Search

Background Primary care is a critical partner for antimicrobial stewardship efforts given its high human antibiotic usage. Peer comparison audit and feedback (A&F) is often used to reduce inappropriate antibiotic prescribing. The design and implementation of A&F may impact its effectiveness. There are no best practice guidelines for peer comparison A&F in antibiotic prescribing in primary care. Objective To develop best practice guidelines for peer comparison A&F for antibiotic prescribing in primary care in high income countries by leveraging international expertise via the Joint Programming Initiative on Antimicrobial Resistance—Primary Care Antibiotic Audit and Feedback Network. Methods We used a modified Delphi process to achieve convergence of expert opinions on best practice statements for peer comparison A&F based on existing evidence and theory. Three rounds were performed, each with online surveys and virtual meetings to enable discussion and rating of each best practice statement. A five-point Likert scale was used to rate consensus with a median threshold score of 4 to indicate a consensus statement. Results The final set of guidelines include 13 best practice statements in four categories: general considerations (n = 3), selecting feedback recipients (n = 1), data and indicator selection (n = 4), and feedback delivery (n = 5). Conclusion We report an expert-derived best practice recommendations for designing and evaluating peer comparison A&F for antibiotic prescribing in primary care. These 13 statements can be used by A&F designers to optimize the impact of their quality improvement interventions, and improve antibiotic prescribing in primary care., BACKGROUND: Primary care is a critical partner for antimicrobial stewardship efforts given its high human antibiotic usage. Peer comparison audit and feedback (A&F) is often used to reduce inappropriate antibiotic prescribing. The design and implementation of A&F may impact its effectiveness. There are no best practice guidelines for peer comparison A&F in antibiotic prescribing in primary care. OBJECTIVE: To develop best practice guidelines for peer comparison A&F for antibiotic prescribing in primary care in high income countries by leveraging international expertise via the Joint Programming Initiative on Antimicrobial Resistance-Primary Care Antibiotic Audit and Feedback Network. METHODS: We used a modified Delphi process to achieve convergence of expert opinions on best practice statements for peer comparison A&F based on existing evidence and theory. Three rounds were performed, each with online surveys and virtual meetings to enable discussion and rating of each best practice statement. A five-point Likert scale was used to rate consensus with a median threshold score of 4 to indicate a consensus statement. RESULTS: The final set of guidelines include 13 best practice statements in four categories: general considerations (n = 3), selecting feedback recipients (n = 1), data and indicator selection (n = 4), and feedback delivery (n = 5). CONCLUSION: We report an expert-derived best practice recommendations for designing and evaluating peer comparison A&F for antibiotic prescribing in primary care. These 13 statements can be used by A&F designers to optimize the impact of their quality improvement interventions, and improve antibiotic prescribing in primary care.

The last years have seen an increase in Man-at-the-End (MATE) attacks against software applications, both in number and severity. However, software protection, which aims at mitigating MATE attacks, is dominated by fuzzy concepts and security-through-obscurity. This paper presents a rationale for adopting and standardizing the protection of software as a risk management process according to the NIST SP800-39 approach. We examine the relevant constructs, models, and methods needed for formalizing and automating the activities in this process in the context of MATE software protection. We highlight the open issues that the research community still has to address. We discuss the benefits that such an approach can bring to all stakeholders. In addition, we present a Proof of Concept (PoC) decision support system that instantiates many of the discussed construct, models, and methods and automates many activities in the risk analysis methodology for the protection of software. Despite being a prototype, the PoC's validation with industry experts indicated that several aspects of the proposed risk management process can already be formalized and automated with our existing toolbox and that it can actually assist decision-making in industrially relevant settings., Comment: Preprint submitted to Computers & Security. arXiv admin note: substantial text overlap with arXiv:2011.07269

