The middle qualification level of the Austrian university libraries. Historical development, current role and prospects for advancement

Im Zentrum dieses Beitrags steht die mittlere Qualifikationsebene der österreichischen Universitätsbibliotheken mit den Mitarbeitergruppen Mittlerer Dienst und Fachdienst. Kurz werden theoretische Grundlagen erläutert (Terminologie, historische Entwicklung, gegenwärtige Dienstrechtslage, Ausbildungsvarianten, traditionelle und mögliche neue Arbeitsfelder). Zwei zentrale forschungsleitende Hypothesen samt Unterhypothesen werden überprüft durch die Analyse von Stellenausschreibungen, eine quantitative Erhebung in Form einer Online-Umfrage unter den Personalverantwortlichen sowie qualitative Interviews. Der Beitrag liefert Impulse zu einer Reflexion der aktuellen und zukünftigen Rolle dieser Bedienstetengruppe in den österreichischen Bibliotheken. Zugleich enthält er Anregungen für Mitarbeiter*innen, wie ein individuelles Aufstiegsvorhaben gelingen kann.The focus of this article is the middle qualification level of the Austrian university libraries with the employee groups “Mittlerer Dienst” (middle-level service) and “Fachdienst” (specialist service). The theoretical basics are briefly explained (terminology, historical development, current employment law situation, training options, traditional and possible new fields of work). Two central research-leading hypotheses, including sub-hypotheses, are checked by analyzing job advertisements, a quantitative survey in the form of an online survey among HR managers, and qualitative interviews. The article provides impulses for a reflection on this group of employees’ current and future role in Austrian libraries. At the same time, it contains suggestions for employees on how an individual promotion plan can be successful

Maternal exposure to ambient air pollution and fetal growth in North-East Scotland: A population-based study using routine ultrasound scans

The authors acknowledge the support of the Grampian Data Safe Haven (DaSH) and the associated financial support of the University of Aberdeen and NHS Research Scotland, through NHS Grampian investment in DaSH. Tom Clemens and access to the Grampian Data Safe Haven was supported by the UK Medical Research Council through the Farr Institute for Health Informatics (Reference: MR/M501633/2).Peer reviewedPublisher PD

Extracorporeal life support as a bridge to pulmonary retransplantation: prognostic factors for survival in a multicentre cohort analysis

OBJECTIVES: Pulmonary retransplant (ReTx) is considered a controversial procedure. Despite literature reporting outcomes following ReTx, limited data exist in recipients bridged to their ReTx on extracorporeal life support (ECLS). The goal of this study was to investigate the outcomes of recipients bridged to a first-time ReTx by ECLS. METHODS: We performed a retrospective multicentre cohort analysis from 10 centres in Europe, Asia and North America. The primary outcome was overall survival. Risk factors were analysed using Cox regression models. RESULTS: ECLS as a bridge to a first-time ReTx was performed in 50 recipients (ECLS-ReTx). During the study period, 210 recipients underwent a first-time ReTx without bridging on ECLS (regular-ReTx) and 4959 recipients had a primary pulmonary transplant (index-Tx). The overall 1-year (55%) and 5-year (29%) survival was significantly worse for the ECLS-ReTx group.Compared to the index-Tx group, the mortality risk was significantly higher after ECLS-ReTx [hazard ratio 2.76 (95% confidence interval 1.94-3.91); P < 0.001] and regular-ReTx [hazard ratio 1.65 (95% confidence interval 1.36-2); P < 0.001].In multivariable analysis, recipient age ≥35 years, time interval <1 year from index-Tx, primary graft dysfunction as transplant indication, venoarterial-extracorporeal membrane oxygenation and Zurich donor score ≥4 points were significant risk factors for mortality in ECLS-ReTx recipients. CONCLUSIONS: Recipients for ECLS-ReTx should be carefully selected. Risk factors, such as recipient age, intertransplant interval, primary graft dysfunction as transplant indication and type of ECLS should be kept in mind before bridging these patients on ECLS to ReTx

Extracorporeal life support as a bridge to pulmonary retransplantation: prognostic factors for survival in a multicentre cohort analysis

 : Objectives: Pulmonary retransplant (ReTx) is considered a controversial procedure. Despite literature reporting outcomes following ReTx, limited data exist in recipients bridged to their ReTx on extracorporeal life support (ECLS). The goal of this study was to investigate the outcomes of recipients bridged to a first-time ReTx by ECLS. Methods: We performed a retrospective multicentre cohort analysis from 10 centres in Europe, Asia and North America. The primary outcome was overall survival. Risk factors were analysed using Cox regression models. Results: ECLS as a bridge to a first-time ReTx was performed in 50 recipients (ECLS-ReTx). During the study period, 210 recipients underwent a first-time ReTx without bridging on ECLS (regular-ReTx) and 4959 recipients had a primary pulmonary transplant (index-Tx). The overall 1-year (55%) and 5-year (29%) survival was significantly worse for the ECLS-ReTx group.Compared to the index-Tx group, the mortality risk was significantly higher after ECLS-ReTx [hazard ratio 2.76 (95% confidence interval 1.94-3.91); P < 0.001] and regular-ReTx [hazard ratio 1.65 (95% confidence interval 1.36-2); P < 0.001].In multivariable analysis, recipient age ≥35 years, time interval <1 year from index-Tx, primary graft dysfunction as transplant indication, venoarterial-extracorporeal membrane oxygenation and Zurich donor score ≥4 points were significant risk factors for mortality in ECLS-ReTx recipients. Conclusions: Recipients for ECLS-ReTx should be carefully selected. Risk factors, such as recipient age, intertransplant interval, primary graft dysfunction as transplant indication and type of ECLS should be kept in mind before bridging these patients on ECLS to ReTx

The PRICES statement: an ESICM expert consensus on methodology for conducting and reporting critical care echocardiography research studies

International audiencePurpose: Echocardiography is a common tool for cardiac and hemodynamic assessments in critical care research. However, interpretation (and applications) of results and between-study comparisons are often difficult due to the lack of certain important details in the studies. PRICES (Preferred Reporting Items for Critical care Echocardiography Studies) is a project endorsed by the European Society of Intensive Care Medicine and conducted by the Echocardiography Working Group, aiming at producing recommendations for standardized reporting of critical care echocardiography (CCE) research studies. Methods: The PRICE panel identified lists of clinical and echocardiographic parameters (the “items”) deemed important in four main areas of CCE research: left ventricular systolic and diastolic functions, right ventricular function and fluid management. Each item was graded using a critical index (CI) that combined the relative importance of each item and the fraction of studies that did not report it, also taking experts’ opinion into account. Results: A list of items in each area that deemed essential for the proper interpretation and application of research results is recommended. Additional items which aid interpretation were also proposed. Conclusion: The PRICES recommendations reported in this document, as a checklist, represent an international consensus of experts as to which parameters and information should be included in the design of echocardiography research studies. PRICES recommendations provide guidance to scientists in the field of CCE with the objective of providing a recommended framework for reporting of CCE methodology and results