Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 428
Filter
Add filters

Document Type
Year range
2.
Int J Environ Res Public Health ; 18(24)2021 12 19.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1580720

ABSTRACT

Due to a lack of published evidence on the topic, a modified Delphi approach was used to develop recommendations useful for chronic pain management during and after the COVID-19 pandemic. Focusing on the available literature and personal clinical expertise, an Italian board of nine professionals from different disciplines identified four main topics: prevention of chronic pain, treatment of chronic pain, consequences of inadequate treatment, and perspectives. They elaborated a semi-structured questionnaire. A multidisciplinary panel of experts in the field of pain management was requested to comment on the statements. Based on the answers provided, a structured questionnaire was prepared (Round 1). It included 21 statements divided into three categories (organizational issues; diagnosis and therapies; telemedicine and future perspectives). A five-point Likert scale was adopted. The threshold for consensus was set at a minimum of 70% of the number of respondents (level of agreement ≥ 4, Agree or Strongly Agree). A final questionnaire with rephrasing of the statements that did not reach the consensus threshold was elaborated (Round 2). A total of 29 clinicians were included in the panel. Twenty clinicians (69%) responded in both the first and second round. After two rounds, consensus (≥70%) was achieved in 20 out of 21 statements. The lack of consensus was recorded for the statement regarding the management of post-COVID pain (55%; Median 4; IQR 2.3). Another statement on telemedicine reached the threshold in the first round (70%), but the value was not confirmed in Round 2 (65%; Median 4; IQR 2). Most of the proposed items reached consensus, suggesting the need to make organizational changes, the structuring of careful diagnostic and therapeutic pathways, and the application of new technologies in pain medicine. Long-COVID-19 care is an issue that needs further research. Remote assistance for chronic pain must be regulated.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Chronic Pain , Pain Management , COVID-19/complications , Chronic Pain/diagnosis , Chronic Pain/therapy , Consensus , Delphi Technique , Humans , Pandemics
3.
Lancet Oncol ; 23(1): e21-e31, 2022 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1586210

ABSTRACT

High-quality randomised clinical trials testing moderately fractionated breast radiotherapy have clearly shown that local control and survival is at least as effective as with 2 Gy daily fractions with similar or reduced normal tissue toxicity. Fewer treatment visits are welcomed by patients and their families, and reduced fractions produce substantial savings for health-care systems. Implementation of hypofractionation, however, has moved at a slow pace. The oncology community have now reached an inflection point created by new evidence from the FAST-Forward five-fraction randomised trial and catalysed by the need for the global radiation oncology community to unite during the COVID-19 pandemic and rapidly rethink hypofractionation implementation. The aim of this paper is to support equity of access for all patients to receive evidence-based breast external beam radiotherapy and to facilitate the translation of new evidence into routine daily practice. The results from this European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology Advisory Committee in Radiation Oncology Practice consensus state that moderately hypofractionated radiotherapy can be offered to any patient for whole breast, chest wall (with or without reconstruction), and nodal volumes. Ultrafractionation (five fractions) can also be offered for non-nodal breast or chest wall (without reconstruction) radiotherapy either as standard of care or within a randomised trial or prospective cohort. The consensus is timely; not only is it a pragmatic framework for radiation oncologists, but it provides a measured proposal for the path forward to influence policy makers and empower patients to ensure equity of access to evidence-based radiotherapy.


Subject(s)
Advisory Committees/standards , Breast Neoplasms/radiotherapy , Dose Fractionation, Radiation , Patient Selection , Radiation Oncology/standards , Breast Neoplasms/pathology , COVID-19/epidemiology , Consensus , Europe , Evidence-Based Medicine , Female , Humans , Radiation Dose Hypofractionation
4.
Curr Oncol ; 28(6): 5332-5345, 2021 12 13.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1572387

