Consensus-Based Evaluation of Outcome Measures in Pediatric Stroke Care: A Toolkit

Following a pediatric stroke, outcome measures selected for monitoring functional recovery and development vary widely. We sought to develop a toolkit of outcome measures that are currently available to clinicians, possess strong psychometric properties, and are feasible for use within clinical settings. A multidisciplinary group of clinicians and scientists from the International Pediatric Stroke Organization comprehensively reviewed the quality of measures in multiple domains described in pediatric stroke populations including global performance, motor and cognitive function, language, quality of life, and behavior and adaptive functioning. The quality of each measure was evaluated using guidelines focused on responsiveness and sensitivity, reliability, validity, feasibility, and predictive utility. A total of 48 outcome measures were included and were rated by experts based on the available evidence within the literature supporting the strengths of their psychometric properties and practical use. Only three measures were found to be validated for use in pediatric stroke: the Pediatric Stroke Outcome Measure, the Pediatric Stroke Recurrence and Recovery Questionnaire, and the Pediatric Stroke Quality of Life Measure. However, multiple additional measures were deemed to have good psychometric properties and acceptable utility for assessing pediatric stroke outcomes. Strengths and weaknesses of commonly used measures including feasibility are highlighted to guide evidence-based and practicable outcome measure selection. Improving the coherence of outcome assessment will facilitate comparison of studies and enhance research and clinical care in children with stroke. Further work is urgently needed to close the gap and validate measures across all clinically significant domains in the pediatric stroke population

The Hemophilia Joint Health Score version 2.1 Validation in Adult Patients Study: A multicenter international study

BACKGROUND: The Hemophilia Joint Health Score (HJHS) was developed and validated to detect arthropathy in children. Additional evidence is required to show validity in adults. We studied the convergent and discriminant construct validity of the HJHS version 2.1(HJHSv2.1) in adults with hemophilia. A secondary aim was to define age-related normative adult HJHSv2.1 reference values. METHODS: We studied 192 adults with hemophilia, and 120 healthy adults in four age-matched groups-18 to 29, 30 to 40, 41 to 50, and >50 years-at nine centers. Trained physiotherapists scored the HJHS and World Federation of Hemophilia (WFH) joint score. Health history, the Functional Independence Scale of Hemophilia (FISH), Hemophilia Activities List (HAL), and Short-Form McGill Pain Questionnaire (SF-MPQ) were also collected. RESULTS: The median age was 35.0 years. Of participants with hemophilia, 68% had severe, 14% moderate, and 18% mild disease. The HJHS correlated strongly with WFH score (Spearman's rho [rs ] = .95, P < .001). Moderate correlations were seen between the FISH (rs = .50, P < .001) and SF-MPQ Present Pain Intensity (rs = .50, P < .001), while a modest correlation was found with the HAL (rs = -.37, P < .001). The HJHS significantly differentiated between age groups (Kruskal-Wallis T = 35.02, P < .001) and disease severity in participants with hemophilia. The HJHS had high internal reliability (Cronbach's α = .88). We identified duration of swelling as a redundant item in the HJHS. CONCLUSIONS: The HJHS shows evidence of strong convergent and discriminant construct validity to detect arthropathy in adults with hemophilia and is well suited for use in this population

Musculoskeletal ultrasound in hemophilia: Results and recommendations from a global survey and consensus meeting

Abstract Introduction For persons with hemophilia, optimization of joint outcomes is an important unmet need. The aim of this initiative was to determine use of ultrasound in evaluating arthropathy in persons with hemophilia, and to move toward consensus among hemophilia care providers regarding the preferred ultrasound protocols for global adaptation. Methods A global survey of hemophilia treatment centers was conducted that focused on understanding how and why ultrasound was being used and endeavored to move toward consensus definitions of both point‐of‐care musculoskeletal ultrasound (POC‐MSKUS) and full diagnostic ultrasound, terminology to describe structures being assessed by ultrasound, and how these assessments should be interpreted. Next, an in‐person meeting of an international group of hemophilia health care professionals and patient representatives was held, with the objective of achieving consensus regarding the acquisition and interpretation of POC‐MSKUS and full diagnostic ultrasound for use in the assessment of musculoskeletal (MSK) pathologies in persons with hemophilia. Results The recommendations were that clear definitions of the types of ultrasound examinations should be adopted and that a standardized ultrasound scoring/measurement system should be developed, tested, and implemented. The scoring/measurement system should be tiered to allow for a range of complexity yet maintain the ability for comparison across levels. Conclusion Ultrasound is an evolving technology increasingly used for the assessment of MSK outcomes in persons with hemophilia. As adoption increases globally for clinical care and research, it will become increasingly important to establish clear guidelines for image acquisition, interpretation, and reporting to ensure accuracy, consistency, and comparability across groups

