Preparation for the next major incident: are we ready? Comparing major trauma centres and other hospitals

OBJECTIVES: A major incident is any emergency requiring special arrangements by the emergency services. All hospitals are required by law to keep a major incident plan (MIP) detailing the response to such events. In 2006 and 2019, we assessed the preparedness and knowledge of key individuals in hospitals across England and found a substantial gap in responding to the MIP. In this report, we compare responses from doctors at major trauma centres (MTCs) and other hospitals (non-MTCs). METHODS: We identified trusts in England that received over 30 000 patients through the ED in the fourth quarter of 2016/2017. We contacted the on-call anaesthetic, emergency, general surgery and trauma and orthopaedic registrar at each location and asked three questions assessing their confidence in using their hospital’s MIP: (1) Have you read your hospital’s MIP? (2) Do you know where you can access your hospital’s MIP guidelines? (3) Do you know what role you would play if an MIP came into effect while you are on call? We compared data from MTCs and non-MTCs using multinomial mixed proportional odds models. RESULTS: There was a modest difference between responses from individuals at MTCs and non-MTCs for question 2 (OR=2.43, CI=1.03 to 5.73, p=0.04) but no evidence of a difference between question 1 (OR=1.41, CI=0.55 to 3.63, p=0.47) and question 3 (OR=1.78, CI=0.86 to 3.69, p=0.12). Emergency medicine and anaesthetic registrars showed significantly higher preparedness and knowledge across all domains. No evidence of a systematic difference in specialty response by MTC or otherwise was identified. CONCLUSIONS: Confidence in using MIPs among specialty registrars in England remains low. Doctors at MTCs tended to be better prepared and more knowledgeable, but this effect was only marginally significant. We make several recommendations to improve education on major incidents

The politics of the teaching of reading

Historically, political debates have broken out over how to teach reading in primary schools and infant classrooms. These debates and “reading wars” have often resulted from public concerns and media reportage of a fall in reading standards. They also reflect the importance placed on learning to read by parents, teachers, employers, and politicians. Public and media-driven controversies over the teaching of reading have resulted in intense public and professional debates over which specific methods and materials to use with beginning readers and with children who have reading difficulties. Recently, such debates have led to a renewed emphasis on reading proficiency and “standardized” approaches to teaching reading and engaging with literacy. The universal acceptance of the importance of learning to read has also led to vested interests in specific methods, reading programmes, and early literacy assessments amongst professional, business, commercial, and parental lobbying groups. This article traces these debates and the resulting growing support for a quantitative reductionist approach to early-reading programmes

Comparison of published orthopaedic trauma trials following registration in Clinicaltrials.gov

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>After the Food and Drug Administration Modernization Act of 1997, the registration of all clinical trials became mandatory prior to publication. Our primary objective was to determine publication rates for orthopaedic trauma trials registered with ClinicalTrials.gov. We further evaluated methodological consistency between registration and publication.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>We searched Clinical Trials.gov for all trials related to orthopaedic trauma. We excluded active trials and trials not completed by July 2009, and performed a systematic search for publications resulting from registered closed trials. Information regarding primary and secondary outcomes, intervention, study sponsors, and sample size were extracted from registrations and publications.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Of 130 closed trials, 37 eligible trials resulted in 16 publications (43.2%). We found no significant differences in publication rates between funding sources for industry sponsored studies and nongovernment/nonindustry sponsored studies (<it>p </it>> 0.05). About half the trials (45%) did not include the NCT ID in the publication. Two (10%) publications had major changes to the primary outcome measure and ten (52.6%) to sample size.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Registration of orthopaedic trauma trials does not consistently result in publication. When trials are registered, many do not cite NCT ID in the publication. Furthermore, changes that are not reflected in the registry of the trial are frequently made to the final publication.</p

Negative pressure wound therapy: Potential publication bias caused by lack of access to unpublished study results data

