Construction of reference criteria to admit patients to intermediate care units in France: a Delphi survey of intensivists, anaesthesiologists and emergency medicine practitioners (first part of the UNISURC project).

OBJECTIVES: No consensus criteria describe the medical eligibility of the patients to intermediate care units (IMCUs). In this first part of the UNISURC project, we aimed to develop criteria based on a consensus of physicians from the main specialties involved in IMCU admission decisions. DESIGN: We selected criteria from IMCU literature, scoring systems and intensive care unit nursing workload. We submitted these criteria to a panel of experts in a Delphi survey. We used a two-round Delphi survey procedure to assess the validity and feasibility of each criterion. SETTING: Medical practitioners in either public or private French institutions and proposed by the national scientific societies of anaesthesiology, emergency medicine and intensive care. The Delphi rounds took place in 2015-2016. OUTCOME MEASURES: Validity and feasibility of the proposed criteria; uniformity of the judgement across the primary specialty and the hospital category of the responders. RESULTS: The criteria submitted to vote were classified as one of: chronic factor (CF); acute factor (AF); specific pathway (SP); nursing activity (NA) and hospital environment (HE). Of 189 experts invited, 81 (41%) responded to the first round and 62 of them (76%) responded to the second round. A definite selection of 63 items was made, distributed across 6 CF, 18 AF, 31 SP, 3 NA and 5 HE. Validity and feasibility were influenced by the specialty or the public/private status of the institution of the responders for a few items. CONCLUSION: We created a set of 63 consensus criteria with acceptable validity and feasibility to assess the medical eligibility of the patients to IMCUs. The second part of the UNISURC project will assess the distribution of each criterion in a prospective multicentre national cohort. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02590172.

A Framework Proposal for Quality and Safety Measurement in Gynecologic Emergency Care.

OBJECTIVE: To define and assess the prevalence of potentially life-threatening gynecologic emergencies among women presenting for acute pelvic pain for the purpose of developing measures to audit quality of care in emergency departments. METHODS: We conducted a mixed-methods multicenter study at gynecologic emergency departments in France and Belgium. A modified Delphi procedure was first conducted in 2014 among health care professionals to define relevant combinations of potentially life-threatening conditions and near misses in the field of gynecologic emergency care. A prospective case-cohort study in the spring of 2015 then assessed the prevalence of these potentially life-threatening emergencies and near misses among women of reproductive age presenting for acute pelvic pain. Women in the case group were identified at 21 participating centers. The control group consisted of a sample of women hospitalized for acute pelvic pain not caused by a potentially life-threatening condition and a 10% random sample of outpatients. RESULTS: Eight gynecologic emergencies and 17 criteria for near misses were identified using the Delphi procedure. Among the 3,825 women who presented for acute pelvic pain, 130 (3%) were considered to have a potentially life-threatening condition. The most common diagnoses were ectopic pregnancies with severe bleeding (n=54; 42%), complex pelvic inflammatory disease (n=30; 23%), adnexal torsion (n=20; 15%), hemorrhagic miscarriage (n=15; 12%), and severe appendicitis (n=6; 5%). The control group comprised 225 hospitalized women and 381 outpatients. Diagnostic errors occurred more frequently among women with potentially life-threatening emergencies than among either hospitalized (odds ratio [OR] 1.7, 95% CI 1.1-2.7) or outpatient (OR 14.7, 95% CI 8.1-26.8) women in the control group. Of the women with potentially life-threatening conditions, 26 met near-miss criteria compared with six with not potentially life-threatening conditions (OR 25.6, 95% CI 10.9-70.7). CONCLUSIONS: Potentially life-threatening gynecologic emergencies are high-risk conditions that may serve as a useful framework to improve quality and safety in emergency care.

Interrater reliability of a tool to assess omission of prescription and inappropriate prescriptions in paediatrics.

