Time since liver transplant and immunosuppression withdrawal outcomes: Systematic review and individual patient data meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Successful immunosuppression withdrawal (ISW) is possible for a subfraction of liver transplant (LT) recipients but the factors that define the risk of ISW failure are largely unknown. One candidate prognostic factor for ISW success or operational tolerance (OT) is longer time between LT and ISW which we term "pre-withdrawal time". To clarify the impact of pre-withdrawal time span on subsequent ISW success or failure, we conducted a systematic review with meta-analysis. METHODS: We systematically interrogated the literature for LT recipient ISW studies reporting pre-withdrawal time. Eligible articles from Embase, Medline, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were used for backward and forward citation searching. Pre-withdrawal time individual patient data (IPD) was requested from authors. Pooled mean differences and time-response curves were calculated using random-effects meta-analyses. RESULTS: We included 17 studies with 691 patients, 15 of which (620 patients) with IPD. Study-level risk of bias was heterogeneous. Mean pre-withdrawal time was greater by 427 days [95% confidence interval (CI) 67-788] in OT compared to non-OT patients. This increase was potentiated to 799 days (95% CI 369-1229) or 1074 days (95% CI 685-1463) when restricting analysis to adult or European study participants. In time-response meta-analysis for adult or European ISW candidates, likelihood of OT increased by 7% (95% CI 4-10%) per year after LT (GRADE low- and moderate-certainty of evidence, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Our data support the impact of pre-withdrawal time in ISW decision-making for adult and European LT recipients. PROSPERO REGISTRATION: CRD42021272995.

Cost-effectiveness of prehabilitation prior to elective surgery: a systematic review of economic evaluations.

BACKGROUND: Prehabilitation aims at enhancing patients' functional capacity and overall health status to enable them to withstand a forthcoming stressor like surgery. Our aim was to synthesise the evidence on the cost-effectiveness of prehabilitation for patients awaiting elective surgery compared with usual preoperative care. METHODS: We searched PubMed, Embase, the CRD database, ClinicalTrials.gov, the WHO ICTRP and the dissertation databases OADT and DART. Studies comparing prehabilitation for patients with elective surgery to usual preoperative care were included if they reported cost outcomes. All types of economic evaluations (EEs) were included. The primary outcome of the review was cost-effectiveness based on cost-utility analyses (CUAs). The risk of bias of trial-based EEs was assessed with the Cochrane risk of bias 2 tool and the ROBINS-I tool and the credibility of model-based EEs with the ISPOR checklist. Methodological quality of full EEs was assessed using the CHEC checklist. The EEs' results were synthesised narratively using vote counting based on direction of effect. RESULTS: We included 45 unique studies: 25 completed EEs and 20 ongoing studies. Of the completed EEs, 22 were trial-based and three model-based, corresponding to four CUAs, three cost-effectiveness analyses, two cost-benefit analyses, 12 cost-consequence analyses and four cost-minimization analyses. Three of the four trial-based CUAs (75%) found prehabilitation cost-effective, i.e. more effective and/or less costly than usual care. Overall, 16/25 (64.0%) EEs found prehabilitation cost-effective. When excluding studies of insufficient credibility/critical risk of bias, this number reduced to 14/23 (60.9%). In 8/25 (32.0%), cost-effectiveness was unclear, e.g. because prehabilitation was more effective and more costly, and in one EE prehabilitation was not cost-effective. CONCLUSIONS: We found some evidence that prehabilitation for patients awaiting elective surgery is cost-effective compared to usual preoperative care. However, we suspect a relevant risk of publication bias, and most EEs were of high risk of bias and/or low methodological quality. Furthermore, there was relevant heterogeneity depending on the population, intervention and methods. Future EEs should be performed over a longer time horizon and apply a more comprehensive perspective. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42020182813.

Results of the Diaphragmatic Plication Database: 10 Years' Experience.

