118 research outputs found

    Implementing quality indicators in intensive care units: exploring barriers to and facilitators of behaviour change

    Get PDF
    <p/> <p>Background</p> <p>Quality indicators are increasingly used in healthcare but there are various barriers hindering their routine use. To promote the use of quality indicators, an exploration of the barriers to and facilitating factors for their implementation among healthcare professionals and managers of intensive care units (ICUs) is advocated.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>All intensivists, ICU nurses, and managers (n = 142) working at 54 Dutch ICUs who participated in training sessions to support future implementation of quality indicators completed a questionnaire on perceived barriers and facilitators. Three types of barriers related to knowledge, attitude, and behaviour were assessed using a five-point Likert scale (1 = strongly disagree to 5 = strongly agree).</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Behaviour-related barriers such as time constraints were most prominent (Mean Score, MS = 3.21), followed by barriers related to knowledge and attitude (MS = 3.62; MS = 4.12, respectively). Type of profession, age, and type of hospital were related to knowledge and behaviour. The facilitating factor perceived as most important by intensivists was administrative support (MS = 4.3; p = 0.02); for nurses, it was education (MS = 4.0; p = 0.01), and for managers, it was receiving feedback (MS = 4.5; p = 0.001).</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Our results demonstrate that healthcare professionals and managers are familiar with using quality indicators to improve care, and that they have positive attitudes towards the implementation of quality indicators. Despite these facts, it is necessary to lower the barriers related to behavioural factors. In addition, as the barriers and facilitating factors differ among professions, age groups, and settings, tailored strategies are needed to implement quality indicators in daily practice.</p

    Hydrogen Evolution Electrocatalysis with a Molecular Cobalt Bis(alkylimidazole)methane Complex in DMF: a Critical Activity Analysis

    Get PDF
    [Co(HBMIMPh2)2](BF4)2 (1) [HBMIMPh2=bis(1-methyl-4,5-diphenyl-1H-imidazol-2-yl)methane] was investigated for its electrocatalytic hydrogen evolution performance in DMF using voltammetry and during controlled potential/current electrolysis (CPE/CCE) in a novel in-line product detection setup. Performances were benchmarked against three reported molecular cobalt hydrogen evolution reaction (HER) electrocatalysts, [Co(dmgBF2)2(solv)2] (2) (dmgBF2=difluoroboryldimethylglyoximato), [Co(TPP)] (3) (TPP=5,10,15,20-tetraphenylporphyrinato), and [Co(bapbpy)Cl](Cl) (4) [bapbpy=6,6′-bis-(2-aminopyridyl)-2,2′-bipyridine], showing distinct performances differences with 1 being the runner up in H2 evolution during CPE and the best catalyst in terms of overpotential and Faradaic efficiency during CCE. After bulk electrolysis, for all of the complexes, a deposit on the glassy carbon electrode was observed, and post-electrolysis X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS) analysis of the deposit formed from 1 demonstrated only a minor cobalt contribution (0.23 %), mainly consisting of Co2+. Rinse tests on the deposits derived from 1 and 2 showed that the initially observed distinct activity was (partly) preserved for the deposits. These observations indicate that the molecular design of the complexes dictates the features of the formed deposit and therewith the observed activity

    High-throughput proteomic analysis reveals systemic dysregulation in virally suppressed people living with HIV

