Implementation of the Canadian syncope pathway: a pilot non-randomized stepped wedge trial.

BACKGROUND: We developed the Canadian Syncope Pathway (CSP) based on the Canadian Syncope Risk Score (CSRS) to aid emergency department (ED) syncope management. This pilot implementation study assessed patient inclusion, length of transition period, as well as process measures (engagement, reach, adoption, and fidelity) to prepare for multicenter implementation. METHODS: A non-randomized stepped wedge trial at two hospitals was conducted over a 7-month period. After 2-3 months in the control condition, the hospitals crossed over in a stepwise fashion to the intervention condition. Study participants were ED and non-ED physicians, or their delegates, and patients (aged ≥ 18 years) with syncope. We aimed to analyze patient characteristics, ED management including disposition decision, and CSRS recommendations application for all eligible patients during the intervention period. Our targets were 95% inclusion rate, 70% adoption (proportion of physicians who applied the pathway), 60% reach (intervention applied to eligible patients) and 70% fidelity (appropriate recommendations application) for all eligible patients. Clinical Trials registration NCT04790058. RESULTS: 1002 eligible patients (mean age 56.6 years; 51.0% males) were included: 349 patients during the control and 653 patients during the intervention period. Physician engagement varied from 39.7% to 97.1% for presentation at meetings. Process measures for the first month and the end of the intervention were: adoption 70.7% (58/82) and 84.4% (103/122), reach 67.5% (108/160) and 55.0% (359/653), fidelity among patients with physician data form completion 86.3% (88/102) and 88.3% (294/333), versus fidelity among all eligible patients 83.8% (134/160) and 83.3% (544/653) respectively with no significant differences in fidelity at one month and the end of the intervention period. CONCLUSION: In this pilot study, we achieved all prespecified benchmarks for proceeding to the multicenter CSP implementation except reach. Our results indicate a 1-month transition period will be adequate though regular reminders will be needed during full-scale implementation.

RéSUMé: CONTEXTE: Nous avons mis au point la Canadian Syncope Pathway (CSP) basée sur le Canadian Syncope Risk Score (CSRS) pour aider les services d'urgence à gérer la syncope. Cette étude pilote de mise en œuvre a évalué l'inclusion des patients, la durée de la période de transition, ainsi que les mesures de processus (engagement, portée, adoption et fidélité) pour se préparer à la mise en œuvre multicentrique MéTHODES: Un essai par étapes non randomisé dans deux hôpitaux a été mené sur une période de 7 mois. Après 2 à 3 mois dans l'état de contrôle, les hôpitaux sont passés progressivement à l'état d'intervention. Les participants à l'étude étaient des médecins du service de l'urgence et non du service de l'urgence, ou leurs délégués, et des patients (âgés de 18 ans) atteints de syncope. Nous avons cherché à analyser les caractéristiques des patients, la prise en charge des urgences, y compris la décision de disposition, et l'application des recommandations du CSRS pour tous les patients admissibles pendant la période d'intervention. Nos cibles étaient le taux d'inclusion de 95 %, l'adoption de 70 % (proportion de médecins qui ont appliqué la voie), la portée de 60 % (intervention appliquée aux patients admissibles) et la fidélité de 70 % (application des recommandations appropriées) pour tous les patients admissibles. Enregistrement des essais cliniques NCT04790058. RéSULTATS: 1002 patients éligibles (âge moyen 56,6 ans; 51,0% d'hommes) ont été inclus : 349 patients pendant le contrôle et 653 patients pendant la période d'intervention. La participation des médecins variait de 39,7 % à 97,1 % pour la présentation aux réunions. Les mesures du processus pour le premier mois et la fin de l'intervention étaient les suivantes : adoption 70,7 % (58/82) et 84,4 % (103/122), atteinte de 67,5 % (108/160) et 55,0 % (359/653), fidélité chez les patients ayant rempli le formulaire de données médicales 86,3 % (88/102) et 88,3 % (294/333), versus fidélité chez tous les patients admissibles 83,8 % (134/160) et 83,3 % (544/653) respectivement, sans différence significative de fidélité à un mois et à la fin de la période d'intervention. CONCLUSION: Dans cette étude pilote, nous avons atteint tous les points de repère prédéterminés pour procéder à la mise en œuvre du PSC multicentrique, sauf la portée. Nos résultats indiquent qu'une période de transition d'un mois sera adéquate, bien que des rappels réguliers seront nécessaires pendant la mise en œuvre à grande échelle.

Developing Implementation Strategies to Support the Uptake of a Risk Tool to Aid Physicians in the Clinical Management of Patients With Syncope: Systematic Theoretical and User-Centered Design Approach.

