L'année 2012 de la perspective de l'interniste hospitalier [What is new in 2012 for the specialist in hospital internal medicine?].

The knowledge in internal medicine is constantly and so rapidly evolving that practices have to be updated and adjusted to recent scientific rules, in order to improve quality and efficiency in the day to day activities. Residents in the Service of internal medicine of the Lausanne University present several relevant papers published in 2012, whose results are susceptible to change the daily hospital practices. From modest impacts to real revolution, a variety of subjects are discussed in the perspective of evidence based medicine.

Head-to-head comparison of length of stay, patients' outcome and satisfaction in Switzerland before and after SwissDRG-Implementation in 2012 in 2012: an observational study in two tertiary university centers.

On 1 January 2012 Swiss Diagnosis Related Groups (DRG), a new uniform payment system for in-patients was introduced in Switzerland with the intention to replace a "cost-based" with a "case-based" reimbursement system to increase efficiency. With the introduction of the new payment system we aim to answer questions raised regarding length of stay as well as patients' outcome and satisfaction. This is a prospective, two-centre observational cohort study with data from University Hospital Basel and the Cantonal Hospital Aarau, Switzerland, from January to June 2011 and 2012, respectively. Consecutive in-patients with the main diagnosis of either community-acquired pneumonia, exacerbation of COPD, acute heart failure or hip fracture were included. A questionnaire survey was sent out after discharge investigating changes before and after SwissDRG implementation. Our primary endpoint was LOS. Of 1,983 eligible patients 841 returned the questionnaire and were included into the analysis (429 in 2011, 412 in 2012). The median age was 76.7 years (50.8% male). Patients in the two years were well balanced in regard to main diagnoses and co-morbidities. Mean LOS in the overall patient population was 10.0 days and comparable between the 2011 cohort and the 2012 cohort (9.7 vs 10.3; p = 0.43). Overall satisfaction with care changed only slightly after introduction of SwissDRG and remained high (89.0% vs 87.8%; p = 0.429). Investigating the influence of the implementation of SwissDRG in 2012 regarding LOS patients' outcome and satisfaction, we found no significant changes. However, we observed some noteworthy trends, which should be monitored closely.

Consensus 2012 sur le diagnostic et le traitement des patients atteints de démence en Suisse [Consensus 2012--diagnosis and treatment of patients with dementia in Switzerland].

The 2012 Swiss consensus paper on diagnosis and management of patients suffering from dementia resulted from the work of an expert panel who met on March 23d to 25th in Luzem. Based on a literature review, panel members wrote a first draft that was subsequently circulated among multiple dementia experts in Switzerland. After adaptation and revisions according to comments, all consulted dementia specialists and panel members fully endorse the consensus content. The conference was financed by the Swiss Alzheimer Forum.

Editorial research and the publication process in biomedicine and health: Report from the Esteve Foundation Discussion Group, December 2012.

Despite the fact that there are more than twenty thousand biomedical journals in the world, research into the work of editors and publication process in biomedical and health care journals is rare. In December 2012, the Esteve Foundation, a non-profit scientific institution that fosters progress in pharmacotherapy by means of scientific communication and discussion organized a discussion group of 7 editors and/or experts in peer review biomedical publishing. They presented findings of past editorial research, discussed the lack of competitive funding schemes and specialized journals for dissemination of editorial research, and reported on the great diversity of misconduct and conflict of interest policies, as well as adherence to reporting guidelines. Furthermore, they reported on the reluctance of editors to investigate allegations of misconduct or increase the level of data sharing in health research. In the end, they concluded that if editors are to remain gatekeepers of scientific knowledge they should reaffirm their focus on the integrity of the scientific record and completeness of the data they publish. Additionally, more research should be undertaken to understand why many journals are not adhering to editorial standards, and what obstacles editors face when engaging in editorial research.