ABSTRACT

Virtual cancer care (i.e., teleoncology) was rapidly adopted during the COVID-19 pandemic to meet the needs of patients with cancer. However, there is a paucity of guidance for clinicians regarding virtual cancer care. We sought to develop consensus-based statements to guide the optimal provision of virtual care for clinicians caring for patients with cancer, using a modified Delphi consensus process with a 29-member panel consisting of an interprofessional group of clinicians caring for patients with cancer and patient representatives. The consensus process consisted of two rounds and one synchronous final consensus meeting. At the end of the modified Delphi process, 62 of 62 statements achieved consensus. Fifty-seven statements reached consensus in the first round of the process. Concerns regarding the ability to convey difficult news virtually and maintaining similar standards as in-person care without disproportionate strain on clinicians and patients were addressed in the consensus process. We achieved interprofessional consensus on virtual cancer care practices. Further research examining the impact of virtual cancer care on person-centred and clinical outcomes are needed to inform practices during the COVID-19 pandemic and beyond.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Pandemics , Consensus , Delphi Technique , Humans , SARS-CoV-2
6.
Int J Environ Res Public Health ; 18(21)2021 10 27.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1512284

ABSTRACT

Multiple chemical sensitivity (MCS) is a multisystem, recurrent, environmental disorder that flares in response to different exposures (i.e., pesticides, solvents, toxic metals and molds) under the threshold limit value (TLV) calculated for age and gender in the general population. MCS is a syndrome characterized by cutaneous, allergic, gastrointestinal, rheumatological, endocrinological, cardiological and neurological signs and symptoms. We performed a systematic review of the literature to summarize the current clinical and therapeutic evidence and then oriented an eDelphi consensus. Four main research domains were identified (diagnosis, treatment, hospitalization and emergency) and discussed by 10 experts and an MCS patient. Thus, the first Italian MCS consensus had the double aim: (a) to improve MCS knowledge among healthcare workers and patients by standardizing the clinical and therapeutic management to MCS patients; and (b) to improve and shed light on MCS misconceptions not supported by evidence-based medicine (EBM).


Subject(s)
Hypersensitivity , Multiple Chemical Sensitivity , Consensus , Humans , Italy/epidemiology , Multiple Chemical Sensitivity/diagnosis , Multiple Chemical Sensitivity/epidemiology , Multiple Chemical Sensitivity/therapy , Solvents
7.
Front Public Health ; 9: 732539, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1506375

ABSTRACT

The COVID-19 pandemic has revealed significant gaps in mental health in terms of unrecognized and unmet needs. The goal was to accurately assess the needs and identify gaps in this area during the epidemiological crisis. A Delphi study to identify the needs was conducted with a group of decision-makers, experts, and users of mental health services. A starting point of the Delphi study was prepared in two working groups, based on recognizable international recommendations and experiences of the practitioners from the field situation. This initial set of emergency measures was supplemented through the first Delphi round, and consensus about the importance was reached in the second round. A total of 41 activities were derived, the vast majority of which were rated with a score of 4 or more. Mental health activities, which should be addressed in terms of needs, can be divided into systemic measures and service measures. This study recognizes a need to reorganize services in the direction of improving local accessibility and strengthening the network of services for immediate responses to the psychological, health, and social needs of individuals, including those arising from crisis situations, such as COVID-19 pandemic. The results of this study are in line with the international recommendations and also influenced the formulation of the Action Plan of the National Mental Health Program, while some of the measures were already implemented during the publication of the research results.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Pandemics , Consensus , Delphi Technique , Humans , Mental Health , Needs Assessment , SARS-CoV-2
8.
BMJ Open ; 11(10): e049981, 2021 10 19.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1504158

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: Our study aims to describe differences or similarities in the scope, participant characteristics and methods used in core outcome sets (COS) development when only participants from high-income countries (HICs) were involved compared with when participants from low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs) were also involved. DESIGN: Systematic review. DATA SOURCES: Annual Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials systematic reviews of COS which are updated based on SCOPUS and MEDLINE, searches. The latest systematic review included studies published up to the end of 2019. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES: We included studies reporting development of a COS for use in research regardless of age, health condition or setting. Studies reporting the development of a COS for patient-reported outcomes or adverse events or complications were also included. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Data were extracted in relation to scope of the COS study, participant categories and the methods used in outcome selection. RESULTS: Studies describing 370 COS were identified in the database. Of these, 75 (20%) included participants from LMICs. Only four COS were initiated from an LMIC setting. More than half of COS with LMIC participants were developed in the last 5 years. Cancer and rheumatology were the dominant disease domains. Overall, over 259 (70%) of COS explicitly reported including clinical experts; this was higher where LMIC participants were also included 340 (92%). Most LMIC participants were from China, Brazil and South Africa. Mixed methods for consensus building were used across the two settings. CONCLUSION: Progress has been made in including LMIC participants in the development of COS, however, there is a need to explore how to enable initiation of COS development from a range of LMIC settings, how to ensure prioritisation of COS that better reflects the burden of disease in these contexts and how to improve public participation from LMICs.


