Indications for cardiovascular magnetic resonance in children with congenital and acquired heart disease: an expert consensus paper of the Imaging Working Group of the AEPC and the Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance Section of the EACVI.

This article provides expert opinion on the use of cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) in young patients with congenital heart disease (CHD) and in specific clinical situations. As peculiar challenges apply to imaging children, paediatric aspects are repeatedly discussed. The first section of the paper addresses settings and techniques, including the basic sequences used in paediatric CMR, safety, and sedation. In the second section, the indication, application, and clinical relevance of CMR in the most frequent CHD are discussed in detail. In the current era of multimodality imaging, the strengths of CMR are compared with other imaging modalities. At the end of each chapter, a brief summary with expert consensus key points is provided. The recommendations provided are strongly clinically oriented. The paper addresses not only imagers performing CMR, but also clinical cardiologists who want to know which information can be obtained by CMR and how to integrate it in clinical decision-making.

Expert clinical reasoning and pain assessment in mechanically ventilated patients: A descriptive study.

BACKGROUND: Pain assessment in mechanically ventilated patients is challenging, because nurses need to decode pain behaviour, interpret pain scores, and make appropriate decisions. This clinical reasoning process is inherent to advanced nursing practice, but is poorly understood. A better understanding of this process could contribute to improved pain assessment and management. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to describe the indicators that influence expert nurses' clinical reasoning when assessing pain in critically ill nonverbal patients. METHODS: This descriptive observational study was conducted in the adult intensive care unit (ICU) of a tertiary referral hospital in Western Switzerland. A purposive sample of expert nurses, caring for nonverbal ventilated patients who received sedation and analgesia, were invited to participate in the study. Data were collected in "real life" using recorded think-aloud combined with direct non-participant observation and brief interviews. Data were analysed using deductive and inductive content analyses using a theoretical framework related to clinical reasoning and pain. RESULTS: Seven expert nurses with an average of 7.85 (±3.1) years of critical care experience participated in the study. The patients had respiratory distress (n=2), cardiac arrest (n=2), sub-arachnoid bleeding (n=1), and multi-trauma (n=2). A total of 1344 quotes in five categories were identified. Patients' physiological stability was the principal indicator for making decision in relation to pain management. Results also showed that it is a permanent challenge for nurses to discriminate situations requiring sedation from situations requiring analgesia. Expert nurses mainly used working knowledge and patterns to anticipate and prevent pain. CONCLUSIONS: Patient's clinical condition is important for making decision about pain in critically ill nonverbal patients. The concept of pain cannot be assessed in isolation and its assessment should take the patient's clinical stability and sedation into account. Further research is warranted to confirm these results.

Medication incidents in primary care medicine: protocol of a study by the Swiss Federal Sentinel Reporting System.

BACKGROUND/RATIONALE: Patient safety is a major concern in healthcare systems worldwide. Although most safety research has been conducted in the inpatient setting, evidence indicates that medical errors and adverse events are a threat to patients in the primary care setting as well. Since information about the frequency and outcomes of safety incidents in primary care is required, the goals of this study are to describe the type, frequency, seasonal and regional distribution of medication incidents in primary care in Switzerland and to elucidate possible risk factors for medication incidents. Label="METHODS AND ANALYSIS" ="METHODS"/> <AbstractText STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: We will conduct a prospective surveillance study to identify cases of medication incidents among primary care patients in Switzerland over the course of the year 2015. PARTICIPANTS: Patients undergoing drug treatment by 167 general practitioners or paediatricians reporting to the Swiss Federal Sentinel Reporting System. INCLUSION CRITERIA: Any erroneous event, as defined by the physician, related to the medication process and interfering with normal treatment course. EXCLUSION CRITERIA: Lack of treatment effect, adverse drug reactions or drug-drug or drug-disease interactions without detectable treatment error. PRIMARY OUTCOME: Medication incidents. RISK FACTORS: Age, gender, polymedication, morbidity, care dependency, hospitalisation. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Descriptive statistics to assess type, frequency, seasonal and regional distribution of medication incidents and logistic regression to assess their association with potential risk factors. Estimated sample size: 500 medication incidents. LIMITATIONS: We will take into account under-reporting and selective reporting among others as potential sources of bias or imprecision when interpreting the results. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: No formal request was necessary because of fully anonymised data. The results will be published in a peer-reviewed journal. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT0229537.

Expert consensus document: European Consensus Statement on congenital hypogonadotropic hypogonadism-pathogenesis, diagnosis and treatment.

