, Alberta.
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
18
|
Heymans MW, van Tulder MW, Esmail R, Koes BW, Poquet N, Maher CG, Lin CWC. Back schools for acute and subacute non-specific low-back pain. THE COCHRANE DATABASE OF SYSTEMATIC REVIEWS 2010. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.cd008325] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/11/2022]
|
19
|
Esmail R, Duchscherer G, Giesbrecht J, King J, Ritchie P, Zuege D. Prevention of ventilator-associated pneumonia in the calgary health region: a Canadian success story! ACTA ACUST UNITED AC 2008; 11:129-36. [PMID: 18382174 DOI: 10.12927/hcq.2008.19662] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/26/2022]
Abstract
This article describes the experiences of a Canadian multidisciplinary critical care team striving to reduce the incidence of ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP). Several interventions, including a VAP bundle, were used and applied across a health region. Our regional VAP rate has seen a steady decline over the past 12 months and has been largely under our goal of 9.8 cases per 1,000 ventilator-days. The team's success in lowering VAP has provided the momentum for sustained improvement, which has spread to other areas.
Collapse
|
20
|
Guzmán J, Esmail R, Karjalainen K, Malmivaara A, Irvin E, Bombardier C. WITHDRAWN: Multidisciplinary bio-psycho-social rehabilitation for chronic low-back pain. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2007:CD000963. [PMID: 17636646 DOI: 10.1002/14651858.cd000963.pub2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 24] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/06/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Chronic low back pain is, in many countries, the main cause of long term disability in middle age. Patients with chronic low back pain are often referred for multidisciplinary treatment. Previous published systematic reviews on this topic included no randomised controlled trials and pooled together controlled and non-controlled studies. OBJECTIVES To assess the effect of multidisciplinary bio-psycho-social rehabilitation on pain, function, employment, quality of life and global assessment outcomes in subjects with chronic disabling low back pain. SEARCH STRATEGY We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsychLIT, CINAHL, Health STAR, and The Cochrane Library from the beginning of the database to June 1998 using the comprehensive search strategy recommended by the Back Review Group of the Cochrane Collaboration. INTERVENTION specific key words for this review were: patient care team, patient care management, multidisciplinary, interdisciplinary, multiprofessional, multimodal, pain clinic and functional restoration. We also reviewed reference lists and consulted the editors of the Back Review Group of the Cochrane Collaboration. DESIGN randomised controlled trials comparing multidisciplinary bio-psycho-social rehabilitation with a non-multidisciplinary control intervention. POPULATION Adults with disabling low back pain of more than three months in duration. INTERVENTION Patients had to be assessed and treated by qualified professionals according to a plan that addresses physical and at least one of psychological, or social/occupational dimensions. OUTCOMES Only trials which reported treatment effect in at least one of pain, function, employment status, quality of life or global improvement.Exclusion: Pure educational interventions (back schools) and pure physical interventions were excluded. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS Selection, data extraction and quality grading of studies was done by two independent authors using pre-tested data forms. Study quality was assessed according to the scheme recommended by the Back Review Group of the Cochrane Collaboration. Trials with internal validity scores of five or more in a ten point scale were considered high quality. Discrepancies between authors were resolved by consensus or by a third author. Given the marked heterogeneity in study settings, interventions and control groups we decided not to pool trial results in a meta-analysis. Instead, we summarized findings by strength of evidence and nature of intervention and control treatments. The evidence was judged to be strong when multiple high quality trials produced generally consistent findings. It was judged to be moderate when multiple low quality or one high quality and one or more low quality trials produced generally consistent findings. Evidence was considered to be limited when only one randomised trial existed or if findings of existing trials were inconsistent. MAIN RESULTS Ten trials (12 randomised comparisons) were included. They randomised a total of 1964 patients with chronic low back pain. There was strong evidence that intensive multidisciplinary bio-psycho-social rehabilitation with a functional restoration approach improved function when compared with inpatient or outpatient non-multidisciplinary treatments. There was moderate evidence that intensive multidisciplinary bio-psycho-social rehabilitation with a functional restoration approach improved pain when compared with outpatient non-multidisciplinary rehabilitation or usual care. There was contradictory evidence regarding vocational outcomes of intensive multidisciplinary bio-psycho-social intervention. Some trials reported improvements in work readiness, but others showed no significant reduction in sickness leaves. Less intensive outpatient psycho-physical treatments did not improve pain, function or vocational outcomes when compared with non-multidisciplinary outpatient therapy or usual care. Few trials reported effects on quality of life or global assessments. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS The reviewed trials provide evidence that intensive multidisciplinary bio-psycho-social rehabilitation with a functional restoration approach improves pain and function. Less intensive interventions did not show improvements in clinically relevant outcomes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- J Guzmán
- Institute for Work & Health, 481 University Avenue, Suite 800, Toronto, Ontario, Canada, M5G 2E9.
| | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
21
|
Esmail R, Banack D, Cummings C, Duffett-Martin J, Rimmer K, Shultz J, Thurber T, Hulme T. Is your patient ready for transport? Developing an ICU patient transport decision scorecard. ACTA ACUST UNITED AC 2006; 9 Spec No:80-6. [PMID: 17087174 DOI: 10.12927/hcq.2013.18376] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/26/2022]
Abstract
Transport of patients from the intensive care unit (ICU) to another area of the hospital can pose serious risks if the patient has not been assessed prior to transport. Recently, the Department of Critical Care Medicine, Calgary Health Region, experienced two adverse events during transport. A subgroup of the Department's Patient Safety and Adverse Events team developed an ICU patient transport decision scorecard. This tool was tested through Plan-Do-Study-Act cycles and further revised using human factors principles. Staff, especially novice nurses, found the tool extremely useful in determining patient preparedness for transport.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Rosmin Esmail
- Calgary Health Region, Foothills Medical Centre, AB.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
22
|
Heymans MW, van Tulder MW, Esmail R, Bombardier C, Koes BW. Back schools for nonspecific low back pain: a systematic review within the framework of the Cochrane Collaboration Back Review Group. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2005; 30:2153-63. [PMID: 16205340 DOI: 10.1097/01.brs.0000182227.33627.15] [Citation(s) in RCA: 129] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/01/2023]
Abstract
STUDY DESIGN A systematic review within the Cochrane Collaboration Back Review Group. OBJECTIVES To assess the effectiveness of back schools for patients with nonspecific low back pain (LBP). SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA Since the introduction of the Swedish back school in 1969, back schools have frequently been used for treating patients with LBP. However, the content of back schools has changed and appears to vary widely today. METHODS We searched the MEDLINE and EMBASE databases and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials to November 2004 for relevant trials reported in English, Dutch, French, or German. We also screened references from relevant reviews and included trials. Randomized controlled trials that reported on any type of back school for nonspecific LBP were included. Four reviewers, blinded to authors, institution, and journal, independently extracted the data and assessed the quality of the trials. We set the high-quality level, a priori, at a trial meeting six or more of 11 internal validity criteria. Because data were clinically and statistically too heterogeneous to perform a meta-analysis, we used a qualitative review (best evidence synthesis) to summarize the results. The evidence was classified into four levels (strong, moderate, limited, or no evidence), taking into account the methodologic quality of the studies. We also evaluated the clinical relevance of the studies. RESULTS Nineteen randomized controlled trials (3,584 patients) were included in this updated review. Overall, the methodologic quality was low, with only six trials considered to be high-quality. It was not possible to perform relevant subgroup analyses for LBP with radiation versus LBP without radiation. The results indicate that there is moderate evidence suggesting that back schools have better short- and intermediate-term effects on pain and functional status than other treatments for patients with recurrent and chronic LBP. There is moderate evidence suggesting that back schools for chronic LBP in an occupational setting are more effective than other treatments and placebo or waiting list controls on pain, functional status, and return to work during short- and intermediate-term follow-up. In general, the clinical relevance of the studies was rated as insufficient. CONCLUSION There is moderate evidence suggesting that back schools, in an occupational setting, reduce pain and improve function and return-to-work status, in the short- and intermediate-term, compared with exercises, manipulation, myofascial therapy, advice, placebo, or waiting list controls, for patients with chronic and recurrent LBP. However, future trials should improve methodologic quality and clinical relevance and evaluate the cost-effectiveness of back schools.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- M W Heymans
- Department of Public and Occupational Health/EMGO-Institute, VU University Medical Center, Body@Work TNO VUmc, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
| | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
23
|
Abstract
This article will provide an overview of the quality improvement initiatives of the Department of Critical Care Medicine, Calgary Health Region. The Department has a Quality Council that is responsible for its quality improvement activities. The FOCUS-PDSA model is used for various projects including the development of guidelines and protocols. The Department has also participated in two collaboratives which use the Improvement Model methodology. It has 7 projects completed with 10 projects currently underway.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Rosmin Esmail
- Department of Critical Care Medicine, Calgary Health Region, Alberta, Canada.
| | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
24
|
Esmail R, Cummings C, Dersch D, Duchscherer G, Glowa J, Liggett G, Hulme T. Using Healthcare Failure Mode and Effect Analysis tool to review the process of ordering and administrating potassium chloride and potassium phosphate. Healthc Q 2005; 8 Spec No:73-80. [PMID: 16334076 DOI: 10.12927/hcq.2005.17668] [Citation(s) in RCA: 29] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 05/05/2023]
Abstract
During the spring of 2004, in the Calgary Health Region (CHR) two critical incidents occurred involving patients receiving continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT) in the intensive care unit (ICU). The outcome of these events resulted in the sudden death of both patients. The Department of Critical Care Medicine's Patient Safety and Adverse Events Team (PSAT), utilized the Healthcare Failure Mode and Effect Analysis (HFMEA) tool to review the process and conditions surrounding the ordering and administration of potassium chloride (KCI) and potassium phosphate (KPO4) in our ICUs. The HFMEA tool and the multidisciplinary team structure provided a solid framework for systematic analysis and prioritization of areas for improvement regarding the use of intravenous, high-concentration KCL and KPO4 in the ICU.
Collapse
|
25
|
Abstract
BACKGROUND Since the introduction of the Swedish back school in 1969, back schools have frequently been used for treating patients with low-back pain (LBP). However, the content of back schools has changed and appears to vary widely today. OBJECTIVES To assess the effectiveness of back schools for patients with non-specific LBP. SEARCH STRATEGY We searched the MEDLINE and EMBASE databases and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials to May 2003 for relevant trials reported in English, Dutch, French or German. We also screened references from relevant reviews and included trials. SELECTION CRITERIA Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that reported on any type of back school for non-specific LBP were included. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS Four reviewers, blinded to authors, institution and journal, independently extracted the data and assessed the quality of the trials. We set the high quality level, a priori, at a trial meeting six or more of 11 internal validity criteria. As data were clinically and statistically too heterogeneous to perform a meta-analysis, we used a qualitative review (best evidence synthesis) to summarize the results. The evidence was classified into four levels (strong, moderate, limited or no evidence), taking into account the methodological quality of the studies. We also evaluated the clinical relevance of the studies. MAIN RESULTS Nineteen RCTs (3584 patients) were included in this updated review. Overall, the methodological quality was low, with only six trials considered to be high quality. It was not possible to perform relevant subgroup analyses for LBP with radiation versus LBP without radiation. The results indicate that there is moderate evidence suggesting that back schools have better short and intermediate-term effects on pain and functional status than other treatments for patients with recurrent and chronic LBP. There is moderate evidence suggesting that back schools for chronic LBP in an occupational setting, are more effective than other treatments and placebo or waiting list controls on pain, functional status and return to work during short and intermediate-term follow-up. In general, the clinical relevance of the studies was rated as insufficient. REVIEWERS' CONCLUSIONS There is moderate evidence suggesting that back schools, in an occupational setting, reduce pain, and improve function and return-to-work status, in the short and intermediate-term, compared to exercises, manipulation, myofascial therapy, advice, placebo or waiting list controls, for patients with chronic and recurrent LBP. However, future trials should improve methodological quality and clinical relevance and evaluate the cost-effectiveness of back schools.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- M W Heymans
- VUMC/Institute for Research in Extramural Medicine, Van der Boechorststraat 7, Amsterdam, Netherlands, 1081 BT
| | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
26
|
Imrie K, Esmail R, Meyer RM. The role of high-dose chemotherapy and stem-cell transplantation in patients with multiple myeloma: a practice guideline of the Cancer Care Ontario Practice Guidelines Initiative. Ann Intern Med 2002; 136:619-29. [PMID: 11955031 DOI: 10.7326/0003-4819-136-8-200204160-00012] [Citation(s) in RCA: 28] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/22/2022] Open
Abstract
The Hematology Disease Site Group of the Cancer Care Ontario Practice Guidelines Initiative has systematically reviewed the published literature and, through a consensus process, developed an evidence-based practice guideline assessing the role of stem-cell transplantation in patients with multiple myeloma. The conclusions were validated by solicited feedback from 221 practitioners across Ontario, Canada. The guideline comprises six recommendations: 1) Autologous transplantation is recommended for patients with stage II or III myeloma and good performance status. Evidence of benefit is strongest for patients who are younger than 55 years of age and have a serum creatinine level less than 150 micromol/L (<1.7 mg/dL). Physicians must use clinical judgment in recommending transplantation to other patients. 2) Allogeneic transplantation is not recommended as routine therapy. 3) Patients potentially eligible for transplantation should be referred for assessment early after diagnosis and should not be extensively exposed to alkylating agents before collection of stem cells. 4) Autologous peripheral blood stem cells should be harvested early in the patient's treatment course. The best available data suggest that transplantation is most advantageous when performed as part of initial therapy. 5) The comparative data addressing the specifics of the transplantation process are insufficient to allow definitive recommendations. In the absence of such data, a single transplant with high-dose melphalan, with or without total-body irradiation, is suggested for patients undergoing transplantation outside a clinical trial. 6) At this time, no conclusions can be reached about the role of interferon therapy after transplantation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kevin Imrie