Subject(s)
Developing Countries , Poverty , Consensus , Databases, Factual , Humans , Outcome Assessment, Health Care
9.
Gac Med Mex ; 156(6): 559-569, 2020.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1503050

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Mexico has the highest 30-day mortality due to acute myocardial infarction (AMI), which constitutes one of the main causes of mortality in the country: 28 % versus 7.5 % on average for the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development member countries. OBJECTIVE: To establish critical pathways and essential interinstitutional pharmacological strategies for the care of patients with AMI in Mexico, regardless of their socioeconomic status. METHOD: A group of experts in AMI diagnosis and treatment, representatives of the main public health institutions in Mexico, as well as the Mexican cardiology societies, the Mexican Red Cross and representatives of the Spanish Society of Cardiology, were brought together in order to optimize strategies based on the best existing evidence. RESULTS: An interinstitutional clinical practice guideline was designed for early diagnosis and timely treatment of AMI with ST-segment elevation, following the clinical horizon of the disease, with the proposal of algorithms that improve the prognosis of patients who attend the emergency services due to an AMI. CONCLUSION: With these clinical practice guidelines, the group of experts proposes to universalize AMI diagnosis and treatment, regardless of patient socioeconomic status. INTRODUCCIÓN: México tiene la mortalidad más alta a 30 días por infarto agudo de miocardio (IAM), el cual constituye una de las principales causas de mortalidad en el país: 28 % versus 7.5 % del promedio de los países de la Organización para la Cooperación y el Desarrollo Económicos. OBJETIVO: Establecer las rutas críticas y las estrategias farmacológicas esenciales interinstitucionales para la atención de los pacientes con IAM en México, independientemente de su condición socioeconómica. MÉTODO: Se reunió a un grupo de expertos en diagnóstico y tratamiento de IAM, representantes de las principales instituciones públicas de salud de México, así como las sociedades cardiológicas mexicanas, Cruz Roja Mexicana y representantes de la Sociedad Española de Cardiología con la finalidad de optimizar las estrategias con base en la mejor evidencia existente. RESULTADOS: Se diseñó una guía de práctica clínica interinstitucional para el diagnóstico temprano y tratamiento oportuno del IAM con elevación del segmento ST, siguiendo el horizonte clínico de la enfermedad, con la propuesta de algoritmos que mejoren el pronóstico de los pacientes que acuden por IAM a los servicios de urgencias. CONCLUSIÓN: Con la presente guía práctica, el grupo de expertos propone universalizar el diagnóstico y tratamiento en el IAM, independientemente de la condición socioeconómica del paciente.


Subject(s)
Consensus , ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction/diagnosis , Biomarkers/blood , COVID-19/prevention & control , Cardiac Rehabilitation , Cause of Death , Electrocardiography , Humans , Mexico , Myocardial Reperfusion/methods , Percutaneous Coronary Intervention/methods , ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction/blood , ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction/rehabilitation , Societies, Medical , Spain , Thrombolytic Therapy/methods
10.
Ann Intern Med ; 174(11): JC122, 2021 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1497797

ABSTRACT

SOURCE CITATION: Greenhawt M, Abrams EM, Shaker M, et al. The risk of allergic reaction to SARS-CoV-2 vaccines and recommended evaluation and management: a systematic review, meta-analysis, GRADE assessment, and international consensus approach. J Allergy Clin Immunol Pract. 2021;9:3546-67. 34153517.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Hypersensitivity , COVID-19 Vaccines , Consensus , Humans , Hypersensitivity/diagnosis , Hypersensitivity/prevention & control , SARS-CoV-2
11.
Front Cell Infect Microbiol ; 11: 755508, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1497026