BACKGROUND: Unilateral diaphragmatic paralysis or paresis (UDP) in adults is an often overlooked disease which relevantly impairs the patient's lung function and quality of life. Particularly in idiopathic UDP, there is no evidence for conservative therapy and only little evidence for surgical therapy. METHODS: The method involves retrospective single-center analysis of patients with UDP persistent for at least 1 year who were operated by diaphragmatic resection, plication, and augmentation with a polypropylene mesh. The patients were tested for lung and diaphragmatic function, six-minute walk test (6MWT), and blood gas analysis before, 3 and 12 months after surgery. RESULTS: In total, 85 patients received surgery for UDP. The most frequent reasons for UDP were idiopathic (67%), iatrogenic (mainly cardiac and cervical spine surgery; 24%), and trauma (9%). The mean operation time was 84 ± 24 minutes, the length of hospital stay 8.4 ± 3.9 days, chest tubes were removed after 11.7 ± 4.1 days. Overall morbidity was 42%, mortality 0%. Forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1) in supine position improved by 12.4% absolute, vital capacity by 11.8% absolute, and sniff nasal inspiratory pressure by 1.4 kPa 12 months after surgery (p <0.001 each). Total lung capacity increased by 6.8% absolute at 12 months (p = 0.001) The 6MWT distance improved by 45.9 m at 3 months and 50.9 m at 12 months (p = 0.001, each). CONCLUSION: Surgical therapy for UDP is highly effective in the long term. The superiority over conservative treatments needs to be evaluated prospectively with standardized physiotherapeutic protocols. FEV1 in supine position and 6MWT are easy to perform tests and represent statistically and patient-relevant outcomes.

Assessing transferability in systematic reviews of health economic evaluations - a review of methodological guidance.

OBJECTIVE: For assessing cost-effectiveness, Health Technology Assessment (HTA) organisations may use primary economic evaluations (P-HEs) or Systematic Reviews of Health Economic evaluations (SR-HEs). A prerequisite for meaningful results of SR-HEs is that the results from existing P-HEs are transferable to the decision context (e.g, HTA jurisdiction). A particularly pertinent issue is the high variability of costs and resource needs across jurisdictions. Our objective was to review the methods documents of HTA organisations and compare their recommendations on considering transferability in SR-HE. METHODS: We systematically hand searched the webpages of 158 HTA organisations for relevant methods documents from 8th January to 31st March 2019. Two independent reviewers performed searches and selected documents according to pre-defined criteria. One reviewer extracted data in standardised and piloted tables and a second reviewer checked them for accuracy. We synthesised data using tabulations and in a narrative way. RESULTS: We identified 155 potentially relevant documents from 63 HTA organisations. Of these, 7 were included in the synthesis. The included organisations have different aims when preparing a SR-HE (e.g. to determine the need for conducting their own P-HE). The recommendations vary regarding the underlying terminology (e.g. transferability/generalisability), the assessment approaches (e.g. structure), the assessment criteria and the integration in the review process. CONCLUSION: Only few HTA organisations address the assessment of transferability in their methodological recommendations for SR-HEs. Transferability considerations are related to different purposes. The assessment concepts and criteria are heterogeneous. Developing standards to consider transferability in SR-HEs is desirable.

Performance of several types of beta-binomial models in comparison to standard approaches for meta-analyses with very few studies.

BACKGROUND: Meta-analyses are used to summarise the results of several studies on a specific research question. Standard methods for meta-analyses, namely inverse variance random effects models, have unfavourable properties if only very few (2 - 4) studies are available. Therefore, alternative meta-analytic methods are needed. In the case of binary data, the "common-rho" beta-binomial model has shown good results in situations with sparse data or few studies. The major concern of this model is that it ignores the fact that each treatment arm is paired with a respective control arm from the same study. Thus, the randomisation to a study arm of a specific study is disrespected, which may lead to compromised estimates of the treatment effect. Therefore, we extended this model to a version that respects randomisation. The aim of this simulation study was to compare the "common-rho" beta-binomial model and several other beta-binomial models with standard meta-analyses models, including generalised linear mixed models and several inverse variance random effects models. METHODS: We conducted a simulation study comparing beta-binomial models and various standard meta-analysis methods. The design of the simulation aimed to consider meta-analytic situations occurring in practice. RESULTS: No method performed well in scenarios with only 2 studies in the random effects scenario. In this situation, a fixed effect model or a qualitative summary of the study results may be preferable. In scenarios with 3 or 4 studies, most methods satisfied the nominal coverage probability. The "common-rho" beta-binomial model showed the highest power under the alternative hypothesis. The beta-binomial model respecting randomisation did not improve performance. CONCLUSION: The "common-rho" beta-binomial appears to be a good option for meta-analyses of very few studies. As residual concerns about the consequences of disrespecting randomisation may still exist, we recommend a sensitivity analysis with a standard meta-analysis method that respects randomisation.

Assessing the quality of evidence on safety: specifications for application and suggestions for adaptions of the GRADE-criteria in the context of preparing a list of potentially inappropriate medications for older adults.

