What Works to Improve and Manage Fecal Incontinence in Care Home Residents Living With Dementia? A Realist Synthesis of the Evidence.

The prevalence of fecal incontinence (FI) in care homes is estimated to range from 30% to 50%. There is limited evidence of what is effective in the reduction and management of FI in care homes. Using realist synthesis, 6 potential program theories of what should work were identified. These addressed clinician-led support, assessment, and review; the contribution of teaching and support for care home staff on how to reduce and manage FI; addressing the causes and prevention of constipation; how cognitive and physical capacity of the resident affects outcomes; how the potential for recovery, reduction, and management of FI is understood by those involved; and how the care of people living with dementia and FI is integral to the work patterns of the care home and its staff. Dementia was a known risk factor for fecal incontinence (FI), but how it affected uptake of different interventions or the dementia specific continence and toileting skills staff require, were not addressed in the literature. There was a lack of dementia-specific evidence on continence aids. Most care home residents with FI will be doubly incontinent; there is, therefore, limited value in focusing solely on FI or single causes, such as constipation. Medical and nursing support for continence care is an important resource, but it is unhelpful to create a distinction between what is continence care and what is personal or intimate care. Prompted toileting is an approach that may be particularly beneficial for some residents. Valuing the intimate and personal care work unqualified and junior staff provide to people living with dementia and reinforcement of good practice in ways that are meaningful to this workforce are important clinician-led activities. Providing dementia-sensitive continence care within the daily work routines of care homes is key to helping to reduce and manage FI for this population

Reconstruction of the W mass and width at and above WW threshold at FCC-ee

International audienceIn the Standard Model theory, the mass of the W boson is predicted with an uncertainty of 4 MeV/c$^{2}$ whereas the current experimental accuracy is of 12 MeV/c$^{2}$. The present uncertainty is currently limiting the sensitivity to possible effects of new physics through the global fit of the electroweak observables. With more than $2 \times 10^8$ W pairs produced at the W threshold energy and above, the FCC-ee collider will be a W boson factory allowing for W mass measurement with unparalleled precision. The W mass can be directly measured at and above the threshold from the kinematic reconstruction of the W-pair decay products. In addition, $e^+e^-$ collisions offer the possibility to derive the W mass from the WW cross-section measured at the pair-production threshold. The precise measurement of the W mass and width, with both methods, is presented in the context of a future experiment at FCC-ee. A statistical uncertainty on the W mass below 1 MeV/c$^{2}$ is expected and the experimental and theoretical systematic uncertainties must be reduced to match such a level of precision

Benchmarking of survival outcomes following Haematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation (HSCT) : an update of the ongoing project of the European Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation (EBMT) and Joint Accreditation Committee of ISCT and EBMT (JACIE)

From 2016 EBMT and JACIE developed an international risk-adapted benchmarking program of haematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT) outcome to provide individual EBMT Centers with a means of quality-assuring the HSCT process and meeting FACT-JACIE accreditation requirements relating to 1-year survival outcomes. Informed by previous experience from Europe, North America and Australasia, the Clinical Outcomes Group (COG) established criteria for patient and Center selection, and a set of key clinical variables within a dedicated statistical model adapted to the capabilities of the EBMT Registry. The first phase of the project was launched in 2019 to test the acceptability of the benchmarking model through assessment of Centers' performance for 1-year data completeness and survival outcomes of autologous and allogeneic HSCT covering 2013-2016. A second phase was delivered in July 2021 covering 2015-2019 and including survival outcomes. Reports of individual Center performance were shared directly with local principal investigators and their responses were assimilated. The experience thus far has supported the feasibility, acceptability and reliability of the system as well as identifying its limitations. We provide a summary of experience and learning so far in this 'work in progress', as well as highlighting future challenges of delivering a modern, robust, data-complete, risk-adapted benchmarking program across new EBMT Registry systems

Benchmarking of survival outcomes following Haematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation (HSCT): an update of the ongoing project of the European Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation (EBMT) and Joint Accreditation Committee of ISCT and EBMT (JACIE)

From 2016 EBMT and JACIE developed an international risk-adapted benchmarking program of haematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT) outcome to provide individual EBMT Centers with a means of quality-assuring the HSCT process and meeting FACT-JACIE accreditation requirements relating to 1-year survival outcomes. Informed by previous experience from Europe, North America and Australasia, the Clinical Outcomes Group (COG) established criteria for patient and Center selection, and a set of key clinical variables within a dedicated statistical model adapted to the capabilities of the EBMT Registry. The first phase of the project was launched in 2019 to test the acceptability of the benchmarking model through assessment of Centers’ performance for 1-year data completeness and survival outcomes of autologous and allogeneic HSCT covering 2013–2016. A second phase was delivered in July 2021 covering 2015–2019 and including survival outcomes. Reports of individual Center performance were shared directly with local principal investigators and their responses were assimilated. The experience thus far has supported the feasibility, acceptability and reliability of the system as well as identifying its limitations. We provide a summary of experience and learning so far in this ‘work in progress’, as well as highlighting future challenges of delivering a modern, robust, data-complete, risk-adapted benchmarking program across new EBMT Registry systems