A fast-track program reduces complications and length of hospital stay after open colonic surgery.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: A fast-track program is a multimodal approach for patients undergoing colonic surgery that combines stringent regimens of perioperative care (fluid restriction, optimized analgesia, forced mobilization, and early oral feeding) to reduce perioperative morbidity, hospital stay, and cost. We investigated the impact of a fast-track protocol on postoperative morbidity in patients after open colonic surgery. METHODS: A randomized trial of patients in 4 teaching hospitals in Switzerland included 156 patients undergoing elective open colonic surgery who were assigned to either a fast-track program or standard care. The primary end point was the 30-day complication rate. Secondary end points were severity of complications, hospital stay, and compliance with the fast-track protocol. RESULTS: The fast-track protocol significantly decreased the number of complications (16 of 76 in the fast-track group vs 37 of 75 in the standard care group; P = .0014), resulting in shorter hospital stays (median, 5 days; range, 2-30 vs 9 days, respectively; range, 6-30; P < .0001). There was a trend toward less severe complications in the fast-track group. A multiple logistic regression analysis revealed fluid administration greater than the restriction limits (odds ratio, 4.198; 95% confidence interval, 1.7-10.366; P = .002) and a nonfunctioning epidural analgesia (odds ratio, 3.365; 95% confidence interval, 1.367-8.283; P = .008) as independent predictors of postoperative complications. CONCLUSIONS: The fast-track program reduces the rate of postoperative complications and length of hospital stay and should be considered as standard care. Fluid restriction and an effective epidural analgesia are the key factors that determine outcome of the fast-track program.

Accelerated publication versus usual publication in 2 leading medical journals.

BACKGROUND: A number of medical journals have developed policies for accelerated publication of articles judged by the authors, the editors or the peer reviewers to be of special importance. However, the validity of these judgements is unknown. We therefore compared the importance of articles published on a "fast track" with those published in the usual way. METHODS: We identified 12 "case" articles--6 articles from the New England Journal of Medicine that were prereleased on the journal's Web site before publication in print and 6 "fast-tracked" articles from The Lancet. We then identified 12 "control" articles matched to the case articles according to journal, disease or procedure of focus, theme area and year of publication. Forty-two general internists rated the articles, using 10-point scales, on dimensions addressing the articles' importance, ease of applicability and impact on health outcomes. RESULTS: For each dimension, the mean score for the case articles was significantly higher than the mean score for the control articles: importance to clinical practice 7.6 v. 7.1 respectively (p = 0.001), importance from a public health perspective 6.5 v. 6.0 (p < 0.001), contribution to advancement of medical knowledge 6.2 v. 5.8 (p < 0.001), ease of applicability in practice 7.0 v. 6.5 (p < 0.001), potential impact on health outcomes 6.5 v. 5.9 (p < 0.001). Despite these general findings, in 5 of the 12 matched pairs of articles the control article had a higher mean score than the case article across all the dimensions. INTERPRETATION: The accelerated publication practices of 2 leading medical journals targeted articles that, on average, had slightly higher importance scores than similar articles published in the usual way. However, our finding of higher importance scores for control articles in 5 of the 12 matched pairs shows that current journal practices for selecting articles for expedited publication are inconsistent.

How useful is satellite positioning system (GPS) to track gait parameters? A review.

Over the last century, numerous techniques have been developed to analyze the movement of humans while walking and running. The combined use of kinematics and kinetics methods, mainly based on high speed video analysis and forceplate, have permitted a comprehensive description of locomotion process in terms of energetics and biomechanics. While the different phases of a single gait cycle are well understood, there is an increasing interest to know how the neuro-motor system controls gait form stride to stride. Indeed, it was observed that neurodegenerative diseases and aging could impact gait stability and gait parameters steadiness. From both clinical and fundamental research perspectives, there is therefore a need to develop techniques to accurately track gait parameters stride-by-stride over a long period with minimal constraints to patients. In this context, high accuracy satellite positioning can provide an alternative tool to monitor outdoor walking. Indeed, the high-end GPS receivers provide centimeter accuracy positioning with 5-20 Hz sampling rate: this allows the stride-by-stride assessment of a number of basic gait parameters--such as walking speed, step length and step frequency--that can be tracked over several thousand consecutive strides in free-living conditions. Furthermore, long-range correlations and fractal-like pattern was observed in those time series. As compared to other classical methods, GPS seems a promising technology in the field of gait variability analysis. However, relative high complexity and expensiveness--combined with a usability which requires further improvement--remain obstacles to the full development of the GPS technology in human applications.