BACKGROUND: Systematic reviews that synthesize safety outcomes pose challenges (e.g. rare events), which raise questions for grading the strength of the body of evidence. This is maybe one reason why in many potentially inappropriate medication (PIM) lists the recommendations are not based on formalized systems for assessing the quality of the body of evidence such as GRADE. In this contribution, we describe specifications and suggest adaptions of the GRADE system for grading the quality of evidence on safety outcomes, which were developed in the context of preparing a PIM-list, namely PRISCUS. METHODS: We systematically assessed each of the five GRADE domains for rating-down (study limitations, imprecision, inconsistency, indirectness, publication bias) and the criteria for rating-up, considering if special considerations or revisions of the original approach were indicated. The result was gathered in a written document and discussed in a group-meeting of five members with various background until consensus. Subsequently, we performed a proof-of-concept application using a convenience sample of systematic reviews and applied the approach to systematic reviews on 19 different clinical questions. RESULTS: We describe specifications and suggest adaptions for the criteria "study limitations", imprecision, "publication bias" and "rating-up for large effect". In addition, we suggest a new criterion to account for data from subgroup-analyses. The proof-of-concept application did not reveal a need for further revision and thus we used the approach for the systematic reviews that were prepared for the PRISCUS-list. We assessed 51 outcomes. Each of the proposed adaptions was applied. There were neither an excessive number of low and very low ratings, nor an excessive number of high ratings, but the different methodological quality of the safety outcomes appeared to be well reflected. CONCLUSION: The suggestions appear to have the potential to overcome some of the challenges when grading the methodological quality of harms and thus may be helpful for producers of evidence syntheses considering safety.

Restrictions and their reporting in systematic reviews of effectiveness: an observational study.

BACKGROUND: Restrictions in systematic reviews (SRs) can lead to bias and may affect conclusions. Therefore, it is important to report whether and which restrictions were used. This study aims to examine the use of restrictions regarding language, publication period, and study type, as well as the transparency of reporting in SRs of effectiveness. METHODS: A retrospective observational study was conducted with a random sample of 535 SRs of effectiveness indexed in PubMed between 2000 and 2019. The use of restrictions and their reporting were analysed using descriptive statistics. RESULTS: Of the total 535 SRs included, four out of every ten (41.3%) lacked information on at least one of the three restrictions considered (language, publication period, or study type). Overall, 14.6% of SRs did not provide information on restrictions regarding publication period, 19.1% regarding study type, and 18.3% regarding language. Of all included SRs, language was restricted in 46.4%, and in more than half of the SRs with restricted language (130/248), it was unclear whether the restriction was applied during either the search or the screening process, or both. The restrictions were justified for publication period in 22.2% of the respective SRs (33/149), study type in 6.5% (28/433), and language in 3.2% (8/248). Differences in reporting were found between countries as well as between Cochrane and non-Cochrane reviews. CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that there is a lack of transparency in reporting on restrictions in SRs. Authors as well as editors and reviewers should be encouraged to improve the reporting and justification of restrictions to increase the transparency of SRs.

Evolution of Web-Based Training Videos Provided by the German Respiratory League for the Correct Inhalation Technique.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE: To assess whether and how the use of scientifically established Web-based training videos for teaching correct inhalation technique in patients with chronic airway diseases has become accepted among the wider population. METHODS: The viewing trends of 141 freely available YouTube videos (full playing time, 01:31-04:37 min:s) provided by the German Respiratory League, covering a broad range of internationally prescribed devices, were analyzed over a 10-year period. Specific emphasis was placed both on German and international videos. RESULTS: The total number of views was 3,350,678. Non-German videos (English, Russian, Turkish, Greek, Arabic, Farsi, and Slovakian) accounted for 23.2% of the views. The number of views steadily increased between 2011 and 2020 with a mean annual increase of 54.0% (range 24.5/119.9%) compared to the respective previous year. By 2020, the incidence of views per 100,000 German inhabitants was 725 for German videos only and 1,030 for all videos. In terms of the annual trend, there were two peak viewing periods, namely in spring and late fall, while the lowest amount of views occurred in summer. CONCLUSION: This study highlights the rising impact of Web-based training videos used for teaching the correct use of inhalation devices, with a steady increase in the number of annual views and a clear seasonal peaking of views in spring and late fall.

