Correlation between Obesity and Socioeconomic and Psychological Characteristics of Students Attending Different Rural School Types.

We examined the prevalence of obesity in two types of schools-a comprehensive school and a grammar school-in a rural German region of Brandenburg. METHODS: In a cross-sectional study, BMI values were measured in 114 students in grades 5, 7, and 10. In addition to the demographic data, data on nutrition, physical activity, and mental well-being were collected using a questionnaire. RESULTS: A total of 44% (11/25) of the comprehensive school students and 15% (13/89) of the high school students are overweight, and 24% (6/25) of the comprehensive school pupils and 6% (5/89) of the grammar school pupils (p = 0.009) are obese. In addition, 91% (10/11) of the students with obesity, 36% (4/11) of the students with pre-obesity, and 31% (26/84) of the normal-weight students (p = 0.001) are concerned about their weight. Among the children with obesity, 82% (9/11) are afraid of gaining weight. In addition, 6% (5/82) of the normal-weight students, 25% (3/12) of the students with pre-obesity, and 70% (7/10) of the students with obesity feel restricted by their weight when exercising. CONCLUSION: School attendance and parental socioeconomic status appear to correlate with students' weight statuses. There is a high level of suffering, and they feel uncomfortable with their bodies and worry about weight regulation.

Interprofessional collaboration and patient-reported outcomes: a secondary data analysis based on large scale survey data.

BACKGROUND: While interprofessional collaboration (IPC) is widely considered a key element of comprehensive patient treatment, evidence focusing on its impact on patient-reported outcomes (PROs) is inconclusive. The aim of this study was to investigate the association between employee-rated IPC and PROs in a clinical inpatient setting. METHODS: We conducted a secondary data analysis of the entire patient and employee reported data collected by the Picker Institute Germany in cross-sectional surveys between 2003 and 2016. Individual patient data from departments within hospitals was matched with employee survey data from within 2 years of treatment at the department-level. Items assessing employee-rated IPC (independent variables) were included in Principal Component Analysis (PCA). All questions assessing PROs (overall satisfaction, less discomforts, complications, treatment success, willingness to recommend) served as main dependent variables in ordered logistic regression analyses. Results were adjusted for multiple hypothesis testing as well as patients' and employees' gender, age, and education. RESULTS: The data set resulted in 6154 patients from 19 hospitals respective 103 unique departments. The PCA revealed three principal components (department-specific IPC, interprofessional organization, and overall IPC), explaining 67% of the total variance. The KMO measure of sampling adequacy was .830 and Bartlett's test of sphericity highly significant (p < 0.001). An increase of 1 SD in department-specific IPC was associated with a statistically significant chance of a higher (i.e., better) PRO-rating about complications after discharge (OR 1.07, 95% CI 1.00-1.13, p = 0.029). However, no further associations were found. Exploratory analyses revealed positive coefficients of department-specific IPC on all PROs for patients which were treated in surgical or internal medicine departments, whereas results were ambiguous for pediatric patients. CONCLUSIONS: The association between department-level IPC and patient-level PROs remains - as documented in previous literature - unclear and results are of marginal effect sizes. Future studies should keep in mind the different types of IPC, their specific characteristics and possible effect mechanisms. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Study registration: Open Science Framework (DOI https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/2NYAX ); Date of registration: 09 November 2021.