Statistical assessment of dataset shift and model portability in multi-angle in-track image acquisitions

In this study we propose an evaluation of the angular effects altering the spectral response of the land-cover over multi-angle remote sensing image acquisitions. The shift in the statistical distribution of the pixels observed in an in-track sequence of WorldView-2 images is analyzed by means of a kernel-based measure of distance between probability distributions. Afterwards, the portability of supervised classifiers across the sequence is investigated by looking at the evolution of the classification accuracy with respect to the changing observation angle. In this context, the efficiency of various physically and statistically based preprocessing methods in obtaining angle-invariant data spaces is compared and possible synergies are discussed.

Impact of restrictive intravenous fluid replacement and combined epidural analgesia on perioperative volume balance and renal function within a Fast Track program.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Key factors of Fast Track (FT) programs are fluid restriction and epidural analgesia (EDA). We aimed to challenge the preconception that the combination of fluid restriction and EDA might induce hypotension and renal dysfunction. METHODS: A recent randomized trial (NCT00556790) showed reduced complications after colectomy in FT patients compared with standard care (SC). Patients with an effective EDA were compared with regard to hemodynamics and renal function. RESULTS: 61/76 FT patients and 59/75 patients in the SC group had an effective EDA. Both groups were comparable regarding demographics and surgery-related characteristics. FT patients received significantly less i.v. fluids intraoperatively (1900 mL [range 1100-4100] versus 2900 mL [1600-5900], P < 0.0001) and postoperatively (700 mL [400-1500] versus 2300 mL [1800-3800], P < 0.0001). Intraoperatively, 30 FT compared with 19 SC patients needed colloids or vasopressors, but this was statistically not significant (P = 0.066). Postoperative requirements were low in both groups (3 versus 5 patients; P = 0.487). Pre- and postoperative values for creatinine, hematocrit, sodium, and potassium were similar, and no patient developed renal dysfunction in either group. Only one of 82 patients having an EDA without a bladder catheter had urinary retention. Overall, FT patients had fewer postoperative complications (6 versus 20 patients; P = 0.002) and a shorter median hospital stay (5 [2-30] versus 9 d [6-30]; P< 0.0001) compared with the SC group. CONCLUSIONS: Fluid restriction and EDA in FT programs are not associated with clinically relevant hemodynamic instability or renal dysfunction.

The forced adoption of a fast-track appraisal process for a breast cancer treatment in UK

Trastuzumab (Herceptin ®, Roche) is approved in UK for the treatment of the metastatic breast cancer since 2001. As of 2005, concomitantly with the publication of 3 studies that showed it produces a 50% reduction of the recurrence rates of breast cancer, trastuzumab started to be prescribed in the earlt adjuvant treatrnent of this disease. Und June 2006, trastuzumab did not have both: 1) regulatory approval and 2) NICE [National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence] recommendation for the use in early stages of breast cancer. During the period until June 2006, the trastuzumab use in those patients was not reimbursed and because the cost of trastuzumab is equal with the yearly UK average income, most of patients could not self fund their treatrnent. Before the publication of the final NICE guidance, the new data of trastuzumab in early breast cancer raised enormous patient and professional interest and expectations. A great volume of public and professional pressure was generated to transcend a system by which Primary Care Trusts can reimburse a treatment only after a formal guidance was issued. This paper draw on a case study depicting and analyzing the process by which regulatory approval and NICE recommendations were achieved in a record time and how trastuzumab became a standard treatment on early adjuvant breast cancer. According to the data we gathered in this work we were witnessing one of the fastest processes of adoption of a health care technology since the creation of NICE, in 1999. This study addresses the following research question: How and why does the adoption pattern of trastuzumab differ from the rational decision-making model of the reimbursement process in UK? [Author, p. 4]