BACKGROUND: The Canadian Syncope Risk Score (CSRS) was developed to improve syncope management in emergency department settings. Evidence-based tools often fail to have the intended impact because of suboptimal uptake or poor implementation. OBJECTIVE: In this paper, we aimed to describe the process of developing evidence-based implementation strategies to support the deployment and use of the CSRS in real-world emergency department settings to improve syncope management among physicians. METHODS: We followed a systematic approach for intervention development, including identifying who needs to do what differently, identifying the barriers and enablers to be addressed, and identifying the intervention components and modes of delivery to overcome the identified barriers. We used the Behaviour Change Wheel to guide the selection of implementation strategies. We engaged CSRS end users (ie, emergency medicine physicians) in a user-centered design approach to generate and refine strategies. This was achieved over a series of 3 qualitative user-centered design workshops lasting 90 minutes each with 3 groups of emergency medicine physicians. RESULTS: A total of 14 physicians participated in the workshops. The themes were organized according to the following intervention development steps: theme 1-identifying and refining barriers and theme 2-identifying the intervention components and modes of delivery. Theme 2 was subdivided into two subthemes: (1) generating high-level strategies and developing strategies prototypes and (2) refining and testing strategies. The main strategies identified to overcome barriers included education in the format of meetings, videos, journal clubs, and posters (to address uncertainty around when and how to apply the CSRS); the development of a web-based calculator and integration into the electronic medical record (to address uncertainty in how to apply the CSRS); a local champion (to address the lack of team buy-in); and the dissemination of evidence summaries and feedback through email communications (to address a lack of evidence about impact). CONCLUSIONS: The ability of the CSRS to effectively improve patient safety and syncope management relies on broad buy-in and uptake across physicians. To ensure that the CSRS is well positioned for impact, a comprehensive suite of strategies was identified to address known barriers.

Development of practice recommendations based on the Canadian Syncope Risk Score and identification of barriers and facilitators for implementation.

BACKGROUND: Wide variations in emergency department (ED) syncope management exist. The Canadian Syncope Risk Score (CSRS) was developed to predict the probability of 30-day serious outcomes after ED disposition. Study objectives were to evaluate the acceptability of proposed CSRS practice recommendations among providers and patients, and identify barriers and facilitators for CSRS use to guide disposition decisions. METHODS: We conducted semi-structured interviews with 41 physicians involved in ED syncope and 35 ED patients with syncope. We used purposive sampling to ensure a variety of physician specialties and CSRS patient risk levels. Thematic analysis was completed by two independent coders with consensus meetings to resolve conflicts. Analysis proceeded in parallel with interviews until data saturation. RESULTS: The majority (97.6%; 40/41) of physicians agreed with discharge of low risk (CSRS ≤ 0) but opined that 'no follow up' changed to 'follow-up as needed'. Physicians indicated current practices do not align with the medium-risk recommendation to discharge patients with 15-day monitoring (CSRS = 1-3; due to lack of access to monitors and timely follow-up) and the high-risk recommendation (CSRS ≥ 4) to potentially discharge patients with 15-day monitoring. Physicians recommended brief hospitalization of high-risk patients due to patient safety concerns. Facilitators included the CSRS-based patient education and scores supporting their clinical gestalt. Patients reported receiving varying levels of information regarding syncope and post-ED care, were satisfied with care received and preferred less resource intensive options. CONCLUSION: Our recommendations based on the study results were: discharge of low-risk patients with physician follow-up as needed; discharge of medium-risk patients with 15-day cardiac monitoring and brief hospitalization of high-risk patients with 15-day cardiac monitoring if discharged. Patients preferred less resource intensive options, in line with CSRS recommended care. Implementation should leverage identified facilitators (e.g., patient education) and address the barriers (e.g., monitor access) to improve ED syncope care.

RéSUMé: CONTEXTE: La prise en charge des syncopes par les services d'urgence varie considérablement. Le Canadian Syncope Risk Score (CSRS) a été mis au point pour prédire la probabilité d'une issue grave à 30 jours après la prise en charge par le service des urgences. Les objectifs de l'étude étaient d'évaluer l'acceptabilité des recommandations pratiques proposées par le CSRS parmi les prestataires et les patients, et d'identifier les barrières et les facilitateurs de l'utilisation du CSRS pour guider les décisions de disposition. MéTHODES: Nous avons mené des entretiens semi-structurés avec 41 médecins impliqués dans la syncope aux urgences et 35 patients souffrant de syncope aux urgences. Nous avons utilisé un échantillonnage raisonné pour assurer une variété de spécialités médicales et de niveaux de risque pour les patients du CSRS. L'analyse thématique a été réalisée par deux codeurs indépendants, avec des réunions de consensus pour résoudre les conflits. L'analyse s'est déroulée parallèlement aux entretiens jusqu'à saturation des données. RéSULTATS: La majorité (97,6 % ; 40/41) des médecins étaient d'accord avec la sortie des patients à faible risque (CSRS ≤ 0), mais ont estimé que " pas de suivi " devait être remplacée par " suivi en fonction des besoins ". Les médecins ont indiqué que leurs pratiques actuelles ne sont pas conformes à la recommandation à risque moyen de faire sortir les patients avec une surveillance de 15 jours (CSRS = 1-3 ; en raison du manque d'accès aux moniteurs et au suivi en temps opportun) et à la recommandation à risque élevé (CSRS ≥ 4) de potentiellement faire sortir les patients avec une surveillance de 15 jours. Les médecins ont recommandé une brève hospitalisation des patients à haut risque pour des raisons de sécurité. Les facilitateurs comprenaient l'éducation des patients basée sur le CSRS et les scores soutenant leur gestalt clinique. Les patients ont déclaré avoir reçu différents niveaux d'information concernant la syncope et les soins post-urgence, étaient satisfaits des soins reçus et préféraient des options moins gourmandes en ressources. CONCLUSIONS: Nos recommandations basées sur les résultats de l'étude sont les suivantes : sortie des patients à faible risque avec suivi par un médecin si nécessaire ; la sortie des patients à risque moyen avec une surveillance cardiaque de 15 jours et une brève hospitalisation des patients à risque élevé avec une surveillance cardiaque de 15 jours en cas de sortie. Les patients ont préféré des options moins gourmandes en ressources, conformément aux soins recommandés par le CSRS. La mise en œuvre devrait s'appuyer sur les facilitateurs identifiés (par exemple, l'éducation des patients) et s'attaquer aux obstacles (par exemple, le contrôle de l'accès) pour améliorer les soins aux urgences en cas de syncope.