Interprofessional collaboration and patient-reported outcomes in inpatient care: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Interprofessional collaboration (IPC) is seen as the "gold standard" of comprehensive care, but credible evidence concerning the effects on patient-reported outcomes (PRO) is lacking. The aim of this systematic review is to study the effect of IPC on PRO in inpatient care. METHODS: We systematically searched six electronic databases (PubMed, Web of Science/Social Science Citation Index, CENTRAL (Cochrane Library), Current Contents (LIVIVO), CINAHL, and Embase) for studies published between 1997 and 2021. Additional studies were identified through citation tracking, manually searching the Internet and Google Scholar, and consultation of experts. Risk of bias (RoB) was assessed using the RoB 2 tool for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and ROBINS-I for non-randomized studies (NRS). The included controlled before-and-after study (CBA) was assessed using both the ROBINS-I and the Effective Practice and Organization of Care (EPOC) quality criteria. Results were synthesized through narrative description, grouping, and thematic analysis of extracted data. RESULTS: The search yielded 10,213 records, from which 22 studies (16 RCTs, five NRS, and one CBA) fulfilled the inclusion criteria. In all but five studies, RoB was assessed as being high (RoB 2) resp. critical or serious (ROBINS-I). Within these 22 studies, nine inductively derived outcomes were assessed: (i) quality of life, (ii) coping, (iii) functional ability and health status, (iv) psychiatric morbidity, (v) pain, (vi) managing one's own health care, (vii) treatment success, (viii) satisfaction, and (ix) therapeutic relationship. While some studies do not report effect estimates, and some of the reported effects appear to be imprecisely estimated, the overall results indicate that IPC may affect PRO positively across all outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Due to high clinical heterogeneity and high RoB, the question whether IPC affects PRO cannot be answered conclusively. Methodically rigorous studies are needed in order to answer the question of effectiveness of IPC. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42017073900.

Relationship between volume and outcome for gastroschisis: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Newborns with gastroschisis need surgery to reduce intestines into the abdominal cavity and to close the abdominal wall. Due to an existing volume-outcome relationship for other high-risk, low-volume procedures, we aimed at examining the relationship between hospital or surgeon volume and outcomes for gastroschisis. METHODS: We conducted a systematic literature search in Medline, Embase, CENTRAL, CINAHL and Biosis Previews in June 2021 and searched for additional literature. We included (cluster-) randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and prospective or retrospective cohort studies analyzing the relationship between hospital or surgeon volume and mortality, morbidity or quality of life. We assessed risk of bias of included studies using ROBINS-I and performed a systematic synthesis without meta-analysis and used GRADE for assessing the certainty of the evidence. RESULTS: We included 12 cohort studies on hospital volume. Higher hospital volume may reduce in-hospital mortality of neonates with gastroschisis, while the evidence is very uncertain for other outcomes. Findings are based on a low certainty of the evidence for in-hospital mortality and a very low certainty of the evidence for all other analyzed outcomes, mainly due to risk of bias and imprecision. We did not identify any study on surgeon volume. CONCLUSION: The evidence suggests that higher hospital volume reduces in-hospital mortality of newborns with gastroschisis. However, the magnitude of this effect seems to be heterogeneous and results should be interpreted with caution. There is no evidence on the relationship between surgeon volume and outcomes.

A systematic review on the effectiveness of implementation strategies to postpone elective caesarean sections to ≥ 39 + (0-6) weeks of gestation.

BACKGROUND: Caesarean sections often have no urgent indication and are electively planned. Research showed that elective caesarean section should not be performed until 39 + (0-6) weeks of gestation to ensure best neonatal and maternal health if there are no contraindications. This was recommended by various guidelines published in the last two decades. With this systematic review, we are looking for implementation strategies trying to implement these recommendations to reduce elective caesarean section before 39 + (0-6) weeks of gestation. METHODS: We performed a systematic literature search in MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, and CINAHL on 3rd of March 2021. We included studies that assessed implementation strategies aiming to postpone elective caesarean section to ≥ 39 + (0-6) weeks of gestation. There were no restrictions regarding the type of implementation strategy or reasons for elective caesarean section. Our primary outcome was the rate of elective caesarean sections before 39 + (0-6) weeks of gestation. We used the ROBINS-I Tool for the assessment of risk of bias. We did a narrative analysis of the results. RESULTS: We included 10 studies, of which were 2 interrupted time series and 8 before-after studies, covering 205,954 elective caesarean births. All studies included various types of implementation strategies. All implementation strategies showed success in decreasing the rate of elective caesarean sections performed < 39 + (0-6) weeks of gestation. Risk difference differed from - 7 (95% CI - 8; - 7) to - 45 (95% CI - 51; - 31). Three studies reported the rate of neonatal intensive care unit admission and showed little reduction. CONCLUSION: This systematic review shows that all presented implementation strategies to reduce elective caesarean section before 39 + (0-6) weeks of gestation are effective. Reduction rates differ widely and it remains unclear which strategy is most successful. Strategies used locally in one hospital seem a little more effective. Included studies are either before-after studies (8) or interrupted time series (2) and the overall quality of the evidence is rather low. However, most of the studies identified specific barriers in the implementation process. For planning an implementation strategy to reduce elective caesarean section before 39 + (0-6) weeks of gestation, it is necessary to consider specific barriers and facilitators and take all obstetric personal into account. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42017078231.

