La cohorte sepsis lausannoise: une opportunité de développer la recherche dans le Réseau latin de médecine intensive [Lausanne Cohort of septic patients as an opportunity to develop multidisciplinary research within the Swiss Latin Network of Intensive Care Medicine]

Despite recent medical progresses in patient support, the mortality of sepsis remains high. Recently, new supporting strategies were proposed to improve outcome. Whereas such strategies are currently considered as standard of care, their real impact on mortality, morbidity, length of stay, and hence, health care resources utilization has been only weakly evaluated so far. Obviously, there is a critical need for epidemiologic surveys of sepsis to better address these major issues. The Lausanne Cohort of septic patients aims at building a large clinical, biological and microbiological database that will be used as a multidisciplinary research platform to study the various pathogenic mechanisms of sepsis in collaboration with the various specialists. This could be an opportunity to strengthen the collaboration within the Swiss Latin network of Intensive Care Medicine.

EURECCA colorectal: multidisciplinary mission statement on better care for patients with colon and rectal cancer in Europe

Background: Care for patients with colon and rectal cancer has improved in the last twenty years however still considerable variation exists in cancer management and outcome between European countries. Therefore, EURECCA, which is the acronym of European Registration of cancer care, is aiming at defining core treatment strategies and developing a European audit structure in order to improve the quality of care for all patients with colon and rectal cancer. In December 2012 the first multidisciplinary consensus conference about colon and rectum was held looking for multidisciplinary consensus. The expert panel consisted of representatives of European scientific organisations involved in cancer care of patients with colon and rectal cancer and representatives of national colorectal registries. Methods: The expert panel had delegates of the European Society of Surgical Oncology (ESSO), European Society for Radiotherapy & Oncology (ESTRO), European Society of Pathology (ESP), European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO), European Society of Radiology (ESR), European Society of Coloproctology (ESCP), European CanCer Organisation (ECCO), European Oncology Nursing Society (EONS) and the European Colorectal Cancer Patient Organisation (EuropaColon), as well as delegates from national registries or audits. Experts commented and voted on the two web-based online voting rounds before the meeting (between 4th and 25th October and between the 20th November and 3rd December 2012) as well as one online round after the meeting (4th20th March 2013) and were invited to lecture on the subjects during the meeting (13th15th December 2012). The sentences in the consensus document were available during the meeting and a televoting round during the conference by all participants was performed. All sentences that were voted on are available on the EURECCA website www.canceraudit.eu. The consensus document was divided in sections describing evidence based algorithms of diagnostics, pathology, surgery, medical oncology, radiotherapy, and follow-up where applicable for treatment of colon cancer, rectal cancer and stage IV separately. Consensus was achieved using the Delphi method. Results: The total number of the voted sentences was 465. All chapters were voted on by at least 75% of the experts. Of the 465 sentences, 84% achieved large consensus, 6% achieved moderate consensus, and 7% resulted in minimum consensus. Only 3% was disagreed by more than 50% of the members. Conclusions: It is feasible to achieve European Consensus on key diagnostic and treatment issues using the Delphi method. This consensus embodies the expertise of professionals from all disciplines involved in the care for patients with colon and rectal cancer. Diagnostic and treatment algorithms were developed to implement the current evidence and to define core treatment guidance for multidisciplinary team management of colon and rectal cancer throughout Europe.

The international multidisciplinary consensus conference on multimodality monitoring in neurocritical care: evidentiary tables : a statement for healthcare professionals from the neurocritical care society and the European society of intensive care medicine.

A variety of technologies have been developed to assist decision-making during the management of patients with acute brain injury who require intensive care. A large body of research has been generated describing these various technologies. The Neurocritical Care Society (NCS) in collaboration with the European Society of Intensive Care Medicine (ESICM), the Society for Critical Care Medicine (SCCM), and the Latin America Brain Injury Consortium (LABIC) organized an international, multidisciplinary consensus conference to perform a systematic review of the published literature to help develop evidence-based practice recommendations on bedside physiologic monitoring. This supplement contains a Consensus Summary Statement with recommendations and individual topic reviews on physiologic processes important in the care of acute brain injury. In this article we provide the evidentiary tables for select topics including systemic hemodynamics, intracranial pressure, brain and systemic oxygenation, EEG, brain metabolism, biomarkers, processes of care and monitoring in emerging economies to provide the clinician ready access to evidence that supports recommendations about neuromonitoring.