Stretching, Bracing, and Devices for the Treatment of Osteoarthritis-Associated Joint Contractures in Nonoperated Joints: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

CONTEXT: Many patients with osteoarthritis (OA) develop range of motion (ROM) restrictions in their affected joints (contractures), associated with worse outcomes and rising healthcare costs. Effective treatment guidance for lost ROM in OA-affected joints is lacking. OBJECTIVE: A systematic review and meta-analysis evaluating the effectiveness of stretching and/or bracing protocols on native (nonoperated) joint ROM in the setting of radiographically diagnosed OA. DATA SOURCES: Seven databases, English-language. STUDY SELECTION: Studies including participants with radiographically diagnosed OA in any native joint evaluating the effect of stretching or bracing on ROM. STUDY DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level 2. DATA EXTRACTION: Two reviewers independently screened articles for inclusion and assessed risk of bias in included trials. Primary outcomes were ROM, pain, and adverse events (AEs). RESULTS: We identified 6284 articles. A total of 9 randomized controlled trials, all evaluating the knee, met eligibility criteria. For stretching, 3 pooled studies reported total ROM, which improved by mean difference (MD) of 9.3° (95% CI 5.0°,13.5°) versus controls. Two pooled studies showed improved knee flexion ROM (MD 10.8° [7.3°,14.2°]) versus controls. Five studies were pooled for knee extension with mean improvement 9.1° [3.4°,14.8°] versus controls. Seven pooled studies showed reduced pain (standardized MD 1.9 [1.2,2.6]). One study reported improved knee extension of 3.7° [2.9°,4.5°] with use of a device. No studies used orthoses. One study reported on AEs, with none noted. Performance bias was present in all included studies, and only 3 studies clearly reported blinding of outcome assessors. Strength of evidence for primary outcomes was considered moderate. CONCLUSION: There was moderate-quality evidence that stretching is an effective strategy for improving knee total, flexion and extension ROM, and pain. Our findings suggest that stretching to regain joint ROM in OA is not futile and that stretching appears to be an appropriate conservative intervention to improve patient outcomes as part of a comprehensive knee OA treatment plan before arthroplasty.

Performance of single serum progesterone in the evaluation of symptomatic first-trimester pregnant patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVES: Pain and bleeding complicate 30% of pregnancies, raising concerns for viability. The objective is to evaluate the diagnostic characteristics of a single serum progesterone level in assessing pregnancy viability among symptomatic patients. METHODS: We conducted a predefined literature search in MEDLINE, Embase (OVID), CINAHL and Cochrane databases for studies that enrolled patients in first trimester with miscarriage symptoms, measured progesterone and reported pregnancy viability, from inception to July 2020. We extracted data for 2 × 2 tables, progesterone threshold levels and viability. We obtained summary estimates of sensitivity, specificity, Diagnostic Odds Ratio (DOR), and predictive values at given prevalence rates. RESULTS: We identified 54 publications. There was a total of 15,878 patients enrolled, of whom 7864 patients (49.5%) were confirmed to have a viable pregnancy and 8014 patients (50.5%) were confirmed to have a non-viable pregnancy. The cut-off value of progesterone ranged from 3.2 to 25 ng/mL (20.034-79.5 nmol/L). We evaluated the performance of the following progesterone cut-off categories: < 6.3, 6.3-12.6, 12.7-19.9, and 20-25 ng/mL. To detect non-viable pregnancy, progesterone with cut-off < 6.3 ng/mL had sensitivity 73.1%, specificity 99.2% and DOR 322.0 (PPV 0.91, 0.97 and 0.99 at prevalences 0.1, 0.25, 0.5, respectively, indicating higher likelihood of non-viable pregnancy), and cut-off category 20-25 ng/mL had sensitivity 91.3%, specificity 75% and DOR 31.4 (NPV 0.99, 0.96 and 0.89 at the prevalences above indicating higher likelihood of viable pregnancy). CONCLUSION: A single progesterone level provides a clinically useful prognostic information on pregnancy viability. More than nine out of ten patients with a level < 6.3 ng/mL (< 20.034 nmol/L) will be diagnosed with a non-viable pregnancy, and more than 90% of patients with a level ≥ 20-25 ng/mL (63.6-79.5 nmol/L) will have a viable pregnancy confirmed.

