Exploring good practice in life story work with people with dementia : the findings of a qualitative study looking at the multiple views of stakeholders

Introduction: Despite growing international interest in life story work as a tool for person-centred dementia care, there is little agreement on what constitutes good practice and little evidence from the perspectives of people with dementia or their family carers. Design and methods: This paper reports the findings from the qualitative element of a larger study looking at the feasibility of evaluating life story work. Ten focus groups were held with 73 participants: four groups of people with dementia (25 participants), three with family carers (21 participants), and three with staff, professionals and volunteers with experience of life story work (27 participants). Findings: It became apparent through our focus groups that, when people talk about ‘life story work’, different people mean different things. This related to both process and outcomes. In particular, a person with dementia may have very different views from others about what life story work is for and how their life story products should be used. There was general agreement that a good practice approach would be tailored to the individual needs and preferences of the person with dementia. However, in practice many settings used templates and the process was led by staff or completed by family carers. Conclusion: We produced nine key features of good practice which could be used to guide the life story work process. Key elements include: the recognition that not everyone will want to take part in life story work and that some people may even find it distressing; the importance of being led by the person with dementia themselves; the need for training and support for staff, carers and volunteers; and the potential for life story work to celebrate the person’s life today and look to the future

ApoCIII-Enriched LDL in Type 2 Diabetes Displays Altered Lipid Composition, Increased Susceptibility for Sphingomyelinase, and Increased Binding to Biglycan

Objective- Apolipoprotein CIII (apoCIII) is an independent risk factor for cardiovascular disease, but the molecular mechanisms involved are poorly understood. Here, we investigated potential proatherogenic properties of apoCIII-containing LDL from hypertriglyceridemic patients with type 2 diabetes. Research design and methods - LDL was isolated from controls and subjects with type 2 diabetes, and from apoB transgenic mice. LDL-biglycan binding was analyzed with a solid-phase assay using immunoplates coated with biglycan. Lipid composition was analyzed with mass spectrometry. Hydrolysis of LDL by sphingomyelinase was analyzed after labeling plasma LDL with [(3)H]sphingomyelin. ApoCIII isoforms were quantified after isoelectric focusing. Human aortic endothelial cells were incubated with desialylated apoCIII or with LDL enriched with specific apoCIII isoforms. Results- We showed that enriching LDL with apoCIII only induced a small increase in LDL-proteoglycan binding, and this effect was dependent on a functional Site A in apoB100. Our findings indicated that intrinsic characteristics of the diabetic LDL other than apoCIII per se are responsible for further increased proteoglycan binding of diabetic LDL with high endogenous apoCIII, and we showed alterations in the lipid composition of diabetic LDL with high apoCIII. We also demonstrated that high apoCIII increased susceptibility of LDL to hydrolysis and aggregation by SMase. In addition, we demonstrated that sialylation of apoCIII increased with increasing apoCIII content, and that sialylation of apoCIII was essential for its proinflammatory properties. Conclusions- We have demonstrated a number of features of apoCIII-containing LDL from hypertriglyceridemic patients with type 2 diabetes that could explain the proatherogenic role of apoCIII

Practice variation and outcomes of minimally invasive minor liver resections in patients with colorectal liver metastases:a population-based study

Introduction: In 2017, the Southampton guideline stated that minimally invasive liver resections (MILR) should considered standard practice for minor liver resections. This study aimed to assess recent implementation rates of minor MILR, factors associated with performing MILR, hospital variation, and outcomes in patients with colorectal liver metastases (CRLM). Methods: This population-based study included all patients who underwent minor liver resection for CRLM in the Netherlands between 2014 and 2021. Factors associated with MILR and nationwide hospital variation were assessed using multilevel multivariable logistic regression. Propensity-score matching (PSM) was applied to compare outcomes between minor MILR and minor open liver resections. Overall survival (OS) was assessed with Kaplan–Meier analysis on patients operated until 2018. Results: Of 4,488 patients included, 1,695 (37.8%) underwent MILR. PSM resulted in 1,338 patients in each group. Implementation of MILR increased to 51.2% in 2021. Factors associated with not performing MILR included treatment with preoperative chemotherapy (aOR 0.61 CI:0.50–0.75, p &lt; 0.001), treatment in a tertiary referral hospital (aOR 0.57 CI:0.50–0.67, p &lt; 0.001), and larger diameter and number of CRLM. Significant hospital variation was observed in use of MILR (7.5% to 93.0%). After case-mix correction, six hospitals performed fewer, and six hospitals performed more MILRs than expected. In the PSM cohort, MILR was associated with a decrease in blood loss (aOR 0.99 CI:0.99–0.99, p &lt; 0.01), cardiac complications (aOR 0.29, CI:0.10–0.70, p = 0.009), IC admissions (aOR 0.66, CI:0.50–0.89, p = 0.005), and shorter hospital stay (aOR CI:0.94–0.99, p &lt; 0.01). Five-year OS rates for MILR and OLR were 53.7% versus 48.6%, p = 0.21. Conclusion: Although uptake of MILR is increasing in the Netherlands, significant hospital variation remains. MILR benefits short-term outcomes, while overall survival is comparable to open liver surgery. Graphical abstract: [Figure not available: see fulltext.].</p

