Second asymptomatic carotid surgery trial (ACST-2): a randomised comparison of carotid artery stenting versus carotid endarterectomy

Background: Among asymptomatic patients with severe carotid artery stenosis but no recent stroke or transient cerebral ischaemia, either carotid artery stenting (CAS) or carotid endarterectomy (CEA) can restore patency and reduce long-term stroke risks. However, from recent national registry data, each option causes about 1% procedural risk of disabling stroke or death. Comparison of their long-term protective effects requires large-scale randomised evidence. Methods: ACST-2 is an international multicentre randomised trial of CAS versus CEA among asymptomatic patients with severe stenosis thought to require intervention, interpreted with all other relevant trials. Patients were eligible if they had severe unilateral or bilateral carotid artery stenosis and both doctor and patient agreed that a carotid procedure should be undertaken, but they were substantially uncertain which one to choose. Patients were randomly allocated to CAS or CEA and followed up at 1 month and then annually, for a mean 5 years. Procedural events were those within 30 days of the intervention. Intention-to-treat analyses are provided. Analyses including procedural hazards use tabular methods. Analyses and meta-analyses of non-procedural strokes use Kaplan-Meier and log-rank methods. The trial is registered with the ISRCTN registry, ISRCTN21144362. Findings: Between Jan 15, 2008, and Dec 31, 2020, 3625 patients in 130 centres were randomly allocated, 1811 to CAS and 1814 to CEA, with good compliance, good medical therapy and a mean 5 years of follow-up. Overall, 1% had disabling stroke or death procedurally (15 allocated to CAS and 18 to CEA) and 2% had non-disabling procedural stroke (48 allocated to CAS and 29 to CEA). Kaplan-Meier estimates of 5-year non-procedural stroke were 2·5% in each group for fatal or disabling stroke, and 5·3% with CAS versus 4·5% with CEA for any stroke (rate ratio [RR] 1·16, 95% CI 0·86–1·57; p=0·33). Combining RRs for any non-procedural stroke in all CAS versus CEA trials, the RR was similar in symptomatic and asymptomatic patients (overall RR 1·11, 95% CI 0·91–1·32; p=0·21). Interpretation: Serious complications are similarly uncommon after competent CAS and CEA, and the long-term effects of these two carotid artery procedures on fatal or disabling stroke are comparable. Funding: UK Medical Research Council and Health Technology Assessment Programme

Road traffic injuries and alcohol in Eldoret, Kenya Epidemiology and policy analysis

Includes bibliographical referencesAvailable from British Library Document Supply Centre- DSC:DX220215 / BLDSC - British Library Document Supply CentreSIGLEGBUnited Kingdo

Evaluation criteria for the district health management information systems: lessons from the Ministry of Health, Kenya

Background: The District Health Management Information Systems (DHMISs) were established by the Ministry of Health (MoH) in Kenya more than two decades ago. Since then, no comprehensive evaluation has been undertaken. This can partly be attributed to lack of defined criteria for evaluating them. Objective: To propose evaluation criteria for assessing the design, implementation and impact of DHMIS in the management of the District Health System (DHS) in Kenya. Methods: A descriptive cross-sectional study conducted in three DHSs in Kenya: Bungoma, Murang'a and Uasin Gishu districts. Data was collected through focus group discussions, key informant interviews, and documents' review. The respondents, purposely selected from the Ministry of Health headquarters and the three DHS districts, included designers, managers and end-users of the systems. Results: A set of evaluation criteria for DHMISs was identified for each of the three phases of implementation: pre-implemen-tation evaluation criteria (categorised as policy and objectives, technical feasibility, financial viability, political viability and administrative operability) to be applied at the design stage; concurrent implementation evaluation criteria to be applied during implementation of the new system; and post-implementation evaluation criteria (classified as internal – quality of information; external – resources and managerial support; ultimate – systems impact) to be applied after implementation of the system for at least three years. Conclusions: In designing a DHMIS model there is need to have built-in these three sets of evaluation criteria which should be used in a phased manner. Pre-implementation evaluation criteria should be used to evaluate the system's viability before more resources are committed to it; concurrent (operational) – implementation evaluation criteria should be used to monitor the process; and post-implementation evaluation criteria should be applied to assess the system's effectiveness Key words: Evaluation Criteria, District Health Management Information System, District Health System African Journal of Health Sciences Vol.5(1) 2005: 59-6

Pedestrian Safety and the Built Environment : A Review of the Risk Factors

Urban and regional planning has a contribution to make toward improving pedestrian safety, particularly in view of the fact that about 273,000 pedestrians were killed in road traffic crashes in 2010. The road is a built environments that should enhance safety and security for pedestrians, but this ideal is not always the case. This article presents an overview of the evidence on the risks that pedestrians face in the built environment. This article shows that design of the roadway and development of different land uses can either increase or reduce pedestrian road traffic injury. Planners need to design or modify the built environment to minimize risk for pedestrians