[The digitalization of pneumology and the role of medical societies]. / Die Digitalisierung der Pneumologie und die Rolle der Fachgesellschaften.

BACKGROUND: Medicine is becoming increasingly digitalized. Digital applications are finding their way into health care. The aim of the study was to record the attitudes of members of the German Respiratory Society (DGP) towards digitalization. METHODS: The study was conducted in cooperation with the DGP, the German Respiratory League and the Health Innovation Hub (HIH) of the German Federal Ministry of Health. Data were gathered with the help of an online questionnaire (July/August 2021), analyzed descriptively and supplemented with a subgroup comparison regarding proactivity of the members. RESULTS: 284 questionnaires were complete and included in the analysis (31% female); 76.4% believed that digitalization would change their daily professional life within five years. 47.2% had prescribed or planned to prescribe Digital Health Applications (DiGA). Lack of technology skills of patients and the time required for health professionals were seen as critical (49.3 and 47.5%). Regarding DiGA, scientific proof of efficacy (48.9%) and ease of use for patients (47.9%) were rated as most important. The subgroup comparison showed that 42.7% actively informed themselves about digital medicine and that this group saw more opportunities for meaningful use of DiGA. CONCLUSION: The members of the DGP have mostly a positive view about the profound changes expected from digital medicine. The more active the role of DGP members and other professional societies, the more digital elements can add value to practice.

Synthetic Versus Biological Mesh in Laparoscopic and Open Ventral Hernia Repair (LAPSIS): Results of a Multinational, Randomized, Controlled, and Double-blind Trial.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to investigate the approach (open or laparoscopic) and mesh type (synthetic or biological) in ventral hernias in a clean setting.Summary of Background Data: The level of evidence on the optimal surgical approach and type of mesh in ventral hernia repair is still low. METHODS: Patients with a ventral abdominal hernia (diameter 4-10 cm) were included in this double-blind randomized controlled trial across 17 hospitals in 10 European countries. According to a 2 × 2-factorial design, patients were allocated to 4 arms (open retromuscular or laparoscopic intraperitoneal, with synthetic or Surgisis Gold biological mesh). Patients and outcome assessors were blinded to mesh type used. Major postoperative complication rate (hernia recurrence, mesh infection, or reoperation) within 3 years after surgery, was the primary endpoint in the intention-to-treat population. RESULTS: Between September 1st, 2005, and August 7th, 2009, 253 patients were randomized and 13 excluded. Six of 61 patients (9.8%) in the open synthetic mesh arm, 15 of 66 patients (22.7%) in the open biological mesh arm, 7 of 64 patients (10.9%) in the laparoscopic synthetic mesh arm and 17 of 62 patients (27.4%) in the laparoscopic biological mesh arm had a major complication. The use of biological mesh resulted in significantly more complications (P = 0.013), also after adjusting for hernia type, body mass index, and study site. The trial was prematurely stopped due to an unacceptable high recurrence rate in the biological mesh arms. CONCLUSIONS: The use of Surgisis Gold biological mesh is not recommended for noncomplex ventral hernia repair. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This trial was registered at controlled-trials.com (ISRCTN34532248).

The Severe Respiratory Insufficiency Application (SRI App): a pilot randomised controlled trial.

An application (app) for the Severe Respiratory Insufficiency Questionnaire (SRI) has been designed and developed for mobile devices. In a randomised controlled trial comprising 60 patients with chronic respiratory failure, the app was compared with the classic paper SRI. Thereby, it was shown that the SRI app is a practical tool that is well accepted. Missing values can be completely avoided by using the SRI app. Finally, reliability, convergent and discriminant validities were established. Accordingly, for the individual SRI subscales, Cronbach's alpha ranged between 0.56 and 0.81 (app) and between 0.54 and 0.83 (paper), respectively. The multilingual SRI app is accessible free of charge for non-profit research purposes.

Measuring test-retest reliability (TRR) of AMSTAR provides moderate to perfect agreement - a contribution to the discussion of the importance of TRR in relation to the psychometric properties of assessment tools.

