Implementation study of a clinical prediction score to rule out cardiogenic chest pain in community: Cluster randomized trial

1.1 Fundamentals Chest pain is a common complaint in primary care patients (1 to 3% of all consultations) (1) and its aetiology can be miscellaneous, from harmless to potentially life threatening conditions. In primary care practice, the most prevalent aetiologies are: chest wall syndrome (43%), coronary heart disease (12%) and anxiety (7%) (2). In up to 20% of cases, potentially serious conditions as cardiac, respiratory or neoplasic diseases underlie chest pain. In this context, a large number of laboratory tests are run (42%) and over 16% of patients are referred to a specialist or hospitalized (2).¦A cardiovascular origin to chest pain can threaten patient's life and investigations run to exclude a serious condition can be expensive and involve a large number of exams or referral to specialist -­‐ often without real clinical need. In emergency settings, up to 80% of chest pains in patients are due to cardiovascular events (3) and scoring methods have been developed to identify conditions such as coronary heart disease (HD) quickly and efficiently (4-­‐6). In primary care, a cardiovascular origin is present in only about 12% of patients with chest pain (2) and general practitioners (GPs) need to exclude as safely as possible a potential serious condition underlying chest pain. A simple clinical prediction rule (CPR) like those available in emergency settings may therefore help GPs and spare time and extra investigations in ruling out CHD in primary care patients. Such a tool may also help GPs reassure patients with more common origin to chest pain.

Prophylactic isolated limb perfusion for localized, high-risk limb melanoma: results of a multicenter randomized phase III trial. European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Malignant Melanoma Cooperative Group Protocol 18832, the World Health Organization Melanoma Program Trial 15, and the North American Perfusion Group Southwest Oncology Group-8593.

PURPOSE: Patients with primary cutaneous melanoma > or = 1.5 mm in thickness are at high risk of having regional micrometastases at the time of initial surgical treatment. A phase III international study was designed to evaluate whether prophylactic isolated limb perfusion (ILP) could prevent regional recurrence and influence survival. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 832 assessable patients from 16 centers entered the study; 412 were randomized to wide excision (WE) only and 420 to WE plus ILP with melphalan and mild hyperthermia. Median age was 50 years, 68% of patients were female, 79% of melanomas were located on a lower limb, and 47% had a thickness > or = 3 mm. RESULTS: Median follow-up duration is 6.4 years. There was a trend for a longer disease-free interval (DFI) after ILP. The difference was significant for patients who did not undergo elective lymph node dissection (ELND). The impact of ILP was clearly on the occurrence-as first site of progression - of in-transit metastases (ITM), which were reduced from 6.6% to 3.3%, and of regional lymph node (RLN) metastases, with a reduction from 16.7% to 12.6%. There was no benefit from ILP in terms of time to distant metastasis or survival. Side effects were higher after ILP, but transient in most patients. There were two amputations for limb toxicity after ILP. CONCLUSION: Prophylactic ILP with melphalan cannot be recommended as an adjunct to standard surgery in high-risk primary limb melanoma.

Individual patient data systematic review and meta-analysis of optic nerve sheath diameter ultrasonography for detecting raised intracranial pressure: protocol of the ONSD research group.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of the optic nerve sheath diameter (ONSD) research group project is to establish an individual patient-level database from high quality studies of ONSD ultrasonography for the detection of raised intracranial pressure (ICP), and to perform a systematic review and an individual patient data meta-analysis (IPDMA), which will provide a cutoff value to help physicians making decisions and encourage further research. Previous meta-analyses were able to assess the diagnostic accuracy of ONSD ultrasonography in detecting raised ICP but failed to determine a precise cutoff value. Thus, the ONSD research group was founded to synthesize data from several recent studies on the subject and to provide evidence on the diagnostic accuracy of ONSD ultrasonography in detecting raised ICP. METHODS: This IPDMA will be conducted in different phases. First, we will systematically search for eligible studies. To be eligible, studies must have compared ONSD ultrasonography to invasive intracranial devices, the current reference standard for diagnosing raised ICP. Subsequently, we will assess the quality of studies included based on the QUADAS-2 tool, and then collect and validate individual patient data. The objectives of the primary analyses will be to assess the diagnostic accuracy of ONSD ultrasonography and to determine a precise cutoff value for detecting raised ICP. Secondly, we will construct a logistic regression model to assess whether patient and study characteristics influence diagnostic accuracy. DISCUSSION: We believe that this IPD MA will provide the most reliable basis for the assessment of diagnostic accuracy of ONSD ultrasonography for detecting raised ICP and to provide a cutoff value. We also hope that the creation of the ONSD research group will encourage further study. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO registration number: CRD42012003072.