ABSTRACT

COVID-19 continues to circulate globally in 2021, while under the precise policy implementation of China's public health system, the epidemic was quickly controlled, and society and the economy have recovered. During the pandemic response, nucleic acid detection of SARS-CoV-2 has played an indispensable role in the first line of defence. In the cases of emergency operations or patients presenting at fever clinics, nucleic acid detection is required to be performed and reported quickly. Therefore, nucleic acid point-of-care testing (POCT) technology for SARS-CoV-2 identification has emerged, and has been widely carried out at all levels of medical institutions. SARS-CoV-2 POCT has served as a complementary test to conventional polymerase chain reaction (PCR) batch tests, thus forming an experimental diagnosis platform that not only guarantees medical safety but also improves quality services. However, in view of the complexity of molecular diagnosis and the biosafety requirements involved, pathogen nucleic acid POCT is different from traditional blood-based physical and chemical index detection. No guidelines currently exist for POCT quality management, and there have been inconsistencies documented in practical operation. Therefore, Shanghai Society of Molecular Diagnostics, Shanghai Society of Laboratory Medicine, Clinical Microbiology Division of Shanghai Society of Microbiology and Shanghai Center for Clinical Laboratory have cooperated with experts in laboratory medicine to generate the present expert consensus. Based on the current spectrum of major infectious diseases in China, the whole-process operation management of pathogen POCT, including its application scenarios, biosafety management, personnel qualification, performance verification, quality control, and result reporting, are described here. This expert consensus will aid in promoting the rational application and robust development of this technology in public health defence and hospital infection management.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Nucleic Acids , China , Consensus , Humans , Point-of-Care Testing , SARS-CoV-2
12.
Acad Med ; 96(11): 1546-1552, 2021 11 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1493981

ABSTRACT

Racially and ethnically diverse and socioeconomically disadvantaged communities have historically been disproportionately affected by disasters and public health emergencies in the United States. The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services' Office of Minority Health established the National Consensus Panel on Emergency Preparedness and Cultural Diversity to provide guidance to agencies and organizations on developing effective strategies to advance emergency preparedness and eliminate disparities among racially and ethnically diverse communities during these crises. Adopting the National Consensus Panel recommendations, the Johns Hopkins Medicine Office of Diversity, Inclusion, and Health Equity; Language Services; and academic-community partnerships used existing health equity resources and expertise to develop an operational framework to support the organization's COVID-19 response and to provide a framework of health equity initiatives for other academic medical centers. This operational framework addressed policies to support health equity patient care and clinical operations, accessible COVID-19 communication, and staff and community support and engagement, which also supported the National Standards for Culturally and Linguistically Appropriate Services in Health and Health Care. Johns Hopkins Medicine identified expanded recommendations for addressing institutional policy making and capacity building, including unconscious bias training for resource allocation teams and staff training in accurate race, ethnicity, and language data collection, that should be considered in future updates to the National Consensus Panel's recommendations.


Subject(s)
Academic Medical Centers/organization & administration , COVID-19/ethnology , Disasters/prevention & control , Health Equity/standards , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/virology , Civil Defense/organization & administration , Consensus , Cultural Diversity , Government Programs/organization & administration , Government Programs/standards , Healthcare Disparities/ethnology , Humans , Minority Groups/statistics & numerical data , Policy Making , Public Health/standards , SARS-CoV-2/genetics , Social Participation , Socioeconomic Factors , United States/epidemiology
13.
Abdom Radiol (NY) ; 46(11): 5095-5104, 2021 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1465846

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: To assess inter-reader agreement of key features from the SAR-AGA recommendations for the interpretation and reporting of MRE in adult patients with CD, focusing on the impact of radiologist experience on inter-reader agreement of CD phenotypes. METHODS: Two experienced and two less-experienced radiologists retrospectively evaluated 99 MRE in CD patients (50 initial MRE, 49 follow-up MRE) performed from 1/1/2019 to 3/20/2020 for the presence of active bowel inflammation (stomach, proximal small bowel, ileum, colon), stricture, probable stricture, penetrating disease, and perianal disease. The MRE protocol did not include dedicated perianal sequences. Inter-rater agreement was determined for each imaging feature using prevalence-adjusted bias-adjusted kappa and compared by experience level. RESULTS: All readers had almost-perfect inter-reader agreement (κ > 0.90) for penetrating disease, abscess, and perianal abscess in all 99 CD patients. All readers had strong inter-reader agreement (κ: 0.80-0.90) in 99 CD patients for active ileum inflammation, proximal small bowel inflammation, and stricture. Less-experienced readers had significantly lower inter-reader agreement for active ileum inflammation on initial than follow-up MRE (κ 0.68 versus 0.96, p = 0.018) and for strictures on follow-up than initial MRE (κ 0.76 versus 1.0, p = 0.027). Experienced readers had significantly lower agreement for perianal fistula on follow-up than initial MRE (κ: 0.55 versus 0.92, p = 0.008). CONCLUSION: There was strong to almost-perfect inter-reader agreement for key CD phenotypes described in the SAR-AGA consensus recommendations including active ileum and proximal small bowel inflammation, stricture, penetrating disease, abscess, and perianal abscess. Areas of lower inter-reader agreement could be targeted for future education efforts to further standardize CD MRE reporting. Dedicated perianal sequences should be included on follow-up MRE.