Acquisition of chromosome 1q duplication in parental and genome-edited human-induced pluripotent stem cell-derived neural stem cells results in their higher proliferation rate in vitro and in vivo.

OBJECTIVES: Genetic engineering of human-induced pluripotent stem cell-derived neural stem cells (hiPSC-NSC) may increase the risk of genomic aberrations. Therefore, we asked whether genetic modification of hiPSC-NSCs exacerbates chromosomal abnormalities that may occur during passaging and whether they may cause any functional perturbations in NSCs in vitro and in vivo. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The transgenic cassette was inserted into the AAVS1 locus, and the genetic integrity of zinc-finger nuclease (ZFN)-modified hiPSC-NSCs was assessed by the SNP-based karyotyping. The hiPSC-NSC proliferation was assessed in vitro by the EdU incorporation assay and in vivo by staining of brain slices with Ki-67 antibody at 2 and 8 weeks after transplantation of ZFN-NSCs with and without chromosomal aberration into the striatum of immunodeficient rats. RESULTS: During early passages, no chromosomal abnormalities were detected in unmodified or ZFN-modified hiPSC-NSCs. However, at higher passages both cell populations acquired duplication of the entire long arm of chromosome 1, dup(1)q. ZNF-NSCs carrying dup(1)q exhibited higher proliferation rate than karyotypically intact cells, which was partly mediated by increased expression of AKT3 located on Chr1q. Compared to karyotypically normal ZNF-NSCs, cells with dup(1)q also exhibited increased proliferation in vivo 2 weeks, but not 2 months, after transplantation. CONCLUSIONS: These results demonstrate that, independently of ZFN-editing, hiPSC-NSCs have a propensity for acquiring dup(1)q and this aberration results in increased proliferation which might compromise downstream hiPSC-NSC applications.

Relationship between volume and outcome for gastroschisis: a systematic review protocol.

BACKGROUND: Gastroschisis is a congenital anomaly that needs surgical management for repositioning intestines into the abdominal cavity and for abdominal closure. Higher hospital or surgeon volume has previously been found to be associated with better clinical outcomes for different especially high-risk, low volume procedures. Therefore, we aim to examine the relationship between hospital or surgeon volume and outcomes for gastroschisis. METHODS: We will perform a systematic literature search from inception onwards in Medline, Embase, CENTRAL, CINAHL, and Biosis Previews without applying any limitations. In addition, we will search trial registries and relevant conference proceedings. We will include (cluster-) randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and prospective or retrospective cohort studies analyzing the relationship between hospital or surgeon volume and clinical outcomes. The primary outcomes will be survival and mortality. Secondary outcomes will be different measures of morbidity (e.g., severe gastrointestinal complications, gastrointestinal dysfunctions, and sepsis), quality of life, and length of stay. We will systematically assess risk of bias of included studies using RoB 2 for individually or cluster-randomized trials and ROBINS-I for cohort studies, and extract data on the study design, patient characteristics, case-mix adjustments, statistical methods, hospital and surgeon volume, and outcomes into standardized tables. Title and abstract screening, full text screening, critical appraisal, and data extraction of results will be conducted by two reviewers independently. Other data will be extracted by one reviewer and checked for accuracy by a second one. Any disagreements will be resolved by discussion. We will not pool results statistically as we expect included studies to be clinically and methodologically very diverse. We will conduct a systematic synthesis without meta-analysis and use GRADE for assessing the certainty of the evidence. DISCUSSION: Given the lack of a comprehensive summary of findings on the relationship between hospital or surgeon volume and outcomes for gastroschisis, this systematic review will put things right. Results can be used to inform decision makers or clinicians and to adapt medical care. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: Open Science Framework (DOI: https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/EX34M ; https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/HGPZ2 ).

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).