BACKGROUND: Systematic Reviews (SRs) can build the groundwork for evidence-based health care decision-making. A sound methodological quality of SRs is crucial. AMSTAR (A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews) is a widely used tool developed to assess the methodological quality of SRs of randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Research shows that AMSTAR seems to be valid and reliable in terms of interrater reliability (IRR), but the test retest reliability (TRR) of AMSTAR has never been investigated. In our study we investigated the TRR of AMSTAR to evaluate the importance of its measurement and contribute to the discussion of the measurement properties of AMSTAR and other quality assessment tools. METHODS: Seven raters at three institutions independently assessed the methodological quality of SRs in the field of occupational health with AMSTAR. Between the first and second ratings was a timespan of approximately two years. Answers were dichotomized, and we calculated the TRR of all raters and AMSTAR items using Gwet's AC1 coefficient. To investigate the impact of variation in the ratings over time, we obtained summary scores for each review. RESULTS: AMSTAR item 4 (Was the status of publication used as an inclusion criterion?) provided the lowest median TRR of 0.53 (moderate agreement). Perfect agreement of all reviewers was detected for AMSTAR-item 1 with a Gwet's AC1 of 1, which represented perfect agreement. The median TRR of the single raters varied between 0.69 (substantial agreement) and 0.89 (almost perfect agreement). Variation of two or more points in yes-scored AMSTAR items was observed in 65% (73/112) of all assessments. CONCLUSIONS: The high variation between the first and second AMSTAR ratings suggests that consideration of the TRR is important when evaluating the psychometric properties of AMSTAR.. However, more evidence is needed to investigate this neglected issue of measurement properties. Our results may initiate discussion of the importance of considering the TRR of assessment tools. A further examination of the TRR of AMSTAR, as well as other recently established rating tools such as AMSTAR 2 and ROBIS (Risk Of Bias In Systematic reviews), would be useful.

Mesh fixation techniques in primary ventral or incisional hernia repair.

BACKGROUND: The use of a mesh in primary ventral or incisional hernia repair lowers the recurrence rate  and is the accepted standard of care for larger defects. In laparoscopic primary ventral or incisional hernia repair the insertion of a mesh is indispensable. Different mesh fixation techniques have been used and refined over the years. The type of fixation technique is claimed to have a major impact on recurrence rates, chronic pain, health-related quality of life (HRQOL) and complication rates. OBJECTIVES: To determine the impact of different mesh fixation techniques for primary and incisional ventral hernia repair on hernia recurrence, chronic pain, HRQOL and complications. SEARCH METHODS: On 2 October 2020 we searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE (Ovid MEDLINE(R)) Epub Ahead of Print, In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations, Ovid MEDLINE(R) Daily and Ovid MEDLINE(R)), Ovid Embase, and two trials registries. We also performed handsearches, and contacted experts from the European Hernia Society (EHS). SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) including adults with primary ventral or incisional hernia that compared different types of mesh fixation techniques (absorbable/nonabsorbable sutures, absorbable/nonabsorbable tacks, fibrin glue, and combinations of these techniques). DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We extracted data in standardised piloted tables, or if necessary, directly into Review Manager 5. We assessed risks of bias with the Cochrane 'Risk of bias' tool. Two review authors independently selected the publications, and extracted data on results. We calculated risk ratios (RRs) for binary outcomes and mean differences (MDs) for continuous outcomes. For pooling we used an inverse-variance random-effects meta-analysis or the Peto method in the case of rare events. We prepared GRADE 'Summary of findings' tables. For laparoscopic repair we considered absorbable tacks compared to nonabsorbable tacks, and nonabsorbable tacks compared to nonabsorbable sutures as key comparisons. MAIN RESULTS: We included 10 trials with a total of 787 participants. The number of randomised participants ranged from 40 to 199 per comparison. Eight studies included participants with both primary and incisional ventral hernia. One study included only participants with umbilical hernia, and another only participants with incisional hernia. Hernia size varied between studies. We judged the risk of bias as moderate to high. Absorbable tacks compared to nonabsorbable tacks Recurrence rates in the groups were similar (RR 0.74, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.17 to 3.22; 2 studies, 101 participants). It is uncertain whether there is a difference between absorbable tacks and nonabsorbable tacks in recurrence because the certainty of evidence was very low. Evidence suggests that the difference between groups in early postoperative, late follow-up, chronic pain and HRQOL is negligible. Nonabsorbable tacks compared to nonabsorbable sutures At six months there was one recurrence in each group (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.07 to 14.79; 1 study, 36 participants). It is uncertain whether there is a difference between nonabsorbable tacks and nonabsorbable sutures in recurrence because the certainty of evidence was very low. Evidence suggests that the difference between groups in early postoperative, late follow-up and chronic pain is negligible. We found no study that assessed HRQOL. Absorbable tacks compared to absorbable sutures No recurrence was observed at one year (very low certainty of evidence). Early postoperative pain was higher in the tacks group (VAS 0 - 10: MD -2.70, 95% CI -6.67 to 1.27; 1 study, 48 participants). It is uncertain whether there is a difference between absorbable tacks compared to absorbable sutures in early postoperative pain because the certainty of evidence was very low. The MD for late follow-up pain was -0.30 (95% CI -0.74 to 0.14; 1 study, 48 participants). We found no study that assessed HRQOL. Combination of different fixation types (tacks and sutures) or materials (absorbable and nonabsorbable) There were mostly negligible or only small differences between combinations (e.g. tacks plus sutures) compared to a single technique (e.g. sutures only), as well as combinations compared to other combinations (e.g. absorbable sutures combined with nonabsorbable sutures compared to absorbable tacks combined with nonabsorbable tacks) in all outcomes. It is uncertain whether there is an advantage for combining different fixation types or materials for recurrence, chronic pain, HRQOL and complications, because the evidence certainty was very low or low, or we found no study on important outcomes. Nonabsorbable tacks compared to fibrin sealant The two studies showed different directions of effects: one showed higher rates for nonabsorbable tacks, and the other showed higher rates for fibrin sealant. Low-certainty evidence suggests that the difference between groups in early postoperative, late follow-up, chronic pain and HRQOL is negligible. Absorbable tacks compared to fibrin sealant One recurrence in the tacks group and none in the fibrin sealant group were noted after one year (low certainty of evidence). Early postoperative pain might be slightly lower using tacks (VAS 0 - 100; MD -12.40, 95% CI -27.60 to, 2.80;1 study, 50 participants; low-certainty evidence). The pattern of pain and HRQOL course over time (up to 1 year) was similar in the groups (low certainty of evidence). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Currently none of the techniques can be considered superior to any other, because the certainty of evidence was low or very low for all outcomes.

