5 research outputs found
The development and validation of a scoring tool to predict the operative duration of elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy
Background: The ability to accurately predict operative duration has the potential to optimise theatre efficiency and utilisation, thus reducing costs and increasing staff and patient satisfaction. With laparoscopic cholecystectomy being one of the most commonly performed procedures worldwide, a tool to predict operative duration could be extremely beneficial to healthcare organisations.
Methods: Data collected from the CholeS study on patients undergoing cholecystectomy in UK and Irish hospitals between 04/2014 and 05/2014 were used to study operative duration. A multivariable binary logistic regression model was produced in order to identify significant independent predictors of long (> 90 min) operations. The resulting model was converted to a risk score, which was subsequently validated on second cohort of patients using ROC curves.
Results: After exclusions, data were available for 7227 patients in the derivation (CholeS) cohort. The median operative duration was 60 min (interquartile range 45–85), with 17.7% of operations lasting longer than 90 min. Ten factors were found to be significant independent predictors of operative durations > 90 min, including ASA, age, previous surgical admissions, BMI, gallbladder wall thickness and CBD diameter. A risk score was then produced from these factors, and applied to a cohort of 2405 patients from a tertiary centre for external validation. This returned an area under the ROC curve of 0.708 (SE = 0.013, p 90 min increasing more than eightfold from 5.1 to 41.8% in the extremes of the score.
Conclusion: The scoring tool produced in this study was found to be significantly predictive of long operative durations on validation in an external cohort. As such, the tool may have the potential to enable organisations to better organise theatre lists and deliver greater efficiencies in care
Personalizing health care: feasibility and future implications
Considerable variety in how patients respond to treatments, driven by differences in their geno- and/ or phenotypes, calls for a more tailored approach. This is already happening, and will accelerate with developments in personalized medicine. However, its promise has not always translated into improvements in patient care due to the complexities involved. There are also concerns that advice for tests has been reversed, current tests can be costly, there is fragmentation of funding of care, and companies may seek high prices for new targeted drugs. There is a need to integrate current knowledge from a payer’s perspective to provide future guidance. Multiple findings including general considerations; influence of pharmacogenomics on response and toxicity of drug therapies; value of biomarker tests; limitations and costs of tests; and potentially high acquisition costs of new targeted therapies help to give guidance on potential ways forward for all stakeholder groups. Overall, personalized medicine has the potential to revolutionize care. However, current challenges and concerns need to be addressed to enhance its uptake and funding to benefit patients
Recommended from our members
Aspirin Effects on Mortality and Morbidity in Patients With Diabetes Mellitus: Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study Report 14
Objectives.—This report presents information on the effects of aspirin on mortality, the occurrence of cardiovascular events, and the incidence of kidney disease in the patients enrolled in the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS).Study Design.—This multicenter, randomized clinical trial of aspirin vs placebo was sponsored by the National Eye Institute.Patients.—Patients (N=3711) were enrolled in 22 clinical centers between April 1980 and July 1985. Men and women between the ages of 18 and 70 years with a clinical diagnosis of diabetes mellitus were eligible. Approximately 30% of all patients were considered to have type I diabetes mellitus, 31% type II, and in 39% type I or II could not be determined definitely.Intervention.—Patients were randomly assigned to aspirin or placebo (two 325-mg tablets once per day).Main Outcome Measures.—Mortality from all causes was specified as the primary outcome measure for assessing the systemic effects of aspirin. Other outcome variables included cause-specific mortality and cardiovascular events.Results.—The estimate of relative risk for total mortality for aspirin-treated patients compared with placebo-treated patients for the entire study period was 0.91 (99% confidence interval, 0.75 to 1.11). Larger differences were noted for the occurrence of fatal and nonfatal myocardial infarction; the estimate of relative risk was 0.83 for the entire follow-up period (99% confidence interval, 0.66 to 1.04).Conclusions.—The effects of aspirin on any of the cardiovascular events considered in the ETDRS were not substantially different from the effects observed in other studies that included mainly nondiabetic persons. Furthermore, there was no evidence of harmful effects of aspirin. Aspirin has been recommended previously for persons at risk for cardiovascular disease. The ETDRS results support application of this recommendation to those persons with diabetes at increased risk of cardiovascular disease.(JAMA. 1992;268:1292-1300