Nationwide implementation of a decision aid on vaginal birth after cesarean:a before and after cohort study

Woman with a history of a previous cesarean section (CS) can choose between an elective repeat CS (ERCS) and a trial of labor (TOL), which can end in a vaginal birth after cesarean (VBAC) or an unplanned CS. Guidelines describe women's rights to make an informed decision between an ERCS or a TOL. However, the rates of TOL and vaginal birth after CS varies greatly between and within countries. The objective of this study is to asses nation-wide implementation of counselling with a decision aid (DA) including a prediction model, on intended delivery compared to care as usual. We hypothesize that this may result in a reduction in practice variation without an increase in cesarean rates or complications. In a multicenter controlled before and after cohort study we evaluate the effect of nation-wide implementation of a DA. Practice variation was defined as the standard deviation (SD) of TOL percentages. A total of 27 hospitals and 1,364 women were included. A significant decrease was found in practice variation (SD TOL rates: 0.17 control group vs. 0.10 intervention group following decision aid implementation, p=0.011). There was no significant difference in the ERCS rate or overall CS rates. A 21% reduction in the combined maternal and perinatal adverse outcomes was seen. Nationwide implementation of the DA showed a significant reduction in practice variation without an increase in the rate of cesarean section or complications, suggesting an improvement in equality of care

Graphical Tasks to Measure Upper Limb Function in Patients With Parkinson's Disease:Validity and Response to Dopaminergic Medication

The most widely used method to assess motor functioning in Parkinson's disease (PD) patients is the unified Parkinson's disease rating scale-III (UPDRS-III). The UPDRS-III has limited ability to detect subtle changes in motor symptoms. Alternatively, graphical tasks can be used to provide objective measures of upper limb motor dysfunction. This study investigated the validity of such graphical tasks to assess upper limb function in PD patients and their ability to detect subtle changes in performance. Fourteen PD patients performed graphical tasks before and after taking dopaminergic medication. Graphical tasks included figure tracing, writing, and a modified Fitts' task. The Purdue pegboard test was performed to validate these graphical tasks. Movement time (MT), writing size, and the presence of tremor were assessed. MT on the graphical tasks correlated significantly with performance on the Purdue pegboard test (Spearman's rho > 0.65; p <0.05). MT decreased significantly after the intake of dopaminergic medication. Tremor power decreased after taking dopaminergic medication in most PD patients who suffered from tremor. Writing size did not correlate with performance on the Purdue pegboard test, nor did it change after taking medication. Our set of graphical tasks is valid to assess upper limb function in PD patients. MT proved to be the most useful measure for this purpose. The response on dopaminergic medication was optimally reflected by an improved MT on the graphical tasks in combination with a decreased tremor power, whereas writing size did not respond to dopaminergic treatment

Development and measurement of guidelines-based quality indicators of caesarean section care in the Netherlands: A RAND-modified delphi procedure and retrospective medical chart review

Background There is an ongoing discussion on the rising CS rate worldwide. Suboptimal guideline adherence may be an important contributor to this rise. Before improvement of care can be established, optimal CS care in different settings has to be defined. This study aimed to develop and measure quality indicators to determine guideline adherence and identify target groups for improvement of care with direct effect on caesarean section (CS) rates. Method Eighteen obstetricians and midwives participated in an expert panel for systematic CS quality indicator development according to the RAND-modified Delphi method. A multi-center study was performed and medical charts of 1024 women with a CS and a stratified and weighted randomly selected group of 1036 women with a vaginal delivery were analysed. Quality indicator frequency and adherence were scored in 2060 women with a CS or vaginal delivery. Results The expert panel developed 16 indicators on planned CS and 11 indicators on unplanned CS. Indicator adherence was calculated, defined as the number of women in a specific obstetrical situation in which care was performed as recommended in both planned and unplanned CS settings. The most frequently occurring obstetrical situations with low indicator adherence were: 1) suspected fetal distress (frequency 17%, adh

