Validity of self-reported compliance and behavioural determinants of observed compliance: an application of the COM-B hand hygiene questionnaire in nine Dutch hospitals.

BACKGROUND: Hand hygiene compliance (HHC) can be influenced by behavioural determinants, but knowledge on this remains scarce. The Capability, Opportunity, Motivation-Behaviour (COM-B) hand hygiene questionnaire was developed by Lydon et al. to gain insight into self-reported behavioural determinants and self-reported HHC. AIMS: To determine the validity of self-reported HHC using the COM-B questionnaire; and investigate the influence of self-reported behavioural determinants on observed HHC, taking environmental determinants into account. METHODS: This was a cross-sectional study, from September to November 2019, in nine hospitals in the Netherlands. Healthcare workers (HCWs) completed the COM-B questionnaire, and direct hand hygiene observations were performed. In addition, information on environmental determinants (workload, ward category, hospital type and ward infrastructure) was collected. Validity of self-reported HHC was determined using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). Univariable and multi-variable regression analyses were performed to investigate the relationship between behavioural and environmental determinants and observed HHC. FINDINGS: The ICC showed no association between self-reported HHC and observed HHC [0.04, 95% CI -0.14 to 0.21]. In univariable regression analyses, ward category and the opportunity and motivation subscales were significantly associated with observed HHC. In multi-variable regression analysis, only ward category and the motivation subscale remained significant. CONCLUSION: Self-reported HHC is not a valid substitute for direct hand hygiene observations. Motivation (behavioural determinant) was significantly associated with HCC, while almost none of the environmental determinants had an effect on observed HHC. In further development of hand hygiene interventions, increasing the intrinsic motivation of HCWs should receive extra attention.

Effectiveness of the "Living with Cancer" peer self-management support program for persons with advanced cancer and their relatives: study protocol of a non-randomized stepped wedge study.

BACKGROUND: Persons with advanced cancer and their relatives experience physical, emotional, and psychosocial consequences of the illness. Most of the time, they must deal with these themselves. While peer self-management support programs may be helpful, there is little evidence on their value for this population. We present the research protocol of our SMART study that will evaluate the effectiveness of the "Living with Cancer" peer self-management support program, aimed at improving self-management behaviors, self-efficacy, and health-related quality of life of persons with advanced cancer and their relatives. METHODS: We will conduct a non-randomized stepped wedge study in the Netherlands. We will include 130 persons with advanced cancer and 32 relatives. Participants can choose to either start the program within 4 weeks after inclusion or after eight to 10 weeks. The "Living with Cancer" is a peer self-management support program, based on the Chronic Disease Self-Management Program. It consists of six 1,5 hours video-conferencing group meetings with eight to 12 participants, preceded by two or three preparatory audio clips with supportive text per session. The program has the following core components: the learning of self-management skills (action-planning, problem-solving, effective communication, and decision-making), discussing relevant themes (e.g. dealing with pain and fatigue, living with uncertainty, and future planning), and sharing experiences, knowledge, and best practices. The primary outcome for both persons with advanced cancer and relatives is self-management behavior assessed by the subscale "constructive attitudes and approaches" of the Health Education Impact Questionnaire. Secondary outcomes are other self-management behaviors, self-efficacy, health-related quality of life, symptoms, depression and anxiety, and loneliness. Participants complete an online questionnaire at baseline, and after eight and 16 weeks. After each session, they complete a logbook about their experiences. Group meetings will be video recorded. DISCUSSION: SMART aims to evaluate an innovative program building on an evidence-based self-management program. New features are its use for persons with advanced cancer, the inclusion of relatives, and the video-conferencing format for this population. The use of both quantitative and qualitative analyses will provide valuable insight into the effectiveness and value of this program. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study was registered in the Dutch Trial Register on October 2021, identifier NL9806 .

