1,720,998 research outputs found
Effects of implementing a care pathway for colorectal cancer surgery in ten European hospitals: an international multicenter pre-post-test study
No full textAdherence to evidence-based recommendations is variable and generally low. This is also followed in colorectal surgery, despite the availability of the ERAS® protocol. The aim of the study was to evaluate the effect of implementing a care pathway for perioperative care in colorectal cancer surgery on outcomes and protocol adherence. So, we performed an international pre-test-post-test multicenter study, performed in ten hospitals in four European countries. The measures used included length of stay, morbidity and mortality, and documentation and adherence on intervention and patient level. Unadjusted pre-test-post-test differences were analyzed following an analysis adjusted for patient-mix variables. Importance-performance analysis was used to map the relationship between importance and performance of individual interventions. In total, 381 patients were included. Length of stay decreased from 12.6 to 10.7 days (p = 0.0230). Time to normal diet and walking also decreased significantly. Protocol adherence improved from 56 to 62% (p < 0.00001). Adherence to individual interventions remained highly variable. Importance-performance analysis showed 30 interventions were scored as important, of which 19 had an adherence < 70%, showing priorities for improvement. Across hospitals, change in protocol adherence ranged from a 13% decrease to a 22% increase. Implementing a care pathway for colorectal cancer surgery reduced length of stay, time to normal diet and walking. Documentation and protocol adherence improved after implementing the care pathway. However, not in all participating hospitals protocol adherence improved. Only in 25% of patients, protocol adherence of ≥ 70% was achieved, suggesting a large group is at risk for underuse. Importance-performance analysis showed which interventions are important, but have low adherence, prioritizing improvement efforts
Peer support by health care providers in aftermath of patient safety incidents: a cross-sectional study
Full text linkAIM: To investigate the health care professionals' preferences pertaining to support in the aftermath of patient safety incidents and potential variation thereof depending on the degree of harm. BACKGROUND: Peer support systems are available to support health care professionals in the aftermath of patient safety incidents. It is unclear which type of support is best offered by whom. METHODS: A cross-sectional study in 32 Dutch hospitals. RESULTS: In total, 2,362 nurses and 1,404 doctors indicated they were involved in patient safety incidents at any time during their career (86%). Less than 10% of health care providers had spoken with professional support, and less than 20% admitted a need to do so. They used different support. A higher degree of harm related to higher odds of desiring support. Respondents mainly wanted to understand what happened and how it can be prevented. CONCLUSION: The desired support of health care professionals in the aftermath of patient safety incidents depends on the level of harm. IMPLICATION FOR NURSING MANAGEMENT: Health care professionals seem to mostly rely on persons they are close with, and they mainly desire information related to the aftermath of patient safety incidents. This should be taken into account when support programmes are set up.sponsorship: This study was carried out with an unconditional grant from VvAA (VvAA)status: Published onlin
The determinants of expert opinion in the development of care pathways: insights from an exploratory cluster analysis
Full text linkBACKGROUND: We performed a secondary exploratory cluster analysis on the data collected from the validation phase of the study leading to the development of the model care pathway (CP) for Myasthenia Gravis (MG), in which a panel of 85 international experts were asked some characteristics about themselves and their opinion about the model CP. Our aim was to identify which characteristics of the experts play a role in the genesis of their opinion. METHODS: We extracted the questions probing an opinion and those describing a characteristic of the expert from the original questionnaire. We performed a multiple correspondence analysis (MCA) and a subsequent hierarchical clustering on principal component (HCPC) on the opinion variables, integrating the characteristic variables as supplementary (predicted). RESULTS: After reducing the dimensionality of the questionnaire to three dimensions we noticed that the not-appropriateness judgement of the clinical activities may overlap with the completeness one. From the HCPC it seems that the working setting of the expert may play a crucial role in determining the opinion about the setting of the sub-processes of MG: shifting from a cluster where the experts do not work in sub-specialist settings to one where the experts are working in them, the opinion changes accordingly from a mono-disciplinary setting to a multi-disciplinary one. Another interesting result is that the experience in neuromuscular diseases (NMD) measured in years and the expert typology (whether general neurologist or NMD expert) seem not to contribute significantly to the opinions. CONCLUSIONS: These findings might indicate a poor ability of the expert to discriminate what is not appropriate from what is not complete. Also, the opinion of the expert might be influenced by the working setting, but not by the experience in NMD (as measured in years).sponsorship: The principal study [9] was funded with a grant from UCB pharma to European Pathway Association (EPA). (UCB pharma)status: Publishe
Going Beyond Counting First Authors in Author Co-citation Analysis
Full text linkThe present study examines one of the fundamental aspects of author co-citation analysis (ACA) - the way co-citation