Relationship between volume and outcome for surgery on congenital diaphragmatic hernia: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Congenital diaphragmatic hernia (CDH) is a rare and life-threatening anomaly that needs surgical therapy after clinical stabilization of the neonate. Given an existing volume-outcome relationship for other high-risk, low volume procedures, we aimed at examining the relationship between hospital or surgeon volume and outcomes for surgery on CDH. METHODS: We conducted a systematic search in multiple databases in September 2019 and searched for additional literature. We assessed risk of bias of included studies using ROBINS-I and synthesized results in a structured narrative way using GRADE. RESULTS: We included 5 cohort studies on hospital volume. Results for in-hospital mortality, one-year mortality and length of stay are inconclusive. The certainty of the evidence was very low for all outcomes, due to risk of bias, inconsistency and imprecision. We did not identify any study on surgeon volume. CONCLUSION: Due to the very low certainty of the evidence it is uncertain whether higher hospital volume is associated with favorable outcomes for neonates undergoing surgery for CDH. There is no evidence on the relationship between surgeon volume and outcomes. Future studies should use more rigorous methodology and analyze additional outcomes to allow for more meaningful inferences. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO (CRD42018090231).

["If they were to stop coming, I'd panic" : Palliative care networks from the perspectives of patients and informal care givers]. / "Wenn die mal nicht mehr kommen würden, dann kriege ich eine Krise" : Netzwerke der ambulanten Palliativversorgung aus Sicht von Patienten und Angehörigen.

OBJECTIVE: This study examines the perspectives of patients and family caregivers on outpatient palliative care networks. It contrasts primary palliative care (AAPV) and specialized outpatient care (SAPV) services, particularly in regard to pain management. METHODS: The study is based on 27 semi-structured, problem-focussed interviews with 21 patients and 19 informal caregivers. Recruitment was based on purposive sampling in two regions of Brandenburg, Germany. The data were analysed using qualitative content analysis. RESULTS: In AAPV, the general practitioner (GP) is both the central point of contact as well as the coordinator of the care network. In SAPV, the GP plays a less important role. This can lead to conflicts between GPs and health care professionals of the palliative care team. Compared to AAPV, palliative care teams are attributed greater intervention capacities in acute situations as well as expertise in pain therapy. Thus, the option of parenteral administration of opioids is considered a benefit of specialized care. The use of nursing services varies considerably depending on the individual care network-in some cases care is completely taken over by relatives. Relatives are the closest to the patient within the care network and perform key tasks. CONCLUSION: The personal and professional composition of networks of outpatient palliative care varies individually according to care situation and form. Care networks of AAPV and SAPV differ with regard to the accessibility of health care professionals and pain therapy. Home-based palliative care is often made possible by informal care givers in the first place.

Systematic reviews of health economic evaluations: A structured analysis of characteristics and methods applied.

INTRODUCTION: The number of systematic reviews of health economic evaluations (SR-HEs) is increasing. We aimed at providing a detailed overview of the characteristics and applied methods in recently published SR-HEs. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE (03/2017) for SR-HEs published since 2015 using validated search filters. We included studies that performed a systematic review of full economic evaluations and searched at least one electronic database. We extracted data in a standardized, beforehand piloted form that was deduced from the items of the PRISMA and CHEERS checklists. Data were extracted by one reviewer, and a 10% random sample was verified by a second. We prepared descriptive statistical measures to describe the SR-HEs. RESULTS: We included 202 SR-HEs. We identified similarities especially in the methods for information retrieval. Study selection, data extraction, and assessment of quality and transferability were frequently not reported or performed without taking measures to reduce errors (eg, independent study selection). A wide range of different tools was applied for critical appraisal. Moreover, the reporting of included economic evaluations and the synthesis of their results showed strong variations. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, we identified few common features in the applied methods for SR-HEs. The information retrieval processes are largely standardized, but many studies did not use validated search filters. For the other systematic review steps, the methodological approaches varied. In particular, important challenges seem to be the methodological quality and transferability assessment as well as presentation and (quantitative) synthesis of results. Efforts are needed for increasing standardization, quality of applied methods, and reporting of SR-HEs.

Relationship between volume and outcome for congenital diaphragmatic hernia: a systematic review protocol.