The effect of a hand hygiene intervention on infections in residents of nursing homes: a cluster randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: The primary goal of hand hygiene is to reduce infectious disease rates. We examined if a nursing home's participation in a hand hygiene intervention resulted in residents having fewer healthcare associated infections (HAIs) when compared to nursing homes without the hand hygiene intervention. METHODS: This study is a part of a cluster randomized controlled trial (RCT) in 33 nursing homes to improve hand hygiene (HANDSOME). The incidence of five illnesses was followed over 13 months: gastroenteritis, influenza-like illness, pneumonia, urinary tract infections and infections from methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA). Incidence rates per study arm were reported for baseline (October-December 2016) and two follow-up periods (January-April 2017, May-October 2017). HAI rates were compared in a Poisson multilevel analysis, correcting for baseline differences (the baseline infection incidence and the size of the nursing home), clustering of observations within nursing homes, and period in the study. RESULTS: There was statistically significantly more gastroenteritis (p < 0.001) and statistically significantly less influenza-like illness (p < 0.01) in the intervention arm when compared to the control arm. There were no statistically significant differences or pneumonia, urinary tract infections, and MRSA infections in the intervention arm when compared to the control arm. In a sensitivity analysis, gastroenteritis was no longer statistically significantly higher in the intervention arm (p = 0.92). CONCLUSIONS: As in comparable studies, we could not conclusively demonstrate the effectiveness of an HH intervention in reducing HAIs among residents of nursing homes, despite the use of clearly defined outcome measures, a standardized reporting instrument, and directly observed HH in a multicenter cluster RCT. Trial registration Netherlands Trial Register, trial NL6049 (NTR6188). Registered October 25, 2016, https://www.trialregister.nl/trial/6049 .

Randomized trial of intravenous immunoglobulin maintenance treatment regimens in chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyradiculoneuropathy.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: High peak serum immunoglobulin G (IgG) levels may not be needed for maintenance intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIg) treatment in chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyradiculoneuropathy (CIDP) and such high levels may cause side effects. More frequent lower dosing may lead to more stable IgG levels and higher trough levels, which might improve efficacy. The aim of this trial is to investigate whether high frequent low dosage IVIg treatment is more effective than low frequent high dosage IVIg treatment. METHODS: In this randomized placebo-controlled crossover trial, we included patients with CIDP proven to be IVIg-dependent and receiving an individually established stable dose and interval of IVIg maintenance treatment. In the control arm, patients received their individual IVIg dose and interval followed by a placebo infusion at half the interval. In the intervention arm, patients received half their individual dose at half the interval. After a wash-out phase patients crossed over. The primary outcome measure was handgrip strength (assessed using a Martin Vigorimeter). Secondary outcome indicators were health-related quality of life (36-item Short-Form Health Survey), disability (Inflammatory Rasch-built Overall Disability Scale), fatigue (Rasch-built Fatigue Severity Scale) and side effects. RESULTS: Twenty-five patients were included and were treated at baseline with individually adjusted dosages of IVIg ranging from 20 to 80 g and intervals ranging from 14 to 35 days. Three participants did not complete the trial; the main analysis was therefore based on the 22 patients completing both treatment periods. There was no significant difference in handgrip strength change from baseline between the two treatment regimens (coefficient -2.71, 95% CI -5.4, 0.01). Furthermore, there were no significant differences in any of the secondary outcomes or side effects. CONCLUSIONS: More frequent lower dosing does not further improve the efficacy of IVIg in stable IVIg-dependent CIDP and does not result in fewer side effects.

Prediction of pre-eclampsia-related complications in women with suspected or confirmed pre-eclampsia: development and internal validation of clinical prediction model.

OBJECTIVE: A model that can predict reliably the risk of pre-eclampsia (PE)-related pregnancy complications does not exist. The aim of this study was to develop and validate internally a clinical prediction model to predict the risk of a composite outcome of PE-related maternal and fetal complications within 7, 14 and 30 days of testing in women with suspected or confirmed PE. METHODS: The data for this study were derived from a prospective, multicenter, observational cohort study on women with a singleton pregnancy and suspected or confirmed PE at 20 to < 37 weeks' gestation. For the development of the prediction model, the possible contribution of clinical and standard laboratory variables, as well as the biomarkers soluble fms-like tyrosine kinase-1 (sFlt-1), placental growth factor (PlGF) and their ratio, in the prediction of a composite outcome of PE-related complications, consisting of maternal and fetal adverse events within 7, 14 and 30 days, was explored using multivariable competing-risks regression analysis. The discriminative ability of the model was assessed using the concordance (c-) statistic. A bootstrap validation procedure with 500 replications was used to correct the estimate of the prediction model performance for optimism and to compute a shrinkage factor for the regression coefficients to correct for overfitting. RESULTS: Among 384 women with suspected or confirmed PE, 96 (25%) had an adverse PE-related outcome at any time after hospital admission. Important predictors of adverse PE-related outcome included sFlt-1/PlGF ratio, gestational age at the time of biomarker measurement and protein-to-creatinine ratio as continuous variables. The c-statistics (corrected for optimism) for developing a PE-related complication within 7, 14 and 30 days were 0.89, 0.88 and 0.87, respectively. There was limited overfitting, as indicated by a shrinkage factor of 0.91. CONCLUSIONS: We propose a simple clinical prediction model with good discriminative performance to predict PE-related complications. Determination of its usefulness in clinical practice awaits further investigation and external validation. © 2020 The Authors. Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology.