Protocol for Translabial 3D-Ultrasonography for diagnosing levator defects (TRUDIL): a multicentre cohort study for estimating the diagnostic accuracy of translabial 3D-ultrasonography of the pelvic floor as compared to MR imaging

Contains fulltext : 96237.pdf (publisher's version ) (Open Access)BACKGROUND: Pelvic organ prolapse (POP) is a condition affecting more than half of the women above age 40. The estimated lifetime risk of needing surgical management for POP is 11%. In patients undergoing POP surgery of the anterior vaginal wall, the re-operation rate is 30%. The recurrence risk is especially high in women with a levator ani defect. Such defect is present if there is a partially or completely detachment of the levator ani from the inferior ramus of the symphysis. Detecting levator ani defects is relevant for counseling, and probably also for treatment. Levator ani defects can be imaged with MRI and also with Translabial 3D ultrasonography of the pelvic floor. The primary aim of this study is to assess the diagnostic accuracy of translabial 3D ultrasonography for diagnosing levator defects in women with POP with Magnetic Resonance Imaging as the reference standard. Secondary goals of this study include quantification of the inter-observer agreement about levator ani defects and determining the association between levator defects and recurrent POP after anterior repair. In addition, the cost-effectiveness of adding translabial ultrasonography to the diagnostic work-up in patients with POP will be estimated in a decision analytic model. METHODS/DESIGN: A multicentre cohort study will be performed in nine Dutch hospitals. 140 consecutive women with a POPQ stage 2 or more anterior vaginal wall prolapse, who are indicated for anterior colporapphy will be included. Patients undergoing additional prolapse procedures will also be included. Prior to surgery, patients will undergo MR imaging and translabial 3D ultrasound examination of the pelvic floor. Patients will be asked to complete validated disease specific quality of life questionnaires before surgery and at six and twelve months after surgery. Pelvic examination will be performed at the same time points. Assuming a sensitivity and specificity of 90% of 3D ultrasound for diagnosing levator defects in a population of 120 women with POP, with a prior probability of levator ani defects of 40%, we will be able to estimate predictive values with good accuracy (i.e. confidence limits of at most 10% below or above the point estimates of positive and negative predictive values).Anticipating 3% unclassifiable diagnostic images because of technical reasons, and a further safety margin of 10% we plan to recruit 140 patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Nederlands trial register NTR2220

Cost-effectiveness of recurrence risk guided care versus care as usual in women who suffered from early-onset preeclampsia including HELLP syndrome in their previous pregnancy (the PreCare study)

Contains fulltext : 87321.pdf (publisher's version ) (Open Access

Prediction models for diagnosis and prognosis of covid-19: : systematic review and critical appraisal

Readers’ note This article is a living systematic review that will be updated to reflect emerging evidence. Updates may occur for up to two years from the date of original publication. This version is update 3 of the original article published on 7 April 2020 (BMJ 2020;369:m1328). Previous updates can be found as data supplements (https://www.bmj.com/content/369/bmj.m1328/related#datasupp). When citing this paper please consider adding the update number and date of access for clarity. Funding: LW, BVC, LH, and MDV acknowledge specific funding for this work from Internal Funds KU Leuven, KOOR, and the COVID-19 Fund. LW is a postdoctoral fellow of Research Foundation-Flanders (FWO) and receives support from ZonMw (grant 10430012010001). BVC received support from FWO (grant G0B4716N) and Internal Funds KU Leuven (grant C24/15/037). TPAD acknowledges financial support from the Netherlands Organisation for Health Research and Development (grant 91617050). VMTdJ was supported by the European Union Horizon 2020 Research and Innovation Programme under ReCoDID grant agreement 825746. KGMM and JAAD acknowledge financial support from Cochrane Collaboration (SMF 2018). KIES is funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) School for Primary Care Research. The views expressed are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the NHS, the NIHR, or the Department of Health and Social Care. GSC was supported by the NIHR Biomedical Research Centre, Oxford, and Cancer Research UK (programme grant C49297/A27294). JM was supported by the Cancer Research UK (programme grant C49297/A27294). PD was supported by the NIHR Biomedical Research Centre, Oxford. MOH is supported by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute of the United States National Institutes of Health (grant R00 HL141678). ICCvDH and BCTvB received funding from Euregio Meuse-Rhine (grant Covid Data Platform (coDaP) interref EMR187). The funders played no role in study design, data collection, data analysis, data interpretation, or reporting.Peer reviewedPublisher PD