The international multidisciplinary consensus conference on multimodality monitoring in neurocritical care: a list of recommendations and additional conclusions : a statement for healthcare professionals from the neurocritical care society and the European society of intensive care medicine.

Careful patient monitoring using a variety of techniques including clinical and laboratory evaluation, bedside physiological monitoring with continuous or non-continuous techniques and imaging is fundamental to the care of patients who require neurocritical care. How best to perform and use bedside monitoring is still being elucidated. To create a basic platform for care and a foundation for further research the Neurocritical Care Society in collaboration with the European Society of Intensive Care Medicine, the Society for Critical Care Medicine and the Latin America Brain Injury Consortium organized an international, multidisciplinary consensus conference to develop recommendations about physiologic bedside monitoring. This supplement contains a Consensus Summary Statement with recommendations and individual topic reviews as a background to the recommendations. In this article, we highlight the recommendations and provide additional conclusions as an aid to the reader and to facilitate bedside care.

EURECCA colorectal: multidisciplinary mission statement on better care for patients with colon and rectal cancer in Europe

Background: Care for patients with colon and rectal cancer has improved in the last twenty years however still considerable variation exists in cancer management and outcome between European countries. Therefore, EURECCA, which is the acronym of European Registration of cancer care, is aiming at defining core treatment strategies and developing a European audit structure in order to improve the quality of care for all patients with colon and rectal cancer. In December 2012 the first multidisciplinary consensus conference about colon and rectum was held looking for multidisciplinary consensus. The expert panel consisted of representatives of European scientific organisations involved in cancer care of patients with colon and rectal cancer and representatives of national colorectal registries. Methods: The expert panel had delegates of the European Society of Surgical Oncology (ESSO), European Society for Radiotherapy & Oncology (ESTRO), European Society of Pathology (ESP), European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO), European Society of Radiology (ESR), European Society of Coloproctology (ESCP), European CanCer Organisation (ECCO), European Oncology Nursing Society (EONS) and the European Colorectal Cancer Patient Organisation (EuropaColon), as well as delegates from national registries or audits. Experts commented and voted on the two web-based online voting rounds before the meeting (between 4th and 25th October and between the 20th November and 3rd December 2012) as well as one online round after the meeting (4th-20th March 2013) and were invited to lecture on the subjects during the meeting (13th-15th December 2012). The sentences in the consensus document were available during the meeting and a televoting round during the conference by all participants was performed. All sentences that were voted on are available on the EURECCA website www.canceraudit.eu. The consensus document was divided in sections describing evidence based algorithms of diagnostics, pathology, surgery, medical oncology, radiotherapy, and follow-up where applicable for treatment of colon cancer, rectal cancer and stage IV separately. Consensus was achieved using the Delphi method. Results: The total number of the voted sentences was 465. All chapters were voted on by at least 75% of the experts. Of the 465 sentences, 84% achieved large consensus, 6% achieved moderate consensus, and 7% resulted in minimum consensus. Only 3% was disagreed by more than 50% of the members. Conclusions: It is feasible to achieve European Consensus on key diagnostic and treatment issues using the Delphi method. This consensus embodies the expertise of professionals from all disciplines involved in the care for patients with colon and rectal cancer. Diagnostic and treatment algorithms were developed to implement the current evidence and to define core treatment guidance for multidisciplinary team management of colon and rectal cancer throughout Europe.

A new multidisciplinary home care telemedicine system to monitor stable chronic human immunodeficiency virus-infected patients: a randomized study.