RéSUMé: OBJECTIVES: La douleur et les saignements compliquent 30% des grossesses, ce qui soulève des inquiétudes quant à la viabilité. L'objectif est d'évaluer les caractéristiques diagnostiques d'un seul taux sérique de progestérone dans l'évaluation de la viabilité de la grossesse chez les patientes symptomatiques. MéTHODES: Nous avons effectué une recherche littérature prédéfinie dans les bases de données MEDLINE, Embase (OVID), CINAHL et Cochrane pour des études qui ont recruté des patientes au cours du premier trimestre présentant des symptômes de fausse couche, mesuré la progestérone et signalé la viabilité de la grossesse, du début à juillet 2020. Nous avons extrait les données pour les tableaux 2 × 2, les niveaux de seuil de progestérone et la viabilité. Nous avons obtenu des estimations sommaires de la sensibilité, de la spécificité, du rapport de cotes diagnostiques (DOR) et des valeurs prédictives à des taux de prévalence donnés. RéSULTATS: On a identifié 54 publications. Il y avait un total de 15 878 patientes recrutées, dont 7864 patientes (49.5%) ont été confirmées comme ayant une grossesse viable et 8014 patientes (50,5%) ont été confirmées comme ayant une grossesse non viable. La valeur seuil de la progestérone variait de 3.2 ­ 25 ng/mL (20.034 ­ 79.5 nmol/L). Nous avons évalué les performances des catégories de seuil de progestérone suivantes: < 6.3, 6.3­12.6, 12.7­19.9 et 20­25 ng/mL. Pour détecter une grossesse non viable, la progestérone avec seuil < 6.3 ng/mL avait une sensibilité de 73.1%, une spécificité de 99.2% et une DOR 322.0 (PPV 0.91, 0.97 et 0.99 à des prévalences de 0.1, 0.25, 0.5 respectivement indiquant une probabilité plus élevée de grossesse non viable), et la catégorie de coupure 20­25 ng/mL avait une sensibilité de 91,3%, une spécificité de 75% et une DOR 31,4 (NPV 0.99, 0.96 et 0.89 aux prévalences ci-dessus indiquant une probabilité plus élevée de grossesse viable). CONCLUSION: Un seul niveau de progestérone fournit une information pronostique cliniquement utile sur la viabilité de la grossesse. Plus de neuf patientes sur dix avec un niveau < 6.3 ng/mL (< 20.034 nmol/L) sera diagnostiqué de grossesse non viable, et plus de 90% des patientes ayant un niveau ≥ 20­25 ng/mL (63.6­79.5 nmol/L) auront une grossesse viable confirmée.

Outcomes of Immediate Breast Reconstruction in Triple Negative Breast Cancer: A Propensity Score-Matched Analysis.

PURPOSE: Triple negative breast cancer (TNBC) patients have a significantly worse prognosis and survival compared to non-TNBC patients. Mastectomy and immediate breast reconstruction (MIBR) is associated with higher rates of complications overall, but whether MIBR significantly increases oncological risk in TNBC patients has not been fully elucidated. Our study aimed to evaluate the oncological safety of MIBR in patients with TNBC compared to non-TNBC. METHODS: A 6-year prospectively maintained retrospective database at The Ottawa Hospital was reviewed from January 1, 2013 to May 31, 2019. Propensity score-matching was performed using the nearest-neighbour method with a matching ratio of 2:1. Kaplan-Meier and log rank tests were performed to provide statistical comparison of disease-free interval (DFI). DFI was defined as time from MIBR to locoregional recurrence or disease-specific mortality. P-value < 0.05 indicated statistical significance. RESULTS: Of 277 eligible patients, 153 patients were matched. The cohort consisted of 51(33%) TNBC patients and 102 (67%) non-TNBC patients after 2:1 propensity score-matching. The rates of delays to first radiochemotherapy [17 (33%) vs.14 (14%), p = 0.10], postoperative complications [13 (26%) vs. 34 (33%), p = 0.50], and locoregional recurrence [2 (1.96%) vs. 1 (1.96%), p = 1.0] were statistically similar in TNBC and non-TNBC, respectively. DFI was not significantly different in TNBC compared to non-TNBC patients (log-rank p = 1.0). There was no mortality in this cohort. CONCLUSIONS: This 6-year retrospective 2:1 propensity score-matched cohort study demonstrated similar oncological safety for MIBR in patients with TNBC and non-TNBC. Overall, these findings provide additional support for the oncological safety of MIBR in TNBC. Therefore, MIBR remains a therapeutic option for patients with TNBC.

The Effect of Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy on Safety Outcomes Following Immediate Breast Reconstruction.

