Search

Your search keyword '"Nathan Pace"' showing total 3 results
Start Over Author "Nathan Pace" Topic medicine
3 results on '"Nathan Pace"'

1. Protocol for a systematic review and network meta-analysis of the management of new onset atrial fibrillation in critically unwell adult patients

Author

Brian W. Johnston, Ruaraidh Hill, Rui Duarte, Chung Shen Chean, Danny F. McAuley, Bronagh Blackwood, Nathan Pace, and Ingeborg D. Welters

Subjects
Atrial fibrillation, Intensive care, Systematic review, Network meta-analysis, Medicine
Abstract

Abstract Background New onset atrial fibrillation is the most commonly encountered arrhythmia in critically unwell patients with a reported incidence of 4% to 29%. The occurrence of new onset atrial fibrillation may precipitate acute heart failure and lead to thromboembolic complications as well as being associated with increased in-hospital and in intensive care unit (ICU) mortality. Despite being common, much of our current knowledge regarding the treatment of new onset atrial fibrillation comes from patients with chronic atrial fibrillation or post cardiac surgery. It is unclear if management strategies in these patient cohorts can be applied to new onset atrial fibrillation in the general ICU. This protocol for a systematic review and network meta-analysis aims to address this uncertainty and define what is the most effective management strategy for the treatment of new onset atrial fibrillation (NOAF) in acutely unwell adult patients. Methods In this systematic review and network meta-analysis, we plan to search electronic databases (Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials [CENTRAL], MEDLINE, EMBASE, Science Citation Index Expanded on Web of Science and relevant trial registries) for relevant randomised and non-randomised trials. Citations will be reviewed by title, abstract and full text by two independent reviewers and disagreement resolved by discussion and a third independent reviewer, if necessary. The Cochrane Risk of Bias tool will be used to assess risk of bias in randomised trials and the Risk of Bias in Nonrandomised Studies of Interventions (ROBINS-I) tool will be used for non-randomised studies. Statistical analysis will be carried out using R package meta and netmeta. We will first conduct a pairwise meta-analysis. If conditions for indirect comparison are satisfied and suitable data are available, we will conduct network meta-analysis using frequentist methodology. Treatments will be ranked according to efficacy with associated P-scores. We will assess the quality of the evidence in the pairwise using GRADE methodology and network meta-analysis comparisons in the CINeMA module in R package meta. Discussion Our review will be the first to assess direct and indirect evidence to assess the efficacy and rank the treatments available for new onset atrial fibrillation in critically unwell patients. Our review findings will be applicable to the care of people in a range of acute settings including, ICU, the emergency department and acute medical units. Systematic review registration PROSPERO registry number: CRD42019121739.

Published
2019
Full Text
View/download PDF

2. Systematic review and consensus definitions for the Standardized Endpoints in Perioperative Medicine (StEP) initiative: cardiovascular outcomes

