49 research outputs found
Optimum Blood Pressure in Patients With Shock After Acute Myocardial Infarction and Cardiac Arrest
BACKGROUND In patients with shock after acute myocardial infarction (AMI), the optimal level of pharmacologic support is unknown. Whereas higher doses may increase myocardial oxygen consumption and induce arrhythmias, diastolic hypotension may reduce coronary perfusion and increase infarct size. OBJECTIVES This study aimed to determine the optimal mean arterial pressure (MAP) in patients with AMI and shock after cardiac arrest. METHODS This study used patient-level pooled analysis of post-cardiac arrest patients with shock after AMI randomized in the Neuroprotect (Neuroprotective Goal Directed Hemodynamic Optimization in Post-cardiac Arrest Patients; NCT02541591) and COMACARE (Carbon Dioxide, Oxygen and Mean Arterial Pressure After Cardiac Arrest and Resuscitation; NCT02698917) trials who were randomized to MAP 65 mm Hg or MAP 80/85 to 100 mm Hg targets during the first 36 h after admission. The primary endpoint was the area under the 72-h high-sensitivity troponin-T curve. RESULTS Of 235 patients originally randomized, 120 patients had AMI with shock. Patients assigned to the higher MAP target (n = 58) received higher doses of norepinephrine (p = 0.004) and dobutamine (p = 0.01) and reached higher MAPs (86 +/- 9 mm Hg vs. 72 +/- 10 mm Hg, p <0.001). Whereas admission hemodynamics and angiographic findings were all well-balanced and revascularization was performed equally effective, the area under the 72-h high-sensitivity troponin-T curve was lower in patients assigned to the higher MAP target (median: 1.14 mu g.72 h/l [interquartile range: 0.35 to 2.31 mu g.72 h/l] vs. median: 1.56 mu g.72 h/l [interquartile range: 0.61 to 4.72 mu g. 72 h/l]; p = 0.04). Additional pharmacologic support did not increase the risk of a new cardiac arrest (p = 0.88) or atrial fibrillation (p = 0.94). Survival with good neurologic outcome at 180 days was not different between both groups (64% vs. 53%, odds ratio: 1.55; 95% confidence interval: 0.74 to 3.22). CONCLUSIONS In post-cardiac arrest patients with shock after AMI, targeting MAP between 80/85 and 100 mm Hg with additional use of inotropes and vasopressors was associated with smaller myocardial injury. (C) 2020 by the American College of Cardiology Foundation.Peer reviewe
Conditional Survival After Resection for Pancreatic Cancer: A Population-Based Study and Prediction Model
Background: Conditional survival is the survival probability after already surviving a predefined time period. This may be informative during follow-up, especially when adjusted for tumor characteristics. Such prediction models for patients with resected pancreatic cancer are lacking and therefore conditional survival was assessed and a nomogram predicting 5-year survival at a predefined period after resection of pancreatic cancer was developed. Methods: This population-based study included patients with resected pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma from the Netherlands Cancer Registry (2005–2016). Conditional survival was calculated as the median, and the probability of surviving up to 8 years in patients who already survived 0–5 years after resection was calculated using the Kaplan–Meier method. A prediction model was constructed. Results: Overall, 3082 patients were included, with a median age of 67 years. Median overall survival was 18 months (95% confidence interval 17–18 months), with a 5-year survival of 15%. The 1-year conditional survival (i.e. probability of surviving the next year) increased from 55 to 74 to 86% at 1, 3, and 5 years after surgery, respectively, while the median overall survival increased from 15 to 40 to 64 months at 1, 3, and 5 years after surgery, respectively. The prediction model demonstrated that the probability of achieving 5-year survival at 1 year after surgery varied from 1 to 58% depending on patient and tumor characteristics. Conclusions: This population-based study showed that 1-year conditional survival was 55% 1 year after resection and 74% 3 years after resection in patients with pancreatic cancer. The prediction model is available via www.pancreascalculator.com to inform patients and caregivers
Differences in patient outcomes and chronic care management of oral anticoagulant therapy: an explorative study
Contains fulltext :