Congenital hypogonadotropic hypogonadism (CHH) is a rare disorder caused by the deficient production, secretion or action of gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH), which is the master hormone regulating the reproductive axis. CHH is clinically and genetically heterogeneous, with >25 different causal genes identified to date. Clinically, the disorder is characterized by an absence of puberty and infertility. The association of CHH with a defective sense of smell (anosmia or hyposmia), which is found in ∼50% of patients with CHH is termed Kallmann syndrome and results from incomplete embryonic migration of GnRH-synthesizing neurons. CHH can be challenging to diagnose, particularly when attempting to differentiate it from constitutional delay of puberty. A timely diagnosis and treatment to induce puberty can be beneficial for sexual, bone and metabolic health, and might help minimize some of the psychological effects of CHH. In most cases, fertility can be induced using specialized treatment regimens and several predictors of outcome have been identified. Patients typically require lifelong treatment, yet ∼10-20% of patients exhibit a spontaneous recovery of reproductive function. This Consensus Statement summarizes approaches for the diagnosis and treatment of CHH and discusses important unanswered questions in the field.

Practical guidance and considerations for transitioning patients from oxcarbazepine or carbamazepine to eslicarbazepine acetate--Expert opinion.

There is currently a lack of guidance on methodology and special considerations for transitioning patients from oxcarbazepine (OXC) or carbamazepine (CBZ) to eslicarbazepine acetate (ESL), if deemed clinically necessary. An advisory panel of epilepsy experts was convened to share their experience on the use of adjunctive ESL in clinical practice and to provide practical recommendations to help address this gap. When changing over from OXC to ESL, an OXC:ESL dose ratio of 1:1 should be employed to calculate the ESL target dose, and the changeover can take place overnight. No changes to comedication are required. Since CBZ has a different mechanism of action to ESL and is a stronger inducer of cytochrome P450 (CYP) enzymes, the transitioning of patients from CBZ to ESL requires careful consideration on a patient-by-patient basis. In general, a CBZ:ESL dose ratio of 1:1.3 should be employed to calculate the ESL target dose, and patients should be transitioned over a minimum period of 1-2weeks. Special considerations include adjustment of titration schedule and target dose in elderly patients and those with hepatic or renal impairment and potential adjustment of comedications metabolized by CYP enzymes. In summary, due to structural distinctions between ESL, OXC, and CBZ, which affect mechanism of action and tolerability, there are clinical situations in which it may be appropriate to consider transitioning patients from OXC or CBZ to ESL. Changing patients over from OXC to ESL is generally more straightforward than transitioning patients from CBZ to ESL, which requires careful consideration.

Indications for cardiovascular magnetic resonance in children with congenital and acquired heart disease: an expert consensus paper of the Imaging Working Group of the AEPC and the Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance Section of the EACVI.

This article provides expert opinion on the use of cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) in young patients with congenital heart disease (CHD) and in specific clinical situations. As peculiar challenges apply to imaging children, paediatric aspects are repeatedly discussed. The first section of the paper addresses settings and techniques, including the basic sequences used in paediatric CMR, safety, and sedation. In the second section, the indication, application, and clinical relevance of CMR in the most frequent CHD are discussed in detail. In the current era of multimodality imaging, the strengths of CMR are compared with other imaging modalities. At the end of each chapter, a brief summary with expert consensus key points is provided. The recommendations provided are strongly clinically oriented. The paper addresses not only imagers performing CMR, but also clinical cardiologists who want to know which information can be obtained by CMR and how to integrate it in clinical decision-making.

Les neurosciences au Tribunal : de la responsabilité à la dangerosité, enjeux éthiques soulevés par la nouvelle loi française

