Reducing the environmental impact of surgery on a global scale: systematic review and co-prioritization with healthcare workers in 132 countries

Abstract Background Healthcare cannot achieve net-zero carbon without addressing operating theatres. The aim of this study was to prioritize feasible interventions to reduce the environmental impact of operating theatres. Methods This study adopted a four-phase Delphi consensus co-prioritization methodology. In phase 1, a systematic review of published interventions and global consultation of perioperative healthcare professionals were used to longlist interventions. In phase 2, iterative thematic analysis consolidated comparable interventions into a shortlist. In phase 3, the shortlist was co-prioritized based on patient and clinician views on acceptability, feasibility, and safety. In phase 4, ranked lists of interventions were presented by their relevance to high-income countries and low–middle-income countries. Results In phase 1, 43 interventions were identified, which had low uptake in practice according to 3042 professionals globally. In phase 2, a shortlist of 15 intervention domains was generated. In phase 3, interventions were deemed acceptable for more than 90 per cent of patients except for reducing general anaesthesia (84 per cent) and re-sterilization of ‘single-use’ consumables (86 per cent). In phase 4, the top three shortlisted interventions for high-income countries were: introducing recycling; reducing use of anaesthetic gases; and appropriate clinical waste processing. In phase 4, the top three shortlisted interventions for low–middle-income countries were: introducing reusable surgical devices; reducing use of consumables; and reducing the use of general anaesthesia. Conclusion This is a step toward environmentally sustainable operating environments with actionable interventions applicable to both high– and low–middle–income countries

Efficacy and Safety of Omalizumab (Xolair) for Cholinergic Urticaria in Patients Unresponsive to a Double Dose of Antihistamines: A Randomized Mixed Double-Blind and Open-Label Placebo-Controlled Clinical Trial

Background: Cholinergic urticaria (UCOL) is a highly disabling inducible urticaria triggered by an increase in core body temperature. Objective: To explore the safety and efficacy of omalizumab in controlling UCOL. Methods: We conducted a multicenter randomized mixed double-blind and open-label (first 4 months blinded followed by 8 months open-label) placebo-controlled clinical trial in 22 patients suffering from UCOL who were unresponsive to a double dose of antihistamines. We performed an exercise challenge test during each visit as our main outcome variable. Results: The overall rate of exercise challenge test negative at week 48 was 31.3%, with an average increase in exercise challenge test negative rate of 2.9% points (95% CI, 1.5-4.2) per visit. Statistically significant differences in the negative exercise challenge test rate between the placebo and active intervention groups were not observed during the blinded period (first 4 months of the study). However, from the fourth dose, a progressive improvement was observed. When comparing before and after treatment, statistically significant improvements in all secondary outcome measures were noted after 4 doses (UCOL score: P = .0015; visual analog scale score: P = .0108; days with symptoms: P = .0125) and after 8 doses (UCOL score: P = .0005; chronic urticaria quality of life questionnaire: P = .0105; visual analog scale score: P = .0008; and days with symptoms: P = .0144). In the follow-up visit after the cessation of treatment, the symptoms reappeared, with positive exercise challenge test result and significant increases in all variables. Only 4 of 22 patients remained asymptomatic after 3 months of no treatment. No adverse effects were reported. Conclusions: This randomized mixed double-blind and open-label placebo-controlled trial showed evidence of the safety and potential efficacy of omalizumab in patients with UCOL

Efficacy and safety of Omalizumab (Xolair) for cholinergic urticaria in patients unresponsive to a double dose of antihistamines: A randomized mixed double-blind and open-label placebo-controlled clinical trial

Background Cholinergic urticaria (UCOL) is a highly disabling inducible urticaria triggered by an increase in core body temperature. Objective To explore the safety and efficacy of omalizumab in controlling UCOL. Methods We conducted a multicenter randomized mixed double-blind and open-label (first 4 months blinded followed by 8 months open-label) placebo-controlled clinical trial in 22 patients suffering from UCOL who were unresponsive to a double dose of antihistamines. We performed an exercise challenge test during each visit as our main outcome variable. Results The overall rate of exercise challenge test negative at week 48 was 31.3%, with an average increase in exercise challenge test negative rate of 2.9% points (95% CI, 1.5-4.2) per visit. Statistically significant differences in the negative exercise challenge test rate between the placebo and active intervention groups were not observed during the blinded period (first 4 months of the study). However, from the fourth dose, a progressive improvement was observed. When comparing before and after treatment, statistically significant improvements in all secondary outcome measures were noted after 4 doses (UCOL score: P = .0015; visual analog scale score: P = .0108; days with symptoms: P = .0125) and after 8 doses (UCOL score: P = .0005; chronic urticaria quality of life questionnaire: P = .0105; visual analog scale score: P = .0008; and days with symptoms: P = .0144). In the follow-up visit after the cessation of treatment, the symptoms reappeared, with positive exercise challenge test result and significant increases in all variables. Only 4 of 22 patients remained asymptomatic after 3 months of no treatment. No adverse effects were reported. Conclusions This randomized mixed double-blind and open-label placebo-controlled trial showed evidence of the safety and potential efficacy of omalizumab in patients with UCOL