BACKGROUND: Congenital diaphragmatic hernia is a rare and life-threatening anomaly that occurs during fetal development and results in an incomplete or incorrect formation of the diaphragm. Surgical therapy of the diaphragm should be performed after clinical stabilization of the neonate. Higher hospital or surgeon volume has previously been found to be associated with better clinical outcomes for different especially high-risk, low-volume procedures. Therefore, we aim to examine the relationship between hospital or surgeon volume and outcomes for congenital diaphragmatic hernia. METHODS: This systematic review protocol has been designed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis Protocol. We will perform a systematic literature search in MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL and Biosis Previews without applying any limitations. In addition, we will search for relevant conference abstracts. We will screen titles and abstracts of retrieved studies, obtain potentially relevant full texts, and assess the eligibility of those full texts against our inclusion criteria. We will include comparative studies analyzing the relationship between hospital or surgeon volume and clinical outcomes. We will systematically assess risk of bias of included studies and extract data on the study design, patient characteristics, case-mix adjustments, statistical methods, hospital and surgeon volume, and outcomes into standardized tables. Title and abstract screening, full-text screening, critical appraisal, and data extraction of results will be conducted by two reviewers independently. Other data will be extracted by one reviewer and checked for accuracy by a second one. Any disagreements will be resolved by discussion. We will not perform a meta-analysis as we expect included studies to be clinically and methodologically very diverse. We will synthesize findings from primary studies in a structured narrative way and using GRADE. DISCUSSION: Given the lack of a comprehensive summary of findings on the relationship between hospital or surgeon volume and outcomes for congenital diaphragmatic hernia, this systematic review will put things right. Results can be used to inform decision makers or clinicians and to adapt medical care. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO ( CRD42018090231 ).

SYSTEMATIC REVIEWS OF ECONOMIC EVALUATIONS IN HEALTH TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT: A REVIEW OF CHARACTERISTICS AND APPLIED METHODS.

OBJECTIVES: When making decisions in health care, it is essential to consider economic evidence about an intervention. The objective of this study was to analyze the methods applied for systematic reviews of health economic evaluations (SR-HEs) in HTA and to identify common challenges. METHODS: We manually searched the Web pages of HTA organizations and included HTA-reports published since 2015. Prerequisites for inclusion were the conduct of an SR-HE in at least one electronic database and the use of the English, German, French, or Spanish language. Methodological features were extracted in standardized tables. We prepared descriptive statistical (e.g., median, range) measures to describe the applied methods. Data were synthesized in a structured narrative way. RESULTS: Eighty-three reports were included in the analysis. We identified inexplicable heterogeneity, particularly concerning literature search strategy, data extraction, assessment of quality, and applicability. Furthermore, process steps were often missing or reported in a nontransparent way. The use of a standardized data extraction form was indicated in one-third of reports (32 percent). Fifty-four percent of authors systematically appraised included studies. In 10 percent of reports, the applicability of included studies was assessed. Involvement of two reviewers was rarely reported for the study selection (43 percent), data extraction (28 percent), and quality assessment (39 percent). CONCLUSIONS: The methods applied for SR-HEs in HTA and their reporting quality are very heterogeneous. Efforts toward a detailed, standardized guidance for the preparation of SR-HEs definitely seem necessary. A general harmonization and improvement of the applied methodology would increase the value of SR-HE for decision makers.

(Update of a) systematic review on the impact of elective early term (< 39th gestational week) caesarean sections on maternal and neonatal health - a protocol.

