Towards harmonised procedures in wildlife epidemiological investigations: A serosurvey of infection with Mycobacterium bovis and closely related agents in wild boar (Sus scrofa) in Switzerland

Bovine tuberculosis (bTB) is a (re-)emerging disease in European countries, including Switzerland. This study assesses the seroprevalence of infection with Mycobacterium bovis and closely related agents in wild boar (Sus scrofa) in Switzerland, because wild boar are potential maintenance hosts of these pathogens. The study employs harmonised laboratory methods to facilitate comparison with the situation in other countries. Eighteen out of 743 blood samples tested seropositive (2.4%, CI: 1.5-3.9%) by ELISA, and the results for 61 animals previously assessed using culture and PCR indicated that this serological test was not 100% specific for M. bovis, cross-reacting with M. microti. Nevertheless, serology appears to be an appropriate test methodology in the harmonisation of wild boar testing throughout Europe. In accordance with previous findings, the low seroprevalence found in wild boar suggests wildlife is an unlikely source of the M. bovis infections recently detected in cattle in Switzerland. This finding contrasts with the epidemiological situation pertaining in southern Spain.

Medication double-checking procedures in clinical practice: a cross-sectional survey of oncology nurses' experiences.

BACKGROUND Double-checking is widely recommended as an essential method to prevent medication errors. However, prior research has shown that the concept of double-checking is not clearly defined, and that little is known about actual practice in oncology, for example, what kind of checking procedures are applied. OBJECTIVE To study the practice of different double-checking procedures in chemotherapy administration and to explore nurses' experiences, for example, how often they actually find errors using a certain procedure. General evaluations regarding double-checking, for example, frequency of interruptions during and caused by a check, or what is regarded as its essential feature was assessed. METHODS In a cross-sectional survey, qualified nurses working in oncology departments of 3 hospitals were asked to rate 5 different scenarios of double-checking procedures regarding dimensions such as frequency of use in practice and appropriateness to prevent medication errors; they were also asked general questions about double-checking. RESULTS Overall, 274 nurses (70% response rate) participated in the survey. The procedure of jointly double-checking (read-read back) was most commonly used (69% of respondents) and rated as very appropriate to prevent medication errors. Jointly checking medication was seen as the essential characteristic of double-checking-more frequently than 'carrying out checks independently' (54% vs 24%). Most nurses (78%) found the frequency of double-checking in their department appropriate. Being interrupted in one's own current activity for supporting a double-check was reported to occur frequently. Regression analysis revealed a strong preference towards checks that are currently implemented at the responders' workplace. CONCLUSIONS Double-checking is well regarded by oncology nurses as a procedure to help prevent errors, with jointly checking being used most frequently. Our results show that the notion of independent checking needs to be transferred more actively into clinical practice. The high frequency of reported interruptions during and caused by double-checks is of concern.

Epicardial Radiofrequency Ablation Failure During Ablation Procedures for Ventricular Arrhythmias: Reasons and Implications for Outcomes.

BACKGROUND Radiofrequency ablation (RFA) from the epicardial space for ventricular arrhythmias is limited or impossible in some cases. Reasons for epicardial ablation failure and the effect on outcome have not been systematically analyzed. METHODS AND RESULTS We assessed reasons for epicardial RFA failure relative to the anatomic target area and the type of heart disease and assessed the effect of failed epicardial RFA on outcome after ablation procedures for ventricular arrhythmias in a large single-center cohort. Epicardial access was attempted during 309 ablation procedures in 277 patients and was achieved in 291 procedures (94%). Unlimited ablation in an identified target region could be performed in 181 cases (59%), limited ablation was possible in 22 cases (7%), and epicardial ablation was deemed not feasible in 88 cases (28%). Reasons for failed or limited ablation were unsuccessful epicardial access (6%), failure to identify an epicardial target (15%), proximity to a coronary artery (13%), proximity to the phrenic nerve (6%), and complications (<1%). Epicardial RFA was impeded in the majority of cases targeting the left ventricular summit region. Acute complications occurred in 9%. The risk for acute ablation failure was 8.3× higher (4.5-15.0; P<0.001) after no or limited epicardial RFA compared with unlimited RFA, and patients with unlimited epicardial RFA had better recurrence-free survival rates (P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS Epicardial RFA for ventricular arrhythmias is often limited even when pericardial access is successful. Variability of success is dependent on the target area, and the presence of factors limiting ablation is associated with worse outcomes.

Role of alternative interventional procedures when endo- and epicardial catheter ablation attempts for ventricular arrhythmias fail.

BACKGROUND Ventricular tachycardia (VT) refractory to antiarrhythmic drugs and standard percutaneous catheter ablation techniques portends a poor prognosis. We characterized the reasons for ablation failure and describe alternative interventional procedures in this high-risk group. METHODS AND RESULTS Sixty-seven patients with VT refractory to 4±2 antiarrhythmic drugs and 2±1 previous endocardial/epicardial catheter ablation attempts underwent transcoronary ethanol ablation, surgical epicardial window (Epi-window), or surgical cryoablation (OR-Cryo; age, 62±11 years; VT storm in 52%). Failure of endo/epicardial ablation attempts was because of VT of intramural origin (35 patients), nonendocardial origin with prohibitive epicardial access because of pericardial adhesions (16), and anatomic barriers to ablation (8). In 8 patients, VT was of nonendocardial origin with a coexisting condition also requiring cardiac surgery. Transcoronary ethanol ablation alone was attempted in 37 patients, OR-Cryo alone in 21 patients, and a combination of transcoronary ethanol ablation and OR-Cryo (5 patients), or transcoronary ethanol ablation and Epi-window (4 patients), in the remainder. Overall, alternative interventional procedures abolished ≥1 inducible VT and terminated storm in 69% and 74% of patients, respectively, although 25% of patients had at least 1 complication. By 6 months post procedures, there was a significant reduction in defibrillator shocks (from a median of 8 per month to 1; P<0.001) and antiarrhythmic drug requirement although 55% of patients had at least 1 VT recurrence, and mortality was 17%. CONCLUSIONS A collaborative strategy of alternative interventional procedures offers the possibility of achieving arrhythmia control in high-risk patients with VT that is otherwise uncontrollable with antiarrhythmic drugs and standard percutaneous catheter ablation techniques.