Complementary and alternative medicine mention and recommendations in inflammatory bowel disease guidelines: systematic review and assessment using AGREE II.

BACKGROUND: Many patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) use complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) for disease management. There is, however, a communication gap between patients and healthcare professionals regarding CAM use, where patients are hesitant to disclose CAM use to providers. The purpose of this study was to identify the quantity and assess the quality of CAM recommendations in IBD clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II (AGREE II) instrument. METHODS: MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CINAHL were systematically searched from 2011 to 2022 to find CPGs for the treatment and/or management of IBD. The Guidelines International Network (GIN) and National Center for Complementary and Integrative Health (NCCIH) websites were also searched. Eligible CPGs were assessed using the AGREE II instrument. RESULTS: Nineteen CPGs made CAM recommendations for IBD and were included in this review. Average scaled domain percentages of CPGs were as follows (overall CPG, CAM section): scope and purpose (91.5%, 91.5%), clarity of presentation (90.3%, 64.0%), editorial independence (57.0%, 57.0%), stakeholder involvement (56.7%, 27.8%), rigour of development (54.7%, 45.9%), and applicability (14.6%, 2.1%). CONCLUSIONS: The majority of CPGs with CAM recommendations were of low quality and their CAM sections scored substantially lower relative to other therapies in the overall CPG. In future updates, CPGs with low scaled-domain percentages could be improved in accordance with AGREE II and other guideline development resources. Further research investigating how CAM therapies can best be incorporated into IBD CPGs is warranted.

Economic impact of COVID-19 pandemic on healthcare facilities and systems: International perspectives.

International hospitals and healthcare facilities are facing catastrophic financial challenges related to the COVID-19 pandemic. The American Hospital Association estimates a financial impact of $202.6 billion in lost revenue for America's hospitals and healthcare systems, or an average of $50.7 billion per month. Furthermore, it could cost low- and middle-income countries ~ US$52 billion (equivalent to US$8.60 per person) each four weeks to provide an effective healthcare response to COVID-19. In the setting of the largest daily COVID-19 new cases in the US, this burden will influence patient care, surgeries, and surgical outcomes. From a global economic standpoint, The World Bank projects that global growth is projected to shrink by almost 8% with poorer countries feeling most of the impact, and the United Nations projects that it will cost the global economy around 2 trillion dollars this year. Overall, a lack of preparedness was a major contributor to the struggles experienced by healthcare facilities around the world. Items such as personal protective equipment (PPE) for healthcare workers, hospital equipment, sanitizing supplies, toilet paper, and water were in short supply. These deficiencies were exposed by COVID-19 and have prompted healthcare organizations around the world to invent new essential plans for pandemic preparedness. In this paper, we will discuss the economic impact of COVID-19 on US and international hospitals, healthcare facilities, surgery, and surgical outcomes. In the future, the US and countries around the world will benefit from preparing a plan of action to use as a guide in the event of a disaster or pandemic.

Principles of supply chain management in the time of crisis.

Hospitals face catastrophic financial challenges in light of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Acute shortages in materials such as masks, ventilators, intensive care unit capacity, and personal protective equipment (PPE) are a significant concern. The future success of supply chain management involves increasing the transparency of where our raw materials are sourced, diversifying of our product resources, and improving our technology that is able to predict potential shortages. It is also important to develop a proactive budgeting strategy to meet supply demands through early designation of dependable roles to support organizations and through the education of healthcare staff. In this paper, we discuss supply chain management, governance and financing, emergency protocols, including emergency procurement and supply chain, supply chain gaps and how to address them, and the importance of communication in the times of crisis.

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.

Safety assessment of highly automated driving systems in test tracks: A new framework.

Among the three major safety assessment methods (i.e., simulation, test track, and on-road test) for highly automated driving systems (ADS), test tracks provide high fidelity and a safe and controllable testing environment. However, due to the lack of realistic background traffic, scenarios that can be tested in test tracks are usually static and limited. To address this limitation, a new safety assessment framework is proposed in this paper, which integrates an augmented reality (AR) testing platform and a testing scenario library generation (TSLG) method. The AR testing platform generates simulated background traffic in test tracks, which interact with subject ADS under test, to create a realistic traffic environment. The TSLG method can systematically generate a set of critical scenarios under each operational design domain (ODD) and the critical scenarios generated from the TSLG method can be imported into the AR testing platform. The proposed framework has been implemented in the Mcity test track at the University of Michigan with a Level 4 ADS. Field test results show that the proposed framework can accurately and efficiently evaluate the safety performance of highly ADS in a cost-effective fashion. In the cut-in case study, the proposed framework is estimated to accelerate the assessment process by 9.87×104 times comparing to the on-road test approach.