Stakeholder Engagement in the Development of Public Health Economic Models: An Application to Modelling of Minimum Unit Pricing of Alcohol in South Africa.

BACKGROUND: Health economic models aim to provide decision makers with information that is contextually relevant, understandable and credible. This requires ongoing engagement throughout the research project between the modeller and end-users. OBJECTIVES: We aim to reflect on how a public health economic model of minimum unit pricing of alcohol in South Africa benefited from, and was shaped by, stakeholders. We outline how engagement activities were used during the development, validation and communication phases of the research with input gathered at each stage to inform future priorities. METHODS: A stakeholder mapping exercise was completed to identify stakeholders with the required knowledge, for example academics with expertise in modelling alcohol harm in South Africa, members of civil society organisations with lived experience of informal alcohol outlets, and policy professionals working at the forefront of alcohol policy development in South Africa. The stakeholder engagement consisted of four phases: developing a detailed understanding of the local policy context; co-producing model focus and structure; scrutinising model development and communication planning; and communicating research evidence to end-users. The first phase utilised 12 individual semi-structured interviews. Phases two to four centred around face-to-face workshops (two online) with both individual and group-based exercises employed to achieve required outputs. RESULTS: Phase one provided key learning on policy context and initiated working relationships. Phases two to four provided a conceptualisation of the problem of alcohol harm in South Africa and the choice of policy to model. Stakeholders chose population subgroups of interest and advised on both economic and health outcomes. They provided input on critical assumptions, data sources, priorities for future work, and communication strategies. The final workshop provided a platform to communicate the results of the model to a largely policy audience. These activities led to the production of highly contextualised research methods and findings that were able to be communicated widely beyond academia. CONCLUSIONS: Our programme of stakeholder engagement was fully integrated into the research programme. It resulted in a number of benefits including creating positive working relationships, guiding modelling decisions, tailoring the research to the context, and providing ongoing opportunities for communication.

Use of urinalysis during baseline diagnostics in dogs and cats: an open survey.

OBJECTIVES: To describe how veterinarians utilise and perform urinalyses for dogs and cats. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A survey, developed and distributed through the Veterinary Information Network, enlisted veterinarians who perform urinalyses for dogs and cats. Participants were directed to question banks based on whether urinalyses were performed in-house, by an outside diagnostic laboratory, or using an in-house automated instrument. Participants using multiple methods were directed to questions that related to the chosen methods. RESULTS: A total of 1059 predominantly first-opinion clinicians from the USA and Canada completed the survey. Participants performed urinalyses much less frequently than blood work during a routine examination. The most common factors preventing participants from performing a urinalysis with blood work included clients' financial constraints, difficulty obtaining urine and lack of perceived diagnostic need. The most common reasons for submission to a diagnostic laboratory included efficiency, more trusted results and convenience. Speed of obtaining results was the most common reason for performing urinalyses in-house. Of the participants who performed in-house urinalyses, fewer always performed a manual sediment examination (79%) as compared with urine-specific gravity (99%) and manual dipstick (87%). CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: This survey documents that urinalysis is often not used in senior patients as recommended by recent clinical guidelines for dogs and cats which can result in decreased diagnosis and impaired management of subclinical disease. There is significant variability in urinalysis methods despite veterinary guidelines promoting standardisation, and this could lead to inaccurate results.

An audit of the diagnostic accuracy of rotational thromboelastometry for the identification of hypofibrinogenaemia and thrombocytopenia during cardiopulmonary bypass.

