Survival With Favorable Neurologic Outcome and Quality of Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation Following In-Hospital Cardiac Arrest in Children With Cardiac Disease Compared With Noncardiac Disease.

OBJECTIVES: To assess associations between outcome and cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) quality for in-hospital cardiac arrest (IHCA) in children with medical cardiac, surgical cardiac, or noncardiac disease. DESIGN: Secondary analysis of a multicenter cluster randomized trial, the ICU-RESUScitation Project (NCT02837497, 2016-2021). SETTING: Eighteen PICUs. PATIENTS: Children less than or equal to 18 years old and greater than or equal to 37 weeks postconceptual age receiving chest compressions (CC) of any duration during the study. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Of 1,100 children with IHCA, there were 273 medical cardiac (25%), 383 surgical cardiac (35%), and 444 noncardiac (40%) cases. Favorable neurologic outcome was defined as no more than moderate disability or no worsening from baseline Pediatric Cerebral Performance Category at discharge. The medical cardiac group had lower odds of survival with favorable neurologic outcomes compared with the noncardiac group (48% vs 55%; adjusted odds ratio [aOR] [95% CI], aOR 0.59 [95% CI, 0.39-0.87], p = 0.008) and surgical cardiac group (48% vs 58%; aOR 0.64 [95% CI, 0.45-0.9], p = 0.01). We failed to identify a difference in favorable outcomes between surgical cardiac and noncardiac groups. We also failed to identify differences in CC rate, CC fraction, ventilation rate, intra-arrest average target diastolic or systolic blood pressure between medical cardiac versus noncardiac, and surgical cardiac versus noncardiac groups. The surgical cardiac group had lower odds of achieving target CC depth compared to the noncardiac group (OR 0.15 [95% CI, 0.02-0.52], p = 0.001). We failed to identify a difference in the percentage of patients achieving target CC depth when comparing medical cardiac versus noncardiac groups. CONCLUSIONS: In pediatric IHCA, medical cardiac patients had lower odds of survival with favorable neurologic outcomes compared with noncardiac and surgical cardiac patients. We failed to find differences in CPR quality between medical cardiac and noncardiac patients, but there were lower odds of achieving target CC depth in surgical cardiac compared to noncardiac patients.

Development and Validation of Risk Prediction Models for Colorectal Cancer in Patients with Symptoms.

We aimed to develop and validate prediction models incorporating demographics, clinical features, and a weighted genetic risk score (wGRS) for individual prediction of colorectal cancer (CRC) risk in patients with gastroenterological symptoms. Prediction models were developed with internal validation [CRC Cases: n = 1686/Controls: n = 963]. Candidate predictors included age, sex, BMI, wGRS, family history, and symptoms (changes in bowel habits, rectal bleeding, weight loss, anaemia, abdominal pain). The baseline model included all the non-genetic predictors. Models A (baseline model + wGRS) and B (baseline model) were developed based on LASSO regression to select predictors. Models C (baseline model + wGRS) and D (baseline model) were built using all variables. Models' calibration and discrimination were evaluated through the Hosmer-Lemeshow test (calibration curves were plotted) and C-statistics (corrected based on 1000 bootstrapping). The models' prediction performance was: model A (corrected C-statistic = 0.765); model B (corrected C-statistic = 0.753); model C (corrected C-statistic = 0.764); and model D (corrected C-statistic = 0.752). Models A and C, that integrated wGRS with demographic and clinical predictors, had a statistically significant improved prediction performance. Our findings suggest that future application of genetic predictors holds significant promise, which could enhance CRC risk prediction. Therefore, further investigation through model external validation and clinical impact is merited.

Is the linkage of census and health data justified? Views from a public panel of the Scottish Health and Ethnicity Linkage study.

Background: Using routine health data for research aimed at improving health requires the public's awareness and trust. The Scottish Health and Ethnicity Linkage study explores variations in health between ethnic groups. We aimed to establish a public panel to obtain their views on its methods, findings and dissemination, including use of routine health data without individual opt-in consent. Methods: Adult applicants were sought via a range of sources, aiming for a balance of age, gender and ethnicity. Three half-day meetings were held in 2015-16. Discussion covered the study's aims and governance; record linkage methods; data security; main findings, dissemination and publication processes. Results: Of 29 applicants, 19 joined the panel. Panellists were from 10 ethnic groups, 11 were females, ages 29-69 years. With some reservations, they enjoyed the meetings. After methods and security were explained, they unanimously accepted the study's use of linked data without individual opt-in consent. They thought explaining such complex methods to the general public was difficult. They recommended more should be done to communicate study findings to the public, practitioners and policy makers. Conclusions: The panellists' support for the study methods was reassuring. Their recommendations have led to the implementation of a wider dissemination plan.

Clinical nurse specialists shaping policies and procedures via an evidence-based clinical practice council.

In the practice of nursing, organizations with progressive evidence-based practice programs implement structures and processes whereby nurses are engaged in the review of existing research and in the development of clinical practice documents to better align nursing practices with the best available scientific knowledge. At our academic hospital system, clinical nurse specialists (CNSs) took the lead to help transform a traditional nursing policy and procedure committee into a hospital-wide, staff-represented Clinical Practice Council (CPC) that ensures evidence-based nursing practices are reflected in the organization's nursing practice documents for the provision of patient care. Clinical nurse specialists function as mentors and cochairs who are dedicated to ensuring that nursing practice is supported by the latest evidence and committed to guiding staff nurses to continually move their practice forward. The success of the CPC is due to the leadership and commitment of the CNSs. This article describes the structure, process, and outcomes of an effective CPC where CNSs successfully engage frontline clinicians in promoting nursing care that is evidence based. Clinical nurse specialist leadership is increasingly made visible as CNSs effectively involve staff nurses in practice reforms to improve patient outcomes.