Author

W. Scott Beattie, Manoj Lalu, Matthew Bocock, Simon Feng, Duminda N. Wijeysundera, Peter Nagele, Lee A. Fleisher, Andrea Kurz, Bruce Biccard, Kate Leslie, Simon Howell, Giovanni Landoni, Hilary Grocott, Andre Lamy, Toby Richards, Paul Myles, T.J. Gan, Phil Peyton, Dan Sessler, Martin Tramèr, Alan Cyna, Gildasio S. De Oliveira, Christopher Wu, Mark Jensen, Henrik Kehlet, Mari Botti, Oliver Boney, Guy Haller, Mike Grocott, Tim Cook, Lee Fleisher, Mark Neuman, David Story, Russell Gruen, Sam Bampoe, Lis Evered, David Scott, Brendan Silbert, Diederik van Dijk, Cor Kalkman, Matthew Chan, Rod Eckenhoff, Lars Rasmussen, Lars Eriksson, Scott Beattie, Duminda Wijeysundera, Richard J. Bartlett, Robert McMonnies, Jacob Gerstl, Mohammad Jay, David Kishlyansky, Matthew Machina, Matthew Bobcock, Rupert Pearse, Monty Mythen, Jaume Canet, Ann Moller, Tony Gin, Marcus Schultz, Paolo Pelosi, Marcelo Gabreu, Emmanuel Futier, Ben Creagh-Brown, Tom Abbott, Andy Klein, Tomas Corcoran, D. Jamie Cooper, Stefan Dieleman, Elisabeth Diouf, David McIlroy, Rinaldo Bellomo, Andrew Shaw, John Prowle, Keyvan Karkouti, Josh Billings, David Mazer, Mohindas Jayarajah, Michael Murphy, Justyna Bartoszko, Rob Sneyd, Steve Morris, Ron George, Ramani Moonesinghe, Mark Shulman, Meghan Lane-Fall, Ulrica Nilsson, Nathalie Stevenson, Jamie (DJ) Cooper, Wilton van Klei, Luca Cabrini, Tim Miller, Nathan Pace, Sandy Jackson, Donal Buggy, Tim Short, Bernhard Riedel, Vijay Gottumukkala, Bilal Alkhaffaf, Mark Johnson, Beattie, W. S., Lalu, M., Bocock, M., Feng, S., Wijeysundera, D. N., Nagele, P., Fleisher, L. A., Kurz, A., Biccard, B., Leslie, K., Howell, S., Landoni, G., Grocott, H., Lamy, A., Richards, T., Myles, P., Cooper, D. J., Gan, T. J., Peyton, P., Sessler, D., Tramer, M., Cyna, A., De Oliveira, G. S., Wu, C., Jensen, M., Kehlet, H., Botti, M., Boney, O., Haller, G., Grocott, M., Cook, T., Fleisher, L., Neuman, M., Story, D., Gruen, R., Bampoe, S., Evered, L., Scott, D., Silbert, B., van Dijk, D., Kalkman, C., Chan, M., Eckenhoff, R., Rasmussen, L., Eriksson, L., Beattie, S., Wijeysundera, D., Bartlett, R. J., Mcmonnies, R., Gerstl, J., Jay, M., Kishlyansky, D., Machina, M., Bobcock, M., Pearse, R., Mythen, M., Canet, J., Moller, A., Gin, T., Schultz, M., Pelosi, P., Gabreu, M., Futier, E., Creagh-Brown, B., Abbott, T., Klein, A., Corcoran, T., Dieleman, S., Diouf, E., Mcilroy, D., Bellomo, R., Shaw, A., Prowle, J., Karkouti, K., Billings, J., Mazer, D., Jayarajah, M., Murphy, M., Bartoszko, J., Sneyd, R., Morris, S., George, R., Moonesinghe, R., Shulman, M., Lane-Fall, M., Nilsson, U., Stevenson, N., Cooper, J. D., van Klei, W., Cabrini, L., Miller, T., Pace, N., Jackson, S., Buggy, D., Short, T., Riedel, B., Gottumukkala, V., Alkhaffaf, B., Johnson, M., Tramer, Martin, and Haller, Guy Serge Antoine

Subjects
medicine.medical_specialty, Consensus, Heart disease, Delphi Technique, Endpoint Determination, perioperative medicine, MACE, Cochrane Library, Perioperative Care, 03 medical and health sciences, Patient safety, cardiovascular events, outcome measures, 0302 clinical medicine, Postoperative Complications, 030202 anesthesiology, Anesthesiology, medicine, Humans, clinical trials, myocardial infarction, standardised endpoint, Intensive care medicine, Adverse effect, Clinical Trials as Topic, Perioperative medicine, ddc:617, business.industry, Cardiovascular Diseases, Perioperative Medicine, Research Design, Perioperative, medicine.disease, Clinical trial, Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, business
Abstract

Background: Adverse cardiovascular events are a leading cause of perioperative morbidity and mortality. The definitions of perioperative cardiovascular adverse events are heterogeneous. As part of the international Standardized Endpoints in Perioperative Medicine initiative, this study aimed to find consensus amongst clinical trialists on a set of standardised and valid cardiovascular outcomes for use in future perioperative clinical trials.Methods: We identified currently used perioperative cardiovascular outcomes by a systematic review of the anaesthesia and perioperative medicine literature (PubMed/Ovid, Embase, and Cochrane Library). We performed a three-stage Delphi consensus-gaining process that involved 55 clinician researchers worldwide. Cardiovascular outcomes were first shortlisted and the most suitable definitions determined. These cardiovascular outcomes were then assessed for validity, reliability, feasibility, and clarity.Results: We identified 18 cardiovascular outcomes. Participation in the three Delphi rounds was 100% (n=19), 71% (n=55), and 89% (n=17), respectively. A final list of nine cardiovascular outcomes was elicited from the consensus: myocardial infarction, myocardial injury, cardiovascular death, non-fatal cardiac arrest, coronary revascularisation, major adverse cardiac events, pulmonary embolism, deep vein thrombosis, and atrial fibrillation. These nine cardiovascular outcomes were rated by the majority of experts as valid, reliable, feasible, and clearly defined.Conclusions: These nine consensus cardiovascular outcomes can be confidently used as endpoints in clinical trials designed to evaluate perioperative interventions with the goal of improving perioperative outcomes.