Living conditions and autonomy levels in COPD patients receiving non-invasive ventilation: impact on health related quality of life.

BACKGROUND: Research on health-related quality of life (HRQL) has become increasingly important in recent decades. However, the impact of both living conditions and the level of autonomy impairments on HRQL in COPD patients receiving non-invasive ventilation (NIV) is still unclear. METHODS: The Severe Respiratory Insufficiency Questionnaire (SRI) was used to measure HRQL in a prospective cohort of COPD patients in whom home NIV was already established. Data on sociodemographics, clinical characteristics and standardized levels of autonomy impairment were evaluated. A multiple linear regression analysis was performed to identify the factors associated with a reduced HRQL. RESULTS: A total of 137 patients (67.0 ± 7.8 years, 45% female) were assessed. The mean SRI Summary Score was 54.1 ± 16.9 (95%CI: 51.1-57.1; N = 127). Regular ambulatory care was provided in 76% of patients, but only 37% underwent pulmonary rehabilitation. Overall, 69% of patients lived with family members, while 31% lived alone (family situation). Autonomy impairment levels were most serious in 3%, serious in 14%, and significant in 29% of patients, while 54% had no impairments at all. Of note, higher levels of autonomy impairment were markedly associated with lower SRI scores (regression coefficient - 6.5 ± 1.1 per level; P < 0.001). In contrast, family situation (0.2 ± 3.0; P = 0.959), ambulatory care by a respiratory specialist (1.7 ± 3.6; P = 0.638), and pulmonary rehabilitation (- 0.8 ± 3.1; P = 0.802) did not appear to influence HRQL. Possible subgroup effects were evident for the factors "impaired autonomy" and "living in a nursing home" (P = 0.016). CONCLUSION: A higher level of autonomy impairment has been identified as the major determinant of reduced HRQL in COPD-patients receiving long-term NIV, particularly in those living in a nursing home. Trial Registration German Clinical Trials Register (DRKS00008759).

Perspective of potential patients on the hospital volume-outcome relationship and the minimum volume threshold for total knee arthroplasty: a qualitative focus group and interview study.