BACKGROUND: The rate of caesarean sections increased in the last decades to about 30% of births in western populations. Many caesarean sections are electively planned without an urgent medical reason for mother or child. Especially in women with a foregoing caesarean section, the procedure is planned early. An early caesarean section though may harm the newborn. Our aim is to evaluate the gestational time point after the 37th gestational week (after prematurity = term) of performing an elective caesarean section with the lowest morbidity for mother and child. METHODS: This is an update of a systematic review previously carried out on behalf of the German Federal Ministry of Health. We will perform a systematic literature search in MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL and CINAHL. Our primary outcome is the rate of admissions to the neonatal intensive care unit in early versus late term neonates. We will include (quasi) randomized controlled trials and cohort studies. The studies should include pregnant women who have an elective caesarean section at term. We will screen titles and abstracts and the identified full texts of studies for eligibility. Risk of bias will be assessed with the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool for Randomized Trials or with the Risk of Bias Tool for Non-Randomized Studies of Interventions (ROBINS-I). These tasks will be performed independently by two reviewers. Data will be extracted in beforehand piloted extraction tables. A dose-response meta-analysis will be performed. DISCUSSION: Our aim is to reach a higher validity in the assessment of the time point of elective caesarean sections by performing a meta-analysis to support recommendations for clinical practice. We assume to identify less randomized controlled trials but a large number of cohort studies analyzing the given question. We will discuss similarities and differences in included studies as well as methodological strengths and weaknesses. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42017078231.

Interprofessional collaboration and patient-reported outcomes in inpatient care: protocol for a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Interprofessional collaboration (IPC) is a core demand of policymakers, funding parties, and health care professionals in practice. Although the causal mechanism from increased IPC to improved patient outcomes seems to be intuitive, there is a lack of credible causal evidence concerning the effects not only on the objective but also on the subjective patient outcomes. The aim of the planned systematic review is to focus on the effect of IPC on patient-reported outcomes and experiences in inpatient care. METHODS: A systematic literature review will be undertaken by searching the following electronic databases: PubMed, Web of Science/Social Science Citation Index, Cochrane Library (CENTRAL), Current Contents (LIVIVO), CINAHL, and EMBASE. Additional studies will be identified through forward and backward citation tracking, manually searching the Internet and Google Scholar, and consultation of experts. Data will be synthesized through narrative description, grouping, and thematic analysis of the extracted data. If heterogeneity for some studies and outcomes is sufficiently low, a quantitative meta-analysis of effect sizes and standard errors will be applied. DISCUSSION: The systematic review will synthesize the evidence regarding the effectiveness of IPC and how it is perceived by patients in inpatient care. As the patients' perspective becomes increasingly relevant in the context of quality improvement, the results can help decision-makers in policy- and health care institutions to understand and develop strategies to ensure a high quality of care. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO registration number: CRD42017073900 ; date of registration in PROSPERO 07 August 2017.

Guideline appraisal with AGREE II: online survey of the potential influence of AGREE II items on overall assessment of guideline quality and recommendation for use.

BACKGROUND: The AGREE II instrument is the most commonly used guideline appraisal tool. It includes 23 appraisal criteria (items) organized within six domains. AGREE II also includes two overall assessments (overall guideline quality, recommendation for use). Our aim was to investigate how strongly the 23 AGREE II items influence the two overall assessments. METHODS: An online survey of authors of publications on guideline appraisals with AGREE II and guideline users from a German scientific network was conducted between 10th February 2015 and 30th March 2015. Participants were asked to rate the influence of the AGREE II items on a Likert scale (0 = no influence to 5 = very strong influence). The frequencies of responses and their dispersion were presented descriptively. RESULTS: Fifty-eight of the 376 persons contacted (15.4%) participated in the survey and the data of the 51 respondents with prior knowledge of AGREE II were analysed. Items 7-12 of Domain 3 (rigour of development) and both items of Domain 6 (editorial independence) had the strongest influence on the two overall assessments. In addition, Items 15-17 (clarity of presentation) had a strong influence on the recommendation for use. Great variations were shown for the other items. The main limitation of the survey is the low response rate. CONCLUSIONS: In guideline appraisals using AGREE II, items representing rigour of guideline development and editorial independence seem to have the strongest influence on the two overall assessments. In order to ensure a transparent approach to reaching the overall assessments, we suggest the inclusion of a recommendation in the AGREE II user manual on how to consider item and domain scores. For instance, the manual could include an a-priori weighting of those items and domains that should have the strongest influence on the two overall assessments. The relevance of these assessments within AGREE II could thereby be further specified.

External Validation and Update of the RICP-A Multivariate Model to Predict Chronic Postoperative Pain.

