Sex/gender and additional equity characteristics of providers and patients in perioperative anesthesia trials: a cross-sectional analysis of the literature.

Sex and gender, among other equity-related characteristics, influence the process of care and patients' outcomes. Currently, the extent to which these characteristics are considered in the anesthesia literature remains unknown. This study assesses their incorporation in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on anesthesia-related interventions, for both patients and healthcare providers. This is a cross-sectional analysis using an existing dataset derived from the anesthesia literature. The dataset originated from a scoping review searching MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, CENTRAL, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic reviews. RCTs investigating the effect of anesthesia-related interventions on mortality for adults undergoing surgery were included. Equity outcome measures were recorded for both patients and providers and assessed for inclusion in the study design, reporting of results, and analysis of intervention effects. Three-hundred sixty-one RCTs (n = 144,674) were included. Most RCTs (91%) reported patient sex/gender, with 58% of patients identified as male. There were 139 studies (39%), where 70% or more of the sample was male, compared to just 14 studies (4%), where 70% or more of the sample was female. Only 10 studies (3%) analyzed results by patient sex/gender, with one reporting a significant effect. There was substantial variation in how age was reported, although nearly all studies (98%) reported some measure of age. For healthcare providers, equity-related information was never available. Better consideration of sex/gender and additional health equity parameters for both patients and providers in RCTs is needed to improve evidence quality, and ultimately, patient care and outcome.

Measuring the teamwork performance of operating room teams: a systematic review of assessment tools and their measurement properties.

Teamwork is fundamental to surgical patient safety but is inconsistently measured. While many tools have been developed for elective intraoperative situations, it is unclear which is the most robust. This systematic review aimed to identify tools to measure the teamwork of operating room teams. Studies were included if they examined the measurement properties of these tools. PsycINFO, Embase (via OVID), CINAHL, ERIC, Medline and Medline in Process (via OVID) were searched through to May 3, 2019, as were reference lists of included studies and previously published relevant reviews. Retrieved articles were screened and data extracted in duplicate by two independent reviewers. Quality was assessed using the COSMIN checklist. Of the 2121 references identified, 14 studies of six assessment tools were included. Tools were validated across various specialties, mostly in clinical rather than simulated settings. The Observational Teamwork Assessment for Surgery (OTAS) and Operating Theater Team Non-Technical Skills Assessment Tool (NOTECHS) were the most frequently investigated tools. Though acceptable for assessing teamwork, both NOTECHS and OTAS rely on the questionable assumption that the teamwork of a team is equivalent to the sum of individual performances. Future studies may investigate other assessment tools that assess the whole team as the unit of analysis along with the potential of these tools to provide healthcare providers with meaningful feedback in clinical practice.

Impact of physician's sex/gender on processes of care, and clinical outcomes in cardiac operative care: a systematic review.

OBJECTIVES: This systematic review aimed to assess the role of physician's sex and gender in relation to processes of care and/or clinical outcomes within the context of cardiac operative care. DESIGN: A systematic review. DATA SOURCES: Searches were conducted in PsycINFO, Embase and Medline from inception to 6 September 2018. The reference lists of relevant systematic reviews and included studies were also searched. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES: Quantitative studies of any design were included if they were published in English or French, involved patients of any age undergoing a cardiac surgical procedure and specifically assessed differences in processes of care or clinical patient outcomes by physician's sex or gender. Studies were screened in duplicate by two pairs of independent reviewers. OUTCOME MEASURES: Processes of care, patient morbidity and patient mortality. RESULTS: The search yielded 2095 publications after duplicate removal, of which two were ultimately included. These studies involved various types of surgery, including cardiac. One study found that patients treated by female surgeons compared with male surgeons had a lower 30-day mortality. The other study, however, found no differences in patient outcomes by surgeon's sex. There were no studies that investigated anaesthesiologist's sex/gender. There were also no studies investing physician's sex or gender exclusively in the cardiac operating room. CONCLUSIONS: The limited data surrounding the impact of physician's sex/gender on the outcomes of cardiac surgery inhibits drawing a robust conclusion at this time. Results highlight the need for primary research to determine how these factors may influence cardiac operative practice, in order to optimise provider's performance and improve outcomes in this high-risk patient group.

