Search

Teamwork is fundamental to surgical patient safety but is inconsistently measured. While many tools have been developed for elective intraoperative situations, it is unclear which is the most robust. This systematic review aimed to identify tools to measure the teamwork of operating room teams. Studies were included if they examined the measurement properties of these tools. PsycINFO, Embase (via OVID), CINAHL, ERIC, Medline and Medline in Process (via OVID) were searched through to May 3, 2019, as were reference lists of included studies and previously published relevant reviews. Retrieved articles were screened and data extracted in duplicate by two independent reviewers. Quality was assessed using the COSMIN checklist. Of the 2121 references identified, 14 studies of six assessment tools were included. Tools were validated across various specialties, mostly in clinical rather than simulated settings. The Observational Teamwork Assessment for Surgery (OTAS) and Operating Theater Team Non-Technical Skills Assessment Tool (NOTECHS) were the most frequently investigated tools. Though acceptable for assessing teamwork, both NOTECHS and OTAS rely on the questionable assumption that the teamwork of a team is equivalent to the sum of individual performances. Future studies may investigate other assessment tools that assess the whole team as the unit of analysis along with the potential of these tools to provide healthcare providers with meaningful feedback in clinical practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction. Occupational therapists have shown low adoption rates for many evidence-based practices. One such practice is the limited uptake of standardized outcome measures such as the Canadian Occupational Performance Measure. Use of this measure has not consistently translated into practice despite decades of encouragement. Theory-based approaches to understanding healthcare provider behaviour change are needed if we are to realize the goal of attaining practice that is in keeping with evidence. This study utilized the Theoretical Domains Framework, a theory-based approach for understanding barriers to evidence-based practice, in order to increase our understanding of the limited uptake of the Canadian Occupational Performance Measure in occupational therapy practice. Methods. Theoretical Domains Framework methods were followed. First, primary data was collected from occupational therapists through semistructured interviews that focused on key behaviour change domains as they related to the use of the Canadian Occupational Performance Measure. Two independent researchers coded interview data into domains, derived belief statements from the data, and used belief strength, conflict, and frequency to determine the more and less influential domains for using the Canadian Occupational Performance Measure. Results. Interviews with 15 practicing occupational therapists across a range of practice areas yielded six key behaviour change domains for increasing the use of the Canadian Occupational Performance Measure. The more relevant domains were Social influences, Social professional role and identity, Beliefs about consequences, Beliefs about capabilities, Skills, and Behavioural regulation). The other eight domains were found to be less relevant. Conclusion. We identified important domains and beliefs that influence the use of the Canadian Occupational Performance Measure by occupational therapists. Results inform our understanding of the use of this measure in practice and identify potential targets for behaviour change interventions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Congenital malformations of lung, such as congenital lobar emphysema, cystic adenomatoid malformation, bronchial cyst, pulmonary sequestration are of rare occurrence. However, our hospital being in a rural area attracts a large number of patients with complex malformations. Methods: This retrospective analysis is done to evaluate diagnostic accuracy, safety and efficacy and outcomes of open lung resections at a rural hospital. Results: 16 children with congenital lung malformation underwent open resection in a rural hospital, with no mortality and minimal morbidity, no complications and more than 24 months follow-up. Conclusion: Open lung resections are found to be safe, effective in a rural setting also. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Progress in Modern Biomedicine is the property of Publishing House of Progress in Modern Biomedicine and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Controversy exists on the optimal age for elective resection of asymptomatic congenital pulmonary airway malformation. Current recommendations vary widely, highlighting the overall lack of consensus. A systematic search of Embase, MEDLINE, CINAL, and CENTRAL was conducted in January 2016. Identified citations were screening independently in duplicate and consensus was required for inclusion. Results were pooled using inverse variance fixed effects meta-analysis. Meta-analysis results indicate no statistically significant differences for complications within the 3-month and 6-month age comparison groups [odds ratio (OR) 4.20, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.78-22.77, I 2 = 0%; OR 2.39, 95% CI 0.63-9.11, I 2 = 0%, respectively]. Older patients were significantly favoured for 3-month and 6-month age comparison groups for length of hospital stay [mean difference (MD) 4.13, 95% CI 2.31-5.96, I 2 = 0%; MD 3.38, 95% CI 0.44-6.31, I 2 = 0%, respectively]. Borderline statistical significance was observed for chest tube duration in patients ≥6 months of age (MD 1.06, 95% CI 0.02-2.09, I 2 = 0%). No mortalities were recorded. Surgical treatment appears to be safe at all ages, with no mortalities and similar rates of complications between age groups. The included evidence was not sufficient to make a conclusive recommendation on optimal age for elective resection. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Critically ill adults with acute kidney injury (AKI) experience considerable morbidity and mortality. Controversy remains regarding the optimal renal replacement intervention for these patients. Our systematic review aimed to determine the effect(s) of sustained low-efficiency dialysis (SLED) compared with continuous renal replacement (CRRT) therapy on relevant patient outcomes. A systematic search of Medline, Embase, CINAHL and the Cochrane Library was conducted. Identified citations were screened independently in duplicate for relevance, and the methodological quality of included studies was evaluated. Data were extracted on study, patient and intervention characteristics and relevant clinical outcomes. Results were pooled using inverse variance fixed and random effectsmeta-analysis. A total of 1564 patients from 18 studieswere included. Meta-analysis results indicated no statistically significant difference in our primary outcome, overall proportion of renal recovery (risk ratio (RR) 0.87, 95%confidence interval (CI) 0.63-1.20, I2 = 66%). No significant difference was observed for the secondary outcome of time to renal recovery (mean difference 1.33, 95% CI 0.23-2.88, I2=0%). Statistically, SLED was marginally favoured over CRRT for the secondary outcome of mortality (RR 1.21, 95% CI 1.02-1.43, I2= 47%); however, this diminished when sensitivity analysis of only randomized controlled trials was conducted (RR 1.25, 95%CI 1.00-1.57, I2=0%). There appears to be no clear for advantage continuous renal replacement in the hemodynamically unstable patient. Currently, both modalities are safe and effective means of treating AKI in the critically ill adult. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: To determine whether open or laparoscopic pyloromyotomy is superior for the treatment of hypertrophic pyloric stenosis in infants.Methods: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CENTRAL for articles comparing laparoscopic and open procedures. We conducted meta-analyses when possible and described other results narratively.Results: Our meta-analyses revealed no significant difference in our primary outcome of major complications [risk difference (RD) 0.03, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.03 to 0.08, P = 0.35, I 2 = 55%], or in our secondary outcomes of all perioperative complications (RD -0.01, 95% CI -0.06 to 0.04, P = 0.74, I 2 = 0%), operative time [mean difference (MD) 0.68, 95% CI -3.60 to 4.79, P = 0.76, I 2 = 86%], and length of stay (MD -2.60, 95% CI -6.05 to 0.86, P = 0.14, I 2 = 0%). Laparoscopy was associated with a shorter time to full feeds (standardized mean difference -0.25, 95% CI -0.43 to -0.06, P = 0.009, I 2 = 8%) and a slightly higher rate of inadequate pyloromyotomy (RD 0.04, 95% CI 0.00-0.08, P = 0.03, I 2 = 0%). Results from one randomized controlled trial indicate a better cosmetic outcome after laparoscopy compared to open procedure.Conclusion: There is no strong evidence to support a recommendation of one procedure over the other; therefore, the choice of laparoscopic or open procedure should be left to the discretion of the surgeon. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Incomplete reporting of study methods and results has become a focal point for failures in the reproducibility and translation of findings from preclinical research. Here we demonstrate that incomplete reporting of preclinical research is not limited to a few elements of research design, but rather is a broader problem that extends to the reporting of the methods and results. We evaluated 47 preclinical research studies from a systematic review of acute lung injury that use mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) as a treatment. We operationalized the ARRIVE (Animal Research: Reporting of In Vivo Experiments) reporting guidelines for pre-clinical studies into 109 discrete reporting sub-items and extracted 5,123 data elements. Overall, studies reported less than half (47%) of all sub-items (median 51 items; range 37–64). Across all studies, the Methods Section reported less than half (45%) and the Results Section reported less than a third (29%). There was no association between journal impact factor and completeness of reporting, which suggests that incomplete reporting of preclinical research occurs across all journals regardless of their perceived prestige. Incomplete reporting of methods and results will impede attempts to replicate research findings and maximize the value of preclinical studies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]