AIM: In the past few years, spectacular progress in neuroscience has led to the emergence of a new interdisciplinary field, the so-called "neurolaw" whose goal is to explore the effects of neuroscientific discoveries on legal proceedings and legal rules and standards. In the United States, a number of neuroscientific researches are designed specifically to explore legally relevant topics and a case-law has already been developed. In Europe, neuroscientific evidence is increasingly being used in criminal courtrooms, as part of psychiatric testimony, nourishing the debate about the legal implications of brain research in psychiatric-legal settings. Though largely debated, up to now the use of neuroscience in legal contexts had not specifically been regulated by any legislation. In 2011, with the new bioethics law, France has become the first country to admit by law the use of brain imaging in judicial expertise. According to the new law, brain imaging techniques can be used only for medical purposes, or scientific research, or in the context of judicial expertise. This study aims to give an overview of the current state of the neurolaw in the US and Europe, and to investigate the ethical issues raised by this new law and its potential impact on the rights and civil liberties of the offenders. METHOD: An overview of the emergence and development of "neurolaw" in the United States and Europe is given. Then, the new French law is examined in the light of the relevant debates in the French parliament. Consequently, we outline the current tendencies in Neurolaw literature to focus on assessments of responsibility, rather than dangerousness. This tendency is analysed notably in relation to the legal context relevant to criminal policies in France, where recent changes in the legislation and practice of forensic psychiatry show that dangerousness assessments have become paramount in the process of judicial decision. Finally, the potential interpretations of neuroscientific data introduced into psychiatric testimonies by judges are explored. RESULTS: The examination of parliamentary debates showed that the new French law allowing neuroimaging techniques in judicial expertise was introduced in the aim to provide a legal framework that would protect the subject against potential misuses of neuroscience. The underlying fear above all, was that this technology be used as a lie detector, or as a means to predict the subject's behaviour. However, the possibility of such misuse remains open. Contrary to the legislator's wish, the defendant is not fully guaranteed against uses of neuroimaging techniques in criminal courts that would go against their interests and rights. In fact, the examination of the recently adopted legislation in France shows that assessments of dangerousness and of risk of recidivism have become central elements of the criminal policy, which makes it possible, if not likely that neuroimaging techniques be used for the evaluation of the dangerousness of the defendant. This could entail risks for the latter, as judges could perceive neuroscientific data as hard evidence, more scientific and reliable than the soft data of traditional psychiatry. If such neuroscientific data are interpreted as signs of potential dangerousness of a subject rather than as signs of criminal responsibility, defendants may become subjected to longer penalties or measures aiming to ensure public safety in the detriment of their freedom. CONCLUSION: In the current context of accentuated societal need for security, the judge and the expert-psychiatrist are increasingly asked to evaluate the dangerousness of a subject, regardless of their responsibility. Influenced by this policy model, the judge might tend to use neuroscientific data introduced by an expert as signs of dangerousness. Such uses, especially when they subjugate an individual's interest to those of society, might entail serious threats to an individual's freedom and civil liberties.

Quality of Qualitative Research in the Health Sciences : Analysis of the Common Criteria Present in 58 Assessment Guidelines by Expert Users

The number of qualitative research methods has grown substantially over the last twenty years, both in social sciences and, more recently, in the health sciences. This growth came with questions on the quality criteria needed to evaluate this work, and numerous guidelines were published. The latters include many discrepancies though, both in their vocabulary and construction. Many expert evaluators decry the absence of consensual and reliable evaluation tools. The authors present the results of an evaluation of 58 existing guidelines in 4 major health science fields (medicine and epidemiology; nursing and health education; social sciences and public health; psychology / psychiatry, research methods and organization) by expert users (article reviewers, experts allocating funds, editors, etc.). The results propose a toolbox containing 12 consensual criteria with the definitions given by expert users. They also indicate in which disciplinary field each type of criteria is known to be more or less essential. Nevertheless, the authors highlight the limitations of the criteria comparability, as soon as one focuses on their specific definitions. They conclude that each criterion in the toolbox must be explained to come to broader consensus and identify definitions that are consensual to all the fields examined and easily operational.

Le raisonnement clinique de l'infirmier (ère) expert(e) lors de l'évaluation de la douleur chez les patients ventilés, sédatés et non communicants aux soins intensifs

