Report of the key comparison CCQM-K88 : determination of lead in lead-free solder containing silver and copper

The CCQM-K88 key comparison was organised by the Inorganic Analysis Working Group of CCQM to test the abilities of the national metrology institutes to measure the mass fraction of lead in lead-free solder containing silver and copper. National Metrology Institute of Japan (NMIJ), National Institute of Metrology P. R. China (NIM) and Korea Research Institute of Standards and Science (KRISS) acted as the coordinating laboratories. The participants used different measurement methods, though most of them used inductively coupled plasma optical emission spectrometry (ICP-OES) or isotope-dilution inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry (ID-ICP-MS). Accounting for relative expanded uncertainty, comparability of measurement results was successfully demonstrated by the participating NMIs for the measurement of the mass fraction of lead in lead-free solder at the level of 200 mg/kg. It is expected that metals at mass fractions greater than approximately100 mg/kg in lead-free solder containing silver and copper can be determined by each participant using the same technique(s) employed for this key comparison to achieve similar uncertainties mentioned in the present report.Fil: Hioki, Akiharu. National Metrology Institute of Japan (NMIJ); JapónFil: Nonose, Naoko. National Metrology Institute of Japan (NMIJ); JapónFil: Liandi, Ma. National Institute of Metrology (NIM); ChinaFil: Jingbo, Chao. National Institute of Metrology (NIM); ChinaFil: Liuxing, Feng. National Institute of Metrology (NIM); ChinaFil: Chao, Wei. National Institute of Metrology (NIM); ChinaFil: Cho, Kyung Haeng. Korea Research Institute of Standards and Science (KRISS); Corea del SurFil: Suh, Jung Ki. Korea Research Institute of Standards and Science (KRISS); Corea del SurFil: Min, Hyung Sik. Korea Research Institute of Standards and Science (KRISS); Corea del SurFil: Lim, Youngran. Korea Research Institute of Standards and Science (KRISS); Corea del SurFil: Recknagel, Sebastian. Federal Institute for Materials Research and Testing (BAM); AlemaniaFil: Koenig, Maren. Federal Institute for Materials Research and Testing (BAM); AlemaniaFil: Vogl, Jochen. Federal Institute for Materials Research and Testing (BAM); AlemaniaFil: Caciano de Sena, Rodrigo. Instituto Nacional de Metrologia, Qualidade e Tecnologia (INMetro); BrasilFil: dos Reis, Lindomar Augusto. Instituto Nacional de Metrologia, Qualidade e Tecnologia (INMetro); BrasilFil: Borinsky, Mónica. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Industrial (INTI); ArgentinaFil: Puelles, Mabel. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Industrial (INTI); ArgentinaFil: Hatamleh, Nadia. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Industrial (INTI); ArgentinaFil: Acosta, Osvaldo. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Industrial (INTI); ArgentinaFil: Turk, Gregory. National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST); Estados UnidosFil: Rabb, Savelas. National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST); Estados UnidosFil: Sturgeon, Ralph. National Research Council (NRC); CanadáFil: Methven, Brad. National Research Council (NRC); CanadáFil: Rienitz, Olaf. Physikalisch-Technische Bundesanstalt (PTB); AlemaniaFil: Jaehrling, Reinhard. Physikalisch-Technische Bundesanstalt (PTB); AlemaniaFil: Konopelko, L. A. D. I. Mendeleev Institute for Metrology (VNIIM); RusiaFil: Kustikov, Yu. A. D. I. Mendeleev Institute for Metrology (VNIIM); RusiaFil: Kozyreva, S. B. D. I. Mendeleev Institute for Metrology (VNIIM); RusiaFil: Korzh, A. A. D. I. Mendeleev Institute for Metrology (VNIIM); Rusi

Actively implementing an evidence-based feeding guideline for critically ill patients (NEED): a multicenter, cluster-randomized, controlled trial.

BackgroundPrevious cluster-randomized controlled trials evaluating the impact of implementing evidence-based guidelines for nutrition therapy in critical illness do not consistently demonstrate patient benefits. A large-scale, sufficiently powered study is therefore warranted to ascertain the effects of guideline implementation on patient-centered outcomes.MethodsWe conducted a multicenter, cluster-randomized, parallel-controlled trial in intensive care units (ICUs) across China. We developed an evidence-based feeding guideline. ICUs randomly allocated to the guideline group formed a local "intervention team", which actively implemented the guideline using standardized educational materials, a graphical feeding protocol, and live online education outreach meetings conducted by members of the study management committee. ICUs assigned to the control group remained unaware of the guideline content. All ICUs enrolled patients who were expected to stay in the ICU longer than seven days. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality within 28 days of enrollment.ResultsForty-eight ICUs were randomized to the guideline group and 49 to the control group. From March 2018 to July 2019, the guideline ICUs enrolled 1399 patients, and the control ICUs enrolled 1373 patients. Implementation of the guideline resulted in significantly earlier EN initiation (1.20 vs. 1.55 mean days to initiation of EN; difference - 0.40 [95% CI - 0.71 to - 0.09]; P = 0.01) and delayed PN initiation (1.29 vs. 0.80 mean days to start of PN; difference 1.06 [95% CI 0.44 to 1.67]; P = 0.001). There was no significant difference in 28-day mortality (14.2% vs. 15.2%; difference - 1.6% [95% CI - 4.3% to 1.2%]; P = 0.42) between groups.ConclusionsIn this large-scale, multicenter trial, active implementation of an evidence-based feeding guideline reduced the time to commencement of EN and overall PN use but did not translate to a reduction in mortality from critical illness.Trial registrationISRCTN, ISRCTN12233792 . Registered November 20th, 2017