96817.pdf (publisher's version ) (Open Access)BACKGROUND: The oral anticoagulant therapy - provided to prevent thrombosis - is known to be associated with substantial avoidable hospitalization. Improving the quality of the oral anticoagulant therapy could avoid drug related hospitalizations. Therefore, this study compared the patient outcomes between Dutch anticoagulant clinic (AC) regions taking the variation in chronic care management into account in order to explore whether chronic care management elements could improve the quality of oral anticoagulant therapy. METHODS: Two data sources were combined. The first source was a questionnaire that was send to all ACs in the Netherlands in 2008 (response = 100%) to identify the application of chronic care management elements in the AC regions. The Chronic Care Model of Wagner was used to make the concept of chronic care management operational. The second source was the report of the Dutch National Network of ACs which contains patient outcomes of the ACs. RESULTS: Patient outcomes achieved by the ACs were good, yet differences existed; for instance the percentage of patients in the appropriate therapeutic ranges varied from 67 to 87% between AC regions. Moreover, differences existed in the use of chronic care management elements of the chronic care model, for example 12% of the ACs had multidisciplinary meetings and 58% of the ACs had formal agreements with at least one hospital within their region. Patient outcomes were significantly associated with patient orientation and the number of specialized nurses versus doctors (p-values < 0.05). Furthermore, the overall extent to which chronic care management elements were applied was positively associated with patient outcomes (p-values < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Substantial differences in the patient outcomes as well as chronic care management of oral anticoagulant therapy existed. Since our results showed a positive association between overall application of chronic care management and patient outcomes, additional research is needed to fully understand the working mechanism of chronic care management
Association of the location of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (head, body, tail) with tumor stage, treatment, and survival: a population-based analysis
Background: The association between pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) location (head, body, tail) and tumor stage, treatment and overall survival (OS) is unclear. Methods: Patients with PDAC diagnosed between 2005 and 2015 were included from the population-based Netherlands Cancer Registry. Patient, tumor and treatment characteristics were compared with the tumor locations. Multivariable logistic and Cox regression analyses were used. Results: Overall, 19,023 patients were included. PDAC locations were 13,451 (71%) head, 2429 (13%) body and 3143 (16%) tail. Differences were found regarding metastasized disease (head 42%, body 69%, tail 84%, p 4 cm: 21%, 40%, 51%, p <.001) and resection rate (17%, 4%, 7%, p <.001). For patients without metastases, median OS did not differ between head, body, tail (after resection: 16.8, 15.0, 17.3 months, without resection: 5.2, 6.1, 4.6 months, respectively). For patients with metastases, median OS differed slightly (2.6, 2.4, 1.9 months, respectively, adjusted HR body versus head 1.17 (95%CI 1.10–1.23), tail versus head 1.35 (95%CI 1.29–1.41)). Conclusions: PDAC locations in body and tail are larger, more often metastasized and less often resectable than in the pancreatic head. Whereas survival is similar after resection, survival in metastasized disease is somewhat less for PDAC in the pancreatic body and tail
Implementation of integrated care for diabetes mellitus type 2 by two Dutch care groups: a case study
Background Even though previous research has demonstrated improved outcomes of integrated care initiatives, it is not clear why and when integrated care works. This study aims to contribute to filling this knowledge gap by examining the implementation of integrated care for type 2 diabetes by two Dutch care groups. Methods An embedded single case study was conducted including 26 interviews with management staff, care purchasers and health professionals. The Context + Mechanism = Outcome Model was used to study the relationship between context factors, mechanisms and outcomes. Dutch integrated care involves care groups, bundled payments, patient involvement, health professional cooperation and task substitution, evidence-based care protocols and a shared clinical information system. Community involvement is not (yet) part of Dutch integrated care. Results Barriers to the implementation of integrated care included insufficient integration between the patient databases, decreased earnings for some health professionals, patients’ insufficient medical and policy-making expertise, resistance by general practitioner assistants due to perceived competition, too much care provided by practice nurses instead of general practitioners and the funding system incentivising the provision of care exactly as described in the care protocols. Facilitators included performance monitoring via the care chain information system, increased earnings for some health professionals, increased focus on