Problématique : La douleur aux soins intensifs adultes est un problème majeur auquel l'équipe soignante est confrontée quotidiennement. Elle nécessite un traitement adéquat et, pour ce faire, une évaluation systématique et précise est requise. Les patients hospitalisés aux soins intensifs sont vulnérables de par leurs pathologies et les multiples stimulations douloureuses auxquelles ils sont exposés. L'évaluation de la douleur est rendue complexe par le fait qu'ils ne peuvent pas la communiquer verbalement. L'utilisation d'échelles d'évaluation de la douleur est recommandée, mais les scores obtenus doivent être interprétés et contextualisés. Evaluer la douleur chez ce type de patient demande aux infirmières des connaissances et compétences élevées, à même d'être mobilisées lors d'un processus complexe lié au raisonnement clinique. But : l'objectif de cette étude descriptive observationnelle est de décrire les indicateurs influençant le raisonnement clinique de l'infirmière1 experte lors de l'évaluation de la douleur chez les patients ventilés, sédatés et non communicants aux soins intensifs. Les résultats produisent une meilleure compréhension de l'évaluation et de la gestion de la douleur en pratique et, finalement, participent à l'amélioration de la qualité de son évaluation et de sa gestion. Méthode : un échantillon de convenance de sept infirmières expertes travaillant dans une unité de soins intensifs d'un hôpital universitaire de Suisse Romande a été constitué pour cette étude. Les données ont été récoltées en situation réelle lors de l'évaluation de la douleur de sept patients en utilisant la méthode du think aloud, par une observation non participative et par un entretien semistructuré. Les données ont été analysées en utilisant une méthode d'analyse de contenu déductive sur la base d'un modèle de raisonnement clinique, comprenant les suivantes: le contexte, la situation du patient, la génération d'hypothèses, les actions infirmières et l'évaluation de l'action. Résultats : la moyenne d'expérience des infirmières participantes est de 15 ans (ÉT 4.5) en soins et de 7.85 ans (ÉT 3.1) en soins intensifs. Sept patients étaient ventilés, sédatés et non communicants ayant une moyenne de score APACHE II2 de 19. Les résultats montrent que les infirmières se basent principalement sur des indicateurs physiologiques pour évaluer la douleur. Elles cherchent à prévenir la douleur pour le patient. Elles se réfèrent régulièrement à des situations déjà vécues (pattern). Elles mobilisent leurs connaissances pour pondérer l'agitation liée à la douleur ou à d'autres causes en générant des hypothèses, puis réalisent un test antalgique pour confirmer ou infirmer l'hypothèse retenue. Conclusion : le contexte clinique joue un rôle important dans le raisonnement clinique de l'infirmière et la gestion de la douleur. Pour faciliter cette tâche, l'évaluation de la douleur doit être combinée avec l'évaluation de la situation clinique du patient et du niveau de sédation des patients de soins intensifs.

Towards actionable international comparisons of health system performance: expert revision of the OECD framework and quality indicators.

OBJECTIVE: To review and update the conceptual framework, indicator content and research priorities of the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development's (OECD) Health Care Quality Indicators (HCQI) project, after a decade of collaborative work. DESIGN: A structured assessment was carried out using a modified Delphi approach, followed by a consensus meeting, to assess the suite of HCQI for international comparisons, agree on revisions to the original framework and set priorities for research and development. SETTING: International group of countries participating to OECD projects. PARTICIPANTS: Members of the OECD HCQI expert group. RESULTS: A reference matrix, based on a revised performance framework, was used to map and assess all seventy HCQI routinely calculated by the OECD expert group. A total of 21 indicators were agreed to be excluded, due to the following concerns: (i) relevance, (ii) international comparability, particularly where heterogeneous coding practices might induce bias, (iii) feasibility, when the number of countries able to report was limited and the added value did not justify sustained effort and (iv) actionability, for indicators that were unlikely to improve on the basis of targeted policy interventions. CONCLUSIONS: The revised OECD framework for HCQI represents a new milestone of a long-standing international collaboration among a group of countries committed to building common ground for performance measurement. The expert group believes that the continuation of this work is paramount to provide decision makers with a validated toolbox to directly act on quality improvement strategies.

Bias in dissemination of clinical research findings: structured OPEN framework of what, who and why, based on literature review and expert consensus.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to review highly cited articles that focus on non-publication of studies, and to develop a consistent and comprehensive approach to defining (non-) dissemination of research findings. SETTING: We performed a scoping review of definitions of the term 'publication bias' in highly cited publications. PARTICIPANTS: Ideas and experiences of a core group of authors were collected in a draft document, which was complemented by the findings from our literature search. INTERVENTIONS: The draft document including findings from the literature search was circulated to an international group of experts and revised until no additional ideas emerged and consensus was reached. PRIMARY OUTCOMES: We propose a new approach to the comprehensive conceptualisation of (non-) dissemination of research. SECONDARY OUTCOMES: Our 'What, Who and Why?' approach includes issues that need to be considered when disseminating research findings (What?), the different players who should assume responsibility during the various stages of conducting a clinical trial and disseminating clinical trial documents (Who?), and motivations that might lead the various players to disseminate findings selectively, thereby introducing bias in the dissemination process (Why?). CONCLUSIONS: Our comprehensive framework of (non-) dissemination of research findings, based on the results of a scoping literature search and expert consensus will facilitate the development of future policies and guidelines regarding the multifaceted issue of selective publication, historically referred to as 'publication bias'.