Mortality from gastrointestinal congenital anomalies at 264 hospitals in 74 low-income, middle-income, and high-income countries: a multicentre, international, prospective cohort study

Summary Background Congenital anomalies are the fifth leading cause of mortality in children younger than 5 years globally. Many gastrointestinal congenital anomalies are fatal without timely access to neonatal surgical care, but few studies have been done on these conditions in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs). We compared outcomes of the seven most common gastrointestinal congenital anomalies in low-income, middle-income, and high-income countries globally, and identified factors associated with mortality. Methods We did a multicentre, international prospective cohort study of patients younger than 16 years, presenting to hospital for the first time with oesophageal atresia, congenital diaphragmatic hernia, intestinal atresia, gastroschisis, exomphalos, anorectal malformation, and Hirschsprung’s disease. Recruitment was of consecutive patients for a minimum of 1 month between October, 2018, and April, 2019. We collected data on patient demographics, clinical status, interventions, and outcomes using the REDCap platform. Patients were followed up for 30 days after primary intervention, or 30 days after admission if they did not receive an intervention. The primary outcome was all-cause, in-hospital mortality for all conditions combined and each condition individually, stratified by country income status. We did a complete case analysis. Findings We included 3849 patients with 3975 study conditions (560 with oesophageal atresia, 448 with congenital diaphragmatic hernia, 681 with intestinal atresia, 453 with gastroschisis, 325 with exomphalos, 991 with anorectal malformation, and 517 with Hirschsprung’s disease) from 264 hospitals (89 in high-income countries, 166 in middleincome countries, and nine in low-income countries) in 74 countries. Of the 3849 patients, 2231 (58·0%) were male. Median gestational age at birth was 38 weeks (IQR 36–39) and median bodyweight at presentation was 2·8 kg (2·3–3·3). Mortality among all patients was 37 (39·8%) of 93 in low-income countries, 583 (20·4%) of 2860 in middle-income countries, and 50 (5·6%) of 896 in high-income countries (p<0·0001 between all country income groups). Gastroschisis had the greatest difference in mortality between country income strata (nine [90·0%] of ten in lowincome countries, 97 [31·9%] of 304 in middle-income countries, and two [1·4%] of 139 in high-income countries; p≤0·0001 between all country income groups). Factors significantly associated with higher mortality for all patients combined included country income status (low-income vs high-income countries, risk ratio 2·78 [95% CI 1·88–4·11], p<0·0001; middle-income vs high-income countries, 2·11 [1·59–2·79], p<0·0001), sepsis at presentation (1·20 [1·04–1·40], p=0·016), higher American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score at primary intervention (ASA 4–5 vs ASA 1–2, 1·82 [1·40–2·35], p<0·0001; ASA 3 vs ASA 1–2, 1·58, [1·30–1·92], p<0·0001]), surgical safety checklist not used (1·39 [1·02–1·90], p=0·035), and ventilation or parenteral nutrition unavailable when needed (ventilation 1·96, [1·41–2·71], p=0·0001; parenteral nutrition 1·35, [1·05–1·74], p=0·018). Administration of parenteral nutrition (0·61, [0·47–0·79], p=0·0002) and use of a peripherally inserted central catheter (0·65 [0·50–0·86], p=0·0024) or percutaneous central line (0·69 [0·48–1·00], p=0·049) were associated with lower mortality. Interpretation Unacceptable differences in mortality exist for gastrointestinal congenital anomalies between lowincome, middle-income, and high-income countries. Improving access to quality neonatal surgical care in LMICs will be vital to achieve Sustainable Development Goal 3.2 of ending preventable deaths in neonates and children younger than 5 years by 2030

Convalescent plasma in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19 (RECOVERY): a randomised controlled, open-label, platform trial

SummaryBackground Azithromycin has been proposed as a treatment for COVID-19 on the basis of its immunomodulatoryactions. We aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of azithromycin in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19.Methods In this randomised, controlled, open-label, adaptive platform trial (Randomised Evaluation of COVID-19Therapy [RECOVERY]), several possible treatments were compared with usual care in patients admitted to hospitalwith COVID-19 in the UK. The trial is underway at 176 hospitals in the UK. Eligible and consenting patients wererandomly allocated to either usual standard of care alone or usual standard of care plus azithromycin 500 mg once perday by mouth or intravenously for 10 days or until discharge (or allocation to one of the other RECOVERY treatmentgroups). Patients were assigned via web-based simple (unstratified) randomisation with allocation concealment andwere twice as likely to be randomly assigned to usual care than to any of the active treatment groups. Participants andlocal study staff were not masked to the allocated treatment, but all others involved in the trial were masked to theoutcome data during the trial. The primary outcome was 28-day all-cause mortality, assessed in the intention-to-treatpopulation. The trial is registered with ISRCTN, 50189673, and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04381936.Findings Between April 7 and Nov 27, 2020, of 16 442 patients enrolled in the RECOVERY trial, 9433 (57%) wereeligible and 7763 were included in the assessment of azithromycin. The mean age of these study participants was65·3 years (SD 15·7) and approximately a third were women (2944 [38%] of 7763). 2582 patients were randomlyallocated to receive azithromycin and 5181 patients were randomly allocated to usual care alone. Overall,561 (22%) patients allocated to azithromycin and 1162 (22%) patients allocated to usual care died within 28 days(rate ratio 0·97, 95% CI 0·87–1·07; p=0·50). No significant difference was seen in duration of hospital stay (median10 days [IQR 5 to >28] vs 11 days [5 to >28]) or the proportion of patients discharged from hospital alive within 28 days(rate ratio 1·04, 95% CI 0·98–1·10; p=0·19). Among those not on invasive mechanical ventilation at baseline, nosignificant difference was seen in the proportion meeting the composite endpoint of invasive mechanical ventilationor death (risk ratio 0·95, 95% CI 0·87–1·03; p=0·24).Interpretation In patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19, azithromycin did not improve survival or otherprespecified clinical outcomes. Azithromycin use in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19 should be restrictedto patients in whom there is a clear antimicrobial indication

