The Performance of ChatGPT on the American Society for Surgery of the Hand Self-Assessment Examination.

BACKGROUND: This study aims to compare the performance of ChatGPT-3.5 (GPT-3.5) and ChatGPT-4 (GPT-4) on the American Society for Surgery of the Hand (ASSH) Self-Assessment Examination (SAE) to determine their potential as educational tools. METHODS: This study assessed the proportion of correct answers to text-based questions on the 2021 and 2022 ASSH SAE between untrained ChatGPT versions. Secondary analyses assessed the performance of ChatGPT based on question difficulty and question category. The outcomes of ChatGPT were compared with the performance of actual examinees on the ASSH SAE. RESULTS: A total of 238 questions were included in the analysis. Compared with GPT-3.5, GPT-4 provided significantly more correct answers overall (58.0% versus 68.9%, respectively; P = 0.013), on the 2022 SAE (55.9% versus 72.9%; P = 0.007), and more difficult questions (48.8% versus 63.6%; P = 0.02). In a multivariable logistic regression analysis, correct answers were predicted by GPT-4 (odds ratio [OR], 1.66; P = 0.011), increased question difficulty (OR, 0.59; P = 0.009), Bone and Joint questions (OR, 0.18; P < 0.001), and Soft Tissue questions (OR, 0.30; P = 0.013). Actual examinees scored a mean of 21.6% above GPT-3.5 and 10.7% above GPT-4. The mean percentage of correct answers by actual examinees was significantly higher for correct (versus incorrect) ChatGPT answers. CONCLUSIONS: GPT-4 demonstrated improved performance over GPT-3.5 on the ASSH SAE, especially on more difficult questions. Actual examinees scored higher than both versions of ChatGPT, but the margin was cut in half by GPT-4.

Prehospital early warning scores for adults with suspected sepsis: the PHEWS observational cohort and decision-analytic modelling study.

Background: Guidelines for sepsis recommend treating those at highest risk within 1 hour. The emergency care system can only achieve this if sepsis is recognised and prioritised. Ambulance services can use prehospital early warning scores alongside paramedic diagnostic impression to prioritise patients for treatment or early assessment in the emergency department. Objectives: To determine the accuracy, impact and cost-effectiveness of using early warning scores alongside paramedic diagnostic impression to identify sepsis requiring urgent treatment. Design: Retrospective diagnostic cohort study and decision-analytic modelling of operational consequences and cost-effectiveness. Setting: Two ambulance services and four acute hospitals in England. Participants: Adults transported to hospital by emergency ambulance, excluding episodes with injury, mental health problems, cardiac arrest, direct transfer to specialist services, or no vital signs recorded. Interventions: Twenty-one early warning scores used alongside paramedic diagnostic impression, categorised as sepsis, infection, non-specific presentation, or other specific presentation. Main outcome measures: Proportion of cases prioritised at the four hospitals; diagnostic accuracy for the sepsis-3 definition of sepsis and receiving urgent treatment (primary reference standard); daily number of cases with and without sepsis prioritised at a large and a small hospital; the minimum treatment effect associated with prioritisation at which each strategy would be cost-effective, compared to no prioritisation, assuming willingness to pay £20,000 per quality-adjusted life-year gained. Results: Data from 95,022 episodes involving 71,204 patients across four hospitals showed that most early warning scores operating at their pre-specified thresholds would prioritise more than 10% of cases when applied to non-specific attendances or all attendances. Data from 12,870 episodes at one hospital identified 348 (2.7%) with the primary reference standard. The National Early Warning Score, version 2 (NEWS2), had the highest area under the receiver operating characteristic curve when applied only to patients with a paramedic diagnostic impression of sepsis or infection (0.756, 95% confidence interval 0.729 to 0.783) or sepsis alone (0.655, 95% confidence interval 0.63 to 0.68). None of the strategies provided high sensitivity (> 0.8) with acceptable positive predictive value (> 0.15). NEWS2 provided combinations of sensitivity and specificity that were similar or superior to all other early warning scores. Applying NEWS2 to paramedic diagnostic impression of sepsis or infection with thresholds of > 4, > 6 and > 8 respectively provided sensitivities and positive predictive values (95% confidence interval) of 0.522 (0.469 to 0.574) and 0.216 (0.189 to 0.245), 0.447 (0.395 to 0.499) and 0.274 (0.239 to 0.313), and 0.314 (0.268 to 0.365) and 0.333 (confidence interval 0.284 to 0.386). The mortality relative risk reduction from prioritisation at which each strategy would be cost-effective exceeded 0.975 for all strategies analysed. Limitations: We estimated accuracy using a sample of older patients at one hospital. Reliable evidence was not available to estimate the effectiveness of prioritisation in the decision-analytic modelling. Conclusions: No strategy is ideal but using NEWS2, in patients with a paramedic diagnostic impression of infection or sepsis could identify one-third to half of sepsis cases without prioritising unmanageable numbers. No other score provided clearly superior accuracy to NEWS2. Research is needed to develop better definition, diagnosis and treatments for sepsis. Study registration: This study is registered as Research Registry (reference: researchregistry5268). Funding: This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme (NIHR award ref: 17/136/10) and is published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 28, No. 16. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information.