Background Potentially inappropriate medication (PIM) and potential prescription omission (PPO) are common issues in pharmacotherapy in vulnerable populations. A first tool to assess PIM's and PPO's targeting pediatric populations: POPI «Pediatrics Omission of Prescriptions and Inappropriate Prescriptions¼ was created in 2014. Objective This study aimed to evaluate inter-rater reliability between healthcare professionals who apply POPI. Setting: Mother and child emergency ward of a university hospital. Method Twenty cases with or without PIM or PPO were identified in a previous retrospective PIM-PPO prevalence study on 15,973 patients. One doctor and one pharmacist, who participated in the creation of POPI tool, identified PIM and PPO ("gold standard response"). These cases were reviewed independently by eleven clinicians (generalists, pediatricians, pharmacists, residents), with no previous experience of this tool. Interrater agreement was calculated by using the Kappa agreement test. Main outcome measure: Inter-clinician agreement. Results A high level of agreement of PIM and PPO detection was recorded (PIM: median = 0.80; PPO: median = 0.71). Conclusion POPI demonstrated a good interrater reliability. This validation by many clinicians proves that POPI is a reliable tool. Other multicenter and prospective studies should be conducted to evaluate economical and clinical impacts of POPI.

Retrospective study of irrational prescribing in French paediatric hospital: prevalence of inappropriate prescription detected by Pediatrics: Omission of Prescription and Inappropriate prescription (POPI) in the emergency unit and in the ambulatory setting.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Pediatrics: Omission of Prescription and Inappropriate prescription (POPI) is the first detection tool for potentially inappropriate medicines (PIMs) and potentially prescribing omissions (PPOs) in paediatrics. The aim of this study was to evaluate the prevalence of PIM and PPO detected by POPI regarding prescriptions in hospital and for outpatients. The second objective is to determine the risk factors related to PIM and PPO. DESIGN: A retrospective, descriptive study was conducted in the emergency department (ED) and community pharmacy (CP) during 6 months. POPI was used to identify PIM and PPO. SETTING: Robert-Debré Hospital (France) and Albaret community pharmacy (Seine and Marne). PARTICIPANTS: Patients who were under 18 years old and who had one or more drugs prescribed were included. Exclusion criteria consisted of inaccessible medical records for patients consulted in ED and prescription without drugs for outpatients. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: PIM and PPO rate and risk factors. RESULTS: At the ED, 18 562 prescriptions of 15 973 patients and 4780 prescriptions of 2225 patients at the CP were analysed. The PIM rate and PPO rate were, respectively, 2.9% and 2.3% at the ED and 12.3% and 6.1% at the CP. Respiratory and digestive diseases had the highest rate of PIM. CONCLUSION: This is the first study to assess the prevalence of PIM and PPO detected by POPI in a paediatric population. This study assessed PIMs or PPOs within a hospital and a community pharmacy. POPI could be used to improve drug use and patient care and to limit hospitalisation and adverse drug reaction. A prospective multicentric study should be conducted to evaluate the impact and benefit of implementing POPI in clinical practice.

Practical generic guidelines for paediatric-to-adult transition for adolescents with chronic disease.

BACKGROUND: The last 20 years have seen many attempts to improve transition to adult healthcare for adolescents with chronic disease, but there is currently no established consensus on generic practices. Our goal was to identify relevant and pragmatic guidelines for transition practice for each step of this process (before, during and after transfer), applicable to a wide range of chronic illnesses and health services, via a participatory approach involving all the key stakeholders. METHODS: We conducted interviews and a literature review to elaborate a questionnaire for use in an online 2-round Delphi survey. The survey panel included 36 French health and social professionals from different care settings, and young adults and parents with an experience of healthcare transition related to all types of chronic disease. RESULTS: The survey consensus identified 19 items on feasibility and relevance criteria, which form the guidelines. It is composed of five practices to be adopted during preparation in paediatrics, seven practices in the active phase of transition and seven in adult care. Two guidelines achieved complete consensus: having a longer consultation for the first appointment with the adult doctor, and keeping the same adult doctor throughout follow-up. A further 36 items met the criterion of relevance, but were deemed unfeasible. CONCLUSIONS: Taking into account all stakeholder views and the real-world applicability of care practices enabled us to elaborate consensual guidelines whose implementation requires no additional health service resources.