Protocol for a systematic review on the extent of non-publication of research studies and associated study characteristics.

BACKGROUND: Methodological research has found that non-published studies often have different results than those that are published, a phenomenon known as publication bias. When results are not published, or are published selectively based on the direction or the strength of the findings, healthcare professionals and consumers of healthcare cannot base their decision-making on the full body of current evidence. METHODS: As part of the OPEN project (http://www.open-project.eu) we will conduct a systematic review with the following objectives:1. To determine the proportion and/or rate of non-publication of studies by systematically reviewing methodological research projects that followed up a cohort of studies that a. received research ethics committee (REC) approval,b. were registered in trial registries, orc. were presented as abstracts at conferences.2. To assess the association of study characteristics (for example, direction and/or strength of findings) with likelihood of full publication.To identify reports of relevant methodological research projects we will conduct electronic database searches, check reference lists, and contact experts. Published and unpublished projects will be included. The inclusion criteria are as follows:a. RECs: methodological research projects that examined the subsequent proportion and/or rate of publication of studies that received approval from RECs;b. Trial registries: methodological research projects that examine the subsequent proportion and/or rate of publication of studies registered in trial registries;c. Conference abstracts: methodological research projects that examine the subsequent proportion and/or rate of full publication of studies which were initially presented at conferences as abstracts.Primary outcomes: Proportion/rate of published studies; time to full publication (mean/median; cumulative publication rate by time).Secondary outcomes: Association of study characteristics with full publication.The different questions (a, b, and c) will be investigated separately. Data synthesis will involve a combination of descriptive and statistical summaries of the included methodological research projects. DISCUSSION: Results are expected to be publicly available in mid 2013.

Publication bias in animal research: a systematic review protocol.

BACKGROUND: Systematic reviews and meta-analyses of pre-clinical studies, in vivo animal experiments in particular, can influence clinical care. Publication bias is one of the major threats of validity in systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Previous empirical studies suggested that systematic reviews and meta-analyses have become more prevalent until 2010 and found evidence for compromised methodological rigor with a trend towards improvement. We aim to comprehensively summarize and update the evidence base on systematic reviews and meta-analyses of animal studies, their methodological quality and assessment of publication bias in particular. METHODS/DESIGN: The objectives of this systematic review are as follows: âeuro¢To investigate the epidemiology of published systematic reviews of animal studies until present. âeuro¢To examine methodological features of systematic reviews and meta-analyses of animal studies with special attention to the assessment of publication bias. âeuro¢To investigate the influence of systematic reviews of animal studies on clinical research by examining citations of the systematic reviews by clinical studies. Eligible studies for this systematic review constitute systematic reviews and meta-analyses that summarize in vivo animal experiments with the purpose of reviewing animal evidence to inform human health. We will exclude genome-wide association studies and animal experiments with the main purpose to learn more about fundamental biology, physical functioning or behavior. In addition to the inclusion of systematic reviews and meta-analyses identified by other empirical studies, we will systematically search Ovid Medline, Embase, ToxNet, and ScienceDirect from 2009 to January 2013 for further eligible studies without language restrictions. Two reviewers working independently will assess titles, abstracts, and full texts for eligibility and extract relevant data from included studies. Data reporting will involve a descriptive summary of meta-analyses and systematic reviews. DISCUSSION: Results are expected to be publicly available later in 2013 and may form the basis for recommendations to improve the quality of systematic reviews and meta-analyses of animal studies and their use with respect to clinical care.

A stepwise protocol to coat aAPC beads prevents out-competition of anti-CD3 mAb and consequent experimental artefacts.

Artificial antigen-presenting cells (aAPC) are widely used for both clinical and basic research applications, as cell-based or bead-based scaffolds, combining immune synapse components of interest. Adequate and controlled preparation of aAPCs is crucial for subsequent immunoassays. We reveal that certain proteins such as activatory anti-CD3 antibody can be out-competed by other proteins (e.g. inhibitory receptor ligands such as PDL1:Fc) during the coating of aAPC beads, under the usually performed coating procedures. This may be misleading, as we found that decreased CD8 T cell activity was not due to inhibitory receptor triggering but rather because of unexpectedly low anti-CD3 antibody density on the beads upon co-incubation with inhibitory receptor ligands. We propose an optimized protocol, and emphasize the need to quality-control the coating of proteins on aAPC beads prior to their use in immunoassays.