Sepsis is a life-threatening condition in which an abnormal response to infection causes heart, lung or kidney failure. People with sepsis need urgent treatment. They need to be prioritised at the emergency department rather than waiting in the queue. Paramedics attempt to identify people with possible sepsis using an early warning score (based on simple measurements, such as blood pressure and heart rate) alongside their impression of the patient's diagnosis. They can then alert the hospital to assess the patient quickly. However, an inaccurate early warning score might miss cases of sepsis or unnecessarily prioritise people without sepsis. We aimed to measure how accurately early warning scores identified people with sepsis when used alongside paramedic diagnostic impression. We collected data from 71,204 people that two ambulance services transported to four different hospitals in 2019. We recorded paramedic diagnostic impressions and calculated early warning scores for each patient. At one hospital, we linked ambulance records to hospital records and identified who had sepsis. We then calculated the accuracy of using the scores alongside diagnostic impression to diagnose sepsis. Finally, we used modelling to predict how many patients (with and without sepsis) paramedics would prioritise using different strategies based on early warning scores and diagnostic impression. We found that none of the currently available early warning scores were ideal. When they were applied to all patients, they prioritised too many people. When they were only applied to patients whom the paramedics thought had infection, they missed many cases of sepsis. The NEWS2, score, which ambulance services already use, was as good as or better than all the other scores we studied. We found that using the NEWS2, score in people with a paramedic impression of infection could achieve a reasonable balance between prioritising too many patients and avoiding missing patients with sepsis.

Corrigendum: VIDIIA Hunter: a low-cost, smartphone connected, artificial intelligence-assisted COVID-19 rapid diagnostic platform approved for medical use in the UK.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.3389/fmolb.2023.1144001.].

VIDIIA Hunter diagnostic platform: a low-cost, smartphone connected, artificial intelligence-assisted COVID-19 rapid diagnostics approved for medical use in the UK.

Introduction: Accurate and rapid diagnostics paired with effective tracking and tracing systems are key to halting the spread of infectious diseases, limiting the emergence of new variants and to monitor vaccine efficacy. The current gold standard test (RT-qPCR) for COVID-19 is highly accurate and sensitive, but is time-consuming, and requires expensive specialised, lab-based equipment. Methods: Herein, we report on the development of a SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) rapid and inexpensive diagnostic platform that relies on a reverse-transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP) assay and a portable smart diagnostic device. Automated image acquisition and an Artificial Intelligence (AI) deep learning model embedded in the Virus Hunter 6 (VH6) device allow to remove any subjectivity in the interpretation of results. The VH6 device is also linked to a smartphone companion application that registers patients for swab collection and manages the entire process, thus ensuring tests are traced and data securely stored. Results: Our designed AI-implemented diagnostic platform recognises the nucleocapsid protein gene of SARS-CoV-2 with high analytical sensitivity and specificity. A total of 752 NHS patient samples, 367 confirmed positives for coronavirus disease (COVID-19) and 385 negatives, were used for the development and validation of the test and the AI-assisted platform. The smart diagnostic platform was then used to test 150 positive clinical samples covering a dynamic range of clinically meaningful viral loads and 250 negative samples. When compared to RT-qPCR, our AI-assisted diagnostics platform was shown to be reliable, highly specific (100%) and sensitive (98-100% depending on viral load) with a limit of detection of 1.4 copies of RNA per µL in 30 min. Using this data, our CE-IVD and MHRA approved test and associated diagnostic platform has been approved for medical use in the United Kingdom under the UK Health Security Agency's Medical Devices (Coronavirus Test Device Approvals, CTDA) Regulations 2022. Laboratory and in-silico data presented here also indicates that the VIDIIA diagnostic platform is able to detect the main variants of concern in the United Kingdom (September 2023). Discussion: This system could provide an efficient, time and cost-effective platform to diagnose SARS-CoV-2 and other infectious diseases in resource-limited settings.