Twenty years on: RECIST as a biomarker of response in solid tumours. An EORTC Imaging Group – ESOI joint paper

Response evaluation criteria in solid tumours (RECIST) v1.1 are currently the reference standard for evaluating efficacy of therapies in patients with solid tumours who are included in clinical trials, and they are widely used and accepted by regulatory agencies. This expert statement discusses the principles underlying RECIST, as well as their reproducibility and limitations. While the RECIST framework may not be perfect, the scientific bases for the anticancer drugs that have been approved using a RECIST-based surrogate endpoint remain valid. Importantly, changes in measurement have to meet thresholds defined by RECIST for reponse classification within thus partly circumventing the problems of measurement variability. The RECIST framework also applies to clinical patients in individual settings even though the relationship between tumour size changes and outcome from cohort studies is not necessarily translatable to individual cases. As reproducibility of RECIST measurements is impacted by reader experience, choice of target lesions and detection/interpretation of new lesions, it can result in patients changing response categories when measurements are near threshold values or if new lesions are missed or incorrectly interpreted. There are several situations where RECIST will fail to evaluate treatment-induced changes correctly; knowledge and understanding of these is crucial for correct interpretation. Also, some patterns of response/progression cannot be correctly documented by RECIST, particularly in relation to organ-site (e.g. bone without associated soft-tissue lesion) and treatment type (e.g. focal therapies). These require specialist reader experience and communication with oncologists to determine the actual impact of the therapy and best evaluation strategy. In such situations, alternative imaging markers for tumour response may be used but the sources of variability of individual imaging techniques need to be known and accounted for. Communication between imaging experts and oncologists regarding the level of confidence in a biomarker is essential for the correct interpretation of a biomarker and its application to clinical decision-making. Though measurement automation is desirable and potentially reduces the variability of results, associated technical difficulties must be overcome, and human adjudications may be required

Ovarian stimulation for IVF and risk of primary breast cancer in BRCA1/2 mutation carriers

Background: The effect of in vitro fertilisation (IVF) on breast cancer risk for BRCA1/2 mutation carriers is rarely examined. As carriers may increasingly undergo IVF as part of preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD), we examined the impact of ovarian stimulation for IVF on breast cancer risk in BRCA1/2 mutation carriers. Methods: The study population consisted of 1550 BRCA1 and 964 BRCA2 mutation carriers, derived from the nationwide HEBON study and the nationwide PGD registry. Questionnaires, clinical records and linkages with the Netherlands Cancer Registry were used to collect data on IVF exposure, risk-reducing surgeries and cancer diagnosis, respectively. Time-dependent Cox regression analyses were conducted, stratified for birth cohort and adjusted for subfertility. Results: Of the 2514 BRCA1/2 mutation carriers, 3% (n = 76) were exposed to ovarian stimulation for IVF. In total, 938 BRCA1/2 mutation carriers (37.3%) were diagnosed with breast cancer. IVF exposure was not associated with risk of breast cancer (HR: 0.79, 95% CI: 0.46–1.36). Similar results were found for the subgroups of subfertile women (n = 232; HR: 0.73, 95% CI: 0.39–1.37) and BRCA1 mutation carriers (HR: 1.12, 95% CI: 0.60–2.09). In addition, age at and recency of first IVF treatment were not associated with breast cancer risk. Conclusion: No evidence was found for an association between ovarian stimulation for IVF and breast cancer risk in BRCA1/2 mutation carriers