Australian and New Zealand practice in intensive care (ANZPIC II): Predictors of physician confidence to diagnose pneumonia and determine illness severity in ventilated patients

The manner in which elements of clinical history, physical examination and investigations influence subjectively assessed illness severity and outcome prediction is poorly understood. This study investigates the relationship between clinician and objectively assessed illness severity and the factors influencing clinician's diagnostic confidence and illness severity rating for ventilated patients with suspected pneumonia in the intensive care unit (ICU). A prospective study of fourteen ICUs included all ventilated admissions with a clinical diagnosis of pneumonia. Data collection included pneumonia type - community-acquired (CAP), hospital-acquired (HAP) and ventilator-associated (VAP), clinician determined illness severity (CDIS), diagnostic methods, clinical diagnostic confidence (CDC), microbiological isolates and antibiotic use. For 476 episodes of pneumonia (48% CAP, 24% HAP, 28% VAP), CDC was greatest for CAP (64% CAP, 50% HAP and 49% VAP, P < 0.01) or when pneumonia was considered life-threatening (84% high CDC, 13% medium CDC and 3% low CDC, P < 0.001). Life-threatening pneumonia was predicted by worsening gas exchange (OR 4.8, CI 95% 2.3-10.2, P < 0.001), clinical signs of consolidation (OR 2.0, CI 95% 1.2-3.2, P < 0.01) and the Sepsis-Related Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) Score (OR 1.1, CI 95% 1.1-1.2, P < 0.001). Diagnostic confidence increased with CDIS (OR 163, CI 95% 8.4-31.4, P < 0.001), definite pathogen isolation (OR 3.3, CI 95% 2.0-5.6) and clinical signs of consolidation (OR 2.1, CI 95% 1.3-3.3, P = 0.001). Although the CDIS, SOFA Score and the Simplified Acute Physiologic Score (SAPS II) were all associated with mortality, the SAPS II Score was the best predictor of mortality (P = 0.02). Diagnostic confidence for pneumonia is moderate but increases with more classical presentations. A small set of clinical parameters influence subjective assessment. Objective assessment using SAPS II Scoring is a better predictor of mortality.

User dyads in software testing: bypassing the need for expert observers

This paper arises out of a research study into the online help facilities provided in popular software applications such as word processors. Its particular focus is on experimental methods of evaluating the effectiveness and usability of those facilities. Focus groups, questionnaires, and online surveys had already been used in other phases of the study, but it was judged that these approaches would be unsuitable for measuring effectiveness and usability because they are susceptible to respondents' subjectivity. Direct observation of people working on set word-processing tasks was ruled out initially because of a lack of trained observers; it would have taken too long for the investigator to observe a large enough sample by himself. Automatic recording of users' actions was also rejected, as it would have demanded equipment and/or software that was not available and seemed too expensive to acquire. The approach and techniques described here were an attempt to overcome these difficulties by using observers drawn from the same population of students that provided the test subjects; as a by-product, this may also have enhanced the acceptability (and hence possibly the validity) of the experiments by reducing the exam pressure perceived by participants.

Global standard for the composition of infant formula: Recommendations of an ESPGHAN coordinated international expert group

The Codex Alimentarius Commission of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) and the World Health Organization (WHO) develops food standards, guidelines and related texts for protecting consumer health and ensuring fair trade practices globally. The major part of the world's population lives in more than 160 countries that are members of the Codex Alimentarius. The Codex Standard on Infant Formula was adopted in 1981 based on scientific knowledge available in the 1970s and is currently being revised. As part of this process, the Codex Committee on Nutrition and Foods for Special Dietary Uses asked the ESPGHAN Committee on Nutrition to initiate a consultation process with the international scientific community to provide a proposal on nutrient levels in infant formulae, based on scientific analysis and taking into account existing scientific reports on the subject. ESPGHAN accepted the request and, in collaboration with its sister societies in the Federation of International Societies on Pediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Nutrition, invited highly qualified experts in the area of infant nutrition to form an International Expert Group (IEG) to review the issues raised. The group arrived at recommendations on the compositional requirements for a global infant formula standard which are reported here.

Preliminary findings of a systematic review and expert opinion workshop on Biosecurity on cattle farms in the UK

In this paper risk factors for the introduction of IBR, BVD, Salmonella and Johne's disease to cattle farms are reported. Two sources of information were used: literature was searched systematically and an expert opinion workshop was held. The findings from both indicate that direct contact between cattle is an important risk factor. Indirect and occasional contact is considered of less importance. Therefore, in the development of biosecurity programmes for cattle farms emphasis should be put on preventing direct contact with cattle from outside the herd.

