A core outcome domain set for clinical research on capillary malformations (the COSCAM project): an e-Delphi process and consensus meeting.

BACKGROUND: There is limited evidence on the best available treatment options for capillary malformations (CMs), mainly due to the absence of uniform outcome measures in trials on therapies. A core outcome set (COS) enables standard reporting of trial outcomes, which facilitates comparison of treatment results. OBJECTIVES: To develop a core outcome domain set (CDS), as part of a core outcome set (COS), for clinical research on CMs. METHODS: Sixty-seven potentially relevant outcome subdomains were recognized based on the literature, focus group sessions, and input from the COSCAM working group. These outcome subdomains were presented in an online Delphi study to CM experts (medical specialists and authors of relevant literature) and (parents of) patients with CM (international patient associations). During three e-Delphi study rounds, the participants repeatedly scored the importance of these outcome subdomains on a seven-point Likert scale. Participants could also propose other relevant outcome subdomains. Consensus was defined as ≥ 80% agreement as to the importance of an outcome subdomain among both stakeholder groups. The CDS was finalized during an online consensus meeting. RESULTS: In total 269 participants from 45 countries participated in the first e-Delphi study round. Of these, 106 were CM experts from 32 countries, made up predominantly of dermatologists (59%) and plastic surgeons (18%). Moreover, 163 (parents of) patients with CM from 28 countries participated, of whom 58% had Sturge-Weber syndrome. During the two subsequent e-Delphi study rounds, 189 and 148 participants participated, respectively. After the entire consensus process, consensus was reached on 11 outcome subdomains: colour/redness, thickness, noticeability, distortion of anatomical structures, glaucoma, overall health-related quality of life, emotional functioning, social functioning, tolerability of intervention, patient satisfaction with treatment results, and recurrence. CONCLUSIONS: We recommend the CDS to be used as a minimum reporting standard in all future trials of CM therapy. Our next step will be to select suitable outcome measurement instruments to score the core outcome subdomains. What is already known about this topic? Besides physical and functional sequelae, capillary malformations (CMs) often cause emotional and social burden. The lack of uniform outcome measures obstructs proper evaluation and comparison of treatment strategies. As a result, there is limited evidence on the best available treatment options. The development of a core outcome set (COS) may improve standardized reporting of trial outcomes. What does this study add? A core outcome domain set (CDS), as part of a COS, was developed for clinical research on CMs. International consensus was reached on the recommended core outcome subdomains to be measured in CM trials: colour/redness, thickness, noticeability, distortion of anatomical structures, glaucoma, overall health-related quality of life, emotional functioning, social functioning, tolerability of intervention, patient satisfaction with treatment results, and recurrence. This CDS enables the next step in the development of a COS, namely to reach consensus on the core outcome measurement instruments to score the core outcome subdomains. What are the clinical implications of this work? The obtained CDS will facilitate standardized reporting of treatment outcomes, thereby enabling proper comparison of treatment results. This comparison is likely to provide more reliable information for patients about the best available treatment options.

Patient-Reported Outcomes of Yearly Imaging Surveillance in Patients Following Endovascular Aortic Aneurysm Repair.

Little is known about the impact of standardized imaging surveillance on anxiety levels and well-being of patients after endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR). We hypothesize that patient anxiety levels increase just before receiving the imaging results compared with standard anxiety levels. METHODS: Prospective cohort study from November 2018 to May 2020 including post-EVAR patients visiting the outpatient clinics of 4 Dutch hospitals for imaging follow-up. The Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) was used. Patients completed the PROMIS Anxiety v1.0 Short Form (SF) 4a, PROMIS-Global Health Scale v1.2, and PROMIS-Physical Function v1.2 SF8b at 2 time points: prior to the result of the imaging study (T1: pre-visit) and 6-8 months later (T2: reference measurement). Mean T-scores at T1 were compared to T2, and T2 to the general 65+ Dutch population. RESULTS: Altogether 342 invited patients were eligible, 214 completed the first questionnaire, 189 returned 2 completed questionnaires and 128 patients did not participate. Out of 214 respondents, 195 were male (91.1%) and the mean (standard deviation) age was 75.2 (7.0) years. There were no significant differences between T1 and T2 in anxiety levels (0.48; 95% confidence interval[CI] -0.42-1.38), global mental health (0.27; 95% CI -0.79-0.84), global physical health (0.10; 95% CI -0.38-1.18) and physical function (0.53; 95% CI -0.26-1.32). Compared with the 65+ Dutch population, at T2 patients experienced more anxiety (3.8; 95% CI 2.96-5.54), had worse global physical health (-3.2; 95% CI -4.38 - -2.02) and physical function (-2.4; 95% CI -4.00 - -0.80). Global mental health was similar (-1.0; 95% CI -2.21 - 0.21). CONCLUSIONS: Post-EVAR patients do not experience more anxiety just before receiving surveillance imaging results than outside this period, but do suffer from more anxiety and worse physical outcomes than the 65+ Dutch population.