BACKGROUND: Total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is performed to treat end-stage knee osteoarthritis. In Germany, a minimum volume threshold of 50 TKAs/hospital/year was implemented to ensure outcome quality. This study, embedded within a systematic review, aimed to investigate the perspectives of potential TKA patients on the hospital volume-outcome relationship for TKA (higher volumes associated with better outcomes). METHODS: A convenience sample of adults with knee problems and heterogeneous demographic characteristics participated in the study. Qualitative data were collected during a focus group prior to the systematic review (n = 5) and during telephone interviews, in which preliminary results of the systematic review were discussed (n = 16). The data were synthesised using content analysis. RESULTS: All participants (n = 21) believed that a hospital volume-outcome relationship exists for TKA while recognising that patient behaviour or the surgeon could also influence outcomes. All participants would be willing to travel longer for better outcomes. Most interviewees would choose a hospital for TKA depending on reputation, recommendations, and service quality. However, some would also choose a hospital based on the results of the systematic review that showed slightly lower mortality/revision rates at higher-volume hospitals. Half of the interviewees supported raising the minimum volume threshold even if this were to increase travel time to receive TKA. CONCLUSIONS: Potential patients believe that a hospital volume-outcome relationship exists for TKA. Hospital preference is based mainly on subjective factors, although some potential patients would consider scientific evidence when making their choice. Policy makers and physicians should consider the patient perspectives when deciding on minimum volume thresholds or recommending hospitals for TKA, respectively.

Factors predicting failure of internal fixations of fractures of the lower limbs: a prospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: We assessed predictive factors of patients with fractures of the lower extremities caused by trauma. We examined which factors are associated with an increased risk of failure. Furthermore, the predictive factors were set into context with other long-term outcomes, concrete pain and physical functioning. METHODS: We performed a prospective cohort study at a single level I trauma center. We enrolled patients with traumatic fractures of the lower extremities treated with internal fixation from April 2017 to July 2018. We evaluated the following predictive factors: age, gender, diabetes, smoking status, obesity, open fractures and peripheral arterial diseases. The primary outcome was time to failure (nonunion, implant failure or reposition). Secondary outcomes were pain and physical functioning measured 6 months after initial surgery. For the analysis of the primary outcome, we used a stratified (according fracture location) Cox proportional hazard regression model. RESULTS: We included 204 patients. Overall, we observed failure in 33 patients (16.2 %). Most of the failures occurred within the first 3 months. Obesity and open fractures were associated with an increased risk of failure and decreased physical functioning. None of the predictors showed an association with pain. Age, female gender and smoking of more than ≥ 10 package years increased failure risk numerically but statistical uncertainty was high. CONCLUSIONS: We found that obesity and open fractures were strongly associated with an increased risk of failure. These predictors seem promising candidates to be included in a risk prediction model and can be considered as a good start for clinical decision making across different types of fractures at the lower limbs. However, large heterogeneity regarding the other analyzed predictors suggests that "simple" models might not be adequate for a precise personalized risk estimation and that computer-based models incorporating a variety of detailed information (e.g. pattern of injury, x-ray and clinical data) and their interrelation may be required to significantly increase prediction precision. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT03091114 .

[Invasive and Non-Invasive Home Mechanical Ventilation in Germany - A Rapid Development with Large Regional Differences]. / Invasive und nicht-invasive außerklinische Beatmung in Deutschland.

BACKGROUND: The number of patients using home mechanical ventilation (HMV) is steadily increasing in Germany. Detailed data on inpatient initiation and control of HMV are not available. This, however, is absolutely necessary in order to optimize the medical care structures in Germany. Regional diversities must be taken into consideration in order to provide care structures that reflect the local needs. METHOD: The data sets of the German Federal Statistical Office on the OPS (Operation and Procedure Classification System) for HMV from 2008 to 2019 were analysed (N = 572,494). RESULTS: Between 2008 and 2019 there was a doubling of the number of HMV initiations and controls. The number of initiations (N = 17,958) and controls (N = 49,140) was highest in 2019. Furthermore, at the state level, the development of HMV is very heterogeneous. Finally, the increases were particularly due to an increase in non-invasively ventilated patients. CONCLUSION: The rapid increase in HMV is reaching capacity limits of the existing healthcare structure. New healthcare structures should provide an integrated approach between outpatient and inpatient care in order to ensure a high quality of care for patients receiving HMV without compromising the human and economic resources of the system.

A systematic review and time-response meta-analysis of the optimal timing of elective caesarean sections for best maternal and neonatal health outcomes.