Heterogeneity of human monocytes: an optimized four-color flow cytometry protocol for analysis of monocyte subsets.

Monocytes are central mediators in the development of atherosclerotic plaques. They circulate in blood and eventually migrate into tissue including the vessel wall where they give rise to macrophages and dendritic cells. The existence of monocyte subsets with distinct roles in homeostasis and inflammation suggests specialization of function. These subsets are identified based on expression of the CD14 and CD16 markers. Routinely applicable protocols remain elusive, however. Here, we present an optimized four-color flow cytometry protocol for analysis of human blood monocyte subsets using a specific PE-Cy5-conjugated monoclonal antibody (mAb) to HLA-DR, a PE-Cy7-conjugated mAb to CD14, a FITC-conjugated mAb to CD16, and PE-conjugated mAbs to additional markers relevant to monocyte function. Classical CD14(+)CD16(-) monocytes (here termed "Mo1" subset) expressed high CCR2, CD36, CD64, and CD62L, but low CX(3)CR1, whereas "nonclassical" CD14(lo)CD16(+) monocytes (Mo3) essentially showed the inverse expression pattern. CD14(+)CD16(+) monocytes (Mo2) expressed high HLA-DR, CD36, and CD64. In patients with stable coronary artery disease (n = 13), classical monocytes were decreased, whereas "nonclassical" monocytes were increased 90% compared with healthy subjects with angiographically normal coronary arteries (n = 14). Classical monocytes from CAD patients expressed higher CX(3)CR1 and CCR2 than controls. Thus, stable CAD is associated with expansion of the nonclassical monocyte subset and increased expression of inflammatory markers on monocytes. Flow cytometric analysis of monocyte subsets and marker expression may provide valuable information on vascular inflammation. This may translate into the identification of monocyte subsets as selective therapeutic targets, thus avoiding adverse events associated with indiscriminate monocyte inhibition.

Need of reduced and harmonized bureaucracy in multi-centre clinical research - a case-report from a Swiss trial

Introduction We launched an investigator-initiated study(ISRCTN31181395) to evaluate the potential benefit of pharmacokinetic-guided dosage individualization of imatinib for leukaemia patients followed in public and private sectors. Following approval by the research ethics committee (REC) of the coordinating centre, recruitment throughout Switzerland necessitated to submit the protocol to 11 cantonal RECs.Materials and Methods We analysed requirements and evaluation procedures of the 12 RECs with associated costs.Results 1-18 copies of the dossier, in total 4300 printed pages, were required (printing/posting costs: ~300 CHF) to meet initial requirements. Meeting frequencies of RECs ranged between 2 weeks and 2 months, time from submission to first feedback took 2-75 days. Study approval was obtained from a chairman, a subor the full committee, the evaluation work being invoiced by 0-1000 CHF (median: 750 CHF, total: 9200 CHF). While 5 RECs gave immediate approval, the other 6 rose in total 38 queries before study release, mainly related to wording in the patient information, leading to 7 different final versions approved. Submission tasks employed an investigator half-time over about 6 months.Conclusion While the necessity of clinical research evaluation by independent RECs is undisputed, there is a need of further harmonization and cooperation in evaluation procedures. Current administrative burden is indeed complex, time-consuming and costly. A harmonized electronic application form, preferably compatible with other regulatory bodies and European countries, could increase transparency, improve communication, and encourage academic multi-centre clinical research in Switzerland.

Effective continuing professional development for translating shared decision making in primary care: A study protocol.

Background: Shared decision making (SDM) is a process by which a healthcare choice is made jointly by the healthcare professional and the patient. SDM is the essential element of patient-centered care, a core concept of primary care. However, SDM is seldom translated into primary practice. Continuing professional development (CPD) is the principal means by which healthcare professionals continue to gain, improve, and broaden the knowledge and skills required for patient-centered care. Our international collaboration seeks to improve the knowledge base of CPD that targets translating SDM into the clinical practice of primary care in diverse healthcare systems. Methods: Funded by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR), our project is to form an international, interdisciplinary research team composed of health services researchers, physicians, nurses, psychologists, dietitians, CPD decision makers and others who will study how CPD causes SDM to be practiced in primary care. We will perform an environmental scan to create an inventory of CPD programs and related activities for translating SDM into clinical practice. These programs will be critically assessed and compared according to their strengths and limitations. We will use the empirical data that results from the environmental scan and the critical appraisal to identify knowledge gaps and generate a research agenda during a two-day workshop to be held in Quebec City. We will ask CPD stakeholders to validate these knowledge gaps and the research agenda. Discussion: This project will analyse existing CPD programs and related activities for translating SDM into the practice of primary care. Because this international collaboration will develop and identify various factors influencing SDM, the project could shed new light on how SDM is implemented in primary care.