Global variation in postoperative mortality and complications after cancer surgery: a multicentre, prospective cohort study in 82 countries

© 2021 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 licenseBackground: 80% of individuals with cancer will require a surgical procedure, yet little comparative data exist on early outcomes in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs). We compared postoperative outcomes in breast, colorectal, and gastric cancer surgery in hospitals worldwide, focusing on the effect of disease stage and complications on postoperative mortality. Methods: This was a multicentre, international prospective cohort study of consecutive adult patients undergoing surgery for primary breast, colorectal, or gastric cancer requiring a skin incision done under general or neuraxial anaesthesia. The primary outcome was death or major complication within 30 days of surgery. Multilevel logistic regression determined relationships within three-level nested models of patients within hospitals and countries. Hospital-level infrastructure effects were explored with three-way mediation analyses. This study was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03471494. Findings: Between April 1, 2018, and Jan 31, 2019, we enrolled 15 958 patients from 428 hospitals in 82 countries (high income 9106 patients, 31 countries; upper-middle income 2721 patients, 23 countries; or lower-middle income 4131 patients, 28 countries). Patients in LMICs presented with more advanced disease compared with patients in high-income countries. 30-day mortality was higher for gastric cancer in low-income or lower-middle-income countries (adjusted odds ratio 3·72, 95% CI 1·70–8·16) and for colorectal cancer in low-income or lower-middle-income countries (4·59, 2·39–8·80) and upper-middle-income countries (2·06, 1·11–3·83). No difference in 30-day mortality was seen in breast cancer. The proportion of patients who died after a major complication was greatest in low-income or lower-middle-income countries (6·15, 3·26–11·59) and upper-middle-income countries (3·89, 2·08–7·29). Postoperative death after complications was partly explained by patient factors (60%) and partly by hospital or country (40%). The absence of consistently available postoperative care facilities was associated with seven to 10 more deaths per 100 major complications in LMICs. Cancer stage alone explained little of the early variation in mortality or postoperative complications. Interpretation: Higher levels of mortality after cancer surgery in LMICs was not fully explained by later presentation of disease. The capacity to rescue patients from surgical complications is a tangible opportunity for meaningful intervention. Early death after cancer surgery might be reduced by policies focusing on strengthening perioperative care systems to detect and intervene in common complications. Funding: National Institute for Health Research Global Health Research Unit

Effects of hospital facilities on patient outcomes after cancer surgery: an international, prospective, observational study

© 2022 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY 4.0 licenseBackground: Early death after cancer surgery is higher in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs) compared with in high-income countries, yet the impact of facility characteristics on early postoperative outcomes is unknown. The aim of this study was to examine the association between hospital infrastructure, resource availability, and processes on early outcomes after cancer surgery worldwide. Methods: A multimethods analysis was performed as part of the GlobalSurg 3 study—a multicentre, international, prospective cohort study of patients who had surgery for breast, colorectal, or gastric cancer. The primary outcomes were 30-day mortality and 30-day major complication rates. Potentially beneficial hospital facilities were identified by variable selection to select those associated with 30-day mortality. Adjusted outcomes were determined using generalised estimating equations to account for patient characteristics and country-income group, with population stratification by hospital. Findings: Between April 1, 2018, and April 23, 2019, facility-level data were collected for 9685 patients across 238 hospitals in 66 countries (91 hospitals in 20 high-income countries; 57 hospitals in 19 upper-middle-income countries; and 90 hospitals in 27 low-income to lower-middle-income countries). The availability of five hospital facilities was inversely associated with mortality: ultrasound, CT scanner, critical care unit, opioid analgesia, and oncologist. After adjustment for case-mix and country income group, hospitals with three or fewer of these facilities (62 hospitals, 1294 patients) had higher mortality compared with those with four or five (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 3·85 [95% CI 2·58–5·75]; p<0·0001), with excess mortality predominantly explained by a limited capacity to rescue following the development of major complications (63·0% vs 82·7%; OR 0·35 [0·23–0·53]; p<0·0001). Across LMICs, improvements in hospital facilities would prevent one to three deaths for every 100 patients undergoing surgery for cancer. Interpretation: Hospitals with higher levels of infrastructure and resources have better outcomes after cancer surgery, independent of country income. Without urgent strengthening of hospital infrastructure and resources, the reductions in cancer-associated mortality associated with improved access will not be realised. Funding: National Institute for Health and Care Research