BACKGROUND: Mastectomy and immediate breast reconstruction (MIBR) are becoming an increasingly popular option for women with breast cancer. However, MIBR is associated with a higher risk of postoperative complications compared to mastectomy alone, which may delay adjuvant cancer therapy. The main objective of this retrospective cohort study was to investigate oncologic outcomes in MIBR patients with and without neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT). METHODS: A 6-year retrospective study of breast cancer patients treated with MIBR was conducted from January 2013 to May 2019. The primary outcome was a delay in adjuvant radiochemotherapy. Secondary outcomes included postoperative complications and locoregional recurrences. RESULTS: Of 1832 patients reviewed, 300 (7.1%) were included. The cohort consisted of 277 (92%) MIBR patients without NACT and 23 (7.7%) with NACT. There was significantly more N1 and N2 tumor node status in the non-NACT group compared to the NACT group (p<0.001). The overall complication rates were similar in the NACT group compared to non-NACT (37.5% versus 21.7%, p=0.148). The rates of major and minor complications were also similar between NACT and non-NACT groups (Major: 29.6% versus 21.7%, p=0.823) and (Minor: 26.7% versus 8.70%, p =0.0970). The rates of locoregional recurrence (p=1.00), time to adjuvant therapy (p=0.629), and rates of delay (p=0.305) was also similar between groups. Overall survival was significantly lower in the NACT group compared to non-NACT (98.2% versus 82.6%, p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: There was no difference in complication rates, or timing to adjuvant therapy, among MIBR patients with and without NACT. However, MIBR patients who received NACT had worse overall survival than MIBR patients without NACT.

Oncological Safety, Surgical Outcome, and Patient Satisfaction of Oncoplastic Breast-Conserving Surgery With Contralateral Balancing Reduction Mammoplasty.

INTRODUCTION: Oncoplastic breast-conserving surgery (OBCS) is considered a cornerstone in the management of locally invasive breast cancer. We evaluated patient-reported outcomes of OBCS with contralateral balancing breast reduction mammoplasty and reviewed its oncologic outcomes and complications. METHODS: This is mixed method study design using retrospective chart review and prospective cohort study. Patient demographics were reviewed. Outcome measures included clinicopathologic characteristics, complications, margin status, local recurrence, tumor histopathologies, duration of follow-up, patient satisfaction, self-esteem, event-related stress, and quality of life. RESULTS: A total of 48 patients were included in this study. Complete excision with negative margins was obtained in 42 (87.5%) patients, positive margins in 6 (12.5%) patients, all who had re-excision with repeat lumpectomy. Thirteen patients developed minor complications, defined as being managed as an outpatient. No patients developed major complications requiring inpatient admission. These complications did not delay commencement of chemotherapy or radiotherapy. Postsurgery BREAST-QTM26 scores demonstrated no statistical difference in satisfaction with breasts, nipples, and sexual well-being. There was high satisfaction with overall outcome with average score of 80.8%. For the Rosenberg self-esteem scale, the results were similar for 3- and 12-month post-operative indicating maintenance of normal self-esteem post-operatively. The Impact of Events Scale showed statistically significant difference at 12-month post-operative (25.1) when compared with preoperative scores indicating that patients had lower event-related stress. There was no significant change in Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale. CONCLUSION: Our study has shown that the patient who undergo OBCS have high patient-reported outcomes with acceptable oncologic outcomes and complication rates.

INTRODUCTION: La chirurgie oncoplastique de conservation mammaire (COCM) est considérée comme un pilier de la prise en charge du cancer du sein localement invasif. Les chercheurs ont évalué le pronostic de COCM déclaré par les patientes après une mammoplastie de réduction avec symétrie controlatérale et ont analysé les résultats oncologiques et les complications. MÉTHODOLOGIE: Dans la présente étude à méthodologie mixte, les chercheurs ont privilégié une analyse rétrospective de dossiers et une étude de cohorte prospective. Les chercheurs ont examiné la démographie des patients. Les mesures de résultat incluaient les caractéristiques clinicopathologiques, les complications, l'état des marges, les récurrences locales, l'histopathologie des tumeurs, la durée du suivi, la satisfaction des patientes, l'estime de soi, le stress lié à l'événement et la qualité de vie. RÉSULTATS: Au total, 48 patientes ont participé à l'étude. De ce nombre, 42 (87,5 %) ont subi une excision complète aux marges négatives, et six (12,5 %), une excision complète aux marges positives et toutes ont subi réexcision avec une reprise de la lumpectomie. Treize patientes ont développé des complications mineures, définies comme prises en charge dans un contexte ambulatoire. Aucune patiente n'a développé de complications majeures exigeant une hospitalisation. Les complications n'ont pas retardé le début de la chimiothérapie ou de la radiothérapie. Les scores BREAST-QTM26 après l'opération n'ont démontré aucune différence statistique pour ce qui est de la satisfaction envers les seins, les mamelons et le bien-être sexuel. Les patientes avaient un taux de satisfaction élevé à l'égard des résultats globaux, pour un score moyen de 80,8 %. Sur l'échelle d'estime de soi de Rosenberg, le maintien de l'estime de soi normal était semblable trois et 12 mois après l'opération. L'échelle d'effet des événements a révélé une différence statistiquement significative 12 mois après l'opération (25,1) par rapport aux scores avant l'opération, indiquant que les patientes ressentaient moins de stress envers l'événement. Il n'y avait pas de changement significatif dans l'échelle d'anxiété et de dépression à l'hôpital. CONCLUSION: La présente étude a révélé que la patiente qui subit une COCM déclare des résultats très positifs, dont les pronostics oncologiques et le taux de complications sont acceptables.