Reasons for Long-term Opioid Prescriptions After Guideline-directed Opioid Prescribing and Excess Opioid Pill Disposal.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to determine the frequency and reasons for long-term opioid prescriptions (rxs) after surgery in the setting of guideline-directed prescribing and a high rate of excess opioid disposal. BACKGROUND: Although previous studies have demonstrated that 5% to 10% of opioid-naïve patients prescribed opioids after surgery will receive long-term (3-12 months after surgery) opioid rxs, little is known about the reasons why long-term opioids are prescribed. METHODS: We studied 221 opioid-naïve surgical patients enrolled in a previously reported prospective clinical trial which used a patient-centric guideline for discharge opioid prescribing and achieved a high rate of excess opioid disposal. Patients were treated on a wide variety of services; 88% of individuals underwent cancer-related surgery. Long-term opioid rxs were identified using a Prescription Drug Monitoring Program search and reasons for rxs and opioid adverse events were ascertained by medical record review. We used a consensus definition for persistent opioid use: opioid rx 3 to 12 months after surgery and >60day supply. RESULTS: 15.3% (34/221) filled an opioid rx 3 to 12 months after surgery, with 5.4% and 12.2% filling an rx 3 to 6 and 6 to 12 months after surgery, respectively. The median opioid rx days supply per patient was 7, interquartile range 5 to 27, range 1 to 447 days. The reasons for long-term opioid rxs were: 51% new painful medical condition, 40% new surgery, 6% related to the index operation; only 1 patient on 1 occasion was given an opioid rx for a nonspecific reason. Five patients (2.3%) developed persistent opioid use, 2 due to pain from recurrent cancer, 2 for new medical conditions, and 1 for a chronic abscess. CONCLUSIONS: In a group of prospectively studied opioid-naïve surgical patients discharged with guideline-directed opioid rxs and who achieved high rates of excess opioid disposal, no patients became persistent opioid users solely as a result of the opioid rx given after their index surgery. Long-term opioid use did occur for other, well-defined, medical or surgical reasons.

Clinical and cost effectiveness of single stage compared with two stage revision for hip prosthetic joint infection (INFORM): pragmatic, parallel group, open label, randomised controlled trial.

OBJECTIVES: To determine whether patient reported outcomes improve after single stage versus two stage revision surgery for prosthetic joint infection of the hip, and to determine the cost effectiveness of these procedures. DESIGN: Pragmatic, parallel group, open label, randomised controlled trial. SETTING: High volume tertiary referral centres or orthopaedic units in the UK (n=12) and in Sweden (n=3), recruiting from 1 March 2015 to 19 December 2018. PARTICIPANTS: 140 adults (aged ≥18 years) with a prosthetic joint infection of the hip who required revision (65 randomly assigned to single stage and 75 to two stage revision). INTERVENTIONS: A computer generated 1:1 randomisation list stratified by hospital was used to allocate participants with prosthetic joint infection of the hip to a single stage or a two stage revision procedure. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary intention-to-treat outcome was pain, stiffness, and functional limitations 18 months after randomisation, measured by the Western Ontario and McMasters Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) score. Secondary outcomes included surgical complications and joint infection. The economic evaluation (only assessed in UK participants) compared quality adjusted life years and costs between the randomised groups. RESULTS: The mean age of participants was 71 years (standard deviation 9) and 51 (36%) were women. WOMAC scores did not differ between groups at 18 months (mean difference 0.13 (95% confidence interval -8.20 to 8.46), P=0.98); however, the single stage procedure was better at three months (11.53 (3.89 to 19.17), P=0.003), but not from six months onwards. Intraoperative events occurred in five (8%) participants in the single stage group and 20 (27%) in the two stage group (P=0.01). At 18 months, nine (14%) participants in the single stage group and eight (11%) in the two stage group had at least one marker of possible ongoing infection (P=0.62). From the perspective of healthcare providers and personal social services, single stage revision was cost effective with an incremental net monetary benefit of £11 167 (95% confidence interval £638 to £21 696) at a £20 000 per quality adjusted life years threshold (£1.0; $1.1; €1.4). CONCLUSIONS: At 18 months, single stage revision compared with two stage revision for prosthetic joint infection of the hip showed no superiority by patient reported outcome. Single stage revision had a better outcome at three months, fewer intraoperative complications, and was cost effective. Patients prefer early restoration of function, therefore, when deciding treatment, surgeons should consider patient preferences and the cost effectiveness of single stage surgery. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN registry ISRCTN10956306.