Development of a core outcome domain set for clinical research on capillary malformations (the COSCAM project).

BACKGROUND: Due to a large variety in treatment outcomes reported in therapeutic trials and lacking patient-relevant outcomes, it is hard to adequately compare and improve current therapies for patients with capillary malformations (CMs). The Core Outcome Set for Capillary Malformations (COSCAM) project aims to develop a core outcome set (COS) for use in future CM trials, in which we will first develop a core outcome (sub)domain set (CDS). Here, we describe the methods for the development of a CDS and present the results of the first development stage. METHODS: The COSCAM project is carried out according to the recommendations of the Cochrane Skin Core OUtcomes Set INitiative (CS-COUSIN) and the Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials (COMET) initiative. During the first stage, we identified all potentially relevant outcome subdomains based on a systematic review, two focus group sessions and input from patient representatives of Dutch patient organizations and the COSCAM-founding group. In stage two, we will present the subdomains in a three-round e-Delphi study and online consensus meeting, in which CM patients, parents/caregivers and CM experts worldwide rate the importance of the proposed subdomains, hereby finalizing the core outcome (sub)domains of the CDS. RESULTS: A total of 67 potential outcome subdomains were included; sixteen were previously used in the literature, 20 were proposed by Dutch patients and their parents/caregivers (n = 13) in focus group sessions and 38 were suggested by the experts of the COSCAM-founding group. Seven were excluded because of overlap. CONCLUSION: The final CDS may serve as a minimum standard in future CM trials, thereby facilitating adequate comparison of treatment outcomes. After this CDS development, we will select appropriate outcome measurement instruments to measure the core outcome subdomains.

Chronically ill children's participation and health outcomes in shared decision-making: a scoping review.

Based on the United Nations Conventions on the Rights of the Child (CRC), it is a child's right to participate in all matters concerning its wellbeing. Little is known about chronically and/or critically ill children's participation in pediatric shared decision-making (SDM). We explored medical literature to see if and how these children participate in pediatric SDM. We searched relevant medical databases published between January 2008 and January 2020 for studies targeting children aged 4-18 years old, suffering from a chronic and/or critical disease. We found 9 relevant studies. SDM interventions mostly used were decision aids (n=8), questionnaires for caretakers/parents and children (n=4), and a SDM toolkit (n=2). Perceived involvement in SDM and knowledge increased amongst children, adolescents, and caretakers following these interventions. Decisional conflict measured using the 0-100 point DCS scale (higher scores indicate more decisional conflict) was reduced by 15.9 points in one study (p<0.01) and 17.8 points in another (95%CI: 13.3-22.9). Lower scores were associated with higher satisfaction with the decision aid by children, caretakers, and clinicians.Conclusion: Stakeholders should advocate initiatives to facilitate a child's participation preferences regarding pediatric SDM since decision support tools help chronically ill children to be more involved in SDM as they increase the children's knowledge and satisfaction and reduce decisional conflicts. What is Known: • Decision aids can help improve participation, knowledge, satisfaction, and health outcomes. • Quality and consistency of the information exchange impact quality and outcome of SDM. What is New: • Depending on a child's age, evolving capacities, and communication and participation preferences, more evidence is needed on which tools are suitable for chronically ill children to ensure their preferred participation in pediatric SDM. • Pediatricians adopt healthcare SDM tools and techniques that do not always take into account that a child's right to participate in pediatric SDM including the tendency to use interventions that are not specifically designed for pediatrics.