Exploring how non-inferiority and equivalence are assessed in paediatrics: a systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: To review characteristics, methodology and reporting of non-inferiority and equivalence trials in the specific context of paediatrics. DESIGN: PubMed and Cochrane databases were searched (up to September 2016) for non-inferiority/equivalence randomised controlled trials conducted in children published in high-impact-factor journals (>5.0 for general/specialist medical journals; >2.2 for paediatric journals). RESULTS: We found that the statistical hypothesis was inconsistent with the objective in 12 (10%) of the 125 reports included. Non-inferiority (n=98) and equivalence trials (n=27) were mostly used to evaluate interventions with easier administration (45%, n=54/120) and/or better safety profile (34%, n=41/120). All the data needed for targeted sample size recalculation were available for 39 reports (31%). The margin-representing the largest difference between arms that would be clinically acceptable-was reported in 119 (95%), and 44/119 (37%) reported the method used for margin determination. The median sample size was 268 (IQR 125-531). Margins were wider in smaller trials (<125 randomised patients) than in larger trials (p=0.04/p<0.01 for binary/continuous outcomes, respectively). We did not agree with the authors' conclusions in 11% (11/103) of the reports that provided sufficient information. CONCLUSIONS: There is still a need to improve the quality of methodology, reporting and interpretation of non-inferiority/equivalence trials in paediatrics. In particular, the margins were often not justified and the conclusion was often not supported by the design and/or the results. As researchers have to cope with small sample size and with lack of evidence, methods for non-inferiority/equivalence trials need to be used and/or developed in this vulnerable population.

Nutritional Status in the First 2 Years of Life in Cystic Fibrosis Diagnosed by Newborn Screening.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate nutritional status and associated factors in a cystic fibrosis (CF) cohort diagnosed by newborn screening and followed up to month 24. METHODS: A prospective longitudinal multicenter study assessing nutritional status according to pancreatic status, feeding modalities, prescriptions, pulmonary outcome, and biological nutritional parameters. RESULTS: One hundred and five infants were recruited and 99 completed the study. Nutritional care management prevented undernutrition and stunting in those with exocrine pancreatic sufficiency (EPS), but affected (13/87) 15% and (21/86) 24%, respectively, of infants with exocrine pancreatic insufficiency (EPI). The logistic regression model found a positive association between both weight and length z scores "at risk" at month 24, and initial pulmonary symptoms (odds ratio [OR] 0.06, P < 0.01 and OR 0.08, P < 0.01, respectively); these symptoms were less frequent when age at first visit was earlier than 1.2 months (33% vs 67%, P = 0.02); stunting was also associated with high-calorie density intake and Staphylococcus aureus (OR 0.05, P = 0.01 and OR 0.17, P < 0.01). Pulmonary outcome did not differ according to pancreatic status; breast-feeding for at least 3 months delayed first acquisition of Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Despite sodium and fat-soluble vitamin supplementation, half of both cohorts had low urinary sodium output and half of the EPI cohort had low vitamin D levels. CONCLUSIONS: Our data shed light on the fact that stunting was more frequent than undernutrition, while both parameters involved only patients with pancreatic insufficiency. Modalities of feeding were not associated with nutritional status; breast-feeding may provide some protection against acquisition of P aeruginosa.

Identifying potential indicators to measure the outcome of translational cancer research: a mixed methods approach.

BACKGROUND: In a context where there is an increasing demand to evaluate the outcome of bio-medical research, our work aims to develop a set of indicators to measure the impact of translational cancer research. The objective of our study was to explore the scope and issues of translational research relevant to evaluation, explore the views of researchers on the evaluation of oncological translational research, and select indicators measuring the outcomes and outputs of translational research in oncology by consensus. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews amongst 23 researchers involved in translational cancer research were conducted and analysed using thematic analysis. A two-round modified Delphi survey of 35 participants with similar characteristics was then performed followed by a physical meeting. Participants rated the feasibility and validity of 60 indicators. The physical meeting was held to discuss the methodology of the new indicators. RESULTS: The main themes emerging from the interviews included a common definition for translational research but disagreements about the exact scope and limits of this research, the importance of multidisciplinarity and collaboration for the success of translational research, the disadvantages that translational research faces in current evaluation systems, the relative lack of pertinence of existing indicators, and propositions to measure translational cancer research in terms of clinical applications and patient outcomes. A total of 35 participants took part in the first round survey and 12 in the second round. The two-round survey helped us select a set of 18 indicators, including four that seemed to be particularly adapted to measure translational cancer research impact on health service research (number of biomarkers identified, generation of clinical guidelines, citation of research in clinical guidelines, and citation of research in public health guidelines). The feedback from participants helped refine the methodology and definition of indicators not commonly used. CONCLUSION: Indicators need to be accepted by stakeholders under evaluation. This study helped the selection and refinement of indicators considered as the most relevant by researchers in translational cancer research. The feasibility and validity of those indicators will be tested in a scientometric study.

