Search

INTRODUCTION: Blinding is a methodologically important aspect in randomised controlled trials yet frequently overlooked in trials of spinal manual therapy interventions for back pain. To help inform the blinding methods of a future, double-placebo-controlled trial comparing spinal manual therapy and nerve root injection for lumbosacral radicular pain, we set four objectives: (1) to assess the feasibility of blinding participants, randomly allocated to an active or placebo-control spinal manual therapy intervention protocol, (2) to assess the feasibility of blinding outcome assessors within the trial, (3) to explore the influence of spinal manual therapy experience and low back pain on blinding, and (4) to explore factors contributing to perceptions about intervention assignment among participants and outcome assessors. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Two-parallel-group, single-centre, placebo-controlled, methodological blinding feasibility randomised trial. We will recruit between 60 and 100 adults with or without back pain and with or without experience of spinal manual therapy from Zurich, Switzerland. Participants will be randomised to either an active spinal manual therapy or a placebo-control spinal manual therapy protocol-both interventions delivered over two study visits, up to two weeks apart. The primary outcome is participant blinding using the Bang blinding index within each intervention arm immediately after each of the two study visits. Secondary outcomes are participant blinding using the James blinding index, outcome assessor blinding (Bang and James blinding indices), self-reported factors influencing perceived intervention assignment among participants and outcome assessors, and participant-reported credibility and expectancy of study interventions. Other outcomes-included to blind the study objective from participants-are lumbar spine range of motion, self-rated general health, satisfaction with care, pain intensity, and function. Intervention provider outcomes include intervention component fidelity and quality of intervention delivery. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The independent ethics commission of Canton Zurich granted ethical approval for this study (KEK 2023-00381). Written informed consent will be obtained from all participants. Findings will be disseminated in scientific conferences and a peer-reviewed publication and inform the blinding methods of a future double-placebo controlled trial comparing spinal manual therapy and nerve root injection for lumbosacral radicular pain-the SALuBRITY trial. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT05778396.

Objectives: To assess the current quality of surgical outcome reporting in the medical literature and to provide recommendations for improvement. Background: In 1996, The Lancet labeled surgery as a "comic opera" mostly referring to the poor quality of outcome reporting in the literature impeding improvement in surgical quality and patient care. Methods: We screened 3 first-tier and 2 second-tier surgical journals, as well as 3 leading medical journals for original articles reporting on results of surgical procedures published over a recent 18-month period. The quality of outcome reporting was assessed using a prespecified 12-item checklist. Results: Six hundred twenty-seven articles reporting surgical outcomes were analyzed, including 125 randomized controlled trials. Only 1 (0.2%) article met all 12 criteria of the checklist, whereas 356 articles (57%) fulfilled less than half of the criteria. The poorest reporting was on cumulative morbidity burden, which was missing in 94% of articles (n= 591) as well as patient-reported outcomes missing in 83% of publications (n=518). Comparing journal groups for the individual criterion, we found moderate to very strong statistical evidence for better quality of reporting in high versus lower impact journals for 7 of 12 criteria and strong statistical evidence for better reporting of patientreported outcomes in medical versus surgical journals (P<0·001). Conclusions: The quality of outcomes reporting in the medical literature remains poor, lacking improvement over the past 20 years onmost key end points. The implementation of standardized outcome reporting is urgently needed to minimize biased interpretation of data thereby enabling improved patient care and the elaboration of meaningful guidelines. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: A significant proportion of the global population has been infected with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) at some point since the onset of the pandemic. Although most individuals who develop coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) recover without complications, about 6% have persistent symptoms, referred to as post-COVID-19 condition (PCC). Intervention studies investigating treatments that potentially alleviate PCC-related symptoms and thus aim to mitigate the global public health burden and healthcare costs linked to PCC are desperately needed. The PYCNOVID trial investigates the effects of Pycnogenol®, a French maritime pine bark extract with anti-inflammatory and antioxidative properties, versus placebo on patient-reported health status in people with PCC. Methods: This is a single-center, placebo-controlled, quadruple blind, randomized trial. We aim to randomly assign 150 individuals with PCC (1:1 ratio) to receive either 200 mg Pycnogenol® or placebo daily for 12 weeks. Randomization is stratified for duration of PCC symptoms (≤ 6 months versus > 6 months) and presence of symptomatic chronic disease(s). The primary endpoint is perceived health status at 12 weeks (EuroQol—Visual Analogue Scale) adjusted for baseline values and stratification factors. Secondary endpoints include change in self-reported PCC symptoms, health-related quality of life, symptoms of depression and anxiety, cognitive function, functional exercise capacity, physical activity measured with accelerometry, and blood biomarkers for endothelial health, inflammation, coagulation, platelet function, and oxidative stress. Investigators, study participants, outcome assessors, and data analysts are blinded regarding the intervention assignment. Individuals with PCC were involved in the design of this study. Discussion: This is the first trial to investigate the effects of Pycnogenol® versus placebo on patient-reported health status in people with PCC. Should the trial proof clinical effectiveness, Pycnogenol® may serve as a therapeutic approach to mitigate symptoms associated with PCC. Trial registration: The study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov. :NCT05890534, June 6, 2023. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: Some people do not fully recover from an acute viral infection and experience persistent symptoms or incomplete recovery for months or even years. This is not unique to the SARS-CoV-2 virus and history shows that post-viral conditions like post COVID-19 condition, also referred to as Long Covid, are not new. In particular, during and after pandemics caused by respiratory viruses in which large parts of the population were infected or exposed, professional and public attention was increased, not least because of the large number of people affected. Methods: Given the current relevance of the topic, this article aims to narratively review and summarize the literature on post-viral symptoms during past pandemics and to supplement and illustrate it with Swiss examples from the pandemics of 1890, 1918-1920 and later. Results: Post-viral diseases were an increasingly emphasised health topic during and after past pandemics triggered by respiratory infections over the last 150 years. Conclusion: In the next pandemic, it should not be surprising that post-viral conditions will again play a role, and pandemic plans should reflect this. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Although there are guidelines and ideas on how to improve public health education, translating innovative approaches into actual training programs remains challenging. In this article, we provide an overview of some initiatives that tried to put this into action in different parts of the world, and present the Emerging Health Care Leader (EHCL), a novel training program developed in Switzerland. Policy Options and Recommendations: Looking at the experience of the EHCL, we propose policymakers and other interested stakeholders who wish to help reform public health education to support these initiatives not only through funding, but by valuing them through the integration of early career healthcare leaders in projects where their developing expertise can be practically applied. Conclusion: By openly sharing the experiences, strengths, weaknesses, and lessons learned with the EHCL program, we aim to foster a transparent debate on how novel training programs in public health can be organised. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Qualitative research and mixed methods are core competencies for epidemiologists. In response to the shortage of guidance on graduate course development, we wrote a course development guide aimed at faculty and students designing similar courses in epidemiology curricula. The guide combines established educational theory with faculty and student experiences from a recent introductory course for epidemiology and biostatistics doctoral students at the University of Zurich and Swiss Federal Institute of Technology, Zurich. We propose a student-centred course with inverse classroom teaching and practice exercises with faculty input. Integration of student input during the course development process helps align the course syllabus with student needs. The proposed course comprises six sessions that cover learning outcomes in comprehension, knowledge, application, analysis, synthesis and evaluation. Following an introductory session, the students engage in face-to-face interviews, focus group interviews, observational methods, analysis and how qualitative and quantitative methods are integrated in mixed methods. Furthermore, the course covers interviewer safety, research ethics, quality in qualitative research and a practice session focused on the use of interview hardware, including video and audio recorders. The student-led teaching characteristic of the course allows for an immersive and reflective teaching-learning environment. After implementation of the course and learning from faculty and student perspectives, we propose these additional foci: a student project to apply learned knowledge to a case study; integration in mixed-methods; and providing faculty a larger space to cover theory and field anecdotes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: As there is no ranking designed for schools of Public Health, the aim of this project was to create one. Methods: To design the Public Health Academic Ranking (PHAR), we used the InCites Benchmarking and Analytics™ software and the Web Of Science™ Core Collection database. We collected bibliometric data on 26 schools of Public Health from each continent, between August and September 2022. We included 11 research indicators/ scores, covering four criteria (productivity, quality, accessibility for readers, international collaboration), for the period 2017–2021. For the Swiss School of Public Health (SSPH+), a network gathering faculties across different universities, a specific methodology was used, with member-specific research queries. Results: The five top schools of the PHAR were: London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, Public Health Foundation of India, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, SSPH+, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. Conclusion: The PHAR allows worldwide bibliometric ordering of schools of Public Health. As this is a pilot project, the results must be taken with caution. This article aims to critically discuss its methodology and future improvements. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Study design: Single-centre, two-parallel group, methodological randomised controlled trial to assess blinding feasibility. Background: Trials of manual therapy interventions of the back face methodological challenges regarding blinding feasibility and success. We assessed the feasibility of blinding an active manual soft tissue mobilisation and control intervention of the back. We also assessed whether blinding is feasible among outcome assessors and explored factors influencing perceptions about intervention assignment. Methods: On 7–8 November 2022, 24 participants were randomly allocated (1:1 ratio) to active or control manual interventions of the back. The active group (n = 11) received soft tissue mobilisation of the lumbar spine. The control group (n = 13) received light touch over the thoracic region with deep breathing exercises. The primary outcome was blinding of participants immediately after a one-time intervention session, as measured by the Bang blinding index (Bang BI). Bang BI ranges from –1 (complete opposite perceptions of intervention received) to 1 (complete correct perceptions), with 0 indicating 'random guessing'—balanced 'active' and 'control' perceptions within an intervention arm. Secondary outcomes included blinding of outcome assessors and factors influencing perceptions about intervention assignment among both participants and outcome assessors, explored via thematic analysis. Results: 24 participants were analysed following an intention-to-treat approach. 