- Cancer Care Ontario Program in Evidence-Based Care, Ontario, Canada
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
27
|
Kouroukis CT, Browman GP, Esmail R, Meyer RM. Chemotherapy for older patients with newly diagnosed, advanced-stage, aggressive-histology non-Hodgkin lymphoma: a systematic review. Ann Intern Med 2002; 136:144-52. [PMID: 11790067 DOI: 10.7326/0003-4819-136-2-200201150-00012] [Citation(s) in RCA: 34] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/22/2022] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE To conduct a systematic review assessing chemotherapeutic regimens in patients at least 60 years of age with previously untreated, advanced-stage, aggressive-histology non-Hodgkin lymphoma. DATA SOURCES Computerized databases were searched for reports from 1966 to April 2000. Relevant journals, textbooks, and reference lists of published articles were hand searched. Abstract reports were not considered. STUDY SELECTION Randomized trials comparing different chemotherapy regimens were selected. Two independent assessors, who were blinded to authors, institution, and results of the report, reviewed the retrieved citations. DATA EXTRACTION One author abstracted data on patient characteristics, study quality score, survival, disease response and control, toxicity, and quality of life; pooling was not done because of study heterogeneity. DATA SYNTHESIS 12 randomized trials that compared chemotherapeutic regimens were reviewed. Progression-free and overall survival were improved when anthracycline-containing regimens, such as CHOP (cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone) or CTVP (cyclophosphamide, pirarubicin, vincristine, and prednisone), were compared with other regimens. CONCLUSIONS For treatment of older patients with advanced-stage, aggressive-histology lymphoma who do not have significant comorbid illnesses, an anthracycline-containing regimen, such as CHOP, given in standard doses and schedule, provides for superior outcomes compared with other regimens.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- C Tom Kouroukis
- Hamilton Regional Cancer Centre, 699 Concession Street, Hamilton, Ontario L8V 5C2, Canada
| | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
28
|
Abstract
BACKGROUND Chronic low back pain is, in many countries, the main cause of long term disability in middle age. Patients with chronic low back pain are often referred for multidisciplinary treatment. Previous published systematic reviews on this topic included no randomised controlled trials and pooled together controlled and non-controlled studies. OBJECTIVES To assess the effect of multidisciplinary bio-psycho-social rehabilitation on pain, function, employment, quality of life and global assessment outcomes in subjects with chronic disabling low back pain. SEARCH STRATEGY We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsychLIT, CINAHL, Health STAR, and The Cochrane Library from the beginning of the database to June 1998 using the comprehensive search strategy recommended by the Back Review Group of the Cochrane Collaboration. INTERVENTION specific key words for this review were: patient care team, patient care management, multidisciplinary, interdisciplinary, multiprofessional, multimodal, pain clinic and functional restoration. We also reviewed reference lists and consulted the editors of the Back Review Group of the Cochrane Collaboration. DESIGN randomised controlled trials comparing multidisciplinary bio-psycho-social rehabilitation with a non-multidisciplinary control intervention. POPULATION Adults with disabling low back pain of more than three months in duration. INTERVENTION Patients had to be assessed and treated by qualified professionals according to a plan that addresses physical and at least one of psychological, or social/occupational dimensions. OUTCOMES Only trials which reported treatment effect in at least one of pain, function, employment status, quality of life or global improvement. Exclusion: Pure educational interventions (back schools) and pure physical interventions were excluded. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS Selection, data extraction and quality grading of studies was done by two independent reviewers using pre-tested data forms. Study quality was assessed according to the scheme recommended by the Back Review Group of the Cochrane Collaboration. Trials with internal validity scores of five or more in a ten point scale were considered high quality. Discrepancies between reviewers were resolved by consensus or by a third reviewer. Given the marked heterogeneity in study settings, interventions and control groups we decided not to pool trial results in a meta-analysis. Instead, we summarized findings by strength of evidence and nature of intervention and control treatments. The evidence was judged to be strong when multiple high quality trials produced generally consistent findings. It was judged to be moderate when multiple low quality or one high quality and one or more low quality trials produced generally consistent findings. Evidence was considered to be limited when only one randomised trial existed or if findings of existing trials were inconsistent. MAIN RESULTS Ten trials (12 randomised comparisons) were included. They randomised a total of 1964 patients with chronic low back pain. There was strong evidence that intensive multidisciplinary bio-psycho-social rehabilitation