BACKGROUND: The rate of caesarean sections (CS) has increased in the last decades to about 30% of births in high income countries. Many CSs are electively planned without an urgent medical reason for mother or child. An early CS though may harm the newborn. Our aim was to evaluate the gestational time point after the 37 + 0 week of gestation (WG) (after prematurity = term) of performing an elective CS with the lowest morbidity for mother and child by assessing the time course from 37 + 0 to 42+ 6 WG. METHODS: We performed a systematic literature search in MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL and CINAHL in November 2018. We included studies that compared different time points of elective CS at term no matter the reason for elective CS. Our primary outcomes were the rate of admissions to the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU), neonatal death and maternal death in early versus late term elective CS. Various binary and dose response random effects meta-analyses were performed. RESULTS: We identified 35 studies including 982,749 women. Except one randomised controlled trial, all studies were cohort studies. We performed a linear time-response meta-analysis on the primary outcome NICU admission on 14 studies resulting in a decrease of the relative risk (RR) to 0.63 (95% CI 0.56, 0.71) from 37 + 0 to 39 + 6 WG. RR for neonatal death showed a decrease to 39 + (0-6) WG (RR 0.59 95% CI 0.43 to 0.83) and increase from then on (RR 2.09 95% CI 1.18 to 3.70) assuming a U-shape course and using a cubic spline model for meta-analysis of four studies. We only identified one study analyzing maternal death resulting in RR of 0.38 (95% CI 0.04 to 3.40) for 37 + 0 + 38 + 6 WG versus ≥39 + 0 WG. CONCLUSION: Our systematic review showed that elective CS (primary and repeated) before the 39 + 0 WG lead to more NICU admissions and neonatal deaths, although death is rare and increases again after 39 + 6 WG. We did not find enough evidence on maternal outcomes. There is a need for more research, considering maternal outcomes to provide a balanced decision between neonatal and maternal health. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: Registered in PROSPERO (CRD42017078231).

[Memorandum Registry for Health Services Research: Update 2019]. / Memorandum Register für die Versorgungsforschung: Update 2019.

Health registries could be used to analyze questions concerning routine practice in healthcare. Therefore, registries are a core method in health services research. The German Network for Health Services Research (Deutsches Netzwerk Versorgungsforschung, DNVF) promotes the quality of registries by scientific exchange, organization of advanced training, and recommendations in the form of a memorandum "Registry for Health Services Research". The current recommendations are an update of the memorandum's first version of 2010. The update describes the capabilities and aims of registries in health services research. Furthermore, it illustrates the state-of-the-art in designing and implementing health registries. The memorandum provides developers the methodological basis to ensure high quality health registries. It further provides users of health registries with insights that enable assessing the quality of data and results of health registries. Finally, funding agencies and health policy actors can use the quality criteria to establish a framework for the financing and legislative requirements for health registries. The memorandum provides first a definition of health registries and presents an overview of their utility in health services research and health care improvement. Second, several areas of methodological importance for the development and operation of health registries are presented. This includes the conceptual and preliminary design, implementation, technical organization of a health registry, statistical analysis, reporting of results, and data protection. From these areas, criteria are deduced to allow the assessment of the quality of a health registry. Finally, a checklist is presented.

Comparative effectiveness of common therapies for Wilson disease: A systematic review and meta-analysis of controlled studies.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Wilson disease (WD) is a rare disorder of copper metabolism. The objective of this systematic review was to determine the comparative effectiveness and safety of common treatments of WD. METHODS: We included WD patients of any age or stage and the study drugs D-penicillamine, zinc salts, trientine and tetrathiomolybdate. The control could be placebo, no treatment or any other treatment. We included prospective, retrospective, randomized and non-randomized studies. We searched Medline and Embase via Ovid, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and screened reference lists of included articles. Where possible, we applied random-effects meta-analyses. RESULTS: The 23 included studies reported on 2055 patients and mostly compared D-penicillamine to no treatment, zinc, trientine or succimer. One study compared tetrathiomolybdate and trientine. Post-decoppering maintenance therapy was addressed in one study only. Eleven of 23 studies were of low quality. When compared to no treatment, D-penicillamine was associated with a lower mortality (odds ratio 0.013; 95% CI 0.0010 to 0.17). When compared to zinc, there was no association with mortality (odds ratio 0.73; 95% CI 0.16 to 3.40) and prevention or amelioration of clinical symptoms (odds ratio 0.84; 95% CI 0.48 to 1.48). Conversely, D-penicillamine may have a greater impact on side effects and treatment discontinuations than zinc. CONCLUSIONS: There are some indications that zinc is safer than D-penicillamine therapy while being similarly effective in preventing or reducing hepatic or neurological WD symptoms. Study quality was low warranting cautious interpretation of our findings.