Background: Antiretroviral therapy has changed the natural history of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection in developed countries, where it has become a chronic disease. This clinical scenario requires a new approach to simplify follow-up appointments and facilitate access to healthcare professionals. Methodology: We developed a new internet-based home care model covering the entire management of chronic HIV-infected patients. This was called Virtual Hospital. We report the results of a prospective randomised study performed over two years, comparing standard care received by HIV-infected patients with Virtual Hospital care. HIV-infected patients with access to a computer and broadband were randomised to be monitored either through Virtual Hospital (Arm I) or through standard care at the day hospital (Arm II). After one year of follow up, patients switched their care to the other arm. Virtual Hospital offered four main services: Virtual Consultations, Telepharmacy, Virtual Library and Virtual Community. A technical and clinical evaluation of Virtual Hospital was carried out. Findings: Of the 83 randomised patients, 42 were monitored during the first year through Virtual Hospital (Arm I) and 41 through standard care (Arm II). Baseline characteristics of patients were similar in the two arms. The level of technical satisfaction with the virtual system was high: 85% of patients considered that Virtual Hospital improved their access to clinical data and they felt comfortable with the videoconference system. Neither clinical parameters [level of CD4 + T lymphocytes, proportion of patients with an undetectable level of viral load (p = 0.21) and compliance levels 90% (p = 0.58)] nor the evaluation of quality of life or psychological questionnaires changed significantly between the two types of care. Conclusions: Virtual Hospital is a feasible and safe tool for the multidisciplinary home care of chronic HIV patients. Telemedicine should be considered as an appropriate support service for the management of chronic HIV infection.

Incidence of low central venous oxygen saturation during unplanned admissions in a multidisciplinary intensive care unit: an observational study

INTRODUCTION: It has been shown that early central venous oxygen saturation (ScvO2)-guided optimization of hemodynamics can improve outcome in septic patients. The early ScvO2 profile of other patient groups is unknown. The aim of this study was to characterize unplanned admissions in a multidisciplinary intensive care unit (ICU) with respect to ScvO2 and outcome. METHODS: Ninety-eight consecutive unplanned admissions to a multidisciplinary ICU (median age 63 [range 19 to 83] years, median Simplified Acute Physiology Score [SAPS II] 43 [range 11 to 92]) with a clinical indication for a central venous catheter were included in the study. ScvO2 was assessed at ICU arrival and six hours later but was not used to guide treatment. Length of stay in ICU (LOSICU) and in hospital (LOShospital) and 28-day mortality were recorded. RESULTS: ScvO2 was 70% +/- 12% (mean +/- standard deviation) at admission and 71% +/- 10% six hours later (p = 0.484). Overall 28-day mortality was 18%, LOSICU was 3 (1 to 28) days, and LOShospital was 19 (1 to 28) days. Patients with an ScvO2 of less than 60% at admission had higher mortality than patients with an ScvO2 of more than 60% (29% versus 17%, p < 0.05). Changes in ScvO2 during the first six hours were not predictive of LOSICU, LOShospital, or mortality. CONCLUSION: Low ScvO2 in unplanned admissions and high SAPS II are associated with increased mortality. Standard ICU treatment increased ScvO2 in patients with a low admission ScvO2, but the increase was not associated with LOSICU or LOShospital.

A New Multidisciplinary Home Care Telemedicine System to Monitor Stable Chronic Human Immunodeficiency Virus-Infected Patients: A Randomized Study

BACKGROUND: Antiretroviral therapy has changed the natural history of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection in developed countries, where it has become a chronic disease. This clinical scenario requires a new approach to simplify follow-up appointments and facilitate access to healthcare professionals. METHODOLOGY: We developed a new internet-based home care model covering the entire management of chronic HIV-infected patients. This was called Virtual Hospital. We report the results of a prospective randomised study performed over two years, comparing standard care received by HIV-infected patients with Virtual Hospital care. HIV-infected patients with access to a computer and broadband were randomised to be monitored either through Virtual Hospital (Arm I) or through standard care at the day hospital (Arm II). After one year of follow up, patients switched their care to the other arm. Virtual Hospital offered four main services: Virtual Consultations, Telepharmacy, Virtual Library and Virtual Community. A technical and clinical evaluation of Virtual Hospital was carried out. FINDINGS: Of the 83 randomised patients, 42 were monitored during the first year through Virtual Hospital (Arm I) and 41 through standard care (Arm II). Baseline characteristics of patients were similar in the two arms. The level of technical satisfaction with the virtual system was high: 85% of patients considered that Virtual Hospital improved their access to clinical data and they felt comfortable with the videoconference system. Neither clinical parameters [level of CD4+ T lymphocytes, proportion of patients with an undetectable level of viral load (p = 0.21) and compliance levels >90% (p = 0.58)] nor the evaluation of quality of life or psychological questionnaires changed significantly between the two types of care. CONCLUSIONS: Virtual Hospital is a feasible and safe tool for the multidisciplinary home care of chronic HIV patients. Telemedicine should be considered as an appropriate support service for the management of chronic HIV infection. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinical-Trials.gov: NCT01117675.