The role of social participation in municipal-level health systems : the case of Palencia, Guatemala

Background: Social participation has been recognized as an important public health policy since the declaration of Alma-Ata presented it as one of the pillars of primary health care in 1978. Since then, there have been many adaptations to the original policy recommendations, but participation in health is still seen as a means to make the health system more responsive to local health needs, and as a way to bring the health sector and the community closer together. Aim: To explore the role that social participation has in a municipal-level health system in Guatemala in order to inform future policies and programs. Methods: The fieldwork for this study was carried out over eight months and three field visits between early January of 2009 and late March of 2010. During this time, 38 indepth interviews with provincial and district-level health authorities, municipal authorities, community representatives and community health workers were conducted. Using an overall applied ethnographic approach, the main means of data collection were participant observation, in-depth interviews, group discussions and informal conversations. The data was analyzed in two different rounds. In the first one we used documentary analysis, role-ordered matrices and thematic analsis (see papers I-IV) and in the second round, thematic analysis was utilized. Results: We found four themes that frame what the role of social participation in the municipality of Palencia is. The first theme presents the historical, political and social context that has contributed to shaping the participation policies and practices in Guatemala as a whole. The second theme takes a deeper look at these policies and how they have been received in the municipality of Palencia. The third theme presents data regarding the three situated practices of participation, each occurring at a different level: municipal, community and the individual level. Finally, the last theme presents reflections on what it means to participate to the people that were involved in this study. Conclusion: In the process of social participation there are two different and complementary kinds of power that depend on the amount and the kind of resources available at each level of the participation structure. Stakeholders that have higher levels of power to formulate policies will have better access to financial, human and material resources while stakeholders that have higher levels of power to implement policies will have resources like community legitimacy, knowledge of local culture, values and mores, as well as a deep understanding of local social processes. The coordination of financial, human and material resources is just as important as the legitimacy that comes from having community leaders involved in more steps of the process. True collaboration can only be obtained through the promotion and creation of meaningful partnerships between institutional stakeholders and community leaders and other stakeholders that are working at the community level. For this to happen, more structured support for the participation process in the form of clear policies, funding and capacity building is needed

Venous thromboembolism risk and prophylaxis in hospitalised medically ill patients The ENDORSE Global Survey

Limited data are available regarding the risk for venous thromboembolism (VIE) and VIE prophylaxis use in hospitalised medically ill patients. We analysed data from the global ENDORSE survey to evaluate VTE risk and prophylaxis use in this population according to diagnosis, baseline characteristics, and country. Data on patient characteristics, VIE risk, and prophylaxis use were abstracted from hospital charts. VTE risk and prophylaxis use were evaluated according to the 2004 American College of Chest Physicians (ACCP) guidelines. Multivariable analysis was performed to identify factors associated with use of ACCP-recommended prophylaxis. Data were evaluated for 37,356 hospitalised medical patients across 32 countries. VIE risk varied according to medical diagnosis, from 31.2% of patients with gastrointestinal/hepatobiliary diseases to 100% of patients with acute heart failure, active noninfectious respiratory disease, or pulmonary infection (global rate, 41.5%). Among those at risk for VTE, ACCP-recommended prophylaxis was used in 24.4% haemorrhagic stroke patients and 40-45% of cardiopulmonary disease patients (global rate, 39.5%). Large differences in prophylaxis use were observed among countries. Markers of disease severity, including central venous catheters, mechanical ventilation, and admission to intensive care units, were strongly associated with use of ACCP-recommended prophylaxis. In conclusion, VIE risk varies according to medical diagnosis. Less than 40% of at-risk hospitalised medical patients receive ACCP-recommended prophylaxis. Prophylaxis use appears to be associated with disease severity rather than medical diagnosis. These data support the necessity to improve implementation of available guidelines for evaluating VIE risk and providing prophylaxis to hospitalised medical patients

Venous Thromboembolism Risk and Prophylaxis in the Acute Care Hospital Setting (ENDORSE Survey) Findings in Surgical Patients

Objective: To evaluate venous thromboembolism (VTE) risk in patients who underwent a major operation, including the use of, and factors influencing, American College of Chest Physicians-recommended types of VTE prophylaxis