Need of reduced and harmonized bureaucracy in multi-centre clinical research - a case-report from a Swiss trial

Introduction: We launched an investigator-initiated study (ISRCTN31181395) to evaluate the potential benefit of pharmacokinetic-guided dosage individualization of imatinib for leukaemiapatients followed in public and private sectors. Following approval by the research ethics committee (REC) of the coordinating centre, recruitment throughout Switzerland necessitatedto submit the protocol to 11 cantonal RECs.Materials and Methods: We analysed requirements and evaluation procedures of the 12 RECs with associated costs.Results: 1-18 copies of the dossier, in total 4300 printed pages, were required (printing/posting costs: ~300 CHF) to meet initial requirements. Meeting frequencies of RECs ranged between 2 weeks and 2 months, time from submission to fi rst feedback took 2-75 days. Study approval was obtained from a chairman, a subor the full committee, the evaluation work being invoiced by0-1000 CHF (median: 750 CHF, total: 9200 CHF). While 5 RECs gave immediate approval, the other 6 rose in total 38 queries before study release, mainly related to wording in the patient information, leading to 7 different fi nal versions approved. Submission tasks employed an investigator half-time over about 6 months.Conclusion: While the necessity of clinical research evaluation by independent RECs is undisputed, there is a need of further harmonization and cooperation in evaluation procedures. Current administrative burden is indeed complex, time-consuming and costly. A harmonized electronic application form, preferably compatible with other regulatory bodies and European countries, could increase transparency, improve communication, and encourage academic multi-centre clinical research in Switzerland.

Case management for frequent users of the emergency department: study protocol of a randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: We devised a randomised controlled trial to evaluate the effectiveness and efficiency of an intervention based on case management care for frequent emergency department users. The aim of the intervention is to reduce such patients' emergency department use, to improve their quality of life, and to reduce costs consequent on frequent use. The intervention consists of a combination of comprehensive case management care and standard emergency care. It uses a clinical case management model that is patient-identified, patient-directed, and developed to provide high intensity services. It provides a continuum of hospital- and community-based patient services, which include clinical assessment, outreach referral, and coordination and communication with other service providers. METHODS/DESIGN: We aim to recruit, during the first year of the study, 250 patients who visit the emergency department of the University Hospital of Lausanne, Switzerland. Eligible patients will have visited the emergency department 5 or more times during the previous 12 months. Randomisation of the participants to the intervention or control groups will be computer generated and concealed. The statistician and each patient will be blinded to the patient's allocation. Participants in the intervention group (N = 125), additionally to standard emergency care, will receive case management from a team, 1 (ambulatory care) to 3 (hospitalization) times during their stay and after 1, 3, and 5 months, at their residence, in the hospital or in the ambulatory care setting. In between the consultations provided, the patients will have the opportunity to contact, at any moment, the case management team. Participants in the control group (N = 125) will receive standard emergency care only. Data will be collected at baseline and 2, 5.5, 9, and 12 months later, including: number of emergency department visits, quality of life (EuroQOL and WHOQOL), health services use, and relevant costs. Data on feelings of discrimination and patient's satisfaction will also be collected at the baseline and 12 months later. DISCUSSION: Our study will help to clarify knowledge gaps regarding the positive outcomes (emergency department visits, quality of life, efficiency, and cost-utility) of an intervention based on case management care. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01934322.

A new technique for simultaneous validation of two manual nonmercury auscultatory sphygmomanometers (A&D UM-101 and Accoson Greenlight 300) based on the International protocol.