55% of participants in the active manual soft tissue mobilisation group correctly perceived their group assignment beyond chance immediately after intervention (Bang BI: 0.55 [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.25 to 0.84]), and 8% did so in the control group (0.08 [95% CI, −0.37 to 0.53]). Bang BIs in outcome assessors were 0.09 (−0.12 to 0.30) and −0.10 (−0.29 to 0.08) for active and control participants, respectively. Participants and outcome assessors reported varying factors related to their perceptions about intervention assignment. Conclusions: Blinding of participants allocated to an active soft tissue mobilisation of the back was not feasible in this methodological trial, whereas blinding of participants allocated to the control intervention and outcome assessors was adequate. Findings are limited due to imprecision and suboptimal generalisability to clinical settings. Careful thinking and consideration of blinding in manual therapy trials is warranted and needed. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT05822947 (retrospectively registered) [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Genetic defects in the interferon (IFN) system or neutralizing autoantibodies against type I IFNs contribute to severe COVID-19. Such autoantibodies were proposed to affect post–COVID-19 syndrome (PCS), possibly causing persistent fatigue for >12 weeks after confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection. In the current study, we investigated 128 patients with PCS, 21 survivors of severe COVID-19, and 38 individuals who were asymptomatic. We checked for autoantibodies against IFN-α, IFN-β, and IFN-ω. Few patients with PCS had autoantibodies against IFNs but with no neutralizing activity, indicating a limited role of type I IFNs in PCS pathogenesis. In a subset consisting of 28 patients with PCS, we evaluated IFN-stimulated gene activity and showed that it did not correlate with fatigue. In conclusion, impairment of the type I IFN system is unlikely responsible for adult PCS. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To define the concept of surgeon-scientists and identify the root causes of their decline in number and impact. The secondary aim was to provide actionable remedies., Background: Surgeons who conduct research in addition to patient care are referred to as «surgeon-scientists». While their value to society remains undisputed, their numbers and associated impact have been plunging. While reasons have been well identified along with proposals for countermeasures, their application have largely failed., Methods: We conducted a systematic review covering all aspects of surgeon-scientists together with a global online survey among 141 young academic surgeons. Using gap analysis, we determined implementation gaps for proposed measures. Then, we developed a comprehensive rescue package., Results: A surgeon-scientist must actively and continuously engage in both patient care and research. Competence in either field must be established through protected training and criteria of excellence, particularly reflecting contribution to innovation. The decline of surgeon-scientists has reached unprecedented magnitude. Leadership turning hospitals into «profit-factories» is one reason, a flawed selection process not exclusively based on excellence another. Most importantly, the appreciation for the academic mission has vanished. Along with fundamentally addressing these root causes, surgeon-scientists' path to excellence must be streamlined, and their continuous devotion for innovation cherished., Conclusion: The journey of the surgeon-scientist is at crossroads. As society, we either adapt and shift our priorities again towards innovation or capitulate to the greed for profit, permanently losing these invaluable professionals. Successful rescue packages must not only involve hospitals and universities but also the political sphere., (Copyright © 2024 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: To provide improved guidance for the consistent application of the Clavien-Dindo classification (CDC) and Comprehensive Complication Index (CCI®) in challenging clinical scenarios., Background: Standardized outcome reporting is key for proper assessment of surgical procedures. A recent consensus conference recommended the CDC and the CCI® for assessing postoperative morbidity. Several challenging scenarios for grading complications still require evidence-based guidance, and the use of the two metrics in RCTs remains unexplored., Methods: We assessed the use of the CDC and CCI® as an outcome measure in a systematic literature search. Additionally, we asked 163 international surgeons to critically evaluate and independently grade complications in 20 complex clinical scenarios. Finally, a core group of five experts used this information to develop consistent recommendations., Results: Until July 2023, 1327 RCTs selected the CDC and/or CCI® to assess morbidity. Annual use was steadily increasing with now over 200 new RCTs per year. However, only a third (n=335) of published RCTs provided the complete range of CDC grades, including all subgrades. Eighty-nine out of 163 surgeons (response rate 55%) completed the questionnaire that served as basis for the recommendations: Repetitive interventions that are required to treat one complication, complications followed by further complications, complications occurring prior to referral, and expected and unrelated complications to the original procedure should all be counted separately and included in the CCI®. Invasive blank diagnostic interventions should not be considered a complication., Conclusion: The increasing use of the CDC and CCI® in RCTs highlights the importance of their standardized application. The current consensus on various difficult scenarios may offer novel guidance for the consistent use of the CDC and CCI®, aiming to improve complication reporting, and better-quality control, ultimately benefiting all healthcare stakeholders, and first and foremost, all patients., (Copyright © 2024 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)