counts are defined. Co-citation counting provides the data on which all subsequent statistical analyses and mappings
are based, and we compare ACA results based on two different types of co-citation counting - the traditional type that
only counts the first one among a cited work's authors on the one hand and a non-traditional type that takes into
account the first 5 authors of a cited work on the other hand. Results indicate that the picture produced through this non-traditional author co-citation counting contains more coherent author groups and is therefore considerably clearer. However, this picture represents fewer specialties in the research field being studied than that produced through the traditional first-author co-citation counting when the same number of top-ranked authors is selected and analyzed. Reasons for these effects are discussed
Oxygen uptake efficiency slope: betrouwbaarheid en prognostische waarde in patiënten met coronair hartlijden
No full textstatus: Publishe
Variations on the Author
Full text link“Variations on the Author” discusses two of Eduardo Coutinho’s recent films (Um Dia na Vida, from 2010, and Últimas Conversas, posthumously released in 2015) and their contribution to the general question of documentary authorship. The director’s filmography is characterized by a consistent yet self-effacing form of authorial self-inscription: Coutinho often features as an interviewer that rather than express opinions propels discourses; an interviewer that is good at listening. This mode of self-inscription characterizes him as an author who is not expressive but who is nonetheless markedly present on the screen. In Um Dia na Vida, however, Coutinho is completely absent form the image, while Últimas Conversas, on the contrary, includes a confessional prologue that moves the director from the margins to the center of his films. This article examines the ways in which these works stand out in the filmography of a director who offers new insights into the notion of cinematic authorship
Development of a model care pathway for adults undergoing colorectal cancer surgery: Evidence-based key interventions and indicators
No full textRATIONALE, AIMS, AND OBJECTIVES:
During the last decades, perioperative care for patients with colorectal cancer has shifted towards more standardized care, so-called "enhanced recovery after surgery." Those programs aim to optimize interventions in perioperative care to decrease the rate of postoperative complications, improve patients' recovery, and shorten hospital stay. The purpose of this literature review is to identify, summarize, and operationalize the clinical content of both key interventions and clinical indicators to develop an evidence-based model pathway for surgical patients with colorectal cancer.
METHODS:
A systematic search in 3 databases was conducted to identify key interventions (KIs) and indicators to measure the effect of implementation of care pathways. The KIs from the enhanced recovery after surgery protocol were listed and used as framework to identify and match KIs used in the included studies. The Clinical Pathway Compass was used to categorize the indicators.
RESULTS:
Fifteen studies were included. The number of KI used in the study protocols ranged from 9 to 20. In total, 33 KIs were identified. Little information was available concerning the implementation of and compliance to the protocol. Length of stay and complication rate are the most common used indicators (used in 15/15 and 14/15 of the studies), followed by 21 other measures. All but one of the included studies reported a reduction in length of stay.
CONCLUSION:
There is a considerable variation in both number of KIs and indicators as well as operationalization of key interventions, for surgical patients with colorectal cancer documented in literature. Therefore, we summarized the input from different studies and developed an evidence-based model pathway, which can serve as a basis for a local/regional care pathway team to build their own pathway.tal cancer
Appropriate Similarity Measures for Author Cocitation Analysis
Full text linkWe provide a number of new insights into the methodological discussion about author cocitation analysis. We first argue that the use of the Pearson correlation for measuring the similarity between authors’ cocitation profiles is not very satisfactory. We then discuss what kind of similarity measures may be used as an alternative to the Pearson correlation. We consider three similarity measures in particular. One is the well-known cosine. The other two similarity measures have not been used before in the bibliometric literature. Finally, we show by means of an example that our findings have a high practical relevance.information science;Pearson correlation;cosine;similarity measure;author cocitation analysis
Dispelling the Myths Behind First-author Citation Counts
Full text linkWe conducted a full-scale evaluative citation analysis study of scholars in the XML research field to explore just how different from each other author rankings resulting from different citation counting methods actually are, and to demonstrate the capability of emerging data and tools on the Web in supporting more realistic citation counting methods. Our results contest some common arguments for the continued
use of first-author citation counts in the evaluation of scholars, such as high correlations between author rankings by first-author citation counts and other citation
counting methods, and high costs of using more realistic citation counting methods that are not well-supported by the ISI databases. It is argued that increasingly available digital full text research papers make it possible for citation analysis studies to go beyond what the ISI databases have directly supported and to employ more
sophisticated methods
- …