with a functional restoration approach improved function when compared with inpatient or outpatient non-multidisciplinary treatments. There was moderate evidence that intensive multidisciplinary bio-psycho-social rehabilitation with a functional restoration approach improved pain when compared with outpatient non-multidisciplinary rehabilitation or usual care. There was contradictory evidence regarding vocational outcomes of intensive multidisciplinary bio-psycho-social intervention. Some trials reported improvements in work readiness, but others showed no significant reduction in sickness leaves. Less intensive outpatient psycho-physical treatments did not improve pain, function or vocational outcomes when compared with non-multidisciplinary outpatient therapy or usual care. Few trials reported effects on quality of life or global assessments. REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS The reviewed trials provide evidence that intensive multidisciplinary bio-psycho-social rehabilitation with a functional restoration approach improves pain and function. Less intensive interventions did not show improvements in clinically relevant outcomes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- J Guzmán
- University of Manitoba Faculty of Medicine, S112-750 Bannatyne Avenue, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada, R3E 0W3.
| | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
29
|
Guzmán J, Esmail R, Karjalainen K, Malmivaara A, Irvin E, Bombardier C. Multidisciplinary rehabilitation for chronic low back pain: systematic review. BMJ 2001; 322:1511-6. [PMID: 11420271 PMCID: PMC33389 DOI: 10.1136/bmj.322.7301.1511] [Citation(s) in RCA: 642] [Impact Index Per Article: 27.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/03/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To assess the effect of multidisciplinary biopsychosocial rehabilitation on clinically relevant outcomes in patients with chronic low back pain. DESIGN Systematic literature review of randomised controlled trials. PARTICIPANTS A total of 1964 patients with disabling low back pain for more than three months. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES Pain, function, employment, quality of life, and global assessments. RESULTS Ten trials reported on a total of 12 randomised comparisons of multidisciplinary treatment and a control condition. There was strong evidence that intensive multidisciplinary biopsychosocial rehabilitation with functional restoration improves function when compared with inpatient or outpatient non-multidisciplinary treatments. There was moderate evidence that intensive multidisciplinary biopsychosocial rehabilitation with functional restoration reduces pain when compared with outpatient non-multidisciplinary rehabilitation or usual care. There was contradictory evidence regarding vocational outcomes of intensive multidisciplinary biopsychosocial intervention. Some trials reported improvements in work readiness, but others showed no significant reduction in sickness leaves. Less intensive outpatient psychophysical treatments did not improve pain, function, or vocational outcomes when compared with non-multidisciplinary outpatient therapy or usual care. Few trials reported effects on quality of life or global assessments. CONCLUSIONS The reviewed trials provide evidence that intensive multidisciplinary biopsychosocial rehabilitation with functional restoration reduces pain and improves function in patients with chronic low back pain. Less intensive interventions did not show improvements in clinically relevant outcomes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- J Guzmán
- Institute for Work and Health, Toronto, Canada M4W 1E6
| | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
30
|
Abstract
STUDY DESIGN Systematic literature review. OBJECTIVE To critically appraise the methodology of systematic reviews of conservative therapies for chronic nonspecific low back pain and to study the relation between the methodologic quality and other characteristics of these reviews. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA Systematic reviews offer a concise summary of the evidence on treatment effectiveness, but flaws in their methodology can lead to invalid conclusions with serious implications for quality of patient care. METHODS Searches of MEDLINE, EMBASE, Psychinfo, and the Cochrane Library were conducted. Titles, abstracts, and articles were reviewed by two blinded authors using three inclusion criteria: 1) chronic nonspecific low back pain, 2) systematic review, and 3) conservative treatment intervention. Data were extracted from each review by three authors. RESULTS The search strategy retrieved 1102 titles and abstracts; 109 met inclusion criteria. A review of the full text of these articles excluded an additional 73 articles. Data abstraction and methodologic assessment were conducted on 36 articles reviewing 19 discrete interventions. The average quality score was 4.1, ranging from 1 (low) to 7 (high). There was a trend for recent reviews to be of higher quality. Fifty-six percent of the reviews had positive conclusions, but they had lower quality scores compared with those that had negative or uncertain conclusions. There were 27 (73%) qualitative and 10 (27%) quantitative summaries of results. CONCLUSIONS Although the overall quality of systematic reviews was satisfactory, the quality of the individual papers included in the reviews varied considerably. The reviews often provided contradictory evidence on the effectiveness of a wide range of commonly used conservative interventions for chronic nonspecific low back pain. These findings illustrate the pitfalls of systematic reviews where there are a number of low-quality trials and underscore the need for high-quality primary trials that will allow for more conclusive reviews.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- A D Furlan
- Institute for Work & Health, Toronto, Canada.
| | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
31
|
van Tulder M, Malmivaara A, Esmail R, Koes B. Exercise therapy for low back pain: a systematic review within the framework of the cochrane collaboration back review group. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2000; 25:2784-96. [PMID: 11064524 DOI: 10.1097/00007632-200011010-00011] [Citation(s) in RCA: 311] [Impact Index Per Article: 13.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/01/2023]
Abstract
STUDY DESIGN A systematic review of randomized controlled trials was performed. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA Exercise therapy is a widely used treatment for low back pain. OBJECTIVES To evaluate the effectiveness of exercise therapy for low back pain with regard to pain intensity, functional status, overall improvement, and return to work. METHODS The Cochrane Controlled Trials Register, Medline, Embase, PsycLIT, and reference lists of articles were searched. Randomized trials testing all types of exercise therapy for subjects with nonspecific low back pain with or without radiation into the legs were included. Two reviewers independently extracted data and assessed trial quality. Because trials were considered heterogeneous with regard to study populations, interventions, and outcomes, it was decided not to perform a meta-analysis, but to summarize the results using a rating system of four levels of evidence: strong, moderate, limited, or none. RESULTS In this review, 39 trials were identified. There is strong evidence that exercise therapy is not more effective for acute low back pain than inactive or other active treatments with which it has been compared. There is conflicting evidence on the effectiveness of exercise therapy compared with inactive treatments for chronic low back pain. Exercise therapy was more effective than usual care by the general practitioner and just as effective as conventional physiotherapy for chronic low back pain. CONCLUSIONS The evidence summarized in this systematic review does not indicate that specific exercises are effective for the treatment of acute low back pain. Exercises may be helpful for patients with chronic low back pain to increase return to normal daily activities and work.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- M van Tulder
- Institute for Research in Extramural Medicine, Free University, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
| | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
32
|
Abstract
OBJECTIVES to measure the extent to which the recommendations of a geriatric outreach assessment service were being followed, and to determine what patient-related factors were associated with compliance with assessment recommendations. METHODS eighty-one eligible patients or caregivers who had an assessment in a geriatric outreach service participated in a telephone interview. The interview focused on the use of health services and compliance with assessment recommendations. Patient-related variables obtained from charts included demographics, caregiver support and stability, health status and assessment recommendations. RESULTS overall compliance with recommendations from the geriatric outreach assessment service was 65%. Patients were less likely comply fully with recommendations if they had a high number of recommendations [odds ratio (OR) = 0.23; 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.12-0.46; P = 0.0001], inadequate caregiver support (OR = 0.212; 95% CI = 0.04 to 1.02; P = 0.0523), or the ability to transfer themselves independently (OR = 0.12; 95% CI = 0.02-0.63; P = 0.0124). They were more likely to have full compliance if they had normal vision (OR = 6.67; 95% CI = 1.22-36.46; P = 0.0284). CONCLUSION it is important to focus on key issues when developing service recommendations and on the role of the informal caregiver in facilitating compliance with them. Good communication between the patient or caregiver and the family physician and geriatric services can help to identify strategies which might improve acceptance of recommendations.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- R Esmail
- Program in Evidence-Based Care, Health Sciences Centre, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
33
|
Abstract
BACKGROUND Exercise therapy is a widely used treatment for low back pain. OBJECTIVES The objective of this review was to assess the effectiveness of exercise therapy for low back pain with regard to pain intensity, functional status, overall improvement and return to work. SEARCH STRATEGY We searched the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register (1999, issue 1), MEDLINE (1966 - April 1999), EMBASE (1988 - September 1998), PsycLIT (from 1984 to April 1999) and reference lists of articles. SELECTION CRITERIA Randomised trials of all types of exercise therapy for subjects with non-specific low back pain with or without radiation into the legs. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS Two reviewers independently extracted data and assessed trial quality. Because trials were considered heterogeneous with regard to study populations, interventions and outcomes, we decided not to perform a meta-analysis but to summarise the results using a rating system of four levels of evidence (strong, moderate, limited or no evidence). MAIN RESULTS 39 RCTs were identified. There is strong evidence that exercise therapy is not more effective than inactive or other active treatments it has been compared with for acute low back pain. There is conflicting evidence on the effectiveness of exercise therapy compared with inactive treatments for chronic low back pain. Exercise therapy was more effective than usual care by the general practitioner and equally effective as conventional physiotherapy for chronic low back pain. REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS The evidence summarised in this systematic review does not indicate that specific exercises are effective for the treatment of acute low back pain. Exercises may be helpful for chronic low back pain patients to increase return to normal daily activities and work.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- M W van Tulder