Can preventive hyperbaric oxygen therapy optimise surgical outcome?: A systematic review of randomised controlled trials.

BACKGROUND: A primary underlying cause of postoperative complications is related to the surgical stress response, which may be mitigated by hyperbaric oxygen therapy (HBOT), the intermittent administration of oxygen at a pressure higher than the atmospheric pressure at sea level. Promising clinical studies have emerged suggesting HBOT's efficacy for reducing some postoperative complications. Notwithstanding, the effectiveness (if any) of HBOT across a range of procedures and postoperative outcomes has yet to be clearly quantified. OBJECTIVE: This systematic review aimed to summarise the existing literature on peri-operative HBOT to investigate its potential to optimise surgical patient outcome. DESIGN: A systematic review of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) with narrative summary of results. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched without language restrictions through to 19 June 2018. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Studies were included if they involved patients of any age undergoing any surgical procedure and provided with at least one HBOT session in the peri-operative period. Two independent reviewers screened the initial identified trials and determined those to be included. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool for RCTs. RESULTS: The search retrieved 775 references, of which 13 RCTs were included (627 patients). Ten RCTs (546 patients) reported treatment was effective for improving at least one of the patient outcomes assessed, while two studies (55 patients) did not find any benefit and one study (26 patients) found a negative effect. A wide range of patient outcomes were reported, and several other methodological limitations were observed among the included studies, such as limited use of sham comparator and lack of blinding. CONCLUSION: Peri-operative preventive HBOT may be a promising intervention to improve surgical patient outcome. However, future work should consider addressing the methodological weaknesses identified in this review. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The protocol (CRD42018102737) was registered with the International ProspectiveRegister of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO).

Exploring stakeholder perceptions around implementation of the Operating Room Black Box for patient safety research: a qualitative study using the theoretical domains framework.

BACKGROUND: Systematically observing clinical performance in the operating room (OR) to support patient safety initiatives faces numerous logistical and methodological challenges. These may be solved by new audio-video recording technologies like the OR Black Box, which is a tool similar to black boxes in aviation. This study aimed to identify barriers and enablers that may influence patients', clinicians' and senior leadership team members' support of the OR Black Box in order to guide its future implementation. METHODS: Patients, clinicians and senior leadership team members were recruited to participate in semistructured interviews informed by the theoretical domains framework (TDF) to identify factors relevant to planning OR Black Box implementation. Deidentified interview transcripts were analysed in duplicate following a TDF coding structure. RESULTS: Data saturation was achieved at 15 patients, 17 clinicians and 9 senior leadership team members. Seven domains were relevant for patients, nine for clinicians and four for senior leadership. Knowledge and Beliefs about consequences were barriers and enablers for all three groups. Memory, attention and decision processes and Social influences were enablers for both clinicians and senior leadership. Environmental context and resources, Emotion and Behavioural regulation were found to be barriers and enablers for both clinicians and patients. Social/professional role and identity and Reinforcement were enablers for patients only and Optimism and Intentions were barriers and enablers to clinicians. CONCLUSIONS: While most stakeholders were supportive of the OR Black Box, we identified many key areas that need to be addressed during its implementation. It is critical to ensure all stakeholders have adequate and accurate information about the OR Black Box system and research goals, and that the OR Black Box is positioned as a patient safety initiative for learning from and improving practice.

Exploring experiences with compulsory psychiatric community treatment: A qualitative multi-perspective pilot study in an urban Canadian context.