Study Objectives: International guidelines recommend using benzodiazepine receptor agonists (BZRA) for maximally four weeks. Nevertheless, long-term use for chronic insomnia disorder remains a common practice. This study aimed to test the effectiveness of blended care for discontinuing long-term BZRA use in general practice. Methods: A pragmatic cluster randomized controlled superiority trial compared blended care to usual care through urine toxicology screening. In the intervention, care by the general practitioner (GP) was complemented by an interactive e-learning program, based on cognitive behavioral therapy for insomnia. Adults using BZRA daily for minimally 6 months were eligible. Participants were clustered at the level of the GP surgery for allocation (1:1). Effectiveness was measured as the proportion of patients who had discontinued at one-year follow-up. Data analysis followed intention-to-treat principles. Results: In total, 916 patients in 86 clusters, represented by 99 GPs, were randomized. Primary outcome data was obtained from 727 patients (79%). At one-year follow-up, 82 patients (18%) in blended care, compared to 91 patients (20%) in usual care, had discontinued. There was no statistically significant effect for the intervention (OR: 0.924; 95% CI: 0.60; 1.43). No adverse events were reported to the research team. Conclusions: The findings did not support the superiority of blended care over usual care. Both strategies showed clinical effectiveness, with an average of 19% of patients having discontinued at one-year follow-up. Further research is important to study the effect of structurally implementing digital interventions in general practice., SCOPUS: ar.j, info:eu-repo/semantics/published

Background: The increasing use of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) in the treatment of both advanced and early stages of various malignancies has resulted in a substantial increase in the incidence of cardiovascular (CV) immune-related adverse events (irAEs). The current follow-up guidelines are based on anecdotal evidence and expert opinions, due to a lack of solid data and prospective studies. As many questions remain unanswered, cardiac monitoring, in patients receiving ICIs, is not always implemented by oncologists. Hence, an urgent need to investigate the possible short- and long-term CV effects of ICIs, as ICI approval is continuing to expand to the (neo)adjuvant setting. Methods: We have initiated a prospective, multicenter study, i.e. the CAVACI trial, in which a minimum of 276 patients with a solid tumor, eligible for ICI treatment, will be enrolled. The study consists of routine investigations of blood parameters (troponin and N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) levels, in particular) and a thorough CV follow-up (electrocardiograms, transthoracic echocardiograms, and coronary calcium scoring) at fixed time points for a total period of two years. The primary endpoint is the cumulative incidence of troponin elevation in the first three months of ICI treatment, compared to baseline levels. Furthermore, secondary endpoints include incidence above the upper limit of normal of both troponin and NT-proBNP levels, evolution in troponin and NT-proBNP levels, the incidence of CV abnormalities/major adverse cardiac events, evaluation of associations between patient characteristics/biochemical parameters and CV events, transthoracic echocardiography parameters, electrocardiography parameters, and progression of coronary atherosclerosis. Recruitment of patients started in January 2022. Enrolment is ongoing in AZ Maria Middelares, Antwerp University Hospital, AZ Sint-Vincentius Deinze, and AZ Sint-Elisabeth Zottegem. Trial registration: ClinicalTria, SCOPUS: ar.j, info:eu-repo/semantics/published

Man-at-the-end (MATE) attackers have full control over the system on which the attacked software runs, and try to break the confidentiality or integrity of assets embedded in the software. Both companies and malware authors want to prevent such attacks. This has driven an arms race between attackers and defenders, resulting in a plethora of different protection and analysis methods. However, it remains difficult to measure the strength of protections because MATE attackers can reach their goals in many different ways and a universally accepted evaluation methodology does not exist. This survey systematically reviews the evaluation methodologies of papers on obfuscation, a major class of protections against MATE attacks. For 571 papers, we collected 113 aspects of their evaluation methodologies, ranging from sample set types and sizes, over sample treatment, to performed measurements. We provide detailed insights into how the academic state of the art evaluates both the protections and analyses thereon. In summary, there is a clear need for better evaluation methodologies. We identify nine challenges for software protection evaluations, which represent threats to the validity, reproducibility, and interpretation of research results in the context of MATE attacks and formulate a number of concrete recommendations for improving the evaluations reported in future research papers.