In a Genomic Era, Placental Pathology Still Holds the Key in the Nondysmorphic Stillbirth.

Objective To explore the relative utility of genetic testing in contrast to placental pathology in explaining causation of death in the structurally normal stillborn population. Methods A retrospective review of a structurally normal stillborn infant cohort in South East Scotland between 2011 and 2015, defined by death at or after 24 weeks of gestation. We reviewed pathology reports and collected demographic data on cases. This information was collated with genetic test results (quantitative fluorescent polymerase chain reaction and microarray analysis) and placental pathology to create a database for analysis. Primary Results Within the structurally normal population (n = 131), there were 125 genetic tests performed and 11 abnormal results. Sixty-six microarray analyses were performed, and 2 (3%) of the results were thought likely to reflect cause of stillbirth (1 case of incomplete trisomy 4 and 1 case of deletion of chromosome Xp in a female). Analysis was significantly limited in 2 cases as parental samples were not available. The placental pathology was available in a total of 129 cases; significant findings were identified in 100 cases; 79 (61%) showed changes that were considered to have caused death (including cord "accidents"), and a further 21 (16%) showed findings likely to influence the management of subsequent pregnancies. Conclusions We reaffirm the utility of placental examination in the investigation of stillbirth. In cases of nondysmorphic stillbirth where placental pathology does not explain the cause of stillbirth, microarray analysis of fetal DNA can add further diagnostic information in 3% of cases but can add further diagnostic confusion, and it is important that parental bloods are taken to minimize this risk.

Older patients' unexpressed concerns about orthopaedic surgery.

BACKGROUND: As the U.S. population ages, orthopaedic surgeons will increasingly be required to counsel older patients about major surgical procedures. Understanding patient concerns or worries about surgery could help orthopaedic surgeons to assist their patients in making these decisions. The objectives of this study were to explore the nature of patient concerns regarding orthopaedic surgery and to describe how patients raise concerns during visits with orthopaedic surgeons and how orthopaedic surgeons respond. METHODS: As part of a study involving audiotaping of 886 visits between patients and orthopaedic surgeons, fifty-nine patients sixty years of age or older who were considering surgery were recruited to participate in semistructured telephone interviews at five to seven days and one month after the visit. Patients were asked about their perceptions of the visit and how they made their decision about surgery. These interviews were analyzed to identify patients' concerns with the use of qualitative content analysis and then compared with the audiotaped visits to determine whether these concerns were actually raised during the visit and, if so, how well the orthopaedic surgeons responded. Analyses based on patient race (black or white) were also performed. RESULTS: One hundred and sixty-four concerns pertaining to (1) the surgery (anticipated quality of life after the surgery, the care facility, the timing of the operation, and the patient's capacity to meet the demands of the surgery) and (2) the surgeons (their competency, communication, and professional practices) were identified. Patients raised only 53% of their concerns with the orthopaedic surgeons and were selective in what they disclosed; concerns about the timing of the operation and about the care facility were frequently raised, but concerns about their capacity to meet the demands of the surgery and about the orthopaedic surgeons were not. Orthopaedic surgeons responded positively to 66% of the concerns raised by the patients. Only two concerns were raised in response to direct surgeon inquiry. CONCLUSIONS: Patients raised only half their concerns regarding surgery with orthopaedic surgeons. Orthopaedic surgeons are encouraged to fully address how patients' capacity to meet the demands of the surgery, defined by their resources (such as social support, transportation, and finances) and obligations (to family members, employers, and religion), may impinge on their willingness to accept recommended surgery.

Drug formulary decision-making in two regional health authorities in British Columbia, Canada.

OBJECTIVES: Growing pharmaceutical demands challenge healthcare organizations to set drug funding priorities (i.e. establish a formulary list). This responsibility typically rests with pharmacy and therapeutics (P&T) committees, yet how the process transpires within regional health authorities is unclear. The purpose of this study was to construct an explanatory model of drug formulary priority-setting as it occurs within regional health authorities. METHODS: A grounded theory approach was employed to study the practices of two regional health authority P&T committees in British Columbia, Canada. Data sources spanned committee documents, meeting observations (n=4), and semi-structured interviews with committee members (n=15). Data analysis involved coding using the constant comparative technique and writing analytic memos. RESULTS: Regional P&T committees engaged in two activities related to drug formulary priority-setting: developing auto-substitution policies and reviewing drug addition requests. Four processes were central to decision-making: (i) negotiating margins of therapeutic advantage; (ii) seeking value for the resources allocated; (iii) interfacing between community and institutional settings; (iv) situating decisions within an organizational context. CONCLUSIONS: Findings highlight opportunities for institutions to improve the fairness of agenda-setting practices, and for additional collaboration between policy-makers who prioritize drugs for publicly funded formularies applicable to institutional versus community settings.