A conceptual review of engagement in healthcare and rehabilitation

Purpose: This review sought to develop an understanding of how engagement in healthcare has been conceptualized in the literature in order to inform future clinical practice and research in rehabilitation. A secondary purpose was to propose a working definition of engagement

Exploring relational engagement practices in stroke rehabilitation using the Voice Centred Relational Approach

While discussions on patient engagement commonly focus on patient behaviors, a small body of research highlights the patient-practitioner relationship as critical in engagement. Understanding this relationship might be facilitated through a relationally-oriented methodology. The Voice Centred Relational Approach is one such qualitative methodology. Within this paper, we present one turn in a long conversation about this methodology. Drawing on our longitudinal observational study of engagement practices in stroke rehabilitation in New Zealand, we explicate how a theoretical framework can inform how the Voice Centred Relational Approach is enacted in the research process, from entering the field to dissemination. We detail how we adapted the associated analytic techniques (the Listening Guide and i-poems) for use with multiple forms and sources of data. We propose that the underlying relational ontology and relational orientation of this methodology makes it a useful approach in researching relational practice in healthcare

Engaging people experiencing communication disability in stroke rehabilitation: a qualitative study

Engagement is commonly considered important in stroke rehabilitation, with some arguing it is essential for positive patient outcomes. An emerging body of research indicates the practitioner influences engagement through their ways of relating, communicating and working with the patient. People experiencing communication disability may face particular challenges with engagement as a practitioner's communication and interactional patterns may limit their ability to engage.To understand how rehabilitation practitioners worked to engage people experiencing communication disability throughout the course of rehabilitation.A qualitative study using the Voice Centred Relational Approach. Longitudinal observational and interview data were gathered from 28 practitioners and three people experiencing communication disability in inpatient and community stroke rehabilitation services. Data were analyzed using the Listening Guide.Engagement was a relational practice on the part of the rehabilitation practitioner. It was underpinned by a relational philosophy and characterized by three core processes: embedding relational work throughout rehabilitation; getting to know the patient and working in ways valued by the patient; and communicating using relational dialogue and supported conversation. Practitioners wove these together with their technical, disciplinary-based work and rehabilitation tasks.Patient engagement was constructed through relationships and strongly influenced by the practitioners' way of thinking about and enacting practice, challenging the idea that engagement is solely an intrinsic patient state and behaviour. The findings raise questions about which aspects of rehabilitation work and communication are most valuable when working to engage people experiencing communication disability. Viewing engagement as a relational practice and understanding the different ways this is enacted may support practitioners to reflect on their understandings of engagement, their patient's engagement, their ways of working, and the frames and philosophies that surround and influence their practice

The micro-politics of caring: tinkering with person-centered rehabilitation

Purpose: In this paper, we critically investigate the implementation of person-centered care with the purpose of advancing philosophical debates regarding the overarching aims and delivery of rehabilitation. While general agreement exists regarding person centered care’s core principles, how practitioners reconcile the implementation of these principles with competing practice demands remains an open question. Materials and methods: For the paper, we drew on post-qualitative methods to engage in a process of “diffractive” analysis wherein we analyzed the micro-doings of person-centered care in everyday rehabilitation work. Working from our team members’ diverse experiences, traditions, and epistemological commitments, we engaged with data from nine “care events” generated in previous research to interrogate the multiple forces that co-produce care practices. Results: We map our analyses under three categories: scripts mediate practice, securing compliance through “benevolent manipulations”, and care(ful) tinkering. In the latter, we explore the notion of tinkering as a useful concept for approaching person centered care. Uncertainty, humility, and doubt in one’s expertise are inherent to tinkering, which involves a continual questioning of what to do, what is best, and what is person centered care within each moment of care. The paper concludes with a discussion of the implications for rehabilitation and person-centered care.Implications for rehabilitation Determinations of what constitutes good, better, or best rehabilitation practices are inevitably questions of ethics. Person-centered care is promoted as good practice in rehabilitation because it provides a framework for attending to the personhood of all engaged in clinical encounters. Post-critical analyses suggest that multiple interacting forces, conditions, assumptions, and actions intersect in shaping each rehabilitation encounter such that what constitutes good care or person-centered care cannot be determined in advance. “Tinkering” is a potentially useful approach that involves a continual questioning of what to do, what is best, and what is person-centered care within each moment of care

The singer or the singing: Who sings individually to persons with dementia and what are the effects?

"Live" singing to persons with dementia (PWDs) may be an underused but highly accessible resource for their caregivers, regardless of qualifications. A systematic literature review sought to illuminate who sings to PWDs, and with what objectives and effects, to address the question of whether it is the singer or the singing which is effective. The literature revealed that music therapists seek to address cognitive, behavioral, physiological, and social factors through one-to-one singing, whereas other caregivers are more broadly concerned with quality of life, often through facilitating activities of daily living. All included studies concurred that individual singing to PWDs can be effective in a variety of ways, depending on contexts and goals. PWD's perceptions of situations may influence the effectiveness of singing interventions. Music therapists are urged to empower professional caregivers to sing sensitively to PWDs during caregiving activities. © The Author(s) 2010