Risultati per: Gestire la colica renale nel setting delle cure primarie

Cipomo, ‘possibile antidoto contro burnout e aggressioni’

‘Non per la morte ma per la miglior vita possibile’. Nessun hospice per i bambini in 11 regioni

Objective
This study aimed to investigate healthcare professionals’ (HCPs’) experiences with the simulation-based Four Habits Model (4HM) course programme and evaluate how they perceived the 4HM’s immediate and persistent significance for practice within the intermediate care (IC) context.

Design
A qualitative approach was combined with a survey design, structured within an exploratory sequential framework consisting of two phases: (1) focus group interviews with HCPs who had completed the course 2–4 weeks postcourse (n=11), and (2) a detailed questionnaire completed 4 months postcourse (n=14).

Setting and intervention
IC serves as a bridge in the patient pathway from hospital to home providing community-based rehabilitation. The 4HM is a well-established framework for improving clinical communication in healthcare. However, it has never been tested in IC. We conducted two 4HM courses in April 2023 at an IC institution in Norway’s capital.

Participants
The study involved clinical HCPs (n=15) working in IC, participating in the 4HM courses, and consisted of seven nursing assistants, five nurses and three therapists.

Results
The HCPs experienced the 4HM course to be important and useful for practice in the IC context. They perceived that the easy-to-use framework could be applied in many patient–HCP interactions, had the potential to frame the ‘what matters to you’ question and increase satisfaction among patients and relatives. The survey conducted after 4 months disclosed that participants believed they had acquired and applied new communication skills.

Conclusion
The 4HM provided a structured framework for interactions in the IC context, enhancing professionalism and streamlining daily tasks. Overall, the model fostered patient participation through improved communication skills. The findings could assist stakeholders, HCPs and IC service managers in developing educational programmes for HCPs to enhance communication skills and improve the quality of care for older patients in transitional care.

Objectives
To investigate long-acting injectable (LAI) antipsychotic prescribing patterns and their associations with transition and continuation of care and healthcare resource utilisation (HCRU) for patients with schizophrenia in the USA.

Design
A retrospective cohort study.

Setting
Electronic health record data from adults in the USA with schizophrenia were extracted from the NeuroBlu Database V.21R2.

Participants
Adults (aged ≥18 years) with a schizophrenia diagnosis who initiated LAI antipsychotic treatment during psychiatric inpatient admission. The index date was the date of LAI initiation. Patients who had ≥1 primary, secondary or tertiary ICD-9/10 (International Classification of Diseases) diagnosis of schizophrenia at clinical sites that had both inpatient and outpatient facilities were included.

Primary outcome measures
Transition-of-care (eg, risk of rehospitalisation, number of hospital readmissions, number of outpatient visits post discharge), continuation-of-care (eg, first treatment path after discharge, time to index LAI discontinuation and number of patients who restarted LAIs after discontinuation) and HCRU endpoints (eg, length of stay of index hospitalisation and estimated cost for psychiatric outpatient visits pre-index and post-index) were the primary outcome measures.

Results
A total of 1197 patients were included who initiated an LAI in an inpatient setting. Of 339 patients with ≥3 months pre-index and post-index data, median time to rehospitalisation was 135 days. Patients discharged taking an LAI alone had lower frequency of rehospitalisation (incidence rate ratio (IRR)=0.62 (95% CI, 0.46 to 0.84)), lower risk of longer hospital stays (IRR=0.60 (95% CI, 0.43 to 0.84)), lower risk of becoming rehospitalised (HR=0.49 (95% CI, 0.35 to 0.69)) and lower risk of outpatient visits (IRR=0.50 (95% CI, 0.36 to 0.70)) versus patients co-prescribed an oral antipsychotic (LAI+OA). Patients discharged taking an LAI dosed once every 1–2 months or once every 2 weeks had lower frequency of rehospitalisation (IRR=0.85 (95% CI, 0.64 to 1.14)), lower risk of longer hospital stays (IRR=0.90 (95% CI, 0.70 to 1.15)) and lower risk of becoming rehospitalised versus an LAI dosed once every 2 weeks; risk of becoming rehospitalised was no different (HR=1.00 (95% CI, 0.76 to 1.32)) and risk of outpatient visits was greater (IRR=1.25 (95% CI, 0.96 to 1.63)). During hospitalisation, 73.4% of patients were co-prescribed an OA, most frequently risperidone, with their index LAI. From pre-admission to post-discharge, psychiatric clinic costs significantly increased (US$14 231, p

This Viewpoint discusses the challenges facing US leadership in improving the state of the country’s public health and outlines 5 classes of candidates for public health intervention and 4 criteria to guide public health priority setting.