Measuring the outcome of biomedical research: a systematic literature review.

BACKGROUND: There is an increasing need to evaluate the production and impact of medical research produced by institutions. Many indicators exist, yet we do not have enough information about their relevance. The objective of this systematic review was (1) to identify all the indicators that could be used to measure the output and outcome of medical research carried out in institutions and (2) enlist their methodology, use, positive and negative points. METHODOLOGY: We have searched 3 databases (Pubmed, Scopus, Web of Science) using the following keywords: [Research outcome* OR research output* OR bibliometric* OR scientometric* OR scientific production] AND [indicator* OR index* OR evaluation OR metrics]. We included articles presenting, discussing or evaluating indicators measuring the scientific production of an institution. The search was conducted by two independent authors using a standardised data extraction form. For each indicator we extracted its definition, calculation, its rationale and its positive and negative points. In order to reduce bias, data extraction and analysis was performed by two independent authors. FINDINGS: We included 76 articles. A total of 57 indicators were identified. We have classified those indicators into 6 categories: 9 indicators of research activity, 24 indicators of scientific production and impact, 5 indicators of collaboration, 7 indicators of industrial production, 4 indicators of dissemination, 8 indicators of health service impact. The most widely discussed and described is the h-index with 31 articles discussing it. DISCUSSION: The majority of indicators found are bibliometric indicators of scientific production and impact. Several indicators have been developed to improve the h-index. This indicator has also inspired the creation of two indicators to measure industrial production and collaboration. Several articles propose indicators measuring research impact without detailing a methodology for calculating them. Many bibliometric indicators identified have been created but have not been used or further discussed.

A Delphi process to optimize quality and performance of drug evaluation in neonates.

BACKGROUND: Neonatal trials remain difficult to conduct for several reasons: in particular the need for study sites to have an existing infrastructure in place, with trained investigators and validated quality procedures to ensure good clinical, laboratory practices and a respect for high ethical standards. The objective of this work was to identify the major criteria considered necessary for selecting neonatal intensive care units that are able to perform drug evaluations competently. METHODOLOGY AND MAIN FINDINGS: This Delphi process was conducted with an international multidisciplinary panel of 25 experts from 13 countries, selected to be part of two committees (a scientific committee and an expert committee), in order to validate criteria required to perform drug evaluation in neonates. Eighty six items were initially selected and classified under 7 headings: "NICUs description-Level of care" (21), "Ability to perform drug trials: NICU organization and processes (15), "Research Experience" (12), "Scientific competencies and area of expertise" (8), "Quality Management" (16), "Training and educational capacity" (8) and "Public involvement" (6). Sixty-one items were retained and headings were rearranged after the first round, 34 were selected after the second round. A third round was required to validate 13 additional items. The final set includes 47 items divided under 5 headings. CONCLUSION: A set of 47 relevant criteria will help to NICUs that want to implement, conduct or participate in drug trials within a neonatal network identify important issues to be aware of. SUMMARY POINTS: 1) Neonatal trials remain difficult to conduct for several reasons: in particular the need for study sites to have an existing infrastructure in place, with trained investigators and validated quality procedures to ensure good clinical, laboratory practices and a respect for high ethical standards. 2) The present Delphi study was conducted with an international multidisciplinary panel of 25 experts from 13 countries and aims to identify the major criteria considered necessary for selecting neonatal intensive care units (NICUs) that are able to perform drug evaluations competently. 3) Of the 86 items initially selected and classified under 7 headings--"NICUs description-Level of care" (21), "Ability to perform drug trials: NICU organization and processes (15), "Research Experience" (12), "Scientific competencies and area of expertise" (8), "Quality Management" (16), "Training and educational capacity" (8) and "Public involvement" (6)--47 items were selected following a three rounds Delphi process. 4) The present consensus will help NICUs to implement, conduct or participate in drug trials within a neonatal network.

POPI (Pediatrics: Omission of Prescriptions and Inappropriate prescriptions): development of a tool to identify inappropriate prescribing.