Effect of a multilevel implementation programme on shared decision-making in breast cancer care.

BACKGROUND: Women with newly diagnosed breast cancer face multiple treatment options. Involving them in a shared decision-making (SDM) process is essential. The aim of this study was to evaluate whether a multilevel implementation programme enhanced the level of SDM behaviour of clinicians observed in consultations. METHODS: This before-after study was conducted in six Dutch hospitals. Patients with breast cancer who were facing a decision on surgery or neoadjuvant systemic treatment between April 2016 and September 2017 were included, and provided informed consent. Audio recordings of consultations made before and after implementation were analysed using the five-item Observing Patient Involvement in Decision-Making (OPTION-5) instrument to assess whether clinicians adopted new behaviour needed for applying SDM. Patients scored their perceived level of SDM, using the nine-item Shared Decision-Making Questionnaire (SDM-Q-9). Hospital, duration of the consultation(s), age, and number of consultations per patient that might influence OPTION-5 scores were investigated using linear regression analysis. RESULTS: Consultations of 139 patients were audiotaped, including 80 before and 59 after implementation. Mean (s.d.) OPTION-5 scores, expressed on a 0-100 scale, increased from 38.3 (15.0) at baseline to 53.2 (14.8) 1 year after implementation (mean difference (MD) 14.9, 95 per cent c.i. 9.9 to 19.9). SDM-Q-9 scores of 105 patients (75.5 per cent) (72 before and 33 after implementation) were high and showed no significant changes (91.3 versus 87.6; MD -3.7, -9.3 to 1.9). The implementation programme had an association with OPTION-5 scores (ß = 14.2, P < 0.001), hospital (ß = 2.2, P = 0.002), and consultation time (ß = 0.2, P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: A multilevel implementation programme supporting SDM in breast cancer care increased the adoption of SDM behaviour of clinicians in consultations.

Improving shared decision-making in vascular surgery by implementing decision support tools: study protocol for the stepped-wedge cluster-randomised OVIDIUS trial.

BACKGROUND: Shared decision-making improves the quality of patient care. Unfortunately, shared decision-making is not yet common practice among vascular surgeons. Thus, decision support tools were developed to assist vascular surgeons and their patients in using shared decision-making. This trial aims to evaluate the effectiveness and implementation of decision support tools to improve shared decision-making during vascular surgical consultations in which a treatment decision is to be made. METHODS: The study design is a multicentre stepped-wedge cluster-randomised trial. Eligible patients are adult patients, visiting the outpatient clinic of a participating medical centre for whom several treatment options are feasible and who face a primary treatment decision for their abdominal aortic aneurysm, carotid artery disease, intermittent claudication, or varicose veins. Patients and vascular surgeons in the intervention group receive decision support tools that may help them adopt shared decision-making when making the final treatment decision. These decision support tools are decision aids, consultation cards, decision cards, and a practical training. Decision aids are informative websites that help patients become more aware of the pros and cons of the treatment options and their preferences regarding the treatment choice. Consultation cards with text or decision cards with images are used by vascular surgeons during consultation to determine which aspect of a treatment is most important to their patient. In the training vascular surgeons can practice shared decision-making with a patient actor, guided by a medical psychologist. This trial aims to include 502 vascular surgical patients to achieve a clinically relevant improvement in shared decision-making of 10 out of 100 points, using the 5-item OPTION instrument to score the audio-recordings of consultations. DISCUSSION: In the OVIDIUS trial the available decision support tools for vascular surgical patients are implemented in clinical practice. We will evaluate whether these tools actually improve shared decision-making in the consultation room. The stepped-wedge cluster-randomised study design will ensure that at the end of the study all participating centres have implemented at least some of the decision support tools and thereby a certain level of shared decision-making. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Netherlands Trial Registry, NTR6487 . Registered 7 June 2017. URL: http://www.trialregister.nl/trialreg/admin/rctview.asp?TC=6487.

Systematic review of reporting benefits and harms of surgical interventions in randomized clinical trials.