Evaluation of current prediction models for Lynch syndrome: updating the PREMM5 model to identify PMS2 mutation carriers.

Until recently, no prediction models for Lynch syndrome (LS) had been validated for PMS2 mutation carriers. We aimed to evaluate MMRpredict and PREMM5 in a clinical cohort and for PMS2 mutation carriers specifically. In a retrospective, clinic-based cohort we calculated predictions for LS according to MMRpredict and PREMM5. The area under the operator receiving characteristic curve (AUC) was compared between MMRpredict and PREMM5 for LS patients in general and for different LS genes specifically. Of 734 index patients, 83 (11%) were diagnosed with LS; 23 MLH1, 17 MSH2, 31 MSH6 and 12 PMS2 mutation carriers. Both prediction models performed well for MLH1 and MSH2 (AUC 0.80 and 0.83 for PREMM5 and 0.79 for MMRpredict) and fair for MSH6 mutation carriers (0.69 for PREMM5 and 0.66 for MMRpredict). MMRpredict performed fair for PMS2 mutation carriers (AUC 0.72), while PREMM5 failed to discriminate PMS2 mutation carriers from non-mutation carriers (AUC 0.51). The only statistically significant difference between PMS2 mutation carriers and non-mutation carriers was proximal location of colorectal cancer (77 vs. 28%, p < 0.001). Adding location of colorectal cancer to PREMM5 considerably improved the models performance for PMS2 mutation carriers (AUC 0.77) and overall (AUC 0.81 vs. 0.72). We validated these results in an external cohort of 376 colorectal cancer patients, including 158 LS patients. MMRpredict and PREMM5 cannot adequately identify PMS2 mutation carriers. Adding location of colorectal cancer to PREMM5 may improve the performance of this model, which should be validated in larger cohorts.

Pretransplant Numbers of CD16+ Monocytes as a Novel Biomarker to Predict Acute Rejection After Kidney Transplantation: A Pilot Study.

Acute rejection is one of the major immunological determinants of kidney graft function and survival. Early biomarkers to predict rejection are lacking. Emerging evidence reveals a crucial role for the monocyte/macrophage lineage cells in the pathogenesis of rejection. We hypothesized that higher pretransplant numbers of proinflammatory CD16+ monocytes can predict rejection. The study cohort consisted of 104 kidney transplant recipients (58 with no rejection and 46 with biopsy-proven rejection) and 33 healthy persons. Posttransplant median follow-up time was 14.7 mo (interquartile range 0.3-34 mo). Pretransplantation blood samples were analyzed by flow cytometry for monocyte immunophenotypes. Groups were compared by Cox regression models for the occurrence of acute rejection. We documented a significantly increased absolute number of pretransplant CD16+ monocytes in patients who developed biopsy-proven rejection after transplantation compared with those with no rejection (hazard ratio [HR] 1.60, 95% CI 1.28-2.00, p < 0.001) and healthy persons (HR 1.47, 95% CI 1.18-1.82, p < 0.001). In parallel, significantly fewer absolute numbers of CD16- monocytes were observed at pretransplant time points in rejectors versus nonrejectors (HR 0.74, 95% CI 0.58-0.94, p < 0,014). A higher pretransplant number of CD16+ monocytes is significantly associated with a higher risk of acute rejection after kidney transplantation.

Adaptation and external validation of the European randomised study of screening for prostate cancer risk calculator for the Chinese population.

BACKGROUND: To adapt the well-performing European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC) risk calculator to the Chinese setting and perform an external validation. METHODS: The original ERSPC risk calculator 3 (RC3) for prostate cancer (PCa) and high-grade PCa (HGPCa) was applied to a development cohort of 3006 previously unscreened Hong Kong Chinese men with initial transrectal biopsies performed from 1997 to 2015, age 50-80 years, PSA 0.4-50 ng ml-1 and prostate volume 10-150 ml. A simple adaptation to RC3 was performed and externally validated in a cohort of 2214 Chinese men from another Hong Kong hospital. The performance of the models were presented in calibration plots, area under curve (AUC) of receiver operating characteristics (ROCs) and decision curve analyses. RESULTS: PCa and HGPCa was diagnosed in 16.7% (503/3006) and 7.8% (234/3006) men in the development cohort, and 20.2% (447/2204) and 9.7% (214/2204) men in the validation cohort, respectively. The AUCs using the original RC3 model in the development cohort were 0.75 and 0.84 for PCa and HGPCa, respectively, but the calibration plots showed considerable overestimation. In the external validation of the recalibrated RC3 model, excellent calibration was observed, and discrimination was good with AUCs of 0.76 and 0.85 for PCa and HGPCa, respectively. Decision curve analyses in the validation cohort showed net clinical benefit of the recalibrated RC3 model over PSA. CONCLUSIONS: A recalibrated ERSPC risk calculator for the Chinese population was developed, and it showed excellent discrimination, calibration and net clinical benefit in an external validation cohort.