    Get PDF
    BACKGROUND. People living with HIV (PLHIV) receiving antiretroviral therapy (ART) exhibit persistent immune dysregulation and microbial dysbiosis, leading to development of cardiovascular diseases (CVDs). We initially compared plasma proteomic profiles between 205 PLHIV and 120 healthy control participants (HCs) and validated the results in an independent cohort of 639 PLHIV and 99 HCs. Differentially expressed proteins (DEPs) were then associated to microbiome data. Finally, we assessed which proteins were linked with CVD development in PLHIV. METHODS. Proximity extension assay technology was used to measure 1,472 plasma proteins. Markers of systemic inflammation (C-reactive protein, D-dimer, IL-6, soluble CD14, and soluble CD163) and microbial translocation (IFABP) were measured by ELISA, and gut bacterial species were identified using shotgun metagenomic sequencing. Baseline CVD data were available for all PLHIV, and 205 PLHIV were recorded for development of CVD during a 5-year follow-up. RESULTS. PLHIV receiving ART had systemic dysregulation of protein concentrations, compared with HCs. Most of the DEPs originated from the intestine and lymphoid tissues and were enriched in immune- and lipid metabolism-related pathways. DEPs originating from the intestine were associated with specific gut bacterial species. Finally, we identified upregulated proteins in PLHIV (GDF15, PLAUR, RELT, NEFL, COL6A3, and EDA2R), unlike most markers of systemic inflammation, associated with the presence and risk of developing CVD during 5-year follow-up. CONCLUSION. Our findings suggest a systemic dysregulation of protein concentrations in PLHIV; some proteins were associated with CVD development. Most DEPs originated from the gut and were related to specific gut bacterial species.</p

    Evaluating the effectiveness of a tailored multifaceted performance feedback intervention to improve the quality of care: protocol for a cluster randomized trial in intensive care

    Get PDF
    Contains fulltext : 95871.pdf (publisher's version ) (Open Access)ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: Feedback is potentially effective in improving the quality of care. However, merely sending reports is no guarantee that performance data are used as input for systematic quality improvement (QI). Therefore, we developed a multifaceted intervention tailored to prospectively analyzed barriers to using indicators: the Information Feedback on Quality Indicators (InFoQI) program. This program aims to promote the use of performance indicator data as input for local systematic QI. We will conduct a study to assess the impact of the InFoQI program on patient outcome and organizational process measures of care, and to gain insight into barriers and success factors that affected the program's impact. The study will be executed in the context of intensive care. This paper presents the study's protocol. METHODS/DESIGN: We will conduct a cluster randomized controlled trial with intensive care units (ICUs) in the Netherlands. We will include ICUs that submit indicator data to the Dutch National Intensive Care Evaluation (NICE) quality registry and that agree to allocate at least one intensivist and one ICU nurse for implementation of the intervention. Eligible ICUs (clusters) will be randomized to receive basic NICE registry feedback (control arm) or to participate in the InFoQI program (intervention arm). The InFoQI program consists of comprehensive feedback, establishing a local, multidisciplinary QI team, and educational outreach visits. The primary outcome measures will be length of ICU stay and the proportion of shifts with a bed occupancy rate above 80%. We will also conduct a process evaluation involving ICUs in the intervention arm to investigate their actual exposure to and experiences with the InFoQI program. DISCUSSION: The results of this study will inform those involved in providing ICU care on the feasibility of a tailored multifaceted performance feedback intervention and its ability to accelerate systematic and local quality improvement. Although our study will be conducted within the domain of intensive care, we believe our conclusions will be generalizable to other settings that have a quality registry including an indicator set available. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN50542146

    Implementing mentor mothers in family practice to support abused mothers: Study protocol

    Get PDF
    Contains fulltext : 97988.pdf (postprint version ) (Open Access)ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: Intimate partner violence is highly prevalent and mostly affects women with negative consequences for their physical and mental health. Children often witness the violence which has negative consequences for their well-being too. Care offered by family physicians is often rejected because abused women experience a too high threshold. Mentor mother support, a low threshold intervention for abused mothers in family practice, proved to be feasible and effective in Rotterdam, the Netherlands. The primary aim of this study is to investigate which factors facilitate or hinder the implementation of mentor mother support in family practice. Besides we evaluate the effect of mentor mother support in a different region. METHODS/DESIGN: An observational study with pre- and posttests will be performed. Mothers with home living children or pregnant women who are victims of intimate partner violence will be offered mentor mother support by the participating family physicians. The implementation process evaluation consists of focus groups, interviews and questionnaires. In the effect evaluation intimate partner violence, the general health of the abused mother, the mother-child relationship, social support, and acceptance of professional help will be measured twice (t = 0 and t = 6 months) by questionnaires, reporting forms, medical records and interviews with the abused mothers. Qualitative coding will be used to analyze the data from the reporting forms, medical records, focus groups, interviews, and questionnaires. Quantitative data will be analyzed with descriptive statistics, chi square test and t-test matched pairs. DISCUSSION: While other intervention studies only evaluate the feasibility and effectiveness of the intervention, our primary aim is to evaluate the implementation process and thereby investigate which factors facilitate or hinder implementation of mentor mother support in family practice.6 p