Low-Cost, Low-Resource Training Model to Enhance and Sustain Serious Illness Conversation Skills for Internal Medicine Residents.

Background: Funding and limited resources are barriers to required training of residents in serious illness conversation (SIC) skills. Objectives: To examine the effectiveness of a low-cost, low-resource (LCLR) SIC training embedded within a required palliative care rotation. Design: Pre-post prospective cohort study design. Setting/Subjects: Second year internal medicine (IM) residents received an LCLR three-hour training in the SIC Guide (SICG) with a single-faculty member and paired-participant practice replacing actors during a required two-week palliative medicine rotation. Measures: SIC competence checklist measured within simulated patient encounters longitudinally. Results: Twenty resident average SIC checklist scores improved from 11 (95% confidence interval [CI] 9-13) at the beginning of rotation to 19 (95% CI 17-20) at the end of rotation and 18 (95% CI 16-20) at six months after the rotation. Conclusions: LCLR SIC training for IM residents significantly increased the sustained use of basic SIC skills, but was less effective for more complex skills.

An assessment of the impact of 1.5 versus 2 and 2.5°C global temperature increase on flooding in Jamaica: a case study from the Hope watershed.

Climate change models project that, within the Caribbean basin, rainfall intensity is likely to increase toward the end of this century, although the region is projected to be drier overall. This may affect the frequency and severity of floods in Jamaica and the Caribbean Small Island Developing States. We investigate how flood hazards may be affected by increases in global mean surface temperature of 1.5, 2.0 and 2.5°C above pre-industrial levels using a case study of a Jamaican watershed. Rainfall projections from the PRECIS regional climate model for the Caribbean are analysed. Six members from the Quantifying Uncertainty in Model Predictions (AENWH, AEXSA, AEXSC, AEXSK, AEXSL and AEXSM) were used to create 100-year flood inundation maps for the Hope river for different global warming levels using hydrological and hydraulic models. Model runs projected peak discharges at 2.0, 2.5 and 1.5°C warming that were higher than discharges in the historical record of events that damaged sections of the watershed. Projections from the hydraulic model show increased flow area, depth and extent for 1.5 followed by 2.0 and 2.5°C rises in temperature. These results imply continued flood risk for the vulnerable areas of the watershed. This article is part of the theme issue 'Developing resilient energy systems'.

Long-acting opioid prescribing patterns of ophthalmic plastic surgeons in the medicare Part D database.

PURPOSE: To assess extended release/long acting (ER/LA) opioid prescribing patterns among ophthalmic plastic surgeons in the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) Part D database. METHODS: A retrospective observational cohort study was conducted on oculoplastic surgeons in the CMS Part D database who prescribed ER/LA opioids from 2013 to 2017. American Society of Ophthalmic Plastics and Reconstructive Surgery (ASOPRS) and non-ASOPRS surgeons were analyzed as groups. Prescribers were also analyzed based on gender and practice experience. RESULTS: Oculoplastic surgeons (64 ASOPRS and 78 non-ASOPRS) were responsible for 1,177 ER/LA opioid prescriptions from 2013 to 2017. ASOPRS members accounted for 4.6% and non-ASOPRS members accounted for 7.5% of all ER/LA opioids prescribed by ophthalmologists over the study period (p= .02). The total number of ASOPRS and non-ASOPRS members prescribing ER/LA opioids decreased by 52% (p= .10) and 58% (p= .07) from 2013 to 2017 respectively. CONCLUSION: ER/LA opioids are indicated for treatment of chronic pain and may be appropriately prescribed by the oculoplastic surgeon in certain circumstances, however due to the higher risk of overdose injury, those circumstances must be defined and justified. While a relatively small number of oculoplastic surgeons (10.6% ASOPRS and 19.6% non-ASOPRS) prescribed ER/LA opioids from 2013 to 2017, non-ASOPRS oculoplastic surgeons wrote 23.5% more ER/LA opioid prescriptions over the study period. Over the 5-year study period there was a general decline in the prescribing of ER/LA opioids by oculoplastic surgeons. Reviewing the prescribing practices of oculoplastic specialists, regardless of professional affiliation, is necessary to understand the role of ER/LA opioids for all of ophthalmology.