As medical, ethical and clinical effectiveness debates about the use of compulsory psychiatric treatment continues, it is important to further explore the actual experiences and perspectives of all relevant stakeholders in community treatment orders (CTOs). This qualitative pilot study engaged a total of twenty-seven clients, their family members, and care providers in Toronto, Canada. Semi-structured, one-on-one interviews were conducted between February and July 2013 and analyzed using thematic analysis. Top key themes from all the participants identified include, among others: 1) clients' experiences of coercion while treated under CTO, but a preference for CTOs compared to involuntary hospitalization, nevertheless; 2) limited real opportunities for collaboration in treatment decisions expressed by clients and family members; 3) acceptance of the potential for clinical recovery on CTOs while debating the role of CTO in a broader recovery journey by all stakeholders; 4) general preservation of therapeutic relationships between clients and care providers, while acknowledging the tension of taking on an "enforcer" role by providers; and 5) existence of different avenues for asserting agency by clients. The findings of this research illuminate the nuanced, complex, and adaptive perspectives held by different stakeholders, point to the importance of preserving and enhancing procedural justice in their use, and alert the field to incorporate recovery-based approaches in this controversial practice that is a widely and commonly used clinical tool across many jurisdictions.

Re-evaluating gender differences in self-rated health: The importance of cohort.

Research examining gender differences in self-rated health (SRH) has typically not distinguished between age and cohort-related changes in the health of men and women over time. Using longitudinal data from the Panel Study of Income Dynamics, this study finds gender diffegrences in SRH may actually be an artifact of cohort. Prior to examining health across cohorts, women reported worse health than men. With the introduction of cohort to the models, no gender difference was found except in the earliest cohort (born 1924-1933). Historical context is therefore critical to understanding the health trajectories of women and men, which are not uniform across cohorts.

Maternal factors and the emotional and behavioural functioning of adolescents with chronic health conditions.

PURPOSE: This study investigated the association between mothers' mental health and education and the emotional and behavioural functioning of adolescents with chronic health conditions over time. METHODS: Data were drawn from an ongoing study. Study participants (N = 363) were recruited through eight children's rehabilitation centres. Logistic regression models were estimated. RESULTS: There were significantly reduced odds that girls would display clinical signs of hyperactivity/inattention one year later compared to boys when a maternal mental health condition was present (OR = 0.10; p < 0.01). Where low maternal education was present, girls were more likely to display peer relationship problems one year later (OR = 3.72; p < 0.01). For both genders, having a mother with less than a high school education was also associated with conduct problems one year later (OR = 2.89; p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Findings support a link between maternal factors and emotional and behavioural functioning in adolescents with chronic conditions. A holistic and family-centred approach to assessment and service delivery is indicated. Implications for Rehabilitation When conducting clinical assessments, service providers should consider associations between maternal education and mental health and the emotional and behavioural functioning of adolescents with chronic health conditions. A holistic and family-centred approach to assessment and service delivery is indicated to ensure adolescents with chronic conditions and their families receive support for interrelated needs.

Race, Gender, and the Resources That Matter: An Investigation of Intersectionality and Health.

This study examined racial disparities in health among women, in particular, the relationship between social status and both the development of psychosocial resources and good health. These relationships were investigated using a sample of 869 women from the 2007 wave of the U.S. Panel Study of Income Dynamics, Child Development Supplement. While Black women developed the intrapersonal rewards of self-efficacy and self-esteem through socioeconomic status, they did not experience the same degree of health benefits with these advantages as White women. Models relating both self-rated health and chronic conditions suggested that, instead, highly educated Black women were at a persistent health disadvantage relative to Whites, even at the same levels of psychosocial resources. That being said, Black women with higher self-efficacy, and particularly, higher self-esteem, were more likely than Black women with lower levels of these resources to report being in better health. Thus, resources may improve health within a disadvantaged group while still not bringing them up to the level of health experienced by their advantaged counterparts. Overall, the findings demonstrated that research should not treat women as a homogenous group, assuming that mechanisms affecting health operate the same for women regardless of their race.