Procalcitonin to guide taking blood cultures in the intensive care unit; a cluster-randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVES: We aimed to study the safety and efficacy of procalcitonin in guiding blood cultures taking in critically ill patients with suspected infection. METHODS: We performed a cluster-randomized, multi-centre, single-blinded, cross-over trial. Patients suspected of infection in whom taking blood for culture was indicated were included. The participating intensive care units were stratified and randomized by treatment regimen into a control group and a procalcitonin-guided group. All patients included in this trial followed the regimen that was allocated to the intensive care unit for that period. In both groups, blood was drawn at the same moment for a procalcitonin measurement and blood cultures. In the procalcitonin-guided group, blood cultures were sent to the department of medical microbiology when the procalcitonin was >0.25 ng/mL. The main outcome was safety, expressed as mortality at day 28 and day 90. RESULTS: The control group included 288 patients and the procalcitonin-guided group included 276 patients. The 28- and 90-day mortality rates in the procalcitonin-guided group were 29% (80/276) and 38% (105/276), respectively. The mortality rates in the control group were 32% (92/288) at day 28 and 40% (115/288) at day 90. The intention-to-treat analysis showed hazard ratios of 0.85 (95% CI 0.62-1.17) and 0.89 (95% CI 0.67-1.17) for 28-day and 90-day mortality, respectively. The results were deemed non-inferior because the upper limit of the 95% CI was below the margin of 1.20. CONCLUSION: Applying procalcitonin to guide blood cultures in critically ill patients with suspected infection seems to be safe, but the benefits may be limited. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: ID NCT01847079. Registered on 24 April 2013, retrospectively registered.

Patients with oesophageal cancer report elevated distress and problems yet do not have an explicit wish for referral prior to receiving their medical treatment plan.

OBJECTIVE: This study aims to identify patients with oesophageal cancer's level of distress, type of problems, and wish for referral prior to treatment. To identify the clinical relevance of patients with oesophageal cancer's level of distress and type of problems, we build models to predict elevated distress, wish for referral, and overall survival. METHODS: We implemented the Distress Thermometer and Problem List in daily clinical practice. A score of ≥5 on the Distress Thermometer reflected elevated distress. We first created an initial model including predictors based on the literature. We then added predictors to the initial model to create an extended model based on the sample data. We used the 'least absolute shrinkage and selection operator' to define our final model. RESULTS: We obtained data from 187 patients (47.9%, of 390 eligible patients with oesophageal cancer) which were similar to non-respondents in their demographic and clinical characteristics. One-hundred thirteen (60%) patients reported elevated distress. The five most frequently reported problems were as follows: eating, tension, weight change, fatigue, and pain. Most patients did not have a wish for referral. Predictors for elevated distress were as follows: being female, total number of practical, emotional, and physical problems, pain, and fatigue. For referral, we identified age, the total number of emotional problems, the level of distress, and fear. The level of distress added prognostic information in a model to predict overall survival. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with oesophageal cancer report elevated distress and a myriad of problems yet do not have an explicit wish for referral prior to receiving their medical treatment plan. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Improving prediction models with new markers: a comparison of updating strategies.

BACKGROUND: New markers hold the promise of improving risk prediction for individual patients. We aimed to compare the performance of different strategies to extend a previously developed prediction model with a new marker. METHODS: Our motivating example was the extension of a risk calculator for prostate cancer with a new marker that was available in a relatively small dataset. Performance of the strategies was also investigated in simulations. Development, marker and test sets with different sample sizes originating from the same underlying population were generated. A prediction model was fitted using logistic regression in the development set, extended using the marker set and validated in the test set. Extension strategies considered were re-estimating individual regression coefficients, updating of predictions using conditional likelihood ratios (LR) and imputation of marker values in the development set and subsequently fitting a model in the combined development and marker sets. Sample sizes considered for the development and marker set were 500 and 100, 500 and 500, and 100 and 500 patients. Discriminative ability of the extended models was quantified using the concordance statistic (c-statistic) and calibration was quantified using the calibration slope. RESULTS: All strategies led to extended models with increased discrimination (c-statistic increase from 0.75 to 0.80 in test sets). Strategies estimating a large number of parameters (re-estimation of all coefficients and updating using conditional LR) led to overfitting (calibration slope below 1). Parsimonious methods, limiting the number of coefficients to be re-estimated, or applying shrinkage after model revision, limited the amount of overfitting. Combining the development and marker set using imputation of missing marker values approach led to consistently good performing models in all scenarios. Similar results were observed in the motivating example. CONCLUSION: When the sample with the new marker information is small, parsimonious methods are required to prevent overfitting of a new prediction model. Combining all data with imputation of missing marker values is an attractive option, even if a relatively large marker data set is available.