Actively implementing an evidence-based feeding guideline for critically ill patients (NEED): a multicenter, cluster-randomized, controlled trial (vol 26, 46, 2022)

BackgroundPrevious cluster-randomized controlled trials evaluating the impact of implementing evidence-based guidelines for nutrition therapy in critical illness do not consistently demonstrate patient benefits. A large-scale, sufficiently powered study is therefore warranted to ascertain the effects of guideline implementation on patient-centered outcomes.MethodsWe conducted a multicenter, cluster-randomized, parallel-controlled trial in intensive care units (ICUs) across China. We developed an evidence-based feeding guideline. ICUs randomly allocated to the guideline group formed a local "intervention team", which actively implemented the guideline using standardized educational materials, a graphical feeding protocol, and live online education outreach meetings conducted by members of the study management committee. ICUs assigned to the control group remained unaware of the guideline content. All ICUs enrolled patients who were expected to stay in the ICU longer than seven days. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality within 28 days of enrollment.ResultsForty-eight ICUs were randomized to the guideline group and 49 to the control group. From March 2018 to July 2019, the guideline ICUs enrolled 1399 patients, and the control ICUs enrolled 1373 patients. Implementation of the guideline resulted in significantly earlier EN initiation (1.20 vs. 1.55 mean days to initiation of EN; difference - 0.40 [95% CI - 0.71 to - 0.09]; P = 0.01) and delayed PN initiation (1.29 vs. 0.80 mean days to start of PN; difference 1.06 [95% CI 0.44 to 1.67]; P = 0.001). There was no significant difference in 28-day mortality (14.2% vs. 15.2%; difference - 1.6% [95% CI - 4.3% to 1.2%]; P = 0.42) between groups.ConclusionsIn this large-scale, multicenter trial, active implementation of an evidence-based feeding guideline reduced the time to commencement of EN and overall PN use but did not translate to a reduction in mortality from critical illness.Trial registrationISRCTN, ISRCTN12233792 . Registered November 20th, 2017

Actively implementing an evidence-based feeding guideline for critically ill patients (NEED): a multicenter, cluster-randomized, controlled trial

Background: Previous cluster-randomized controlled trials evaluating the impact of implementing evidence-based guidelines for nutrition therapy in critical illness do not consistently demonstrate patient benefits. A large-scale, sufficiently powered study is therefore warranted to ascertain the effects of guideline implementation on patient-centered outcomes. Methods: We conducted a multicenter, cluster-randomized, parallel-controlled trial in intensive care units (ICUs) across China. We developed an evidence-based feeding guideline. ICUs randomly allocated to the guideline group formed a local "intervention team", which actively implemented the guideline using standardized educational materials, a graphical feeding protocol, and live online education outreach meetings conducted by members of the study management committee. ICUs assigned to the control group remained unaware of the guideline content. All ICUs enrolled patients who were expected to stay in the ICU longer than seven days. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality within 28 days of enrollment. Results: Forty-eight ICUs were randomized to the guideline group and 49 to the control group. From March 2018 to July 2019, the guideline ICUs enrolled 1399 patients, and the control ICUs enrolled 1373 patients. Implementation of the guideline resulted in significantly earlier EN initiation (1.20 vs. 1.55 mean days to initiation of EN; difference − 0.40 [95% CI − 0.71 to − 0.09]; P = 0.01) and delayed PN initiation (1.29 vs. 0.80 mean days to start of PN; difference 1.06 [95% CI 0.44 to 1.67]; P = 0.001). There was no significant difference in 28-day mortality (14.2% vs. 15.2%; difference − 1.6% [95% CI − 4.3% to 1.2%]; P = 0.42) between groups. Conclusions: In this large-scale, multicenter trial, active implementation of an evidence-based feeding guideline reduced the time to commencement of EN and overall PN use but did not translate to a reduction in mortality from critical illness. Trial registration: ISRCTN, ISRCTN12233792. Registered November 20th, 2017