Impact of Off-Hour Admission with Subarachnoid Hemorrhage: A Meta-Analysis.

OBJECTIVE: This meta-analysis assessed the impact of off-hour hospitalization (weekends, and evenings or nighttime on weekdays) on mortality and morbidity in patients with nontraumatic subarachnoid hemorrhage (SAH). METHODS: Electronic databases were systematically searched for studies comparing outcomes between patients with nontraumatic SAH hospitalized during off-hour and on-hour periods (daytime on weekdays). The primary outcome was mortality (in-hospital and at different follow-up periods after hospitalization). Secondary outcomes included delays in treatment, and complications. Sensitivity analysis including only studies in which adjusted multivariate analyses were performed for any of the outcomes, and meta-regression controlling for clinically important patient factors, were also performed. RESULTS: Sixteen studies were included. There was no significant difference in in-hospital mortality (adjusted odds ratio, 1.03; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.97-1.09; P = 0.30) and at all follow-up periods (7/14 days and 1/3/6 months) after hospitalization between SAH patients who were admitted during off-hour compared with on-hour periods, despite adjusted multivariate meta-analysis being performed. However, patients who were admitted during off-hour periods experienced greater delays from their initial scan to treatment (mean difference, 42.7, 25.2-60.1 hours; P < 0.0001) and had higher rates of pneumonia (odds ratio, 1.65, 1.12-2.44; P = 0.011). CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis has not shown an increased risk of mortality in the short-term and long-term among patients with nontraumatic SAH who were hospitalized during off-hour compared with on-hour periods, despite adjusting for potentially confounding patient factors. The delays to treatment and higher observed rates of pneumonia highlight areas in which hospital services and resources should be targeted during these off-hour periods in patients presenting with nontraumatic SAH.

Glioblastoma: assessment of the readability and reliability of online information.

INTRODUCTION: Glioblastoma Multiforme (GBM) represents one of the most common and most aggressive forms of brain tumours with a poor prognosis. There is often uncertainty around diagnosis and prognosis amongst patients diagnosed with cancer. Most patients rely on internet to access health-related information. The aim of this study was to assess the readability and reliability of online information on GBM. METHODS: The terms 'Glioblastoma' and 'GBM' were used to search Google and the first 50 websites identified were screened. For each website, the quality of each website was assessed using the DISCERN instrument, the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) benchmark criteria and the Health on the Net Foundation code certification (HON-code). The readability was assessed using the Flesch Reading Ease Score (FRE), the Flesch-Kincaid grade level (FKGL) and the Gunning Fog Index (GFI). The relevant patient information by 4 International patient information websites were also assessed. RESULTS: Following screening, 31 websites met the inclusion criteria with only four websites displaying the HON-code (12.9%). The median DISCERN score was 43 (range: 17-70) corresponding to 'fair' quality, and the median JAMA benchmark criteria score was 1. Display of the HON-code certificate or the publication date was associated with higher quality websites. The median FRE score corresponded to 'difficult' to read (34.4). The median GFI score (15.9) and FKGL score (13.3) corresponded to a 'college' level of education reading ability. The Cancer Australia online information was the most readable website while Cancer Research UK had the highest quality information. CONCLUSION: The readability and reliability of online information relating to GBM is inadequate. Health professionals need to provide or guide patients to information that is both readable and reliable.