The effect of immediate breast reconstruction on adjuvant therapy delay, locoregional recurrence, and disease-free survival.

BACKGROUND: An important risk inherent to both alloplastic and autologous immediate breast reconstruction (IBR) is the higher incidence of postoperative complications and delays to adjuvant therapy. The main objective of this retrospective cohort study was to identify risk factors for locoregional recurrence after breast cancer mastectomy and IBR. METHODS: A 6-year retrospective study of breast cancer patients treated with mastectomy only (MO) or mastectomy and IBR (MIBR) was conducted from January 2013 to May 2019. The outcomes of interest included delay in adjuvant chemoradiotherapy, postoperative complications, and locoregional recurrence. Cox regression survival was used to estimate the risk of locoregional recurrence and time to adjuvant therapy. RESULTS: Of 1832 patients reviewed, 720 (38%) were included. The cohort consisted of 443 (62%) MO and 277 (38%) MIBR [140 (51%) direct-to-implant (MIBRi1), 96(35%) tissue expander to implant (MIBRi2), and 41(15%) autologous flap (MIBRf)]. MIBR had more delays to adjuvant therapy compared to MO [113 (70%) vs. 72 (80%) months, p = 0.022]. Kaplan-Meier analysis showed that MIBRi2 had significantly shorter DFS compared to MO [MIBRi2: 39.2 (15.6) vs MO: 41.7 (19.6) months, log-rank p-value = 0.01]. Cox regression indicated that MIBRi2 was associated with a 3.26-higher risk of locoregional recurrence compared to MO [HR: 3.26; 95% CI: 1.56, 9.24]. CONCLUSIONS: Cox regression showed MIBRi2 was significantly associated with increased risk of locoregional recurrence compared to MO. Neither delays nor postoperative complications were identified as significant risk factors for locoregional recurrence risk.

A comparison of patient-reported outcomes between Alloderm and Dermacell in immediate alloplastic breast reconstruction: A randomized control trial.

BACKGROUND: Alloderm and Dermacell are the two leading human acellular dermal matrices (ADM) in immediate breast reconstruction (IBR). Despite differences in sterility, consistency, thickness and cost, there are no comparative trials to date to compare patient-reported outcome measures (PROM) between the two products. The purpose of this study was to determine if there was a difference in patient-reported outcomes (as measured by the BREAST-Q) between patients reconstructed with Alloderm and Dermacell. METHODS: A single center, open-label, randomized control trial of patients undergoing IBR with an implant for breast cancer or breast cancer prophylaxis was performed. Patients were randomized to either Alloderm or Dermacell. Baseline demographic data were compared, and linear mixed models were used to identify associations with BREAST-Q over time. RESULTS: Between June 2016 and October 2018, 62 patients were randomized into two groups, 31(50%) Alloderm and 31(50%) Dermacell. Of these, 23(74%) patients in the Alloderm group and 27(87%) patients of the Dermacell group filled out BREAST-Q questionnaires. Baseline BREAST-Q scores with respect to satisfaction with breasts, psychosocial well-being, sexual well-being, and physical well-being were similar between groups (p>0.05). At 3 months postoperatively, the Alloderm group had a statistically significant improvement with respect to satisfaction with breasts (67 vs 53, p = 0.03), satisfaction with overall results (85 vs 61, p = 0.003), satisfaction with the surgeon (89 vs 67, p = 0.01), and satisfaction with information provided (74 vs 59, p = 0.02). At 12 months postoperatively, there were no statistically significant differences in PROM between groups (p>0.05). CONCLUSION: We report the first randomized controlled trial to date comparing patient-reported outcomes of the two most commonly used ADMs in IBR in Canada. Although a short-term analysis favors the use of Alloderm, there does not appear to be any difference in outcomes between the two products in the longer term.

Predicting Falls Using the Stroke Assessment of Fall Risk Tool.