A framework for systematically improving occupational therapy expert opinions on work capacity

Aim: To present an evidence-based framework to improve the quality of occupational therapy expert opinions on work capacity for litigation, compensation and insurance purposes. Methods: Grounded theory methodology was used to collect and analyse data from a sample of 31 participants, comprising 19 occupational therapists, 6 medical specialists and 6 lawyers. A focused semistructured interview was completed with each participant. In addition, 20 participants verified the key findings. Results: The framework is contextualised within a medicolegal system requiring increasing expertise. The framework consists of (i) broad professional development strategies and principles, and (ii) specific strategies and principles for improving opinions through reporting and assessment practices. Conclusions: The synthesis of the participants' recommendations provides systematic guidelines for improving occupational therapy expert opinion on work capacity.

End-of-life decision making in Europe and Australia - A physician survey

Background: The frequencies with which physicians make different medical end-of-life decisions (ELDs) may differ between countries, but comparison between countries has been difficult owing to the use of dissimilar research methods. Methods: A written questionnaire was sent to a random sample of physicians from 9 specialties in 6 European countries and Australia to investigate possible differences in the frequencies of physicians' willingness to perform ELDs and to identify predicting factors. Response rates ranged from 39% to 68% (N= 10 139). Using hypothetical cases, physicians were asked whether they would ( probably) make each of 4 ELDs. Results: In all the countries, 75% to 99% of physicians would withhold chemotherapy or intensify symptom treatment at the request of a patient with terminal cancer. In most cases, more than half of all physicians would also be willing to deeply sedate such a patient until death. However, there was generally less willingness to administer drugs with the explicit intention of hastening death at the request of the patient. The most important predictor of ELDs was a request from a patient with decisional capacity (odds ratio, 2.1-140.0). Shorter patient life expectancy and uncontrollable pain were weaker predictors but were more stable across countries and across the various ELDs (odds ratios, 1.1-2.4 and 0.9-2.4, respectively). Conclusion: Cultural and legal factors seem to influence the frequencies of different ELDs and the strength of their determinants across countries, but they do not change the essence of decision making.

Comparison of ASAS improvement criteria for ankylosing spondylitis with clinically relevant improvement according to an expert panel

Objective: To investigate whether the recently developed (statistically derived) "ASsessment in Ankylosing Spondylitis Working Group" improvement criteria (ASAS-IC) for ankylosing spondylitis (AS) reflect clinically relevant improvement according to the opinion of an expert panel. Methods: The ASAS-IC consist of four domains: physical function, spinal pain, patient global assessment, and inflammation. Scores on these four domains of 55 patients with AS, who had participated in a non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug efficacy trial, were presented to an international expert panel (consisting of patients with AS and members of the ASAS Working Group) in a three round Delphi exercise. The number of (non-) responders according to the ASAS-IC was compared with the final-consensus of the experts. The most important domains in the opinion of the experts were identified, and also selected with discriminant analysis. A number of provisional criteria sets that best represented the consensus of the experts were defined. Using other datasets, these clinically derived criteria sets as well as the statistically derived ASAS-IC were then tested for discriminative properties and for agreement with the end of trial efficacy by patient and doctor. Results: Forty experts completed the three Delphi rounds. The experts considered twice as many patients to be responders than the ASAS-IC (42 v 21). Overall agreement between experts and ASAS-IC was 62%. Spinal pain was considered the most important domain by most experts and was also selected as such by discriminant analysis. Provisional criteria sets with an agreement of greater than or equal to 80% compared with the consensus of the experts showed high placebo response rates (27-42%), in contrast with the ASAS-IC with a predefined placebo response rate of 25%. All criteria sets and the ASAS-IC discriminated well between active and placebo treatment (chi(2) = 36-45; p < 0.001). Compared with the end of trial efficacy assessment, the provisional criteria sets showed an agreement of 71-82%, sensitivity of 67-83%, and specificity of 81-88%. The ASAS-IC showed an agreement of 70%, sensitivity of 62%, and specificity of 89%. Conclusion: The ASAS-IC are strict in defining response, are highly specific, and consequently show lower sensitivity than the clinically derived criteria sets. However, those patients who are considered as responders by applying the ASAS-IC are acknowledged as such by the expert panel as well as by. patients' and doctors' judgments, and are therefore likely to be true responders.