    No difference in penetrance between truncating and missense/aberrant splicing pathogenic variants in mlh1 and msh2: A prospective lynch syndrome database study

    Get PDF
    Background. Lynch syndrome is the most common genetic predisposition for hereditary cancer. Carriers of pathogenic changes in mismatch repair (MMR) genes have an increased risk of developing colorectal (CRC), endometrial, ovarian, urinary tract, prostate, and other cancers, depending on which gene is malfunctioning. In Lynch syndrome, differences in cancer incidence (penetrance) according to the gene involved have led to the stratification of cancer surveillance. By contrast, any differences in penetrance determined by the type of pathogenic variant remain unknown. Objective. To determine cumulative incidences of cancer in carriers of truncating and missense or aberrant splicing pathogenic variants of the MLH1 and MSH2 genes. Methods. Carriers of pathogenic variants of MLH1 (path_MLH1) and MSH2 (path_MSH2) genes filed in the Prospective Lynch Syndrome Database (PLSD) were categorized as truncating or missense/aberrant splicing according to the InSiGHT criteria for pathogenicity. Results. Among 5199 carriers, 1045 had missense or aberrant splicing variants, and 3930 had truncating variants. Prospective observation years for the two groups were 8205 and 34,141 years, respectively, after which there were no significant differences in incidences for cancer overall or for colorectal cancer or endometrial cancers separately. Conclusion. Truncating and missense or aberrant splicing pathogenic variants were associated with similar average cumulative incidences of cancer in carriers of path MLH1 and path_MSH2.Fil: Dominguez Valentin, Mev. St Mark’s Hospital; Reino Unido. The Norwegian Radium Hospital; Noruega. European Hereditary Tumour Group; Reino UnidoFil: Plazzer, John Paul. St Mark’s Hospital; Reino Unido. The Royal Melbourne Hospital; AustraliaFil: Sampson, Julian R.. European Hereditary Tumour Group; Reino Unido. Cardiff University; Reino UnidoFil: Engel, Christoph. European Hereditary Tumour Group; Reino Unido. Universitat Leipzig; AlemaniaFil: Aretz, Stefan. Universitat Bonn; AlemaniaFil: Jenkins, Mark A.. University of Melbourne; AustraliaFil: Sunde, Lone. Aalborg University; DinamarcaFil: Bernstein, Inge. Aalborg University; DinamarcaFil: Capella, Gabriel. European Hereditary Tumour Group; Reino Unido. St Mark’s Hospital; Reino Unido. Institut Català d’Oncologia; EspañaFil: Balaguer Prunés, Francesc. Universidad de Barcelona; EspañaFil: Macrae, Finlay. European Hereditary Tumour Group; Reino Unido. The Royal Melbourne Hospital; AustraliaFil: Winship, Ingrid M.. University of Melbourne; AustraliaFil: Thomas, Huw. Imperial College London; Reino UnidoFil: Evans, Dafydd Gareth. University of Manchester; Reino UnidoFil: Burn, John. Universidad de Newcastle; Australia. The Royal Melbourne Hospital; Australia. St Mark’s Hospital; Reino UnidoFil: Greenblatt, Marc. University of Vermont; Estados UnidosFil: de Vos tot Nederveen Cappel, Wouter H.. Isala Clinics; Países BajosFil: Sijmons, Rolf H.. University of Groningen; Países Bajos. St Mark’s Hospital; Reino Unido. European Hereditary Tumour Group; Reino UnidoFil: Nielsen, Maartje. Leids Universitair Medisch Centrum; Países BajosFil: Bertario, Lucio. Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori; ItaliaFil: Bonanni, Bernardo. Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori; ItaliaFil: Tibiletti, Maria Grazia. Università dell’Insubria; ItaliaFil: Cavestro, Giulia Martina. Vita-Salute San Raffaele University; ItaliaFil: Lindblom, Annika. Karolinska Huddinge Hospital; SueciaFil: Della Valle, Adriana. Hospital Fuerzas Armadas; UruguayFil: Lopez Kostner, Francisco. Clínica Universidad de los Andes; ChileFil: Alvarez, Karin. Clínica Universidad de los Andes; ChileFil: Gluck, Nathan. Universitat Tel Aviv; IsraelFil: Katz, Lior. Sheba Medical Center; IsraelFil: Heinimann, Karl. University Hospital Basel; SuizaFil: Piñero, Tamara Alejandra. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Oficina de Coordinación Administrativa Houssay. Instituto de Medicina Traslacional e Ingeniería Biomédica - Hospital Italiano. Instituto de Medicina Traslacional e Ingeniería Biomédica.- Instituto Universitario Hospital Italiano de Buenos Aires. Instituto de Medicina Traslacional e Ingeniería Biomédica; ArgentinaFil: Pavicic, Walter Hernan. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Oficina de Coordinación Administrativa Houssay. Instituto de Medicina Traslacional e Ingeniería Biomédica - Hospital Italiano. Instituto de Medicina Traslacional e Ingeniería Biomédica.- Instituto Universitario Hospital Italiano de Buenos Aires. Instituto de Medicina Traslacional e Ingeniería Biomédica; Argentin