BACKGROUND: Falls in the inpatient stroke population are common, resulting in increased morbidity and slow rehabilitation progress. Falls may result from stroke-specific neurologic deficits; however, assessment of these deficits is lacking in many fall screening tools. OBJECTIVE: To compare the ability to predict falls of the Stroke Assessment of Fall Risk (SAFR) tool, which includes items related to stroke-specific neurologic deficits, and the commonly used Morse Fall Scale, which does not include these items. DESIGN: Prospective cohort study. SETTING: Inpatient tertiary stroke rehabilitation unit. PARTICIPANTS: Patients (N = 220) with acute stroke. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Falls were captured by the medical records from January 2017 to September 2018. Logistic regression analysis evaluated both screening tools for predicting falls by calculating sensitivity, specificity, area under the receiver operating characteristic (AUC-ROC) curve, and odds ratio (OR). We compared SAFR and Morse mean scores between fallers and non-fallers using t-tests. RESULTS: Forty-eight (21.8%) patients experienced ≥1 fall. SAFR, but not Morse, scores showed a statistically significant difference between fallers and non-fallers (P = .001 vs P = .24, respectively). Higher SAFR score was associated with higher odds of falls (OR 1.36, 95% CI [1.12, 1.64]), whereas Morse was not (OR 1.04, 95% CI [0.97, 1.12]). SAFR showed a statistically significant difference in hemi-neglect between fallers and non-fallers (P = .03). Sensitivity and specificity of SAFR were 47.9% and 76.7%, vs 45.8% and 68.0% for Morse, respectively. SAFR positive predictive value and negative predictive value were 36.5% and 84.1%, respectively, similar to Morse (28.6% and 81.8%). The AUC-ROC was 0.65 for SAFR and 0.56 for Morse. CONCLUSIONS: SAFR was significantly associated with fall risk and had better discrimination between fallers and non-fallers than Morse. The neurologic-specific hemi-neglect component of SAFR, a component not present on the Morse, was a fall risk factor. Further research evaluating the predictive value of fall scales that include neurologic deficits is needed.

Benefit of hospital admission for detecting serious adverse events among emergency department patients with syncope: a propensity-score-matched analysis of a multicentre prospective cohort.

BACKGROUND: The benefit of hospital admission after emergency department evaluation for syncope is unclear. We sought to determine the association between hospital admission and detection of serious adverse events, and whether this varied according to the Canadian Syncope Risk Score (CSRS). METHODS: We conducted a secondary analysis of a multicentre prospective cohort of patients assessed in the emergency department for syncope. We compared patients admitted to hospital and discharged patients, using propensity scores to match 1:1 for risk of a serious adverse event. The primary outcome was detection of a serious adverse event in hospital for admitted patients or within 30 days after emergency department disposition for discharged patients. RESULTS: We included 8183 patients, of whom 743 (9.1%) were admitted; 658/743 (88.6%) were matched. Admitted patients had higher odds of detection of a serious adverse event (odds ratio [OR] 5.0, 95% confidence interval [CI] 3.3-7.4), nonfatal arrhythmia (OR 5.1, 95% CI 2.9-8.8) and nonarrhythmic serious adverse event (OR 6.3, 95% CI 2.9-13.5). There were no significant differences between the 2 groups in death (OR 1.0, 95% CI 0.4-2.7) or detection of ventricular arrhythmia (OR 2.0, 95% CI 0.7-6.0). Differences between admitted and discharged patients in detection of serious adverse events were greater for those with a CSRS indicating medium to high risk (p = 0.04). INTERPRETATION: Patients with syncope were more likely to have serious adverse events identified within 30 days if they were admitted to hospital rather than discharged from the emergency department. However, the benefit of hospital admission is low for patients at low risk of a serious adverse event.

Complication rates of acellular dermal matrix in immediate breast reconstruction with radiation: A single-institution retrospective comparison study.

BACKGROUND: The use of acellular dermal matrix (ADM) in immediate breast reconstruction (IBR) continues to rise despite ongoing concerns with respect to increased complication rates. While the indications for radiation continue to broaden, it is essential to critically evaluate ADM's performance in its context. The purpose of this study was to review complication rates between patients reconstructed with and without ADM, who underwent IBR and radiation. METHODS: A retrospective review was performed for patients undergoing IBR and radiation from 2010 to 2019. Postoperative outcomes were compared between patients with and without ADM. RESULTS: Over a 9-year period, 130 patients underwent IBR and radiation (42% preoperatively and 59% postoperatively). For patients with preoperative radiation (36 ADM and 18 non-ADM), the average follow-up was 312 and 296 days, respectively. In this group, there was no difference in minor complications (25% ADM, 22% non-ADM, and p = 1.00) or major complications (31% ADM, 22% Non-ADM, and p = 0.52). For patients with postoperative radiation (53 ADM and 23 non-ADM), the average follow-up was 544 and 748 days, respectively. There was no difference in minor complications (21% ADM, 26% non-ADM, and p = 0.11) or major complications (21% ADM, 26% non-ADM, and p = 0.61). Multivariable logistic regression analyses showed no difference between ADM and non-ADM groups (OR 0.83, 95% CI 0.22-3.08, and p = 0.78). CONCLUSION: Despite increasing literature supporting the use of ADM in breast reconstruction, postoperative outcomes following radiation remain poorly understood. In the present study, we report no difference in overall complication rates between breasts reconstructed with and without ADM in an irradiated field. Nevertheless, the complication rate remains high, and future studies will be required to determine whether ADM-associated complications in an irradiated field outweigh the purported benefits.

A mixed-methods pilot study of 'LIFEView' audiovisual technology: Virtual travel to support well-being and quality of life in palliative and end-of-life care patients.