INTRODUCTION: Rational prescribing for children is an issue for all countries and has been inadequately studied. Inappropriate prescriptions, including drug omissions, are one of the main causes of medication errors in this population. Our aim is to develop a screening tool to identify omissions and inappropriate prescriptions in pediatrics based on French and international guidelines. METHODS: A selection of diseases was included in the tool using data from social security and hospital statistics. A literature review was done to obtain criteria which could be included in the tool called POPI. A 2-round-Delphi consensus technique was used to establish the content validity of POPI; panelists were asked to rate their level of agreement with each proposition on a 9-point Likert scale and add suggestions if necessary. RESULTS: 108 explicit criteria (80 inappropriate prescriptions and 28 omissions) were obtained and submitted to a 16-member expert panel (8 pharmacists, 8 pediatricians hospital-based -50%- or working in community -50%-). Criteria were categorized according to the main physiological systems (gastroenterology, respiratory infections, pain, neurology, dermatology and miscellaneous). Each criterion was accompanied by a concise explanation as to why the practice is potentially inappropriate in pediatrics (including references). Two round of Delphi process were completed via an online questionnaire. 104 out of the 108 criteria submitted to experts were selected after 2 Delphi rounds (79 inappropriate prescriptions and 25 omissions). DISCUSSION CONCLUSION: POPI is the first screening-tool develop to detect inappropriate prescriptions and omissions in pediatrics based on explicit criteria. Inter-user reliability study is necessary before using the tool, and prospective study to assess the effectiveness of POPI is also necessary.

Describing ICU data with tables.

INTRODUCTION: The purpose of a scientific paper is to communicate results and within the paper this applies especially to the presentation of data. It is the universal practice in medical journals to present statistical results using tables. Good tables are an integral part of the manuscript. To help researchers communicate their results, we present practical guidance for reporting statistical results using tables. RESULTS: Five key points are presented for reporting statistical results using tables: (1) early reflection and choice about the results to present, (2) presentation of tables and definition of rows and columns, (3) filling the cells, (4) title, caption, footnotes, and quality, (5) final checklist. CONCLUSION: This guidance is a practical tool to improve the reporting of statistical results using tables when presenting ICU data in future research.

Quality indicator development and implementation in maternity units.

Measuring the quality of inpatient obstetrical care has generated considerable interest in recent years. Numerous quality measures have been proposed by national and international programmes and by obstetrics societies; however, no agreement has been reached on which measures should be used. Differences in opinions across healthcare professionals complicate the development of a standardised set of quality indicators. The use of structured methods, particularly consensus methods such as Delphi techniques, can help to choose indicators according to quality goals. Once relevant indicators are identified, maternity units should consider using a dashboard to plan and improve their services. Statistical process control is a statistical method designed to monitor and control processes. This method seems particularly promising for monitoring quality indicators in maternity units. Among statistical process control techniques, cumulative sum charts that monitor pre-selected quality indicators can be easily designed for obstetrics and gynaecology units. Cumulative sum charts provide clinicians with a picture of current practices, and rapidly detect unwanted changes in quality indicator rates.

The effect of atropine on rhythm and conduction disturbances during 322 critical care intubations.

OBJECTIVES: Our objectives were to describe the prevalence of arrhythmia and conduction abnormalities before critical care intubation and to test the hypothesis that atropine had no effect on their prevalence during intubation. DESIGN: Prospective, observational study. SETTING: PICU and pediatric/neonatal intensive care transport. SUBJECTS: All children of age less than 8 years intubated September 2007-2009. Subgroups of intubations with and without atropine were analyzed. INTERVENTION: None. MEASUREMENT AND MAIN RESULTS: A total of 414 intubations were performed in the study period of which 327 were available for analysis (79%). Five children (1.5%) had arrhythmias prior to intubation and were excluded from the atropine analysis. Atropine was used in 47% (152/322) of intubations and resulted in significant acceleration of heart rate without provoking ventricular arrhythmias. New arrhythmias during intubation were related to bradycardia and were less common with atropine use (odds ratio, 0.14 [95% CI, 0.06-0.35], p < 0.001). The most common new arrhythmia was junctional rhythm. Acute bundle branch block was observed during three intubations; one Mobitz type 2 rhythm and five ventricular escape rhythms occurred in the no-atropine group (n = 170). Only one ventricular escape rhythm occurred in the atropine group (n = 152) in a child with an abnormal heart. One child died during intubation who had not received atropine. CONCLUSIONS: Atropine significantly reduced the prevalence of new arrhythmias during intubation particularly for children over 1 month of age, did not convert sinus tachycardia to ventricular tachycardia or fibrillation, and may contribute to the safety of intubation.