- Institute for Research in Extramural Medicine, Vrije Universiteit, van der Boechorststraat 7, Amsterdam, NETHERLANDS, 1081 BT.
| | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
34
|
Abstract
BACKGROUND Since the introduction of the Swedish back school in 1980, the content of back schools has changed and appears to vary widely today. Back schools are frequently used in the treatment of low back pain patients. OBJECTIVES The objective of this systematic review was to assess the effects of back schools for patients with non-specific low back pain. SEARCH STRATEGY We searched the Medline and Embase databases up to December 1997 and the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register up to December 1998 if reported in English, Dutch, French or German. We also screened references given in relevant reviews and identified randomised trials. SELECTION CRITERIA Only randomised trials that reported on any type of back school for non-specific low back pain were included. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS Two reviewers blinded with respect to authors, institution and journal independently extracted the data and assessed trial quality. Our preset "high quality" level was 6 or more out of 11 internal validity criteria with positive scores. As data were statistically and clinically too heterogeneous, a qualitative review (best evidence synthesis) was performed. The evidence was classified into 4 levels (strong, moderate, limited or no evidence) taking into account the methodological quality of the studies. MAIN RESULTS Fifteen RCTs were included in our systematic review. Overall, the methodological quality was low. Only 3 trials were considered high quality. It was not possible to make relevant subgroup analyses for radiation versus no radiation or to have a relevant subgroup of studies reporting on acute low back pain only. The results indicate that there is moderate evidence that back schools have better short-term effects than other treatments for chronic low back pain, and that there is moderate evidence that back schools in an occupational setting are more effective compared to 'placebo' or waiting list controls. REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS Back schools may be effective for patients with recurrent and chronic low back pain in occupational settings, but little is known about the cost-effectiveness of back schools.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- M W van Tulder
- Institute for Research in Extramural Medicine, Vrije Universiteit, van der Boechorststraat 7, Amsterdam, Netherlands, 1081 BT.
| | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
35
|
Keenan SP, Montgomery J, Chen LM, Esmail R, Inman KJ, Sibbald WJ. Ventilatory care in a selection of Ontario hospitals: bigger is not necessarily better! Critical Care Research Network (CCR-Net). Intensive Care Med 1998; 24:946-52. [PMID: 9803331 DOI: 10.1007/s001340050694] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/28/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To determine whether there is variability in the structure and process of ventilatory care in intensive care units (ICUs) of the hospitals of Southwestern Ontario. DESIGN Self-administered questionnaire-based survey. SETTING ICUs of selected community and teaching hospitals of Southwestern Ontario. PARTICIPANTS Head of respiratory therapy service of respective hospitals; in those hospitals without respiratory therapists, the ICU nurse manager. INTERVENTION Self-administered questionnaire. OUTCOME MEASURE(S) The availability of different models of ventilators and respiratory therapist and physician coverage were assessed. In addition, the use of clinical practice guidelines, respiratory therapists, and the nursing role in ventilatory care were determined. RESULTS In general, the structure of ventilatory care, including availability of different modes of ventilation, and coverage by respiratory therapists and physicians was more comprehensive in larger hospitals. However, the availability of some modes of ventilation varied more than expected among hospitals of comparable size. Similarly, variability in the process of ventilatory care, defined by the availability of clinical practice guidelines and the roles of respiratory therapists varied both within and among hospitals of different size. CONCLUSIONS The structure and process of ventilatory care in this sample of Southwestern Ontario ICUs was found to be variable. Not all this variability could be accounted for by hospital size, suggesting a potential for improvement in overall ventilatory care. Further study is required before any specific recommendations can be considered.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- S P Keenan
- Richard Ivey Critical Care Trauma Center, Victoria Hospital London, Ontario, Canada.
| | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
36
|
Keenan SP, Busche KD, Chen LM, Esmail R, Inman KJ, Sibbald WJ. Withdrawal and withholding of life support in the intensive care unit: a comparison of teaching and community hospitals. The Southwestern Ontario Critical Care Research Network. Crit Care Med 1998; 26:245-51. [PMID: 9468160 DOI: 10.1097/00003246-199802000-00018] [Citation(s) in RCA: 112] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/06/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES To compare the incidence of withdrawal or withholding of life support (WD/WHLS), and to identify similarities and differences in the process of the withdrawal of life support (WDLS) between teaching and community hospitals' intensive care units (ICUs). DESIGN Prospective cohort study, with some data obtained by retrospective chart review. SETTING The ICUs of three teaching hospitals and six community hospitals. PATIENTS All patients who died in these nine ICUs over a 6-mo period. INTERVENTIONS None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS Data on admitting diagnosis, cause of death, mode of death (death despite active treatment, withdrawal or withholding of life support), those initiating and involved in WDLS, and modalities of life support withdrawn were gathered for patients dying in the ICU over a 6-mo period. One hundred sixty patients in community hospitals and 292 in teaching hospitals died in their respective ICUs over the 6-mo period. We found a difference in the distribution of mode of death between community hospitals and teaching hospitals, resulting from a greater proportion of patients dying as a result of withholding life support in community hospitals (11.9% vs. 3.8% withheld, respectively, p = .004). Among the six community hospitals and three teaching hospitals, we found a difference in the proportion of patients dying despite active treatment compared with those dying as a result of WD/WHLS (p = .042 and p = .044, respectively). Initiation of WDLS by physicians was more frequent at teaching hospitals (81% vs. 61%, p = .0005), while families more commonly initiated WDLS at community hospitals (34% vs. 19%, p = .005). A greater proportion of patients in teaching hospitals were receiving mechanical ventilation (99% vs. 89%) and vasopressors (76% vs. 65%) before WDLS. Similar proportions had mechanical ventilation withdrawn (68% and 74%, community hospitals and teaching hospitals, respectively), while there was a trend for fewer patients in community hospitals to have vasopressors withdrawn (56% vs. 70%, p = .082). The time to death after WDLS had begun was longer in community hospitals compared with teaching hospitals (0.74 +/- 1.38 days vs. 0.27 +/- 0.79 [SD] days, p = .0028). CONCLUSIONS The incidence of WD/WHLS was similar in community hospitals and teaching hospitals; however, withholding of life support was more common in community hospitals. The process of WDLS appears to differ between community hospitals and teaching hospitals.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- S P Keenan
- Richard Ivey Critical Care Trauma Center, Victoria Hospital, London, ON, Canada
| | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
37
|
|
38
|
Ng SW, Esmail R, Sibbald WJ, Doig GS. Potential savings involved in the purchase of low-cost, high-volume medical commodities as established from a community hospital survey. Healthc Manage Forum 1996; 9:24-9. [PMID: 10164210 DOI: 10.1016/s0840-4704(10)60758-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/16/2022]
Abstract
Health technology refers to the instruments, equipment, drugs and procedures used in health care delivery, as well as the organizations supporting it. Health technology assessment, which is the process of conducting investigations to establish the criteria for efficacious, effective and efficient patient care, is becoming increasingly important in an era of diminishing resources. This survey of 39 community hospitals in southwestern Ontario found that improved purchasing strategies can result in substantial cost savings which can in turn be used to improve patient care. The study shows that optimizing the price of basic hospital commodities could save an average community hospital as much as $625,000 per year.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- S W Ng
- Michael G. DeGroote School of Business, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario
| | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
39
|
|