Case-mix adjustment to compare nationwide hospital performances after resection of colorectal liver metastases

Background: Differences in patient demographics and disease burden can influence comparison of hospital performances. This study aimed to provide a case-mix model to compare short-term postoperative outcomes for patients undergoing liver resection for colorectal liver metastases (CRLM). Methods: This retrospective, population-based study included all patients who underwent liver resection for CRLM between 2014 and 2018 in the Netherlands. Variation in case-mix variables between hospitals and influence on postoperative outcomes was assessed using multivariable logistic regression. Primary outcomes were 30-day major morbidity and 30-day mortality. Validation of results was performed on the data from 2019. Results: In total, 4639 patients were included in 28 hospitals. Major morbidity was 6.2% and mortality was 1.4%. Uncorrected major morbidity ranged from 3.3% to 13.7% and mortality ranged from 0.0% to 5.0%. between hospitals. Significant differences between hospitals were observed for age higher than 80 (0.0%-17.1%, p <0.001), ASA 3 or higher (3.3%-36.3%, p <0.001), histopathological parenchymal liver disease (0.0%-47.1%, p <0.001), history of liver resection (8.1%-36.3%, p <0.001), major liver resection (6.7%-38.0%, p <0.001) and synchronous metastases (35.5%-62.1%, p <0.001). Expected 30-day major morbidity between hospitals ranged from 6.4% to 11.9% and expected 30-day mortality ranged from 0.6% to 2.9%. After case-mix correction no significant outliers concerning major morbidity and mortality remained. Validation on patients who underwent liver resection for CRLM in 2019 affirmed these outcomes. Conclusion: Case-mix adjustment is a prerequisite to allow for institutional comparison of short-term postoperative outcomes after liver resection for CRLM. (C) 2020 University Medical Center Groningen. Published by Elsevier Ltd

Hypercholesterolemia and Myocardial function evaluated via Tissue Doppler Imaging

This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Licens

Nationwide oncological networks for resection of colorectal liver metastases in the Netherlands:Differences and postoperative outcomes

INTRODUCTION: Widespread differences in patient demographics and disease burden between hospitals for resection of colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) have been described. In the Netherlands, networks consisting of at least one tertiary referral centre and several regional hospitals have been established to optimize treatment and outcomes. The aim of this study was to assess variation in case-mix, and outcomes between these networks. METHODS: This was a population-based study including all patients who underwent CRLM resection in the Netherlands between 2014 and 2019. Variation in case-mix and outcomes between seven networks covering the whole country was evaluated. Differences in case-mix, expected 30-day major morbidity (Clavien-Dindo ≥3a) and 30-day mortality between networks were assessed. RESULTS: In total 5383 patients were included. Thirty-day major morbidity was 5.7% and 30-day mortality was 1.5%. Significant differences between networks were observed for Charlson Comorbidity Index, ASA 3+, previous liver resection, liver disease, preoperative MRI, preoperative chemotherapy, ≥3 CRLM, diameter of largest CRLM ≥55 mm, major resection, combined resection and ablation, rectal primary tumour, bilobar and extrahepatic disease. Uncorrected 30-day major morbidity ranged between 3.3% and 13.1% for hospitals, 30-day mortality ranged between 0.0% and 4.5%. Uncorrected 30-day major morbidity ranged between 4.4% and 6.0% for networks, 30-day mortality ranged between 0.0% and 2.5%. No negative outliers were observed after case-mix correction. CONCLUSION: Variation in case-mix and outcomes are considerably smaller on a network level as compared to a hospital level. Therefore, auditing is more meaningful at a network level and collaboration of hospitals within networks should be pursued