Takayasu's Arteritis from the Patients' Perspectives: Measuring the Pulse to the Patient-Reported Outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Patients with Takayasu's arteritis (TA) experience important changes in lifestyle, quality of life, and functional status due to ischemic symptoms or treatment toxicity. PURPOSE: To describe the clinical characteristics and the patient-reported outcomes (PROs), such as quality of life, disability, fatigue, and perception/impact of the disease in Mexican patients with TA. METHODS: Cross-sectional study including patients with established diagnosis of TA recruited at a tertiary care center. Demographics, comorbidities, clinical characteristics, laboratory, imaging, and treatment were retrieved. Disease activity (the Indian Takayasu Clinical Activity Score (ITAS) 2010), damage (Vasculitis Damage Index (VDI)), quality of life (Short Form 36 (SF-36)), disability (Health Assessment Questionnaire Disability Index (HAQ-DI)), fatigue (Multidimensional Fatigue Inventory-20), and patient's disease perceptions were assessed. RESULTS: Fifteen women were included, with a median age of 41 years (interquartile range (IQR) 30-45) and disease duration of 108 months (IQR 55-197). Median ITAS 2010 and VDI scores were 0 (IQR 0-2) and 3 points (IQR 2-6), respectively. Mean SF-36 score was 71.38 ± 13.39, with mean physical and mental component summaries of 66.52 ± 13.37 and 76.24 ± 14.89, respectively. HAQ-DI mean score was 0.48 ± 0.62, being grip the most affected domain. Among fatigue subscales, the higher scores were present in the physical fatigue (16.3 ± 5.8). Correlations between the HAQ-DI and the VDI score (r = 0.64, P = 0.03); between the general fatigue, score, and disease duration (r = -0.71, P = 0.01); and between the SF-36 total score and the HAQ-DI (r = -0.87, P = 0.0004) were found. CONCLUSIONS: It is important to identify disease-specific outcomes of interest to the patients to develop tools that assess them with a holistic approach.

Managing central venous access during a health care crisis.

OBJECTIVE: During the COVID-19 pandemic, central venous access line teams were implemented at many hospitals throughout the world to provide access for critically ill patients. The objective of this study was to describe the structure, practice patterns, and outcomes of these vascular access teams during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional, self-reported study of central venous access line teams in hospitals afflicted with the COVID-19 pandemic. To participate in the study, hospitals were required to meet one of the following criteria: development of a formal plan for a central venous access line team during the pandemic; implementation of a central venous access line team during the pandemic; placement of central venous access by a designated practice group during the pandemic as part of routine clinical practice; or management of an iatrogenic complication related to central venous access in a patient with COVID-19. RESULTS: Participants from 60 hospitals in 13 countries contributed data to the study. Central venous line teams were most commonly composed of vascular surgery and general surgery attending physicians and trainees. Twenty sites had 2657 lines placed by their central venous access line team or designated practice group. During that time, there were 11 (0.4%) iatrogenic complications associated with central venous access procedures performed by the line team or group at those 20 sites. Triple lumen catheters, Cordis (Santa Clara, Calif) catheters, and nontunneled hemodialysis catheters were the most common types of central venous lines placed by the teams. Eight (14%) sites reported experience in placing central venous lines in prone, ventilated patients with COVID-19. A dedicated line cart was used by 35 (59%) of the hospitals. Less than 50% (24 [41%]) of the participating sites reported managing thrombosed central lines in COVID-19 patients. Twenty-three of the sites managed 48 iatrogenic complications in patients with COVID-19 (including complications caused by providers outside of the line team or designated practice group). CONCLUSIONS: Implementation of a dedicated central venous access line team during a pandemic or other health care crisis is a way by which physicians trained in central venous access can contribute their expertise to a stressed health care system. A line team composed of physicians with vascular skill sets provides relief to resource-constrained intensive care unit, ward, and emergency medicine teams with a low rate of iatrogenic complications relative to historical reports. We recommend that a plan for central venous access line team implementation be in place for future health care crises.

I. THE ROLE OF RESEARCH ETHICS COMMITTEES IN OBSERVATIONAL STUDIES: EPIDEMIOLOGICAL REGISTRIES, CASE REPORTS, INTERVIEWS, AND RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES.

It is often unclear to the clinical investigator whether observational studies should be submitted to a research ethics committee (REC), mostly because, in general, no active or additional interventions are performed. Moreover, obtaining an informed consent under these circumstances may be challenging, either because these are very large epidemiological registries, or the subject may no longer be alive, is too ill to consent, or is impossible to contact after being discharged. Although observational studies do not involve interventions, they entail ethical concerns, including threats such as breaches in confidentiality and autonomy, and respect for basic rights of the research subjects according to the good clinical practices. In this context, in addition to their main function as evaluators from an ethical, methodological, and regulatory point of view, the RECs serve as mediators between the research subjects, looking after their basic rights, and the investigator or institution, safeguarding them from both legal and unethical perils that the investigation could engage, by ensuring that all procedures are performed following the international standards of care for research. The aim of this manuscript is to provide information on each type of study and its risks, along with actions to prevent such risks, and the function of RECs in each type of study.

I. The role of research ethics committees in observational studies: epidemiological registries, case reports, interviews, and retrospective studies

Abstract It is often unclear to the clinical investigator whether observational studies should be submitted to a research ethics committee (REC), mostly because, in general, no active or additional interventions are performed. Moreover, obtaining an informed consent under these circumstances may be challenging, either because these are very large epidemiological registries, or the subject may no longer be alive, is too ill to consent, or is impossible to contact after being discharged. Although observational studies do not involve interventions, they entail ethical concerns, including threats such as breaches in confidentiality and autonomy, and respect for basic rights of the research subjects according to the good clinical practices. In this context, in addition to their main function as evaluators from an ethical, methodological, and regulatory point of view, the RECs serve as mediators between the research subjects, looking after their basic rights, and the investigator or institution, safeguarding them from both legal and unethical perils that the investigation could engage, by ensuring that all procedures are performed following the international standards of care for research. The aim of this manuscript is to provide information on each type of study and its risks, along with actions to prevent such risks, and the function of RECs in each type of study.