Stakeholders' perceptions of rehabilitation services for individuals living with disability:A survey study

Background: The World Health Organization (WHO) was tasked with developing health system guidelines for the implementation of rehabilitation services. Stakeholders' perceptions are an essential factor to take into account in the guideline development process. The aim of this study was to assess stakeholders' perceived feasibility and acceptability of eighteen rehabilitation services and the values they attach to ten rehabilitation outcomes.   Methods: We disseminated an online self-administered questionnaire through a number of international and regional organizations from the different WHO regions. Eligible individuals included persons with disability, caregivers of persons with disability, health professionals, administrators and policy makers. The answer options consisted of a 9-point Likert scale.   Results: Two hundred fifty three stakeholders participated. The majority of participants were health professional (64 %). In terms of outcomes, 'Increasing access' and 'Optimizing utilization' were the top service outcomes rated as critical (i.e., 7, 8 or 9 on the Likert scale) by >70 % of respondents. 'Fewer hospital admissions', 'Decreased burden of care' and 'Increasing longevity' were the services rated as least critical (57 %, 63 % and 58 % respectively). In terms of services, 'Community based rehabilitation' and 'Home based rehabilitation' were found to be both definitely feasible and acceptable (75 % and 74 % respectively). 'Integrated and decentralized rehabilitation services' was found to be less feasible than acceptable according to stakeholders (61 % and 71 % respectively). As for 'Task shifting', most stakeholders did not appear to find task shifting as either definitely feasible or definitely acceptable (63 % and 64 % respectively).   Conclusion: The majority of stakeholder's perceived 'Increasing access' and 'Optimizing utilization' as most critical amongst rehabilitation outcomes. The feasibility of the 'Integrated and decentralized rehabilitation services' was perceived to be less than their acceptability. The majority of stakeholders found 'Task shifting' as neither feasible nor acceptable

Sarah Bates-Kennard, oboe

Antonio PasculliGordon Percival Septimus JacobJohann Sebastian Bac

Extending the RIGHT statement for reporting adapted practice guidelines in healthcare: the RIGHT-Ad@pt Checklist protocol

Evidence-based medicine; Guideline adaptation; Guidelines as topicMedicina basada en la evidencia; Adaptación de guías clínicas; Guías clínicasMedicina basada en l'evidència; Adaptació de guies clíniques; Guies clíniquesIntroduction: The adaptation of guidelines is an increasingly used methodology for the efficient development of contextualised recommendations. Nevertheless, there is no specific reporting guidance. The essential Reporting Items of Practice Guidelines in Healthcare (RIGHT) statement could be useful for reporting adapted guidelines, but it does not address all the important aspects of the adaptation process. The objective of our project is to develop an extension of the RIGHT statement for the reporting of adapted guidelines (RIGHTAd@pt Checklist). Methods and analysis: To develop the RIGHT-Ad@pt Checklist, we will use a multistep process that includes: (1) establishment of a Working Group; (2) generation of an initial checklist based on the RIGHT statement; (3) optimisation of the checklist (an initial assessment of adapted guidelines, semistructured interviews, a Delphi consensus survey, an external review by guideline developers and users and a final assessment of adapted guidelines); and (4) approval of the final checklist. At each step of the process, we will calculate absolute frequencies and proportions, use content analysis to summarise and draw conclusions, discuss the results, draft a report and refine the checklist. Ethics and dissemination: We have obtained a waiver of approval from the Clinical Research Ethics Committee at the Hospital de la Santa Creu i Sant Pau (Barcelona, Spain). We will disseminate the RIGHT-Ad@pt Checklist by publishing into a peer-reviewed journal, presenting to relevant stakeholders and translating into different languages. We will continuously seek feedback from stakeholders, surveil new relevant evidence and, if necessary, update the checklist.YS is funded by China Scholarship Council (No 201707040103). LMG is funded by a Miguel Servet contract from the Instituto de Salud Carlos III (CP18/00007)

Defining decision thresholds for judgments on health benefits and harms using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) Evidence to Decision (EtD) frameworks : A protocol for a randomised methodological study (GRADE-THRESHOLD)

Introduction The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) and similar Evidence to Decision (EtD) frameworks require its users to judge how substantial the effects of interventions are on desirable and undesirable people-important health outcomes. However, decision thresholds (DTs) that could help understand the magnitude of intervention effects and serve as reference for interpretation of findings are not yet available. The objective of this study is an approach to derive and use DTs for EtD judgments about the magnitude of health benefits and harms. We hypothesise that approximate DTs could have the ability to discriminate between the existing four categories of EtD judgments (Trivial, Small, Moderate, Large), support panels of decision-makers in their work, and promote consistency and transparency in judgments. Methods and analysis We will conduct a methodological randomised controlled trial to collect the data that allow deriving the DTs. We will invite clinicians, epidemiologists, decision scientists, health research methodologists, experts in Health Technology Assessment (HTA), members of guideline development groups and the public to participate in the trial. Then, we will investigate the validity of our DTs by measuring the agreement between judgments that were made in the past by guideline panels and the judgments that our DTs approach would suggest if applied on the same guideline data. Ethics and dissemination The Hamilton Integrated Research Ethics Board reviewed this study as a quality improvement study and determined that it requires no further consent. Survey participants will be required to read a consent statement in order to participate in this study at the beginning of the trial. This statement reads: You are being invited to participate in a research project which aims to identify indicative DTs that could assist users of the GRADE EtD frameworks in making judgments. Your input will be used in determining these indicative thresholds. By completing this survey, you provide consent that the anonymised data collected will be used for the research study and to be summarised in aggregate in publication and electronic tools. PROTOCOL registration number NCT05237635