We audited the diagnostic accuracy of ROTEM® (TEM Innovations, GmbH, Munich, Germany) measurements of hypofibrinogenaemia (fibrinogen <1.5 g/l) and thrombocytopenia (platelet count <100 x 109/l) in 200 adult non-transplant patients during cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB). Blood samples were obtained for FIBTEM (assay for the fibrin part of the clot), PLTEM (calculated platelet-specific component), and laboratory measurements simultaneously. Our thresholds for FIBTEM and PLTEM were A10 (clot firmness 10 minutes after clotting time) ≤8 mm, and <35 mm respectively. We also calculated the accuracy of smaller thresholds and earlier indices. We found that FIBTEM A10 ≤8 mm had low sensitivity (0.62) for hypofibrinogenaemia. With the 13% hypofibrinogenaemia prevalence in our sample, the positive predictive value (PPV) was 0.47. In contrast, FIBTEM A10 ≤8 mm had higher specificity (0.90) (negative predictive value [NPV] 0.94). Of the other FIBTEM values analysed, only A5 ≤6 mm had similar or superior accuracy. The PLTEM results were less encouraging (sensitivity 0.81, specificity 0.62). With our prevalence of thrombocytopenia (also 13%), the PPV was only 0.24. However, the NPV was high (0.96). Of the other PLTEM values analysed, only A5 <25 mm had similar or superior accuracy. These findings indicate that during CPB FIBTEM A10 ≤8 mm and PLTEM A10 <35 mm have greater accuracy in identifying the absence of hypofibrinogenaemia and thrombocytopenia respectively than their presence. On the basis of these results we would be reassured by FIBTEM A10 values >8 mm and PLTEM A10 values ≥35 mm, but would continue to use laboratory measurements for confirmation. We would not use FIBTEM A10 ≤8 mm or PLTEM A10 <35 mm values alone to guide replacement therapy unless clinical conditions warranted an immediate decision before laboratory measurements were available.

Prevalence of major vessels anterior to the trachea at sites of potential front-of-neck emergency airway access in adults.

BACKGROUND: Several case reports have described anatomical variations that can cause difficulty with front-of-neck airway access, such as major vessels anterior to the trachea. The prevalence of these anomalies is unknown. METHODS: We screened 500 consecutive thoracic computed tomography (CT) scans in adult patients performed independently in any public hospital in Western Australia. The prevalence of major vessels anterior to the trachea in the anterior triangle of the neck was determined. RESULTS: In the suprasternal notch, 264 CT scans (53%) demonstrated part of a major vessel anterior to the trachea, most commonly the brachiocephalic artery. At 10, 20, and 30 mm above the suprasternal notch, respectively, 126 (25%), 48 (9%), and 5 (1%) CT scans showed a major vessel anterior to the trachea. None showed a major vessel anterior to the cricothyroid membrane. In the suprasternal notch, a major vessel was anterior to the trachea in 10 of 120 CT scans (8%) that had a manubrio-cricoid distance <25 mm, and 108 of 116 CT scans (93%) that had a manubrio-cricoid distance >50 mm. In a logistic-regression model, increased length of trachea above the manubrium was a strong predictor of major vessels anterior to the trachea in the suprasternal notch, whilst sex, age, thoracic kyphosis, tracheal diameter, and the origin of the brachiocephalic artery were not strong predictors. CONCLUSIONS: It is common for patients to have some portion of a major vessel anterior to the trachea at sites where an emergency tracheostomy might be performed.

Patient and procedural factors associated with an increased risk of harm or death in the first 4,000 incidents reported to webAIRS.

This report describes an analysis of patient and procedural factors associated with a higher proportion of harm or death versus no harm in the first 4,000 incidents reported to webAIRS. The report is supplementary to a previous cross-sectional report on the first 4,000 incidents reported to webAIRS. The aim of this analysis was to identify potential patient or procedural factors that are more common in incidents resulting in harm or death than in incidents with more benign outcomes. There was a >50% higher proportion of harm (versus no harm) for incidents in which the patient's body mass index (BMI) was <18.5 kg/m2, for incidents in post-anaesthesia care units and non-theatre procedural areas, and for incidents under the main category of cardiovascular or neurological. The proportion of incidents associated with death was also higher (risk ratio >1.5) for BMI <18.5 kg/m2, incidents in non-theatre procedural areas, and incidents under the main category of cardiovascular or neurological. In addition, the proportion of incidents associated with death was higher for incidents in which the patient's age was >80 years, the American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status was 4 or 5, incidents involving non-elective procedures, and incidents occurring after hours (1800 to 0800 hours). When faced with incidents with these potential risk factors, anaesthetists should consider earlier interventions and request assistance at an earlier stage. Educational strategies on incident prevention and management should place even further emphasis on scenarios involving these factors.