BACKGROUND: Standardized reporting methods facilitate comparisons between studies. Reporting of data on benefits and harms of treatments in surgical RCTs should support clinical decision-making. Correct and complete reporting of the outcomes of clinical trials is mandatory to appreciate available evidence and to inform patients properly before asking informed consent. METHODS: RCTs published between January 2005 and January 2017 in 15 leading journals comparing a surgical treatment with any other treatment were reviewed systematically. The CONSORT checklist, including the extension for harms, was used to appraise the publications. Beneficial and harmful treatment outcomes, their definitions and their precision measures were extracted. RESULTS: Of 1200 RCTs screened, 88 trials were included. For the differences in effect size of beneficial outcomes, 68 per cent of the trials reported a P value only but not a 95 per cent confidence interval. For harmful effects, this was 67 per cent. Only five of the 88 trials (6 per cent) reported a number needed to treat, and no study a number needed to harm. Only 61 per cent of the trials reported on both the beneficial and harmful outcomes of the intervention studied in the same paper. CONCLUSION: Despite CONSORT guidelines, current reporting of benefits and harms in surgical trials does not facilitate clear communication of treatment outcomes with patients. Researchers, reviewers and journal editors should ensure proper reporting of treatment benefits and harms in trials.

ANTECEDENTES: Los métodos para la estandarización en la descripción de los resultados facilitan la comparación entre estudios. La toma de decisiones clínicas debe estar respaldada por los resultados que se obtienen en los ensayos clínicos aleatorizados (randomized clinical trials, RCTs) quirúrgicos sobre los efectos beneficiosos y nocivos de los tratamientos. Es obligado que la descripción de los resultados de los ensayos clínicos sea correcta y completa a fin de estimar la evidencia disponible y poder informar a los pacientes de forma adecuada antes de solicitar el consentimiento informado. MÉTODOS: Se revisaron de forma sistemática los RCTs publicados entre enero de 2005 y enero de 2017 en las 15 revistas principales en los que se comparaba un tratamiento quirúrgico con cualquier otro. Para evaluar las publicaciones, se utilizó la guía de comprobación del CONsolidated Standard of Reporting Trials (CONSORT), haciéndola extensiva también a los efectos nocivos. Se obtuvieron los resultados sobre los efectos beneficiosos y nocivos del tratamiento, sus definiciones y sus medidas de precisión. RESULTADOS: De 1.200 RCTs seleccionados, se incluyeron 88 ensayos. Para comparar las diferencias de los efectos beneficiosos de los resultados, en el 68% de los ensayos se aportó sólo un valor de la P pero no el intervalo de confianza del 95%. Para efectos nocivos, el porcentaje fue del 67%. En sólo 5 de 88 ensayos (6%) se informó del número de pacientes que es necesario tratar (number needed to treat, NNT), y en ningún estudio se precisó el número de pacientes que es necesario para perjudicar (number needed to harm, NNH). En sólo el 61% de los ensayos se informó de los resultados beneficiosos y nocivos de la intervención analizada en el mismo artículo. CONCLUSIÓN: A pesar de la guía CONSORT, la descripción actual de los efectos beneficiosos y nocivos en los ensayos quirúrgicos no permite obtener una clara información del resultado del tratamiento obtenido en los pacientes. Los investigadores, los revisores y los editores de las revistas deben garantizar una descripción adecuada los beneficios y efectos nocivos del tratamiento en los ensayos clínicos.

Factors related to failure of autologous cranial reconstructions after decompressive craniectomy.