Sofosbuvir with daclatasvir and the outcomes of patients with COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis with GRADE assessment.

PURPOSE: This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the effect of sofosbuvir/daclatasvir (SOF/DCV) on mortality, the need for intensive care unit (ICU) admission or invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) and clinical recovery in patients with COVID-19. METHODS: We performed a systematic literature search through the PubMed, Scopus and Embase from the inception of databases until 6 April 2021. The intervention group was SOF/DCV, and the control group was standard of care. The primary outcome was mortality, defined as clinically validated death. The secondary outcomes were (1) the need for ICU admission or IMV and (2) clinical recovery. The pooled effect estimates were reported as risk ratios (RRs). RESULTS: There were four studies with a total of 231 patients in this meta-analysis. Three studies were randomised controlled trial, and one study was non-randomised. SOF/DCV was associated with lower mortality (RR: 0.31 (0.12, 0.78); p=0.013; I2: 0%) and reduced need for ICU admission or IMV (RR: 0.35 (0.18, 0.69); p=0.002; I2: 0%). Clinical recovery was achieved more frequently in the SOF/DCV (RR: 1.20 (1.04, 1.37); p=0.011; I2: 21.1%). There was a moderate certainty of evidence for mortality and need for ICU/IMV outcome, and a low certainty of evidence for clinical recovery. The absolute risk reductions were 140 fewer per 1000 for mortality and 186 fewer per 1000 for the need for ICU/IMV. The increase in clinical recovery was 146 more per 1000. CONCLUSION: SOF/DCV may reduce mortality rate and need for ICU/IMV in patients with COVID-19 while increasing the chance for clinical recovery. PROTOCOL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO: CRD42021247510.

Preliminary Assessment of a Telehealth Approach to Evaluating, Treating, and Discharging Low-Acuity Patients With Suspected COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: Telemedicine is uniquely positioned to address challenges posed to emergency departments (EDs) by the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. By reducing in-person contact, it should decrease provider risk of infection and preserve personal protective equipment (PPE). OBJECTIVES: To describe and assess the early results of a novel telehealth workflow in which remote providers collaborate with in-person nursing to evaluate and discharge well-appearing, low-risk ED patients with suspected COVID-19 infection. METHODS: Retrospective chart review was completed 3 weeks after implementation. Metrics include the number of patients evaluated, number of patients discharged without in-person contact, telehealth wait time and duration, collection of testing, ED length of stay (ED-LOS), 72-h return, number of in-person health care provider contacts, and associated PPE use. RESULTS: Among 302 patients evaluated by telehealth, 153 patients were evaluated and discharged by a telehealth provider with reductions in ED-LOS, PPE use, and close contact with health care personnel. These patients had a 62.5% shorter ED-LOS compared with other Emergency Severity Index level 4 patients seen over the same time period. Telehealth use for these 153 patients saved 413 sets of PPE. We observed a 3.9% 72-h revisit rate. One patient discharged after telehealth evaluation was hospitalized on a return visit 9 days later. CONCLUSION: Telehealth can be safely and efficiently used to evaluate, treat, test, and discharge ED patients suspected to have COVID-19. This workflow reduces infection risks to health care providers, PPE use, and ED-LOS. Additionally, it allows quarantined but otherwise well clinicians to continue working.

Assessment of Retinoblastoma Capacity in the Middle East, North Africa, and West Asia Region.

PURPOSE: We aimed to evaluate the capacity to treat retinoblastoma in the Middle East, North Africa, and West Asia region. METHODS: A Web-based assessment that investigated retinoblastoma-related pediatric oncology and ophthalmology infrastructure and associated capacity at member institutions of the Pediatric Oncology East and Mediterranean group was distributed. Data were analyzed in terms of availability, location, and confidence of use for each resource needed for the management of retinoblastoma. Resources were categorized by diagnostics, focal therapy, chemotherapy, advanced treatment, and supportive care. Responding institutions were further divided into an asset-based tiered system. RESULTS: In total, responses from 23 institutions were obtained. Fifteen institutions reported the availability of an ophthalmologist, 12 of which held primary off-site appointments. All institutions reported the availability of a pediatric oncologist and systemic chemotherapy A significant portion of available resources was located off site. Green laser was available on site at seven institutions, diode laser at six institutions, cryotherapy at 12 institutions, and brachytherapy at nine institutions. There existed marked disparity between the availability of some specific ophthalmic resources and oncologic resources. CONCLUSION: The assessment revealed common themes related to the treatment of retinoblastoma in low- and- middle-income countries, including decentralization of care, limited resources, and lack of multidisciplinary care. Resource disparities warrant targeted intervention in the Middle East, North Africa, and West Asia region to advance the management of retinoblastoma in the region.