    A pan-cancer analysis of the microbiome in metastatic cancer

    Get PDF
    Microbial communities are resident to multiple niches of the human body and are important modulators of the host immune system and responses to anticancer therapies. Recent studies have shown that complex microbial communities are present within primary tumors. To investigate the presence and relevance of the microbiome in metastases, we integrated mapping and assembly-based metagenomics, genomics, transcriptomics, and clinical data of 4,160 metastatic tumor biopsies. We identified organ-specific tropisms of microbes, enrichments of anaerobic bacteria in hypoxic tumors, associations between microbial diversity and tumor-infiltrating neutrophils, and the association of Fusobacterium with resistance to immune checkpoint blockade (ICB) in lung cancer. Furthermore, longitudinal tumor sampling revealed temporal evolution of the microbial communities and identified bacteria depleted upon ICB. Together, we generated a pan-cancer resource of the metastatic tumor microbiome that may contribute to advancing treatment strategies

    Treatment strategies and clinical outcomes in consecutive patients with locally advanced pancreatic cancer:A multicenter prospective cohort

    Get PDF
    Introduction: Since current studies on locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC) mainly report from single, high-volume centers, it is unclear if outcomes can be translated to daily clinical practice. This study provides treatment strategies and clinical outcomes within a multicenter cohort of unselected patients with LAPC. Materials and methods: Consecutive patients with LAPC according to Dutch Pancreatic Cancer Group criteria, were prospectively included in 14 centers from April 2015 until December 2017. A centralized expert panel reviewed response according to RECIST v1.1 and potential surgical resectability. Primary outcome was median overall survival (mOS), stratified for primary treatment strategy. Results: Overall, 422 patients were included, of whom 77% (n = 326) received chemotherapy. The majority started with FOLFIRINOX (77%, 252/326) with a median of six cycles (IQR 4-10). Gemcitabine monotherapy was given to 13% (41/326) of patients and nab-paclitaxel/gemcitabine to 10% (33/326), with a median of two (IQR 3-5) and three (IQR 3-5) cycles respectively. The mOS of the entire cohort was 10 months (95%CI 9-11). In patients treated with FOLFIRINOX, gemcitabine monotherapy, or nab-paclitaxel/gemcitabine, mOS was 14 (95%CI 13-15), 9 (95%CI 8-10), and 9 months (95%CI 8-10), respectively. A resection was performed in 13% (32/252) of patients after FOLFIRINOX, resulting in a mOS of 23 months (95%CI 12-34). Conclusion: This multicenter unselected cohort of patients with LAPC resulted in a 14 month mOS and a 13% resection rate after FOLFIRINOX. These data put previous results in perspective, enable us to inform patients with more accurate survival numbers and will support decision-making in clinical practice. (C) 2020 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd
    corecore