PURPOSE: Cranioplasty is customary after decompressive craniectomy. Many different materials have been developed and used for this procedure. The ideal material does not yet exist, while complication rates in cranioplasties remain high. This study aimed to determine factors related to autologous bone flap failure. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this two-center retrospective cohort study, 276 patients underwent autologous bone cranioplasty after initial decompressive craniectomy between 2004 and 2014. Medical records were reviewed regarding patient characteristics and factors potentially related to bone flap failure. Data were analyzed using univariable and multivariable regression analysis. RESULTS: Independent factors related to overall bone flap failure were: duration of hospitalization after decompressive craniectomy [OR: 1.012 (95%CI: 1.003-1.022); p = 0.012], time interval between decompressive craniectomy and cranioplasty [OR: 1.018 (95%CI: 1.004-1.032); p = 0.013], and follow-up duration [OR: 1.034 (95%CI: 1.020-1.047); p < 0.001]. In patients with bone flap infection, neoplasm as initial diagnosis occurred significantly more often (29.2% vs. 7.8%; RD 21.3%; 95%CI 8.4 -38.3%; NNH 5; 95%CI 3 -12) and duration of hospitalization after decompressive craniectomy tended to be longer (means 54 vs. 28 days, MD 26.2 days, 95%CI -8.6 to 60.9 days). Patients with bone flap resorption were significantly younger (35 vs. 43 years, MD 7.7 years, 95%CI 0.8-14.6 years) and their cranial defect size tended to be wider than in patients without bone flap resorption (mean circumference 39 vs. 37 cm; MD 2.4 cm, 95% CI -0.43-5.2 cm) and follow-up duration was significantly longer (44 vs. 14 months, MD 29 months, 95%CI 17-42 months). CONCLUSION: A neoplasm as initial diagnosis, longer hospitalization after decompressive craniectomy, larger time interval between decompressive craniectomy and cranioplasty, and longer follow-up duration are associated with a higher risk of failure of autologous bone flaps for cranioplasty. Patients with these risk factors may be better served with an early recovery program after decompressive surgery or an alloplastic material for cranioplasty.

Delphi Study to Reach International Consensus Among Vascular Surgeons on Major Arterial Vascular Surgical Complications.

BACKGROUND: The complications discussed with patients by surgeons prior to surgery vary, because no consensus on major complications exists. Such consensus may improve informed consent and shared decision-making. This study aimed to achieve consensus among vascular surgeons on which complications are considered 'major' and which 'minor,' following surgery for abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA), carotid artery disease (CAD) and peripheral artery disease (PAD). METHODS: Complications following vascular surgery were extracted from Cochrane reviews, national guidelines, and reporting standards. Vascular surgeons from Europe and North America rated complications as major or minor on five-point Likert scales via an electronic Delphi method. Consensus was reached if ≥ 80% of participants scored 1 or 2 (minor) or 4 or 5 (major). RESULTS: Participants reached consensus on 9-12 major and 6-10 minor complications per disease. Myocardial infarction, stroke, renal failure and allergic reactions were considered to be major complications of all three diseases. All other major complications were treatment specific or dependent on disease severity, e.g., spinal cord ischemia, rupture following AAA repair, stroke for CAD or deep wound infection for PAD. CONCLUSION: Vascular surgeons reached international consensus on major and minor complications following AAA, CAD and PAD treatment. This consensus may be helpful in harmonizing the information patients receive and improving standardization of the informed consent procedure. Since major complications differed between diseases, consensus on disease-specific complications to be discussed with patients is necessary.

The correlation between intra-operative 2D- and 3D fluoroscopy with postoperative CT-scans in the treatment of calcaneal fractures.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to determine the correlation of the intra-operative fluoroscopic 2D- and 3D-images compared with a postoperative CT-scan, in terms of quality of reduction and fixation of calcaneal fractures. METHODS: Patients requiring open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) of a calcaneal fracture were recruited as part of the EF3X-trial. During surgery, intra-operative images of fluoroscopic 2D- and 3D-imaging were obtained to assess the quality of the reduction and implant position. All patients received a postoperative CT-scan within one week. The operating surgeon evaluated intra-operatively both 2D- and 3D-images according to a 23-item scoring protocol on a 3-point Likert scale. A scoring panel, consisting of three clinical experts, evaluated all images in a blinded and independent fashion. Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) with their 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated using a two-way-random model with absolute agreement. RESULTS: A total of 102 calcaneal fractures were included. Agreement of 3D-imaging for the quality of reduction was better than 2D-imaging, although still fair, but for fixation moderate to good. Agreement between the 2D-images and the CT-scans was poor to fair. Intra-operative 2D-imaging received the highest ratings for image quality and interpretability, followed by CT-scanning. CONCLUSION: Implant position can be evaluated satisfactory with the aid of intra-operative 3D imaging. Although intra-operative 3D imaging had a better agreement with postoperative CT-scanning than 2D-imaging, there is a need to improve image quality and suppress scattering from implants to improve the additional value of intra-operative 3D imaging in calcaneal fracture reduction and fixation.

Systematic review of shared decision-making in surgery.