Published
2021

3. Systematic review and consensus definitions for the Standardised Endpoints in Perioperative Medicine (StEP) initiative : infection and sepsis

Author

Jonathan Barnes, Jennifer Hunter, Steve Harris, Manu Shankar-Hari, Elisabeth Diouf, Ib Jammer, Cor Kalkman, Andrew A. Klein, Tomas Corcoran, Stefan Dieleman, Michael P.W. Grocott, Michael G. Mythen, Paul Myles, Tang Joon Gan, Andrea Kurz, Phil Peyton, Dan Sessler, Martin Tramèr, Alan Cyna, Gildasio S. De Oliveira, Christopher Wu, Mark Jensen, Henrik Kehlet, Mari Botti, Oliver Boney, Guy Haller, Mike Grocott, Tim Cook, Lee Fleisher, Mark Neuman, David Story, Russell Gruen, Sam Bampoe, Lis Evered, David Scott, Brendan Silbert, Diederik van Dijk, Matthew Chan, Hilary Grocott, Rod Eckenhoff, Lars Rasmussen, Lars Eriksson, Scott Beattie, Duminda Wijeysundera, Giovanni Landoni, Kate Leslie, Bruce Biccard, Simon Howell, Peter Nagele, Toby Richards, Andre Lamy, Manoj Lalu, Rupert Pearse, Monty Mythen, Jaume Canet, Ann Moller, Tony Gin, Marcus Schultz, Paolo Pelosi, Marcelo Gabreu, Emmanuel Futier, Ben Creagh-Brown, Alexander Fowler, Tom Abbott, Andy Klein, David James Cooper, David McIlroy, Rinaldo Bellomo, Andrew Shaw, John Prowle, Keyvan Karkouti, Josh Billings, David Mazer, Mohindas Jayarajah, Michael Murphy, Justyna Bartoszko, Rob Sneyd, Steve Morris, Ron George, Ramani Moonesinghe, Mark Shulman, Meghan Lane-Fall, Ulrica Nilsson, Nathalie Stevenson, Jamie (DJ) Cooper, Wilton van Klei, Luca Cabrini, Tim Miller, Nathan Pace, Sandy Jackson, Donal Buggy, Tim Short, Bernhard Riedel, Vijay Gottumukkala, Bilal Alkhaffaf, Mark Johnson, Intensive Care Medicine, AII - Infectious diseases, ACS - Diabetes & metabolism, ACS - Pulmonary hypertension & thrombosis, ACS - Microcirculation, Tramer, Martin, and Haller, Guy Serge Antoine

Subjects
medicine.medical_specialty, Consensus, Delphi Technique, Endpoint Determination, Delphi method, perioperative medicine, Perioperative Care/standards, postoperative outcome, Surgical Wound Infection/therapy, Postoperative outcome, Perioperative Care, Sepsis, Perioperative medicine, sepsis, Core outcome measures, Respiratory Tract Infections/therapy, core outcome measures, infection, standardised endpoints, surgical site infection, Humans, Infection, Respiratory Tract Infections, Surgical Wound Infection, Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, Anesthesiology, Outcome Assessment, Health Care, Endpoint Determination/standards, medicine, Attention, Standardised endpoints, Intensive care medicine, Infections/therapy, ddc:617, business.industry, Sepsis/therapy, Perioperative, anaesthesia, medicine.disease, Clinical trial, Clinical research, Quality and Patient Safety, business, Surgical site infection
Abstract

Background: Perioperative infection and sepsis are of fundamental concern to perioperative clinicians. However, standardised endpoints are either poorly defined or not routinely implemented. The Standardised Endpoints in Perioperative Medicine (StEP) initiative was established to derive a set of standardised endpoints for use in perioperative clinical trials.Methods: We undertook a systematic review to identify measures of infection and sepsis used in the perioperative literature. A multi-round Delphi consensus process that included more than 60 clinician researchers was then used to refine a recommended list of outcome measures.Results: A literature search yielded 1857 titles of which 255 met inclusion criteria for endpoint extraction. A long list of endpoints, with definitions and timescales, was generated and those potentially relevant to infection and sepsis circulated to the theme subgroup and then the wider StEP-COMPAC working group, undergoing a three-stage Delphi process. The response rates for Delphi rounds 1, 3, and 3 were 89% (n=8), 67% (n=62), and 80% (n=8), respectively. A set of 13 endpoints including fever, surgical site, and organ-specific infections as defined by the US Centres for Disease Control and Sepsis-3 are proposed for future use.Conclusions: We defined a consensus list of standardised endpoints related to infection and sepsis for perioperative trials using an established and rigorous approach. Each endpoint was evaluated with respect to validity, reliability, feasibility, and patient centredness. One or more of these should be considered for inclusion in future perioperative clinical trials assessing infection, sepsis, or both, thereby permitting synthesis and comparison of future results.

Published
2019

Catalog

Books, media, physical & digital resources
See catalog results