Subject(s)
Crohn Disease , Radiology , Adult , Consensus , Crohn Disease/diagnostic imaging , Humans , Magnetic Resonance Imaging , Observer Variation , Phenotype , Radiologists , Reproducibility of Results , Retrospective Studies , United States
14.
Crit Care Med ; 49(10): 1684-1693, 2021 10 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1452742

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: Clinical trials evaluating the safety and effectiveness of sedative medication use in critically ill adults undergoing mechanical ventilation differ considerably in their methodological approach. This heterogeneity impedes the ability to compare results across studies. The Sedation Consortium on Endpoints and Procedures for Treatment, Education, and Research Recommendations convened a meeting of multidisciplinary experts to develop recommendations for key methodologic elements of sedation trials in the ICU to help guide academic and industry clinical investigators. DESIGN: A 2-day in-person meeting was held in Washington, DC, on March 28-29, 2019, followed by a three-round, online modified Delphi consensus process. PARTICIPANTS: Thirty-six participants from academia, industry, and the Food and Drug Administration with expertise in relevant content areas, including two former ICU patients attended the in-person meeting, and the majority completed an online follow-up survey and participated in the modified Delphi process. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The final recommendations were iteratively refined based on the survey results, participants' reactions to those results, summaries written by panel moderators, and a review of the meeting transcripts made from audio recordings. Fifteen recommendations were developed for study design and conduct, subject enrollment, outcomes, and measurement instruments. Consensus recommendations included obtaining input from ICU survivors and/or their families, ensuring adequate training for personnel using validated instruments for assessments of sedation, pain, and delirium in the ICU environment, and the need for methodological standardization. CONCLUSIONS: These recommendations are intended to assist researchers in the design, conduct, selection of endpoints, and reporting of clinical trials involving sedative medications and/or sedation protocols for adult ICU patients who require mechanical ventilation. These recommendations should be viewed as a starting point to improve clinical trials and help reduce methodological heterogeneity in future clinical trials.


Subject(s)
Hypnotics and Sedatives/pharmacokinetics , Hypnotics and Sedatives/therapeutic use , Congresses as Topic , Consensus , Delphi Technique , District of Columbia , Humans , Hypnotics and Sedatives/pharmacology , Respiration, Artificial/instrumentation , Respiration, Artificial/methods , Time Factors
15.
Br J Gen Pract ; 71(712): e815-e825, 2021 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1450865

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: In the absence of research into therapies and care pathways for long COVID, guidance based on 'emerging experience' is needed. AIM: To provide a rapid expert guide for GPs and long COVID clinical services. DESIGN AND SETTING: A Delphi study was conducted with a panel of primary and secondary care doctors. METHOD: Recommendations were generated relating to the investigation and management of long COVID. These were distributed online to a panel of UK doctors (any specialty) with an interest in, lived experience of, and/or experience treating long COVID. Over two rounds of Delphi testing, panellists indicated their agreement with each recommendation (using a five-point Likert scale) and provided comments. Recommendations eliciting a response of 'strongly agree', 'agree', or 'neither agree nor disagree' from 90% or more of responders were taken as showing consensus. RESULTS: Thirty-three clinicians representing 14 specialties reached consensus on 35 recommendations. Chiefly, GPs should consider long COVID in the presence of a wide range of presenting features (not limited to fatigue and breathlessness) and exclude differential diagnoses where appropriate. Detailed history and examination with baseline investigations should be conducted in primary care. Indications for further investigation and specific therapies (for myocarditis, postural tachycardia syndrome, mast cell disorder) include hypoxia/desaturation, chest pain, palpitations, and histamine-related symptoms. Rehabilitation should be individualised, with careful activity pacing (to avoid relapse) and multidisciplinary support. CONCLUSION: Long COVID clinics should operate as part of an integrated care system, with GPs playing a key role in the multidisciplinary team. Holistic care pathways, investigation of specific complications, management of potential symptom clusters, and tailored rehabilitation are needed.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , COVID-19/complications , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/therapy , Consensus , Delphi Technique , Humans
16.
Eur J Endocrinol ; 185(4): G35-G42, 2021 Aug 27.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1448609