Cenas Urbanas Performance e política nas ruas de Florianópolis

TCC (graduação) - Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina, Centro de Filosofia e Ciências Humanas, Curso de Ciências Sociais.A escolha da rua como espaço para realização das performances dos grupos ERRO Grupo, Grupo Experiência Trânsito e Corpo (E.T.C.) e Coletivo Urbe, na cidade de Florianópolis, apresenta-se como um modo não-convencional do fazer artístico. O presente trabalho pretende, a partir de uma participação observante (WACQUANT, 2002), investigar e explorar os elementos que compõem as práticas artísticas desses grupos, buscando compreender em que medida tais elementos possuem um sentido político. Desse modo, as questões que guiam esta pesquisa são: Por que fazer da rua um palco? Por que esse espaço é, afinal, importante para os artistas que nele se apresentam? Em que medida esta é uma escolha política? As experiências vivenciadas mostram que tais sentidos políticos se relacionam com lo político (MOUFFE, 2011), isto é, referem-se à escolha estética que, em alguma medida, define esses grupos substantivamente. Essa escolha desdobra-se em aspectos que serão analisados nesta pesquisa, como por exemplo, os lugares em que as performances acontecem; a forma como os grupos se apropriam do mesmo e como isso afeta a performance; as dualidades ator/personagem e ator/espectador; e seus textos dramatúrgicos; elementos estes que, de alguma forma, são desconstruídos nessas experiências. Observamos que, embora apresentem diferenças, as práticas artísticas de tais grupos podem ser compreendidas a partir de um mesmo sentido político, representado por um conjunto de atributos que constituem suas performances.The choice of having the street where the performances take place, as made by the groups ERRO Grupo, Grupo Experiência Trânsito e Corpo (E.T.C.) e Coletivo Urbe, in Florianópolis, is an unconventional way of doing art. The present work intends, from an observant participation (WACQUANT, 2002), to investigate and explore the elements that compose the artistic practices of these groups, trying to understand to what extent these elements have a political meaning. Thus, the questions that guide this research are: Why make the street a stage? Why is this space, after all, important for the artists who present themselves in it? To what extent is this a political choice? Experiences during fieldwork show that these political meanings are related to lo político (MOUFFE, 2011), that is, they refer to the aesthetic choice that, to some extent, defines these groups substantively. This choice unfolds into aspects that will be analyzed in this research, for example, the places in which the performances take place; how the groups appropriate it and how it affects performance; the dualities actor / character and actor / spectator; and their dramaturgical texts; elements that are somehow deconstructed in these experiences. We observe that, although there might be differences among the artistic practices of such groups, they can be understood from the same political sense, represented by a set of attributes that constitute their performances

Proving the Effectiveness of the Fundamentals of Robotic Surgery (FRS) Skills Curriculum: A Single-blinded, Multispecialty, Multi-institutional Randomized Control Trial

Objective: To demonstrate the noninferiority of the fundamentals of robotic surgery (FRS) skills curriculum over current training paradigms and identify an ideal training platform. Summary Background Data: There is currently no validated, uniformly accepted curriculum for training in robotic surgery skills. Methods: Single-blinded parallel-group randomized trial at 12 international American College of Surgeons (ACS) Accredited Education Institutes (AEI). Thirty-three robotic surgery experts and 123 inexperienced surgical trainees were enrolled between April 2015 and November 2016. Benchmarks (proficiency levels) on the 7 FRS Dome tasks were established based on expert performance. Participants were then randomly assigned to 4 training groups: Dome (n = 29), dV-Trainer (n = 30), and DVSS (n = 32) that trained to benchmarks and control (n = 32) that trained using locally available robotic skills curricula. The primary outcome was participant performance after training based on task errors and duration on 5 basic robotic tasks (knot tying, continuous suturing, cutting, dissection, and vessel coagulation) using an avian tissue model (transfer-test). Secondary outcomes included cognitive test scores, GEARS ratings, and robot familiarity checklist scores. Results: All groups demonstrated significant performance improvement after skills training (P < 0.01). Participating residents and fellows performed tasks faster (DOME and DVSS groups) and with fewer errors than controls (DOME group; P < 0.01). Inter-rater reliability was high for the checklist scores (0.82–0.97) but moderate for GEARS ratings (0.40–0.67). Conclusions: We provide evidence of effectiveness for the FRS curriculum by demonstrating better performance of those trained following FRS compared with controls on a transfer test. We therefore argue for its implementation across training programs before surgeons apply these skills clinically