Objective
A multidisciplinary team is essential to providing high-quality, patient-centred care. However, its effectiveness can be either hindered or facilitated by various factors, such as the need for rapid decision-making, which may compromise patient outcomes despite individual efforts. The aim of this study is to synthesise the factors that may act as barriers and facilitators to the work of multidisciplinary teams in managing labour within acute care settings.

Design
A systematic qualitative review and meta-synthesis was conducted following the five-step methodology proposed by Sandelowski et al.

Data source
Three databases (Medline, Embase and Scopus) were systematically searched without time restrictions up to 25 May 2024.

Eligibility criteria for selecting studies
Qualitative studies exploring perspectives, experiences and other similar factors were included. These studies were assessed for methodological quality using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme.

Data extraction and synthesis
The reviewers independently searched, screened and coded the results of the included studies. Data were synthesised using the method proposed by Thomas and Harden.

Results
Seventeen studies were included in the meta-synthesis. Four key dimensions emerged, reflecting both the barriers and the facilitators of multidisciplinary team performances: (1) organisational variables, (2) individual variables, (3) collaborative variables and (4) role variables. A total of 36 variables were identified, which could function as barriers (n=6; eg, high staff turnover), facilitators (n=6; eg, strong listening skills) or both (n=24; eg, team climate), depending on the context.

Conclusions
This meta-synthesis identifies specific barriers and facilitators and variables that can act as both. Understanding these factors enables targeted interventions to enhance the performance of multidisciplinary teams in clinical practice, particularly in acute care settings.

PROSPERO registration number
CRD42022297395.

Essenziali frutta, verdura e olio evo. Si riduce l’infiammazione sistemica

Objectives
Racially minoritised communities (RMCs) were disproportionately affected by COVID-19, experiencing among the highest mortality rates of the UK’s pandemic. We sought to understand the priorities for action to address the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the health and well-being of RMCs in the ethnically diverse and socioeconomically unequal area of East London, located in the northeastern part of London, England.

Design
Prospective surveys and a consensus meeting following the established James Lind Alliance priority setting partnership (PSP) methodology, adapted for a specific geographic location and ethnic groups.

Setting
Conducted in East London between 2021 and 2023.

Participants
Participants were individuals aged ≥18 years living and/or working in East London. Communities represented included Black African, Black Caribbean, Somali, South Asian and Bangladeshi.

Outcome measure
People were asked to submit suggestions for the priorities for action to address the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic. Return responses were reviewed and prioritised in a final workshop.

Results
816 suggestions were gathered from 187 responses to the initial survey. These were summarised into a longlist of 40 for the second survey, from which 243 respondents identified a shortlist of 26 priorities for discussion in a consensus meeting. The final top 10 priorities cover community-based support and spaces spanning education, social support, mental health and housing.

Conclusion
A systematic methodology was used to identify the priorities of RMCs in East London in the context of recovery from the COVID-19 pandemic. The breadth of the top 10 reflects how profound the effects of the pandemic have been among these communities. It also demonstrates the capacity of a PSP to articulate diverse community-driven priorities for a topic that was wider than healthcare. The findings could have applications in other disease areas that disproportionately affect RMCs.

Objective
Atezolizumab plus bevacizumab demonstrates a significant improvement in overall survival and progression-free survival compared with sorafenib in patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). The combined usage of these two medications could result in substantial consumption of resources, primarily due to their exceptionally high costs. The current study aims to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of atezolizumab plus bevacizumab as a first-line treatment for advanced HCC from the perspective of payers in developed and developing countries.

Design
A partitioned survival model was constructed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of atezolizumab plus bevacizumab versus sorafenib as a first-line treatment for advanced HCC. The efficacy and safety data incorporated within the model were derived from the IMbrave150 trial. Costs and utilities were extracted from published sources.

Interventions
Atezolizumab plus bevacizumab versus sorafenib.

Outcome measures
Estimates were calculated for costs, life-years, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) for both treatment strategies. One-way sensitivity, probabilistic sensitivity, expected value of perfect information (EVPI), subgroup and scenario analyses were conducted.

Results
The combination therapy of atezolizumab and bevacizumab results in an additional 0.72 life-years/0.57 QALYs in the USA and 0.64 life-years/0.47 QALYs in China compared with standard sorafenib treatment, although with a significant increase in costs, yielding an average ICER of US$253 247.07/QALY in the USA and US$181 552.71/QALY in China. The probability sensitivity analysis indicated that atezolizumab plus bevacizumab demonstrated a 13.60% likelihood of cost-effectiveness in the USA, whereas this likelihood is negligible (0%) in China. The expected value of uncertainty, as quantified by the EVPI, was estimated at approximately US$3658.41/patient in the USA and US$0/patient in China. The ICER was most sensitive to the cost of subsequent treatment in the USA, and most sensitive to the cost of atezolizumab in China. In scenario analyses, the atezolizumab plus bevacizumab treatment becomes favourable when the cost of atezolizumab decreases to 67.85% and 18.45% of its original price in the USA and China, respectively.