The diagnostic accuracy of procalcitonin for bacteraemia: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

The diagnostic use of procalcitonin for bacterial infections remains a matter of debate. Most studies have used ambiguous outcome measures such as sepsis instead of infection. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to investigate the diagnostic accuracy of procalcitonin for bacteraemia, a proven bloodstream infection. We searched all major databases from inception to June 2014 for original, English language, research articles that studied the diagnostic accuracy between procalcitonin and positive blood cultures in adult patients. We calculated the area under the summary receiver-operating characteristic (SROC) curves and pooled sensitivities and specificities. To minimize potential heterogeneity we performed subgroup analyses. In total, 58 of 1567 eligible studies were included in the meta-analysis and provided a total of 16,514 patients, of whom 3420 suffered from bacteraemia. In the overall analysis the area under the SROC curve was 0.79. The optimal and most widely used procalcitonin cut-off value was 0.5 ng/mL with a corresponding sensitivity of 76% and specificity of 69%. In subgroup analyses the lowest area under the SROC curve was found in immunocompromised/neutropenic patients (0.71), the highest area under the SROC curve was found in intensive-care patients (0.88), sensitivities ranging from 66 to 89% and specificities from 55 78%. In spite of study heterogeneity, procalcitonin had a fair diagnostic accuracy for bacteraemia in adult patients suspected of infection or sepsis. In particular low procalcitonin levels can be used to rule out the presence of bacteraemia. Further research is needed on the safety and efficacy of procalcitonin as a single diagnostic tool to avoid taking blood cultures.

Comparison of two models predicting IVF success; the effect of time trends on model performance.

STUDY QUESTION: How well does the recently developed UK model predicting the success rate of IVF treatment (the 2011 Nelson model) perform in comparison with a UK model developed in the early 1990s (the Templeton model)? SUMMARY ANSWER: Both models showed similar performance, after correction for the increasing success rate over time of IVF. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: For counselling couples undergoing IVF treatment it is of paramount importance to be able to predict success. Several prediction models for the chance of success after IVF treatment have been developed. So far, the Templeton model has been recommended as the best approach after having been validated in several independent patient data sets. The Nelson model, developed in 2011 and characterized by the largest development sample containing the most recently treated couples, may well perform better. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: We tested both models in couples that were included in a national cohort study carried out in the Netherlands between the beginning of January 2002 and the end of December 2004. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: We analysed the IVF cycles of Dutch couples with primary infertility (n = 5176). The chance of success was calculated using the two UK models that had been developed using the information collected in the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority database. Women were treated in 1991-1994 (Templeton) or 2003-2007 (Nelson). The outcome of success for both UK models is the occurrence of a live birth after IVF but the outcome in the Dutch data is an ongoing pregnancy. In order to make the outcomes compatible, we used a factor to convert the chance of live birth to ongoing pregnancy and use the overall terms 'success or no success after IVF'. The discriminative ability and the calibration of both models were assessed, the latter before and after adjustment for time trends in IVF success rates. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: The two models showed a similarly limited degree of discriminative ability on the tested data (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve 0.597 for the Templeton model and 0.590 for the Nelson model). The Templeton model underestimated the success rate (observed 21% versus predicted 14%); the Nelson model overestimated the success rate (observed 21% versus predicted 29%). When the models were adjusted for the changing success rates over time, the calibration of both models considerably improved (Templeton observed 21% versus predicted 20%; Nelson observed 21% versus predicted 24%). LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: We could only test the models in couples with primary infertility because detailed information on secondary infertile couples was lacking in the Dutch data. This shortcoming may have negatively influenced the performance of the Nelson model. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: The changes in success rates over time should be taken into account when assessing prediction models for estimating the success rate of IVF treatment. In patients with primary infertility, the choice to use the Templeton or Nelson model is arbitrary.