Search

The formulation of clinical recommendations pertaining to bariatric surgery is essential in guiding healthcare professionals. However, the extensive and continuously evolving body of literature in bariatric surgery presents considerable challenge for staying abreast of latest developments and efficient information acquisition. Artificial intelligence (AI) has the potential to streamline access to the salient points of clinical recommendations in bariatric surgery. The study aims to appraise the quality and readability of AI-chat-generated answers to frequently asked clinical inquiries in the field of bariatric and metabolic surgery. Remote. Question prompts inputted into AI large language models (LLMs) and were created based on pre-existing clinical practice guidelines regarding bariatric and metabolic surgery. The prompts were queried into 3 LLMs: OpenAI ChatGPT-4, Microsoft Bing, and Google Bard. The responses from each LLM were entered into a spreadsheet for randomized and blinded duplicate review. Accredited bariatric surgeons in North America independently assessed appropriateness of each recommendation using a 5-point Likert scale. Scores of 4 and 5 were deemed appropriate, while scores of 1–3 indicated lack of appropriateness. A Flesch Reading Ease (FRE) score was calculated to assess the readability of responses generated by each LLMs. There was a significant difference between the 3 LLMs in their 5-point Likert scores, with mean values of 4.46 (SD.82), 3.89 (.80), and 3.11 (.72) for ChatGPT-4, Bard, and Bing (P <.001). There was a significant difference between the 3 LLMs in the proportion of appropriate answers, with ChatGPT-4 at 85.7%, Bard at 74.3%, and Bing at 25.7% (P <.001). The mean FRE scores for ChatGPT-4, Bard, and Bing, were 21.68 (SD 2.78), 42.89 (4.03), and 14.64 (5.09), respectively, with higher scores representing easier readability. LLM-based AI chat models can effectively generate appropriate responses to clinical questions related to bariatric surgery, though the performance of different models can vary greatly. Therefore, caution should be taken when interpreting clinical information provided by LLMs, and clinician oversight is necessary to ensure accuracy. Future investigation is warranted to explore how LLMs might enhance healthcare provision and clinical decision-making in bariatric surgery. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: The objective of this systematic review is to characterize the peer-reviewed literature investigating YouTube as a source of patient education for patients undergoing surgery. Summary Background Data: YouTube is the largest online video sharing platform and has become a substantial source of health information that patients are likely to access before surgery, yet there has been no systematic assessment of peer-reviewed studies. A comprehensive literature search was conducted using EMBASE, MEDLINE, and Ovid Health- Star from inception through to December of 2021. Methods: All primary studies evaluating YouTube as a source of patient education relating to surgical procedures (general, cardiac, urology, otolaryngology, plastic, vascular) were included. Study screening and data extraction occurred in duplicate with two reviewers. Characteristics extracted included video length, view count, upload source, overall video educational quality, and quality of individual studies. Results: Among 6,453 citations, 56 studies were identified that examined 6,797 videos with 547 hours of content and 1.39 billion views. There were 49 studies that evaluated the educational quality of the videos. A total of 43 quality assessment tools were used, with each study using a mean of 1.90 assessment tools. Per the global rating for assessments, 34/49 studies (69%) concluded that the overall quality of educational content was poor. Conclusions: While the impact of non-peer-reviewed YouTube videos on patient knowledge for surgery is unclear, the large amount of online content suggests that they are in demand. The overall educational content of these videos is poor, however, and there is substantial heterogeneity in the quality assessment tools used in their evaluation. A peerreviewed and standardized approach to online education with video content is needed to better support patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Knowledge translation and dissemination are some of the main challenges that affect evidence-based medicine. Web 2.0 platforms promote the sharing and collaborative development of content. Executable knowledge tools, such as order sets, are a knowledge translation tool whose localization is critical to its effectiveness but a challenge for organizations to develop independently. Objective: This paper describes a Web 2.0 resource, referred to as the collaborative network (TCN), for order set development designed to share executable knowledge (order sets). This paper also analyzes the scope of its use, describes its use through network analysis, and examines the provision and use of order sets in the platform by organizational size. Methods: Data were collected from Think Research’s TxConnect platform. We measured interorganization sharing across Canadian hospitals using descriptive statistics. A weighted chi-square analysis was used to evaluate institutional size to share volumes based on institution size, with post hoc Cramer V score to measure the strength of association. Results: TCN consisted of 12,495 order sets across 683 diagnoses or processes. Between January 2010 and March 2015, a total of 131 health care organizations representing 360 hospitals in Canada downloaded order sets 105,496 times. Order sets related to acute coronary syndrome, analgesia, and venous thromboembolism were most commonly shared. COVID-19 order sets were among the most actively shared, adjusting for order set lifetime. A weighted chi-square analysis showed nonrandom downloading behavior (P<.001), with medium-sized institutions downloading content from larger institutions acting as the most significant driver of this variance (chi-gram=124.70). Conclusions: In this paper, we have described and analyzed a Web 2.0 platform for the sharing of order set content with significant network activity. The robust use of TCN to access customized order sets reflects its value as a resource for health care organizations when they develop or update their own order sets. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To appraise the quality of reporting on guideline, protocol, and algorithm implementations in adult trauma settings according to the Revised Standards for Quality Improvement Reporting Excellence (SQUIRE 2.0). Background: At present we do not know if published reports of guideline implementations in trauma settings are of sufficient quality to facilitate replication by other centers wishing to implement the same or similar guidelines. Methods: A systematic review of the literature was conducted. Articles were identified through electronic databases and hand searching relevant trauma journals. Studies meeting inclusion criteria focused on a guideline, protocol, or algorithm that targeted adult trauma patients 18 years and/or trauma patient care providers, and evaluated the effectiveness of guideline, protocol, or algorithm implementation in terms of change in clinical practice or patient outcomes. Each included study was assessed in duplicate for adherence to the 18-item SQUIRE 2.0 criteria. The primary endpoint was the proportion of studies meeting at least 80% (score 15) of SQUIRE 2.0. Results: Of 7368 screened studies, 74 met inclusion criteria. Thirty-nine percent of studies scored 80% on SQUIRE 2.0. Criteria that were met most frequently were abstract (93%), problem description (93%), and specific aims (89%). The lowest scores appeared in the funding (28%), context (47%), and results (54%) criteria. No study indicated using SQUIRE 2.0 as a guideline to writing the report. Conclusions: Significant opportunity exists to improve the utility of guideline implementation reports in adult trauma settings, particularly in the domains of study context and the implications of context for study outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The fragility index (FI) measures the robustness of statistically significant findings in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) by quantifying the minimum number of event conversions required to reverse a dichotomous outcome's statistical significance. In vascular surgery, many clinical guidelines and critical decision-making points are informed by a handful of key RCTs, especially regarding open surgical versus endovascular treatment. The objective of this study is to evaluate the FI of RCTs with statistically significant primary outcomes that compared open vs endovascular surgery in vascular surgery. In this meta-epidemiological study and systematic review, MEDLINE, Embase, and CENTRAL were searched for RCTs comparing open versus endovascular treatments for abdominal aortic aneurysms, carotid artery stenosis, and peripheral arterial disease to December 2022. RCTs with statistically significant primary outcomes were included. Data screening and extraction were conducted in duplicate. The FI was calculated by adding an event to the group with the smaller number of events while subtracting a nonevent to the same group until Fisher's exact test produced a nonstatistically significant result. The primary outcome was the FI and proportion of outcomes where the loss to follow-up was greater than the FI. The secondary outcomes assessed the relationship of the FI to disease state, presence of commercial funding, and study design. Overall, 5133 articles were captured in the initial search with 21 RCTs reporting 23 different primary outcomes being included in the final analysis. The median FI (first quartile, third quartile) was 3 (3, 20) with 16 outcomes (70%) reporting a loss to follow-up greater than its FI. Mann-Whitney U test revealed that commercially funded RCTs and composite outcomes had greater FIs (median, 20.0 [5.5, 24.5] vs median, 3.0 [2.0, 5.5], P =.035; median, 21 [8, 38] vs median, 3.0 [2.0, 8.5], P =.01, respectively). The FI did not vary between disease states (P =.285) or between index and follow-up trials (P =.147). There were significant correlations between the FI and P values (Pearson r = 0.90; 95% confidence interval, 0.77-0.96), and the number of events (r = 0.82; 95% confidence interval, 0.48-0.97). A small number of event conversions (median, 3) are needed to alter the statistical significance of primary outcomes in vascular surgery RCTs evaluating open surgical and endovascular treatments. Most studies had loss to follow-up greater than its FI, which can call into question trial results, and commercially funded studies had a greater FI. The FI and these findings should be considered in future trial design in vascular surgery. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To develop comprehensive guidance that captures international impacts, causes, and solutions related to ED crowding and access block. Methods: Emergency physicians representing 15 countries from all the International Federation for Emergency Medicine (IFEM) regions composed the task force. Monthly meetings were held via video‐conferencing software to achieve consensus for report content. The report was submitted and approved by the IFEM Board on June 1, 2020. Results: A total of 14 topic dossiers, each relating to an aspect of ED crowding, were researched and completed collaboratively by members of the task force. Conclusions: The IFEM report is a comprehensive document intended to be used in whole or by section to inform and address aspects of ED crowding and access block. Overall, ED crowding is a multifactorial issue requiring systems‐wide solutions applied at local, regional, and national levels. Access block is the predominant contributor of ED crowding in most parts of the world. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To develop comprehensive guidance that captures international impacts, causes, and solutions related to emergency department crowding and access block., Methods: Emergency physicians representing 15 countries from all IFEM regions composed the Task Force. Monthly meetings were held via video-conferencing software to achieve consensus for report content. The report was submitted and approved by the IFEM Board on June 1, 2020., Results: A total of 14 topic dossiers, each relating to an aspect of ED crowding, were researched and completed collaboratively by members of the Task Force., Conclusions: The IFEM report is a comprehensive document intended to be used in whole or by section to inform and address aspects of ED crowding and access block. Overall, ED crowding is a multifactorial issue requiring systems-wide solutions applied at local, regional, and national levels. Access block is the predominant contributor of ED crowding in most parts of the world.