Conclusions
The atezolizumab plus bevacizumab is unlikely to be cost-effective compared with sorafenib for patients with unresectable HCC in the context of the USA and China. The implementation of significant reductions in drug prices may render the treatment economically viable.

Introduction
Benzodiazepine receptor agonists (BZRA) deprescribing interventions are needed to tackle high BZRA use in the older population. This study aims to assess the feasibility of the D-PRESCRIBE intervention, adapted from Canada to the Belgian community setting. This pharmacist-led intervention comprises a patient educational brochure and a pharmacist-to-prescriber communication tool.

Methods and analysis
We will conduct a feasibility study of a cluster randomised controlled trial involving 8–10 community pharmacies (clusters) and aiming to recruit 56–80 patients (≥65 years). Intervention pharmacies will deliver the adapted D-PRESCRIBE intervention and control pharmacies, usual care. Patients will be blinded to group allocation. Quantitative data will be collected at baseline, 3 months and 6 months through patients’ and pharmacists’ questionnaires, aiming: (1) to test the feasibility of the intervention, (2) to test the feasibility of the study design needed for its evaluation and (3) to perform an exploratory cost-effectiveness analysis. Hence, data about implementation outcomes, mechanisms of impact (ie, mechanisms through which the intervention is supposed to be effective) and contextual factors will be gathered. Patient-centred outcomes will also be collected as they would be in a full cost-effectiveness trial. The feasibility of the study design will be assessed through participation rate, completeness of the data and a satisfaction survey, sent to participants after the 6-month data collection. Data will be analysed using descriptive statistics. To gain a deeper understanding of pharmacists and patients’ experience with the intervention, interviews will be conducted after the 6-month data collection and the Theoretical Domains Framework will be used as a deductive framework for analysis.

Ethics and dissemination
This study was approved by the Ethics Committee of CHU UCL Namur (NUB: B0392023000036). Participants will receive a summary of the results. Results will also be disseminated through the organisation of a local symposium and a peer-reviewed publication.

Trial registration number
NCT05929417.

Hanno applicato decalogo Percorso Perla con Iss, Fiaso e Fnomceo

This randomized clinical trial evaluates the effectiveness of smoking cessation interventions of varying intensities in the lung cancer screening setting.

Monitoraggio Lea, bene gli ospedali, male la prevenzione e le cure territoriali

Airo: “Radioterapia è speranza, serve integrazione specialisti”

Objective
We assessed whether Penthrox (methoxyflurane) can provide better pain relief for elective, outpatient interventional procedures compared with other methods of pain control.

Design
Systematic review.

Data sources
Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trial, MEDLINE, Emcare, Embase, ClinicalTrials.gov and the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature were searched from inception to 6 November 2023.

Eligibility criteria
All published studies including randomised controlled trials (RCTs), cohort studies and case–control studies investigating Penthrox for pain relief, during and/or after an interventional procedure, were included.

Data extraction and synthesis
Two independent reviewers identified eligible studies and retrieved data. Risk of bias was assessed using Cochrane Collaboration Risk of Bias V.2.0 and Risk of Bias in Non-randomised Studies of Interventions (ROBINS I) tools. A meta-analysis was not possible due to heterogeneity.

Results
The literature search yielded 1189 records. 12 studies were eligible for inclusion: 5 RCTs and seven non-randomised studies of interventions (NRSIs). Penthrox was used for a range of procedures across five medical specialities: gastroenterology, gynaecology, haematology, orthopaedics and urology. Two RCTs showed a significant reduction in intraprocedural pain when Penthrox was compared with placebo. However, three RCTs where Penthrox was compared with either placebo or intravenous sedation showed no significant differences in pain or comfort level. Similarly, the NRSIs showed variable results. Most patients were satisfied (63% to >98%; seven studies) with Penthrox, and seven out of eight studies reported that the majority of participants would use it again (46.8%–95%; eight studies). No serious adverse events were reported.

Conclusion
Penthrox (methoxyflurane) shows promise as an analgesic for invasive, elective interventional procedures in the outpatient setting, although the relative benefits appear to vary depending on intervention and comparator pain control measures. There is a pressing need for robustly conducted, large, generalisable multicentre RCTs to evaluate the effectiveness of Penthrox.

PROSPERO registration number
CRD42023404574.