Establishment of a formal program for retinoblastoma: Feasibility of clinical coordination across borders and impact on outcome.

Retinoblastoma is an ocular tumor that occurs in young children, in either heritable or sporadic manner. The relative rarity of retinoblastoma, and the need for expensive equipment, anesthesia, and pediatric ophthalmologic expertise, are barriers for effective treatment in developing countries. Also, with an average age-adjusted incidence of two to five cases per million children, patient number limits development of local expertise in countries with small populations. Lebanon is a small country with a population of approximately 4.5 million. In 2012, a comprehensive retinoblastoma program was formalized at the Children's Cancer Institute (CCI) at the American University of Beirut Medical Center, and resources were allocated for efficient interdisciplinary coordination to attract patients from neighboring countries such as Syria and Iraq, where such specialized therapy is also lacking. Through this program, care was coordinated across hospitals and borders such that patients would receive scheduled chemotherapy at their institution, and monthly retinal examinations and focal laser therapy at the CCI in Lebanon. Our results show the feasibility of successful collaboration across borders, with excellent patient and physician adherence to treatment plans. This was accompanied by an increase in patient referrals, which enables continued expertise development. However, the majority of patients presented with advanced intraocular disease, necessitating enucleation in 90% of eyes in unilateral cases, and more than 50% of eyes in bilateral cases. Future efforts need to focus on expanding the program that reaches to additional hospitals in both countries, and promoting early diagnosis, for further improvement of globe salvage rates.

Cost-effectiveness of cell salvage and donor blood transfusion during caesarean section: results from a randomised controlled trial.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of routine use of cell salvage during caesarean section in mothers at risk of haemorrhage compared with current standard of care. DESIGN: Model-based cost-effectiveness evaluation alongside a multicentre randomised controlled trial. Three main analyses were carried out on the trial data: (1) based on the intention-to-treat principle; (2) based on the per-protocol principle; (3) only participants who underwent an emergency caesarean section. SETTING: 26 obstetric units in the UK. PARTICIPANTS: 3028 women at risk of haemorrhage recruited between June 2013 and April 2016. INTERVENTIONS: Cell salvage (intervention) versus routine care without salvage (control). PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Cost-effectiveness based on incremental cost per donor blood transfusion avoided. RESULTS: In the intention-to-treat analysis, the mean difference in total costs between cell salvage and standard care was £83. The estimated incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was £8110 per donor blood transfusion avoided. For the per-protocol analysis, the mean difference in total costs was £92 and the ICER was £8252. In the emergency caesarean section analysis, the mean difference in total costs was £55 and the ICER was £13 713 per donor blood transfusion avoided. This ICER is driven by the increased probability that these patients would require a higher level of postoperative care and additional surgeries. The results of these analyses were shown to be robust for the majority of deterministic sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSIONS: The results of the economic evaluation suggest that while routine cell salvage is a marginally more effective strategy than standard care in avoiding a donor blood transfusion, there is uncertainty in relation to whether it is a less or more costly strategy. The lack of long-term data on the health and quality of life of patients in both arms of the trial means that further research is needed to fully understand the cost implications of both strategies. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN66118656.

Diagnostic accuracy of a rapid telemedicine encounter in the Emergency Department.