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) is widely applied, although the evidence base is weak. Previous reviews on medical interventions have shown that conclusions based on published data alone may no longer hold after consideration of unpublished data. The main objective of this study was to identify unpublished randomised controlled trials (RCTs) on NPWT within the framework of a systematic review.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>RCTs comparing NPWT with conventional wound therapy were identified using MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and The Cochrane Library. Every database was searched from inception to May 2005. The search was updated in December 2006. Reference lists of original articles and systematic reviews, as well as congress proceedings and online trial registers, were screened for clues to unpublished RCTs. Manufacturers of NPWT devices and authors of conference abstracts were contacted and asked to provide study information. Trials were considered nonrandomised if concealment of allocation to treatment groups was classified as "inadequate". The study status was classified as "completed", "discontinued", "ongoing" or "unclear". The publication status of completed or discontinued RCTs was classified as "published" if a full-text paper on final study results (completed trials) or interim results (discontinued trials) was available, and "unpublished" if this was not the case. The type of sponsorship was also noted for all trials.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>A total of 28 RCTs referring to at least 2755 planned or analysed patients met the inclusion criteria: 13 RCTs had been completed, 6 had been discontinued, 6 were ongoing, and the status of 3 RCTs was unclear. Full-text papers were available on 30% of patients in the 19 completed or discontinued RCTs (495 analysed patients in 10 published RCTs vs. 1154 planned patients in 9 unpublished RCTs). Most information about conference abstracts and unpublished study information referring to trials that were unpublished at the time these documents were generated was obtained from the manufacturer Kinetic Concepts Inc. (KCI) (19 RCTs), followed by The Cochrane Library (18) and a systematic review (15). We were able to obtain some information on the methods of unpublished RCTs, but results data were either not available or requests for results data were not answered; the results of unpublished RCTs could therefore not be considered in the review. One manufacturer, KCI, sponsored the majority of RCTs (19/28; 68%). The sponsorship of the remaining trials was unclear.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Multi-source comprehensive searches identify unpublished RCTs. However, lack of access to unpublished study results data raises doubts about the completeness of the evidence base on NPWT.</p

The integration of lipid-sensing and anti-inflammatory effects: how the PPARs play a role in metabolic balance

The peroxisomal proliferating-activated receptors (PPARs) are lipid-sensing transcription factors that have a role in embryonic development, but are primarily known for modulating energy metabolism, lipid storage, and transport, as well as inflammation and wound healing. Currently, there is no consensus as to the overall combined function of PPARs and why they evolved. We hypothesize that the PPARs had to evolve to integrate lipid storage and burning with the ability to reduce oxidative stress, as energy storage is essential for survival and resistance to injury/infection, but the latter increases oxidative stress and may reduce median survival (functional longevity). In a sense, PPARs may be an evolutionary solution to something we call the 'hypoxia-lipid' conundrum, where the ability to store and burn fat is essential for survival, but is a 'double-edged sword', as fats are potentially highly toxic. Ways in which PPARs may reduce oxidative stress involve modulation of mitochondrial uncoupling protein (UCP) expression (thus reducing reactive oxygen species, ROS), optimising forkhead box class O factor (FOXO) activity (by improving whole body insulin sensitivity) and suppressing NFkB (at the transcriptional level). In light of this, we therefore postulate that inflammation-induced PPAR downregulation engenders many of the signs and symptoms of the metabolic syndrome, which shares many features with the acute phase response (APR) and is the opposite of the phenotype associated with calorie restriction and high FOXO activity. In genetically susceptible individuals (displaying the naturally mildly insulin resistant 'thrifty genotype'), suboptimal PPAR activity may follow an exaggerated but natural adipose tissue-related inflammatory signal induced by excessive calories and reduced physical activity, which normally couples energy storage with the ability to mount an immune response. This is further worsened when pancreatic decompensation occurs, resulting in gluco-oxidative stress and lipotoxicity, increased inflammatory insulin resistance and oxidative stress. Reactivating PPARs may restore a metabolic balance and help to adapt the phenotype to a modern lifestyle

Functionally impaired plasmacytoid dendritic cells and non-haematopoietic sources of type I interferon characterize human autoimmunity

Autoimmune connective tissue diseases arise in a stepwise fashion from asymptomatic preclinical autoimmunity. Type I interferons have a crucial role in the progression to established autoimmune diseases. The cellular source and regulation in disease initiation of these cytokines is not clear, but plasmacytoid dendritic cells have been thought to contribute to excessive type I interferon production. Here, we show that in preclinical autoimmunity and established systemic lupus erythematosus, plasmacytoid dendritic cells are not effector cells, have lost capacity for Toll-like-receptor-mediated cytokine production and do not induce T cell activation, independent of disease activity and the blood interferon signature. In addition, plasmacytoid dendritic cells have a transcriptional signature indicative of cellular stress and senescence accompanied by increased telomere erosion. In preclinical autoimmunity, we show a marked enrichment of an interferon signature in the skin without infiltrating immune cells, but with interferon-κ production by keratinocytes. In conclusion, non-hematopoietic cellular sources, rather than plasmacytoid dendritic cells, are responsible for interferon production prior to clinical autoimmunity