ABSTRACT

COVID-19 has changed the nature of medical consultations, emphasizing virtual patient counselling, with relevance for patients with diabetes insipidus (DI) or hyponatraemia. The main complication of desmopressin treatment in DI is dilutional hyponatraemia. Since plasma sodium monitoring is not always possible in times of COVID-19, we recommend to delay the desmopressin dose once a week until aquaresis occurs allowing excess retained water to be excreted. Patients should measure their body weight daily. Patients with DI admitted to the hospital with COVID-19 have a high risk for mortality due to volume depletion. Specialists must supervise fluid replacement and dosing of desmopressin. Patients after pituitary surgery should drink to thirst and measure their body weight daily to early recognize the development of postoperative SIAD. They should know hyponatraemia symptoms. Hyponatraemia in COVID-19 is common with a prevalence of 20-30% and is mostly due to SIAD or hypovolaemia. It mirrors disease severity and is an early predictor of mortality. Hypernatraemia may also develop in COVID-19 patients, with a prevalence of 3-5%, especially in ICU, and derives from different multifactorial reasons, for example, due to insensible water losses from pyrexia, increased respiration rate and use of diuretics. Hypernatraemic dehydration may contribute to the high risk of acute kidney injury in COVID-19. IV fluid replacement should be administered with caution in severe cases of COVID-19 because of the risk of pulmonary oedema.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Diabetes Insipidus/therapy , Endocrinology/standards , Hyponatremia/therapy , Ambulatory Care/methods , Ambulatory Care/standards , Consensus , Diabetes Insipidus/epidemiology , Diabetes Insipidus/pathology , Distance Counseling/methods , Distance Counseling/standards , Endocrinology/history , Endocrinology/trends , Expert Testimony , History, 21st Century , Hospitalization/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Hyponatremia/epidemiology , Hyponatremia/pathology , Pandemics , Practice Patterns, Physicians'/history , Practice Patterns, Physicians'/standards , Practice Patterns, Physicians'/trends , SARS-CoV-2 , Severity of Illness Index , Telemedicine/history , Telemedicine/methods , Telemedicine/standards
17.
BMC Med Imaging ; 21(1): 143, 2021 10 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1448214

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to compare the performance and interobservers agreement of cases with findings on chest CT based on the British Society of Thoracic Imaging (BSTI) guideline statement of COVID-19 and the Radiological Society of North America (RSNA) expert consensus statement. METHODS: In this study, 903 patients who had admitted to the emergency department with a pre-diagnosis of COVID-19 between 1 and 18 July 2020 and had chest CT. Two radiologists classified the chest CT findings according to the RSNA and BSTI consensus statements. The performance, sensitivity and specificity values of the two classification systems were calculated and the agreement between the observers was compared by using kappa analysis. RESULTS: Considering RT-PCR test result as a gold standard, the sensitivity, specificity and positive predictive values were significantly higher for the two observers according to the BSTI guidance statement and the RSNA expert consensus statement (83.3%, 89.7%, 89.0%; % 81.2,% 89.7,% 88.7, respectively). There was a good agreement in the PCR positive group (κ: 0.707; p < 0.001 for BSTI and κ: 0.716; p < 0.001 for RSNA), a good agreement in the PCR negative group (κ: 0.645; p < 0.001 for BSTI and κ: 0.743; p < 0.001 for RSNA) according to the BSTI and RSNA classification between the two radiologists. CONCLUSION: As a result, RSNA and BSTI statement provided reasonable performance and interobservers agreement in reporting CT findings of COVID-19. However, the number of patients defined as false negative and indeterminate in both classification systems is at a level that cannot be neglected.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/diagnostic imaging , Pneumonia, Viral/diagnostic imaging , Tomography, X-Ray Computed , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Consensus , Emergency Service, Hospital , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral/virology , Predictive Value of Tests , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2 , Sensitivity and Specificity , Societies, Medical , Turkey
18.
Clin Appl Thromb Hemost ; 27: 10760296211039288, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1448131