INTRODUCTION: Auscultatory nonmercury manual devices seem good alternatives for the mercury sphygmomanometers in the clinic and for research settings, but individual internal validation of each device is time-consuming. The aim of this study was to validate a new technique capable of testing two devices simultaneously, based on the International protocol of the European Society of Hypertension. METHODS: The concept of the new technique is to measure blood pressure alternatively by two observers using a mercury sphygmomanometer and by two observers using the A&D UM-101 and Accoson Greenlight 300 devices, connected by Y-tube to obtain simultaneous readings with both nonmercury devices. Thirty-three participants were enrolled (mean age 47.2±14.0 years). Nine sequential blood pressure measurements were performed for each participant. RESULTS: Both devices passed phase 1 using 15 participants. In phase 2.1 (n=33), on a maximum of 99 measurements, the Accoson device produced 81/95/99 measurements within 5/10/15 mmHg for systolic blood pressure (SBP) and 87/98/99 for diastolic blood pressure (DBP). The A&D device produced 86/96/99 for SBP and 94/99/99 for DBP. In phase 2.2 (n=33), 30 participants had at least 2 out of 3 SBP obtained with Accoson device within 5 mmHg of the mercury device, as compared with 29 of 33 participants with the A&D device. For DBP, this was 33 of 33 participants for both devices. CONCLUSION: Both the nonmercury devices passed the International protocol. The new technique of simultaneous device testing using a Y-tube represents a time saving application of the International protocol.

Impact of a program to prevent incivility towards and assault of healthcare staff in an ophtalmological emergency unit: study protocol for the PREVURGO On/Off trial.

BACKGROUND: The emergency department has been identified as an area within the health care sector with the highest reports of violence. The best way to control violence is to prevent it before it becomes an issue. Ideally, to prevent violent episodes we should eliminate all triggers of frustration and violence. Our study aims to assess the impact of a quality improvement multi-faceted program aiming at preventing incivility and violence against healthcare professionals working at the ophthalmological emergency department of a teaching hospital. METHODS/DESIGN: This study is a single-center prospective, controlled time-series study with an alternate-month design. The prevention program is based on the successive implementation of five complementary interventions: a) an organizational approach with a standardized triage algorithm and patient waiting number screen, b) an environmental approach with clear signage of the premises, c) an educational approach with informational videos for patients and accompanying persons in waiting rooms, d) a human approach with a mediator in waiting rooms and e) a security approach with surveillance cameras linked to the hospital security. The primary outcome is the rate of incivility or violence by patients, or those accompanying them against healthcare staff. All patients admitted to the ophthalmological emergency department, and those accompanying them, will be enrolled. In all, 45,260 patients will be included in over a 24-month period. The unit analysis will be the patient admitted to the emergency department. Data analysis will be blinded to allocation, but due to the nature of the intervention, physicians and patients will not be blinded. DISCUSSION: The strengths of this study include the active solicitation of event reporting, that this is a prospective study and that the study enables assessment of each of the interventions that make up the program. The challenge lies in identifying effective interventions, adapting them to the context of care in an emergency department, and thoroughly assessing their efficacy with a high level of proof.The study has been registered as a cRCT at clinicaltrials.gov (identifier: NCT02015884).

Fate of clinical research studies after ethical approval--follow-up of study protocols until publication.

BACKGROUND: Many clinical studies are ultimately not fully published in peer-reviewed journals. Underreporting of clinical research is wasteful and can result in biased estimates of treatment effect or harm, leading to recommendations that are inappropriate or even dangerous. METHODS: We assembled a cohort of clinical studies approved 2000-2002 by the Research Ethics Committee of the University of Freiburg, Germany. Published full articles were searched in electronic databases and investigators contacted. Data on study characteristics were extracted from protocols and corresponding publications. We characterized the cohort, quantified its publication outcome and compared protocols and publications for selected aspects. RESULTS: Of 917 approved studies, 807 were started and 110 were not, either locally or as a whole. Of the started studies, 576 (71%) were completed according to protocol, 128 (16%) discontinued and 42 (5%) are still ongoing; for 61 (8%) there was no information about their course. We identified 782 full publications corresponding to 419 of the 807 initiated studies; the publication proportion was 52% (95% CI: 0.48-0.55). Study design was not significantly associated with subsequent publication. Multicentre status, international collaboration, large sample size and commercial or non-commercial funding were positively associated with subsequent publication. Commercial funding was mentioned in 203 (48%) protocols and in 205 (49%) of the publications. In most published studies (339; 81%) this information corresponded between protocol and publication. Most studies were published in English (367; 88%); some in German (25; 6%) or both languages (27; 6%). The local investigators were listed as (co-)authors in the publications corresponding to 259 (62%) studies. CONCLUSION: Half of the clinical research conducted at a large German university medical centre remains unpublished; future research is built on an incomplete database. Research resources are likely wasted as neither health care professionals nor patients nor policy makers can use the results when making decisions.