Quality indicators for continuous monitoring to improve maternal and infant health in maternity departments: a modified Delphi survey of an international multidisciplinary panel.

OBJECTIVE: Measuring the quality of inpatient obstetrical care using quality indicators is becoming increasingly important for both patients and healthcare providers. However, there is no consensus about which measures are optimal. We describe a modified Delphi method to identify a set of indicators for continuously monitoring the quality of maternity care by healthcare professionals. METHODOLOGY AND MAIN FINDINGS: An international French-speaking multidisciplinary panel comprising 22 obstetricians-gynaecologists, 12 midwives, and 1 paediatrician assessed potential indicators extracted from a medical literature search, using a two-round Delphi procedure followed by a physical meeting. Each panellist rated each indicator based on validity and feasibility. In the first round, 35 panellists from 5 countries and 20 maternity units evaluated 26 indicators including 15 related to the management of the overall population of pregnant women, 3 to the management of women followed from the first trimester of pregnancy, 2 to the management of low-risk pregnant women, and 6 to the management of neonates. 25 quality indicators were kept for next step. In the second round, 27 (27/35: 77%) panellists selected 17 indicators; the remaining 8 indicators were discussed during a physical meeting. The final set comprised 18 indicators. CONCLUSION: A multidisciplinary panel selected indicators that reflect the quality of obstetrical care. This set of indicators could be used to assess and monitor obstetrical care, with the goal of improving the quality of care in maternity units.

Using and reporting the Delphi method for selecting healthcare quality indicators: a systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: Delphi technique is a structured process commonly used to developed healthcare quality indicators, but there is a little recommendation for researchers who wish to use it. This study aimed 1) to describe reporting of the Delphi method to develop quality indicators, 2) to discuss specific methodological skills for quality indicators selection 3) to give guidance about this practice. METHODOLOGY AND MAIN FINDING: Three electronic data bases were searched over a 30 years period (1978-2009). All articles that used the Delphi method to select quality indicators were identified. A standardized data extraction form was developed. Four domains (questionnaire preparation, expert panel, progress of the survey and Delphi results) were assessed. Of 80 included studies, quality of reporting varied significantly between items (9% for year's number of experience of the experts to 98% for the type of Delphi used). Reporting of methodological aspects needed to evaluate the reliability of the survey was insufficient: only 39% (31/80) of studies reported response rates for all rounds, 60% (48/80) that feedback was given between rounds, 77% (62/80) the method used to achieve consensus and 57% (48/80) listed quality indicators selected at the end of the survey. A modified Delphi procedure was used in 49/78 (63%) with a physical meeting of the panel members, usually between Delphi rounds. Median number of panel members was 17(Q1:11; Q3:31). In 40/70 (57%) studies, the panel included multiple stakeholders, who were healthcare professionals in 95% (38/40) of cases. Among 75 studies describing criteria to select quality indicators, 28 (37%) used validity and 17(23%) feasibility. CONCLUSION: The use and reporting of the Delphi method for quality indicators selection need to be improved. We provide some guidance to the investigators to improve the using and reporting of the method in future surveys.

A L-RNA aptamer chiral stationary phase for the resolution of target and related compounds.

In this paper, we report for the first time an aptamer-based chiral stationary phase (CSP) able to resolve racemates of both target and various related compounds. The enantiomers of tyrosine and analogues (11 enantiomeric pairs) were separated using an immobilized tyrosine-specific L-RNA aptamer as CSP and an aqueous buffer (8 mM Tris-HCl buffer, 25 mM NaCl, 5 mM MgCl2; pH 7.4) as mobile phase, at a column temperature of 10 degrees C. It appeared that the carboxylic and amino groups as well as the aromatic side chain of amino acid controlled the stereospecific recognition. Modifications on the polar groups were strongly detrimental for enantioselectivity while the replacement of the phenolic group by some bicyclic aromatic residues of different polarity, size or shape did not impair the enantioselective interaction. In addition, the effects of the mobile phase composition and column temperature upon the retention and stereoselective properties of the CSP were assessed. Finally, it was found that the immobilized RNA aptamer could be used under hydro-organic mobile phase conditions without alteration of the stationary phase stability.