ABSTRACT

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a systemic disease that can be life-threatening involving immune and inflammatory responses, and that can result in potentially lethal complications, including venous thrombo-embolism (VTE). Forming an integrative approach to thrombo-prophylaxis and coagulation treatment for COVID-19 patients ensues. We aim at reviewing the literature for anticoagulation in the setting of COVID-19 infection to provide a summary on anticoagulation for this patient population. COVID-19 infection is associated with a state of continuous inflammation, which results in macrophage activation syndrome and an increased rate of thrombosis. Risk assessment models to predict the risk of thrombosis in critically ill patients have not yet been validated. Currently published guidelines suggest the use of prophylactic intensity over intermediate intensity or therapeutic intensity anticoagulant for patients with critical illness or acute illness related to COVID-19 infection. Critically ill COVID-19 patients who are diagnosed with acute VTE are considered to have a provoking factor, and, therefore, treatment duration should be at least 3 months. Patients with proximal deep venous thrombosis or pulmonary embolism should receive parenteral over oral anticoagulants with low-molecular-weight heparin or fondaparinux preferred over unfractionated heparin. In patients with impending hemodynamic compromise due to PE, and who are not at increased risk for bleeding, reperfusion may be necessary. Internists should remain updated on new emerging evidence regarding anticoagulation for COVID-19 patients. Awaiting these findings, we invite internists to perform individualized decisions that are unique for every patient and to base them on clinical judgment for risk assessment.


Subject(s)
Anticoagulants/therapeutic use , COVID-19/complications , SARS-CoV-2 , Thrombophilia/drug therapy , Anti-Inflammatory Agents/therapeutic use , Anticoagulants/administration & dosage , Anticoagulants/adverse effects , Consensus , Critical Illness , Disease Management , Factor Xa Inhibitors/administration & dosage , Factor Xa Inhibitors/adverse effects , Factor Xa Inhibitors/therapeutic use , Female , Fibrin Fibrinogen Degradation Products/analysis , Fondaparinux/adverse effects , Fondaparinux/therapeutic use , Hemorrhage/chemically induced , Heparin/adverse effects , Heparin/therapeutic use , Heparin, Low-Molecular-Weight/administration & dosage , Heparin, Low-Molecular-Weight/adverse effects , Heparin, Low-Molecular-Weight/therapeutic use , Humans , Inpatients , Male , Practice Guidelines as Topic , Pregnancy , Pregnancy Complications, Hematologic/prevention & control , Pregnancy Complications, Infectious/blood , Pulmonary Embolism/drug therapy , Pulmonary Embolism/etiology , Pulmonary Embolism/prevention & control , Risk , Thrombophilia/etiology , Venous Thromboembolism/drug therapy , Venous Thromboembolism/etiology , Venous Thromboembolism/prevention & control , Venous Thrombosis/drug therapy , Venous Thrombosis/etiology , Venous Thrombosis/prevention & control
19.
Int J Environ Res Public Health ; 18(19)2021 Sep 29.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1444197

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Public health emergencies require rapid responses from experts. Differing viewpoints are common in science, however, "mixed messaging" of varied perspectives can undermine credibility of experts; reduce trust in guidance; and act as a barrier to changing public health behaviours. Collation of a unified voice for effective knowledge creation and translation can be challenging. This work aimed to create a method for rapid psychologically-informed expert guidance during the COVID-19 response. METHOD: TRICE (Template for Rapid Iterative Consensus of Experts) brings structure, peer-review and consensus to the rapid generation of expert advice. It was developed and trialled with 15 core members of the British Psychological Society COVID-19 Behavioural Science and Disease Prevention Taskforce. RESULTS: Using TRICE; we have produced 18 peer-reviewed COVID-19 guidance documents; based on rapid systematic reviews; co-created by experts in behavioural science and public health; taking 4-156 days to produce; with approximately 18 experts and a median of 7 drafts per output. We provide worked-examples and key considerations; including a shared ethos and theoretical/methodological framework; in this case; the Behaviour Change Wheel and COM-B. CONCLUSION: TRICE extends existing consensus methodologies and has supported public health collaboration; co-creation of guidance and translation of behavioural science to practice through explicit processes in generating expert advice for public health emergencies.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Consensus , Delivery of Health Care , Humans , Public Health , SARS-CoV-2
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...