BACKGROUND: Multiple treatment options are generally available for most diseases. Shared decision-making (SDM) helps patients and physicians choose the treatment option that best fits a patient's preferences. This review aimed to assess the extent to which SDM is applied during surgical consultations, and the metrics used to measure SDM and SDM-related outcomes. METHODS: This was a systematic review of observational studies and clinical trials that measured SDM during consultations in which surgery was a treatment option. Embase, MEDLINE and CENTRAL were searched. Study selection, quality assessment and data extraction were conducted by two investigators independently. RESULTS: Thirty-two articles were included. SDM was measured using nine different metrics. Thirty-six per cent of 13 176 patients and surgeons perceived their consultation as SDM, as opposed to patient- or surgeon-driven. Surgeons more often perceived the decision-making process as SDM than patients (43·6 versus 29·3 per cent respectively). SDM levels scored objectively using the OPTION and Decision Analysis System for Oncology instruments ranged from 7 to 39 per cent. Subjective SDM levels as perceived by surgeons and patients ranged from 54 to 93 per cent. Patients experienced a higher level of SDM during consultations than surgeons (93 versus 84 per cent). Twenty-five different SDM-related outcomes were reported. CONCLUSION: At present, SDM in surgery is still in its infancy, although surgeons and patients both think of it favourably. Future studies should evaluate the effect of new interventions to improve SDM during surgical consultations, and its assessment using available standardized and validated metrics.

Randomized clinical trial of intracutaneously versus transcutaneously sutured ileostomy to prevent stoma-related complications (ISI trial).

BACKGROUND: Ileostomy construction is a common procedure but can be associated with morbidity. The stoma is commonly secured to the skin using transcutaneous sutures. It is hypothesized that intracutaneous sutures result in a tighter adherence of the peristomal skin to the stoma plate to prevent faecal leakage. The study aimed to compare the effect of intracutaneous versus transcutaneous suturing of ileostomies on faecal leakage and quality of life. METHODS: This randomized trial was undertaken in 11 hospitals in the Netherlands. Patients scheduled to receive an ileostomy for any reason were randomized to intracutaneous or transcutaneous suturing (IC and TC groups respectively). The primary outcome was faecal leakage. Secondary outcomes were stoma-related quality of life and costs of stoma-related materials and reinterventions. RESULTS: Between April 2011 and February 2016, 339 patients were randomized to the IC (170) or TC (169) group. Leakage rates were higher in the IC than in the TC group (52·4 versus 41·4 per cent respectively; risk difference 11·0 (95 per cent c.i. 0·3 to 21·2) per cent). Skin irritation rates were high (78·2 versus 72·2 per cent), but did not differ significantly between the groups (risk difference 6·1 (95 per cent c.i. -3·2 to 15·10) per cent). There were no significant differences in quality of life or costs between the groups. CONCLUSION: Intracutaneous suturing of an ileostomy is associated with more peristomal leakage than transcutaneous suturing. Overall stoma-related complications did not differ between the two techniques. Registration number: NTR2369 ( http://www.trialregister.nl).

Effects of intra-operative fluoroscopic 3D-imaging on peri-operative imaging strategy in calcaneal fracture surgery.

INTRODUCTION: Previous studies demonstrated that intra-operative fluoroscopic 3D-imaging (3D-imaging) in calcaneal fracture surgery is promising to prevent revision surgery and save costs. However, these studies limited their focus to corrections performed after 3D-imaging, thereby neglecting corrections after intra-operative fluoroscopic 2D-imaging (2D-imaging). The aim of this study was to assess the effects of additional 3D-imaging on intra-operative corrections, peri-operative imaging used, and patient-relevant outcomes compared to 2D-imaging alone. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this before-after study, data of adult patients who underwent open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) of a calcaneal fracture between 2000 and 2014 in our level-I Trauma center were collected. 3D-imaging (BV Pulsera with 3D-RX, Philips Healthcare, Best, The Netherlands) was available as of 2007 at the surgeons' discretion. Patient and fracture characteristics, peri-operative imaging, intra-operative corrections and patient-relevant outcomes were collected from the hospital databases. Patients in whom additional 3D-imaging was applied were compared to those undergoing 2D-imaging alone. RESULTS: A total of 231 patients were included of whom 107 (46%) were operated with the use of 3D-imaging. No significant differences were found in baseline characteristics. The median duration of surgery was significantly longer when using 3D-imaging (2:08 vs. 1:54 h; p = 0.002). Corrections after additional 3D-imaging were performed in 53% of the patients. However, significantly fewer corrections were made after 2D-imaging when 3D-imaging was available (Risk difference (RD) -15%; 95% Confidence interval (CI) -29 to -2). Peri-operative imaging, besides intra-operative 3D-imaging, and patient-relevant outcomes were similar between groups. CONCLUSION: Intra-operative 3D-imaging provides additional information resulting in additional corrections. Moreover, 3D-imaging probably changed the surgeons' attitude to rely more on 3D-imaging, hence a 15%-decrease of corrections performed after 2D-imaging when 3D imaging was available. No substantiation for cost reduction was found through reduction in peri-operative imaging or in terms of improved patient-relevant outcomes.