Objective: The development of chronic postsurgical pain (CPSP) is influenced by several factors. The risk index for chronic pain (RICP) was developed to identify patients at high risk for CPSP. The aim of this study was the external validation and update of the RICP. Design: Prospective cohort study. Setting: Two German hospitals. Subjects: Participants who underwent orthopedic surgery, general surgery, visceral surgery, and neurosurgery. Methods: The predicted outcome was CPSP at six months. We validated the original RICP externally and performed a model update. Analysis was performed using logistic regression. We analyzed the discrimination and calibration of the model. Furthermore, the updated model was internally validated. Results: We included 205 patients. The mean age of participants was 51 years. CPSP was reported by 53.9% of participants. In our population, the original RICP (preoperative pain in the operating field, other preoperative pain, postoperative acute pain, capacity overload, and comorbid stress symptoms) showed a sensitivity of 0.708 and a specificity of 0.727 (area under the curve [AUC] = 0.766, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.688-0.843). The updated RICP (preoperative pain in the operating field, other preoperative pain, postoperative acute pain, sex, marital status) yielded a sensitivity of 0.746 and a specificity of 0.726 (AUC = 0.813, 95% CI = 0.740-0.886). The results were confirmed by cross-validation. Pre- and postoperative pain measures showed the highest predictive ability. Discussion: The study indicates external validity of the original RICP. The updated RICP also showed good predictive ability. The results are limited by the small sample size and the amount of missing outcome data.

Systematic review of current guideline appraisals performed with the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research & Evaluation II instrument-a third of AGREE II users apply a cut-off for guideline quality.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate whether Appraisal of Guidelines for Research & Evaluation (AGREE) II users apply a cut-off based on standardized domain scores or overall guideline quality to distinguish between high- and low-quality guidelines, as well as to investigate which criteria they use to generate this cut-off and which type of cut-off they apply. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: We conducted a systematic search in MEDLINE, EMBASE, DARE, and the HTA-database for German- and English-language studies appraising guidelines with AGREE II. Information on cut-offs was extracted and analyzed descriptively. RESULTS: We identified 118 relevant publications. Thirty-nine (33%) used a cut-off, of which 24 (62%) used a 2-step and 13 (33%) used a 3-step approach. The cut-off for high quality lay between 50% and 70% (2-step) and 60% and 83% (3-step) of the highest possible rating. Twenty-four (62%) publications applied a cut-off based on standardized domain scores and 7 (18%) based on overall guideline quality. Eleven (28%) applied cut-offs to derive the recommendation for guideline use. CONCLUSION: A third of AGREE II users apply a cut-off to distinguish between high- and low-quality guidelines, often without clearly describing how the cut-off is generated. Many users might welcome a clear distinction between high- and low-quality guidelines; specifying a cut-off for this purpose might be useful.

Management of acute pain in the postoperative setting: the importance of quality indicators.

Despite the introduction of evidence-based recommendations for postoperative pain management (POPM), the consensus is that pain control remains suboptimal. Barriers to achieving patient-satisfactory analgesia include deficient knowledge regarding POPM among staff, lack of instructions, insufficient pain assessments and sub-optimal treatment. Effective monitoring of POPM is essential to enable policy makers and healthcare providers to improve the quality of care. Quality indicators (QIs) are quantitative measures of clinical practice that can monitor, evaluate and guide the quality of care provided to patients. QIs can be used to assess various aspects relating to the care process and they have proven useful in improving health outcomes in diseases such as myocardial infarction. In this commentary we critically analyze the evidence regarding the use of QIs in acute POPM based upon the experience of pain specialists from Europe and the USA who are members of the Change Pain Advisory Board. We also undertook a literature review to see what has been published on QIs in acute pain with the goal of assessing which QIs have been developed and used, and which ones have been successful/unsuccessful. In the hospital sector the development and implementation of QIs is complex. The nature of POPM requires a highly trained, multidisciplinary team and it is at this level that major improvements can be made. Greater involvement of patients regarding pain management is also seen as a priority area for improving clinical outcomes. Changes in structure and processes to deliver high-level quality care need to be regularly audited to ensure translation into better outcomes. QIs can help drive this process by providing an indicator of current levels of performance. In addition, outcomes QIs can be used to benchmark levels of performance between different healthcare providers.