A cross-sectional overview of the first 4,000 incidents reported to webAIRS, a de-identified web-based anaesthesia incident reporting system in Australia and New Zealand.

webAIRS is a web-based de-identified anaesthesia incident reporting system, which was introduced in Australia and New Zealand in September 2009. By July 2016, 4,000 incident reports had been received. The incidents covered a wide range of patient age (<28 days to >90 years), American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status, and body mass index (<18.5 to >50 kg/m2). They occurred across a wide range of anaesthesia techniques and grade of anaesthesia provider, and over a wide range of anaesthetising locations and times of day. In a high proportion the outcome was not benign; about 26% of incidents were associated with patient harm and a further 4% with death. Incidents appeared to be an ever-present risk in anaesthetic practice, with extrapolated estimates exceeding 200 per week across Australia and New Zealand. Independent of outcomes, many anaesthesia incidents were associated with increased use of health resources. The four most common main categories of incident were Respiratory/Airway, Medication, Cardiovascular, and Medical Device/Equipment. Over 50% of incidents were considered preventable. The narratives accompanying each incident provide a rich source of information, which will be analysed in subsequent reports on particular incident types. The summary data in this initial overview are a sober reminder of the prevalence and unpredictability of anaesthesia incidents, and their potential morbidity and mortality. The data justify current efforts to better prevent and manage anaesthesia incidents in Australia and New Zealand, and identify areas in which increased resources or additional initiatives may be required.

Bow-tie diagrams for risk management in anaesthesia.

Bow-tie analysis is a risk analysis and management tool that has been readily adopted into routine practice in many high reliability industries such as engineering, aviation and emergency services. However, it has received little exposure so far in healthcare. Nevertheless, its simplicity, versatility, and pictorial display may have benefits for the analysis of a range of healthcare risks, including complex and multiple risks and their interactions. Bow-tie diagrams are a combination of a fault tree and an event tree, which when combined take the shape of a bow tie. Central to bow-tie methodology is the concept of an undesired or 'Top Event', which occurs if a hazard progresses past all prevention controls. Top Events may also occasionally occur idiosyncratically. Irrespective of the cause of a Top Event, mitigation and recovery controls may influence the outcome. Hence the relationship of hazard to outcome can be viewed in one diagram along with possible causal sequences or accident trajectories. Potential uses for bow-tie diagrams in anaesthesia risk management include improved understanding of anaesthesia hazards and risks, pre-emptive identification of absent or inadequate hazard controls, investigation of clinical incidents, teaching anaesthesia risk management, and demonstrating risk management strategies to third parties when required.

Chewing gum in the preoperative fasting period: an analysis of de-identified incidents reported to webAIRS.

The role of preoperative fasting is well established in current anaesthetic practice with different guidelines for clear fluids and food. However, chewing gum may not be categorised as either food or drink by some patients, and may not always be specified in instructions given to patients about preoperative fasting. The aim of this paper was to review anaesthesia incidents involving gum chewing reported to webAIRS to obtain information on the risks, if any, of gum chewing during the preoperative fasting period. There were nine incidents involving chewing gum reported between late 2009 and early 2015. There were no adverse outcomes from the nine incidents other than postponement of surgery in three cases and cancellation in one. In particular, there were no reports of aspiration or airway obstruction. Nevertheless, there were five cases in which the gum was not detected preoperatively and was found in the patient's mouth either intraoperatively or postoperatively. These cases of undetected gum occurred despite patient and staff compliance with their current preoperative checklists. While the risk of increased gastric secretions related to chewing gum preoperatively are not known, the potential for airway obstruction if the gum is not detected and removed preoperatively is very real. We recommend that patients should be specifically advised to avoid gum chewing once fasting from clear fluids is commenced, and that a specific question regarding the presence of chewing gum should be added to all preoperative checklists.

An audit of the statistical validity of conclusions of clinical superiority in anaesthesia journals.

Making a statistically valid conclusion of the superiority of a clinical intervention in a clinical trial requires not only a statistically significant P value, but also adequate a priori power and an observed effect size larger than the clinically important value specified in the sample size calculation. We scrutinised the five most highly cited clinical trials reporting one or more conclusions of clinical superiority published in Anesthesiology, the British Journal of Anaesthesia, Anaesthesia, Anesthesia and Analgesia and Anaesthesia and Intensive Care in 2011 or 2012 to determine how many met all three requisite criteria. In the 25 articles, there were a total of 36 unconditional conclusions of the superiority of a clinical intervention. All were supported by a statistically significant P value. However, only 15 (41.6%) met all three requisite statistical criteria to support clinical superiority. The remainder included secondary outcomes without specific reference to their observational nature, and primary outcomes whose observed effect size was smaller than the clinically important value specified in the sample size calculation. These findings indicate that clinicians should closely scrutinise conclusions of clinical superiority in anaesthesia journals. Many will be 'hypothesis-generating observations' without adequate statistical support for a conclusion of clinical superiority in their own right.