Using patient values and preferences to inform the importance of health outcomes in practice guideline development following the GRADE approach

Q2Q1Artículo de investigación1-10Background: There are diverse opinions and confusion about defining and including patient values and preferences (i.e. the importance people place on the health outcomes) in the guideline development processes. This article aims to provide an overview of a process for systematically incorporating values and preferences in guideline development. Methods: In 2013 and 2014, we followed the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach to adopt, adapt and develop 226 recommendations in 22 guidelines for the Ministry of Health of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. To collect context-specific values and preferences for each recommendation, we performed systematic reviews, asked clinical experts to provide feedback according to their clinical experience, and consulted patient representatives. Results: We found several types of studies addressing the importance of outcomes, including those reporting utilities, non-utility measures of health states based on structured questionnaires or scales, and qualitative studies. Guideline panels used the relative importance of outcomes based on values and preferences to weigh the balance of desirable and undesirable consequences of alternative intervention options. However, we found few studies addressing local values and preferences. Conclusions: Currently there are different but no firmly established processes for integrating patient values and preferences in healthcare decision-making of practice guideline development. With GRADE Evidence-to-Decision (EtD) frameworks, we provide an empirical strategy to find and incorporate values and preferences in guidelines by performing systematic reviews and eliciting information from guideline panel members and patient representatives. However, more research and practical guidance are needed on how to search for relevant studies and grey literature, assess the certainty of this evidence, and best summarize and present the findings

Ventilation Techniques and Risk for Transmission of Coronavirus Disease, Including COVID-19 A Living Systematic Review of Multiple Streams of Evidence

Background: Mechanical ventilation is used to treat respiratory failure in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Purpose: To review multiple streams of evidence regarding the benefits and harms of ventilation techniques for coronavirus infections, including that causing COVID-19. (PROSPERO registration: CRD42020178187) Data Sources: 21 standard, World Health Organization–specific and COVID-19–specific databases, without language restrictions, until 1 May 2020. Study Selection: Studies of any design and language comparing different oxygenation approaches in patients with coronavirus infections, including severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) or Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS), or with hypoxemic respiratory failure. Animal, mechanistic, laboratory, and preclinical evidence was gathered regarding aerosol dispersion of coronavirus. Studies evaluating risk for virus transmission to health care workers from aerosol-generating procedures (AGPs) were included. Data Extraction: Independent and duplicate screening, data abstraction, and risk of bias assessment (GRADE for certainty of evidence and AMSTAR 2 for included systematic reviews). Data Synthesis: 123 studies were eligible (45 on COVID-19, 70 on SARS, 8 on MERS), but only 5 studies (1 on COVID-19, 3 on SARS, 1 on MERS) adjusted for important confounders. A study in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 reported slightly higher mortality with noninvasive ventilation (NIV) than with invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV), but 2 opposing studies, 1 in patients with MERS and 1 in patients with SARS, suggest a reduction in mortality with NIV (very low-certainty evidence). Two studies in patients with SARS report a reduction in mortality with NIV compared with no mechanical ventilation (low-certainty evidence). Two systematic reviews suggest a large reduction in mortality with NIV compared with conventional oxygen therapy. Other included studies suggest increased odds of transmission from AGPs. Limitation: Direct studies in COVID-19 are limited and poorly reported. Conclusion: Indirect and low-certainty evidence suggests that use of NIV, similar to IMV, probably reduces mortality but may increase the risk for transmission of COVID-19 to health care workers

Foot health education for people with rheumatoid arthritis —some patient perspectives

Background: Patient education is an important component of foot health management for people with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). The content and strategies for delivery require investigation in relation to the patients’needs. This study explores patients’ experiences of foot health education, to inform how the patients’ needs could be identified in clinical practice and inform effective education delivery. Method: A focus group was used to collect data. The dialogue was recorded digitally, transcribed verbatim and analysed using a structured thematic approach. Member checking and peer review added to credibility of the data. Six themes emerged; (i) content and purpose of patient education – what it should be, (ii) content of patient education – what it should not be, (iii) timing of information on foot health, (iv) method of delivery, (v) ability to engage with foot health education and (vi) the patient/practitioner relationship. Conclusions: This study identified aspects of patient education considered important by this group of patients in relation to content, timing and delivery, forming the basis for further research on clinical and patient focussed outcomes of patient education. Identifying health education needs and provision of supportive verbal and written information can foster an effective therapeutic relationship, supporting effective foot health education for people with RA

Health system and community level interventions for improving antenatal care coverage and health outcomes

What is the issue? The World Health Organization recommends at least four antenatal visits for all pregnant women. Almost half of pregnant women worldwide miss out on this level of care, and this is more problematic in low- and middle-income countries