self-management, innovators in primary and secondary care, diabetes nurses acting as integrators and financial incentives for guideline adherence. Economic and political context and health IT-related barriers were discussed as the most problematic areas of integrated care implementation. The implementation of integrated care led to improved communication and cooperation but also to insufficient and unnecessary care provision and deteriorated preconditions for person-centred care. Conclusions Dutch integrated diabetes care is still a work in progress, in the academic and the practice setting. This makes it difficult to establish whether overall quality of care has improved. Future efforts should focus on areas that this study found to be problematic or to not have received enough attention yet. Increased efforts are needed to improve the interoperability of the patient databases and to keep the negative consequences of the bundled payment system in check. Moreover, patient and community involvement should be incorporated
Adjuvant hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) in patients with colon cancer at high risk of peritoneal carcinomatosis; the COLOPEC randomized multicentre trial
Background: The peritoneum is the second most common site of recurrence in colorectal cancer. Early detection of peritoneal carcinomatosis (PC) by imaging is difficult. Patients eventually presenting with clinically apparent PC have a poor prognosis. Median survival is only about five months if untreated and the benefit of palliative systemic chemotherapy is limited. Only a quarter of patients are eligible for curative treatment, consisting of cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (CR/HIPEC). However, the effectiveness depends highly on the extent of disease and the treatment is associated with a considerable complication rate. These clinical problems underline the need for effective adjuvant therapy in high-risk patients to minimize the risk of outgrowth of peritoneal micro metastases. Adjuvant hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) seems to be suitable for this purpose. Without the need for cytoreductive surgery, adjuvant HIPEC can be performed with a low complication rate and short hospital stay. Methods/Design: The aim of this study is to determine the effectiveness of adjuvant HIPEC in preventing the development of PC in patients with colon cancer at high risk of peritoneal recurrence. This study will be performed in the nine Dutch HIPEC centres, starting in April 2015. Eligible for inclusion are patients who underwent curative resection for T4 or intra-abdominally perforated cM0 stage colon cancer. After resection of the primary tumour, 176 patients will be randomized to adjuvant HIPEC followed by routine adjuvant systemic chemotherapy in the experimental arm, or to systemic chemotherapy only in the control arm. Adjuvant HIPEC will be performed simultaneously or shortly after the primary resection. Oxaliplatin will be used as chemotherapeutic agent, for 30 min at 42-43 degrees C. Just before HIPEC, 5-fluorouracil and leucovorin will be administered intravenously. Primary endpoint is peritoneal disease-free survival at 18 months. Diagnostic laparoscopy will be performed routinely after 18 months postoperatively in both arms of the study in patients without evidence of disease based on routine follow-up using CT imaging and CEA. Discussion: Adjuvant HIPEC is assumed to reduce the expected 25 % absolute risk of PC in patients with T4 or perforated colon cancer to a risk of 10 %. This reduction is likely to translate into a prolonged overall survival
Score Model for the preservation of digital collections - a case for another digital preservation self-evaluation tool
Demonstratio
Score Model for the preservation of digital collections - iPRES 2019 Amsterdam
The Score Model for the Preservation of Digital Collections is an online (www.scoremodel.org) self-evaluation tool for cultural heritage institutions which aims to help them with getting a grip on digital preservation. The idea and rationale behind the Score Model is that it can be easily used by smaller and less technically advanced organizations. It is therefore as jargon-free as possible and gives organizations hands-on advise on which issues should be tackled first. The Score Model has the form of an online tool in which the user has to register for an account. They then have to answer 56 questions - separated in seven ISO 16363 inspired clusters - which result in a final report. This report gives a comprehensive overview of how the user has scored for the different clusters and which issues the organization should tackle first. Additionally, the report gives an impression of how far the organization has advanced in becoming a Trusted Digital Repository in the form of qualifying for a Core Trust Seal