OBJECTIVES: Emergency Department crowding is an increasing problem, leading to treatment delays and higher risk of mortality. Our institution recently implemented a telemedicine physician intake ("tele-intake") process as a mitigating front-end strategy. Previous studies have focused on ED throughput metrics such as door to disposition; our work aimed to specifically assess the tele-intake model for clinical accuracy. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed ED visits at a high acuity, tertiary care academic hospital before and after tele-intake implementation. We defined the primary outcome as the degree of additional laboratory, imaging, and medication orders placed by the subsequent ED provider. Our secondary outcomes were the cancellation rate of intake orders and the percentage of encounters where no additional second provider orders were necessary. RESULTS: For in-person and tele-intake physician encounters between September 2015 and February 2017, most labs and diagnostic radiology studies, and approximately half of CT, ultrasound, and pharmacy orders were initiated by the intake physician. We found no significant difference for our primary outcome (p = 0.2449). For both tele-intake and in-person encounters, <1% of orders were cancelled by the second provider. Additionally, 30.8% of in-person and 31.5% of telemedicine patient encounters required no additional orders to make a disposition decision. DISCUSSION: This novel analysis of an innovative patient care model suggests that the benefits of tele-intake as a replacement for in-person physician directed intake are not at the cost of over or under utilization of diagnostic testing or interventions.

A randomised controlled trial and economic evaluation of intraoperative cell salvage during caesarean section in women at risk of haemorrhage: the SALVO (cell SALVage in Obstetrics) trial.

BACKGROUND: Caesarean section is associated with blood loss and maternal morbidity. Excessive blood loss requires transfusion of donor (allogeneic) blood, which is a finite resource. Cell salvage returns blood lost during surgery to the mother. It may avoid the need for donor blood transfusion, but reliable evidence of its effects is lacking. OBJECTIVES: To determine if routine use of cell salvage during caesarean section in mothers at risk of haemorrhage reduces the rates of blood transfusion and postpartum maternal morbidity, and is cost-effective, in comparison with standard practice without routine salvage use. DESIGN: Individually randomised controlled, multicentre trial with cost-effectiveness analysis. Treatment was not blinded. SETTING: A total of 26 UK obstetric units. PARTICIPANTS: Out of 3054 women recruited between June 2013 and April 2016, we randomly assigned 3028 women at risk of haemorrhage to cell salvage or routine care. Randomisation was stratified using random permuted blocks of variable sizes. Of these, 1672 had emergency and 1356 had elective caesareans. We excluded women for whom cell salvage or donor blood transfusion was contraindicated. INTERVENTIONS: Cell salvage (intervention) versus routine care without salvage (control). In the intervention group, salvage was set up in 95.6% of the women and, of these, 50.8% had salvaged blood returned. In the control group, 3.9% had salvage deployed. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary - donor blood transfusion. Secondary - units of donor blood transfused, time to mobilisation, length of hospitalisation, mean fall in haemoglobin, fetomaternal haemorrhage (FMH) measured by Kleihauer-Betke test, and maternal fatigue. Analyses were adjusted for stratification factors and other factors that were believed to be prognostic a priori. Cost-effectiveness outcomes - costs of resources and service provision taking the UK NHS perspective. RESULTS: We analysed 1498 and 1492 participants in the intervention and control groups, respectively. Overall, the transfusion rate was 2.5% in the intervention group and 3.5% in the control group [adjusted odds ratio (OR) 0.65, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.42 to 1.01; p = 0.056]. In a planned subgroup analysis, the transfusion rate was 3.0% in the intervention group and 4.6% in the control group among emergency caesareans (adjusted OR 0.58, 95% CI 0.34 to 0.99), whereas it was 1.8% in the intervention group and 2.2% in the control group among elective caesareans (adjusted OR 0.83, 95% CI 0.38 to 1.83) (interaction p = 0.46, suggesting that the difference in effect between subgroups was not statistically significant). Secondary outcomes did not differ between groups, except for FMH, which was higher under salvage in rhesus D (RhD)-negative women with RhD-positive babies (25.6% vs. 10.5%, adjusted OR 5.63, 95% CI 1.43 to 22.14; p = 0.013). No case of amniotic fluid embolism was observed. The additional cost of routine cell salvage during caesarean was estimated, on average, at £8110 per donor blood transfusion avoided. CONCLUSIONS: The modest evidence for an effect of routine use of cell salvage during caesarean section on rates of donor blood transfusion was associated with increased FMH, which emphasises the need for adherence to guidance on anti-D prophylaxis. We are unable to comment on long-term antibody sensitisation effects. Based on the findings of this trial, cell salvage is unlikely to be considered cost-effective. FUTURE WORK: Research into risk of alloimmunisation among women exposed to cell salvage is needed. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN66118656. FUNDING: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 22, No. 2. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