BACKGROUND: There is evidence that psychosocial and spiritual interventions of short duration, such as reminiscence therapy, provide positive impacts on quality of life and emotional and existential well-being in adults receiving palliative care. AIM: To determine (1) the feasibility of integrating 'LIFEView', a video-based software with >1600 videos of world destinations, in palliative care settings, and (2) positive, neutral or harmful effects of using 'LIFEView' videos. DESIGN: A mixed-methods pre-post intervention pilot study was conducted to collect feasibility and preliminary data on physical and psychological symptoms, physiological indicators, spiritual well-being and aspects of quality of life. SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: Adult patients on an inpatient palliative care unit or receiving care from a community palliative care consultation team who were capable of providing consent and completing the outcome measures were eligible participants. RESULTS: Overall, 27/41 (66%) participants took part in the study. Feasibility criteria, including participant acceptability, low participant burden, tool completion rate and retention rate, were fulfilled, though challenges were experienced with recruitment. Modest improvements, though non-significant, were shown on preliminary data collected on physical and psychological symptoms using the Edmonton Symptom Assessment System-revised, spiritual well-being assessed by the 12-item Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy - Spiritual Well-Being scale and physiological measurements. Qualitative analysis revealed five themes: motivations for using 'LIFEView', perceptions of the technology, reminiscence, 'LIFEView' as an adaptable technology and ongoing or future use. CONCLUSION: A future adequately powered study to investigate the impacts of 'LIFEView' on patient well-being and quality of life appears to be feasible.

Effectiveness of stretching and bracing for the treatment of osteoarthritis-associated joint contractures prior to joint replacement: a systematic review protocol.

INTRODUCTION: Many patients with osteoarthritis (OA) develop restrictions in passive range of motion (ROM) of their affected joints (called contractures), leading to increased pain and reduced function. Effective treatment to reverse OA-associated contractures is lacking. Our aim is to evaluate the effectiveness of stretching and bracing on native (non-operated) joint contractures in people with radiographically diagnosed OA. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will search the following databases without time restriction: Cochrane Library (CENTRAL, Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects, Health Technology Assessment Database), MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, SCI-EXPANDED (ISI Web of Knowledge) and PEDro. Other sources will include WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, reference lists of included studies, relevant systematic reviews and textbooks. We will include randomised controlled trials (RCTs), controlled clinical trials, controlled before-and-after studies, cohort studies and case-control studies that include participants ≥18 years of age with radiographic evidence of OA. Participants with inflammatory arthropathies or those that have undergone joint arthroplasty will be excluded. Interventions will include therapist-administered or patient-administered stretching, use of an orthosis (static or dynamic), use of serial casting and/or adjunctive modalities. Outcomes will include joint ROM (active and passive), pain (rest and/or activity related), stiffness, activity limitations, participation restrictions, quality of life and adverse events. Studies will be reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Study inclusion, data extraction and quality assessment will be performed independently by two reviewers. Risk of bias will be assessed using appropriate tools for each study design. Data synthesis will be performed using Cochrane Review Manager software. If sufficient data are available, meta-analysis will be conducted. We will summarise the quality of evidence using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, and the effect size of interventions for RCT and non-RCT studies. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethics approval not required because individual patient data are not included. Findings will be disseminated in a peer-reviewed journal. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42019127244.

Shoe Lifts for Leg Length Discrepancy in Adults With Common Painful Musculoskeletal Conditions: A Systematic Review of the Literature.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether shoe lifts effectively treat leg length discrepancy (LLD)-associated morbidities in adults with common painful musculoskeletal conditions. DATA SOURCES: Trip database, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials database, PubMed database, Physiotherapy Evidence Database, and National Guideline Clearinghouse database. The search was performed in September 2017, was limited to English only, and had no time constraints. STUDY SELECTION: Two reviewers independently determined study eligibility. Inclusion criteria were (1) participants ≥18 years old with musculoskeletal-related complaints and LLD; (2) a shoe lift intervention was used; and (3) the study reported on pain, function, range of motion, patient satisfaction, quality of life, or adverse events. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and controlled intervention, cohort, before-and-after, case series, and case report studies were included. Three-hundred and nineteen articles were screened, and 9 guidelines were reviewed. DATA EXTRACTION: We extracted data pertaining to participant demographic characteristics, study setting, recruitment, randomization, method of LLD measurement, shoe lift characteristics, treatment duration, and outcome measures. We included 10 studies, including 1 RCT. DATA SYNTHESIS: LLD was associated with low back pain, scoliosis, and osteoarthritis of the hip and knee. Description of LLD correction strategy was often inadequate. Study quality was very low or poor. In non-RCT studies reporting on the proportion of participants who improved with a shoe lift, 88%±3% of 349 participants treated had partial or complete pain relief (effect size range, 66.7%-100%). All 22 RCT participants receiving treatment experienced pain relief (mean pain reduction, 27±9mm on a 150-mm visual analog scale). Two of 9 guidelines recommended shoe lift use based on consensus and were of moderate-to-high quality. CONCLUSIONS: There is low-quality evidence that shoe lifts reduce pain and improve function in patients with LLD and common painful musculoskeletal conditions. High-quality research evaluating a threshold LLD to correct and a strategy to do so is necessary. Developing an appropriate comparison group to test clinically relevant outcome measures would make a valuable contribution in this regard.