Systematic CT evaluation of reduction and hardware positioning of surgically treated calcaneal fractures: a reliability analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Up to date, there is a lack of reliable protocols that systematically evaluate the quality of reduction and hardware positioning of surgically treated calcaneal fractures. Based on international consensus, we previously introduced a 23-item scoring protocol evaluating the reduction and hardware positioning in these fractures based on postoperative computed tomography. The current study is a reliability analysis of the described scoring protocol. METHODS: Three raters independently and systematically evaluated anonymized postoperative CT scans of 102 surgically treated calcaneal fractures. A selection of 25 patients was scored twice by all individual raters to calculate intra-rater reliability. The scoring protocol consisted of 23 items addressing quality of reduction and hardware positioning. Each of these four-option questions was answered as: 'optimal', 'suboptimal (but not needing revision)', 'not acceptable (needing revision)' or 'not judgeable'. We used intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC's) to calculate inter- and intra-rater reliability. RESULTS: Inter-rater reliability of the overall 23-item protocol was good (ICC 0.66, 95% CI 0.64-0.69). Individual items that scored an inter-rater ICC ≥0.60 included evaluation of the calcaneocuboid joint, the posterior talocalcaneal joint, the anterior talocalcaneal joint, the position of the plate and sustentaculum screws and screws protruding the tuber and medial wall. The intra-rater reliability for the overall protocol was good for all three individual raters with ICC's between 0.60 and 0.70. CONCLUSION: Our scoring protocol for the radiological evaluation of operatively treated calcaneal fractures is reliable in terms of inter- and intra-rater reliability.

The current level of shared decision-making in anesthesiology: an exploratory study.

BACKGROUND: Shared decision-making (SDM) seeks to involve both patients and clinicians in decision-making about possible health management strategies, using patients' preferences and best available evidence. SDM seems readily applicable in anesthesiology. We aimed to determine the current level of SDM among preoperative patients and anesthesiology clinicians. METHODS: We invited 115 consecutive preoperative patients, visiting the pre-assessment outpatient clinic of the department of Anesthesiology at the Academic Medical Center of Amsterdam. Inclusion criteria were patients who needed surgery in the arms, lower abdomen or legs, and in whom three anesthesia techniques were feasible. The SDM-level of the consultation was scored objectively by independent observers who judged audio-recordings of the consultation using the OPTION5-scale, ranging from 0% (no SDM) to 100% (optimum SDM), as well as subjectively by patients (using the SDM-Q-9 and CollaboRATE questionnaires) and clinicians (SDM-Q-Doc questionnaire). Objective and subjective SDM-levels were assessed on five-point and six-point Likert scales, respectively. Both scores were expressed as percentages. RESULTS: Data of 80 patients could be analysed. Objective SDM-scores were low (30.5%). Subjective scores of the SDM-Q-9 and CollaboRATE were high among patients (91.7% and 96.3%, respectively) and among clinicians (SDM-Q-Doc; 84.3%). Apparently, they appreciated satisfaction rather than SDM, being poorly aware of what SDM entails. CONCLUSION: The level of SDM in an outpatient anesthesiology clinic where preoperative patients receive information about various possible anesthesia options, was found to be low. Thus, there is room for improving the level of SDM. Some suggestions are given how this can be achieved.