One-stage or two-stage revision surgery for prosthetic hip joint infection--the INFORM trial: a study protocol for a randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) affects approximately 1% of patients following total hip replacement (THR) and often results in severe physical and emotional suffering. Current surgical treatment options are debridement, antibiotics and implant retention; revision THR; excision of the joint and amputation. Revision surgery can be done as either a one-stage or two-stage operation. Both types of surgery are well-established practice in the NHS and result in similar rates of re-infection, but little is known about the impact of these treatments from the patient's perspective. The main aim of this randomised controlled trial is to determine whether there is a difference in patient-reported outcome measures 18 months after randomisation for one-stage or two-stage revision surgery. METHODS/DESIGN: INFORM (INFection ORthopaedic Management) is an open, two-arm, multi-centre, randomised, superiority trial. We aim to randomise 148 patients with eligible PJI of the hip from approximately seven secondary care NHS orthopaedic units from across England and Wales. Patients will be randomised via a web-based system to receive either a one-stage revision or a two-stage revision THR. Blinding is not possible due to the nature of the intervention. All patients will be followed up for 18 months. The primary outcome is the WOMAC Index, which assesses hip pain, function and stiffness, collected by questionnaire at 18 months. Secondary outcomes include the following: cost-effectiveness, complications, re-infection rates, objective hip function assessment and quality of life. A nested qualitative study will explore patients' and surgeons' experiences, including their views about trial participation and randomisation. DISCUSSION: INFORM is the first ever randomised trial to compare two widely accepted surgical interventions for the treatment of PJI: one-stage and two-stage revision THR. The results of the trial will benefit patients in the future as the main focus is on patient-reported outcomes: pain, function and wellbeing in the long term. Patients state that these outcomes are more important than those that are clinically derived (such as re-infection) and have been commonly used in previous non-randomised studies. Results from the INFORM trial will also benefit clinicians and NHS managers by enabling the comparison of these key interventions in terms of patients' complication rates, health and social resource use and their overall cost-effectiveness. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current controlled trials ISRCTN10956306 (registered on 29 January 2015); UKCRN ID 18159.

Operative volume in colon surgery: a matched cohort analysis.

Although previous studies have suggested that higher volumes of colectomies performed by surgeons and hospitals are associated with lower mortality, less is known about the relationship between volume and resource utilization. The research team tested the association between volume, costs, complications, length of stay, and mortality using data from the National Inpatient Sample. Results suggest higher volumes for both surgeons and hospitals were associated with lower costs, fewer complications, shorter length of stay, and lower mortality. Propensity score matching showed no significant difference in mortality by surgeon volume (7.38% vs 7.46%, P=.0.842), but significantly fewer complications (45.06% vs 49.10%, P=.008), shorter length of stay (11.8 vs 13.1 days, P<.0001), and lower costs ($33,142 vs $29,578, P<.0001) for high-volume surgeons. Although the major driver of complications and mortality is burden of disease and comorbid conditions, individual surgeon volume is an important determinant of length of stay and costs.

Attributable costs of central line-associated bloodstream infections in a pediatric hematology/oncology population.

BACKGROUND: Although several studies have estimated the attributable cost and length of stay (LOS) of central line-associated bloodstream infections (CLABSIs) in the pediatric intensive care unit setting, little is known about the attributable costs and LOS of CLABSIs in the vulnerable pediatric hematology/oncology population. METHODS: We studied a total of 1562 inpatient admissions for 291 pediatric hematology/oncology patients at a single tertiary care children's hospital in the mid-Atlantic region between January 2008 and May 2011. Costs were normalized to year 2011 dollars. Propensity score matching was used to estimate the effect of CLABSIs on total cost and LOS while controlling for other covariates. RESULTS: Sixty CLABSIs occurred during the 1562 admissions. Compared with the patients without a CLABSI, those who developed a CLABSI tended to be older (9.0 years vs 7.5 years; P = .026) and to have a tunneled catheter (46.7% vs 27.0%) and a peripherally inserted central catheter (20.0% vs 11.2%) as opposed to other types of catheters (P < .0001). Propensity score matching yielded matched groups without significant differences in patient characteristics. In the propensity score analysis, the attributable LOS of a CLABSI was 21.2 days (P < .0001), and the attributable cost of a CLABSI was $69,332 (P < .0001). CONCLUSIONS: Among pediatric hematology/oncology patients, CLABSI was associated with an additional LOS of 21 days and increased costs of nearly $70,000. These findings may inform decisions regarding the value of investing in efforts to prevent CLABSIs in this vulnerable population.