A multidisciplinary reference framework to support innovative design, implementation and assessment of chronic care models

Hoy en día, por primera vez en la historia, la mayor parte de la población podrá vivir hasta los sesenta años y más (United Nations, 2015). Sin embargo, todavía existe poca evidencia que demuestre que las personas mayores, estén viviendo con mejor salud que sus padres, a la misma edad, ya que la mayoría de los problemas de salud en edades avanzadas están asociados a las enfermedades crónicas (WHO, 2015). Los sistemas sanitarios de los países desarrollados funcionan adecuadamente cuando se trata del cuidado de enfermedades agudas, pero no son lo suficientemente eficaces en la gestión de las enfermedades crónicas. Durante la última década, se han realizado esfuerzos para mejorar esta gestión, por medio de la utilización de estrategias de prevención y de reenfoque de la provisión de los servicios de atención para la salud (Kane et al. 2005). Según una revisión sistemática de modelos de cuidado de salud, comisionada por el sistema nacional de salud Británico, pocos modelos han conceptualizado cuáles son los componentes que hay que utilizar para proporcionar un cuidado crónico efectivo, y estos componentes no han sido suficientemente estructurados y articulados. Por lo tanto, no hay suficiente evidencia sobre el impacto real de cualquier modelo existente en la actualidad (Ham, 2006). Las innovaciones podrían ayudar a conseguir mejores diagnósticos, tratamientos y gestión de pacientes crónicos, así como a dar soporte a los profesionales y a los pacientes en el cuidado. Sin embargo, la forma en las que estas innovaciones se proporcionan no es lo suficientemente eficiente, efectiva y amigable para el usuario. Para mejorar esto, hace falta crear equipos de trabajo y estrategias multidisciplinares. En conclusión, hacen falta actividades que permitan conseguir que las innovaciones sean utilizadas en los sistemas de salud que quieren mejorar la gestión del cuidado crónico, para que sea posible: 1) traducir la “atención sanitaria basada en la evidencia” en “conocimiento factible”; 2) hacer frente a la complejidad de la atención sanitaria a través de una investigación multidisciplinaria; 3) identificar una aproximación sistemática para que se establezcan intervenciones innovadoras en el cuidado de salud. El marco de referencia desarrollado en este trabajo de investigación es un intento de aportar estas mejoras. Las siguientes hipótesis han sido propuestas: Hipótesis 1: es posible definir un proceso de traducción que convierta un modelo de cuidado crónico en una descripción estructurada de objetivos, requisitos e indicadores clave de rendimiento. Hipótesis 2: el proceso de traducción, si se ejecuta a través de elementos basados en la evidencia, multidisciplinares y de orientación económica, puede convertir un modelo de cuidado crónico en un marco descriptivo, que define el ciclo de vida de soluciones innovadoras para el cuidado de enfermedades crónicas. Hipótesis 3: es posible definir un método para evaluar procesos, resultados y capacidad de desarrollar habilidades, y asistir equipos multidisciplinares en la creación de soluciones innovadoras para el cuidado crónico. Hipótesis 4: es posible dar soporte al desarrollo de soluciones innovadoras para el cuidado crónico a través de un marco de referencia y conseguir efectos positivos, medidos en indicadores clave de rendimiento. Para verificar las hipótesis, se ha definido una aproximación metodológica compuesta de cuatro Fases, cada una asociada a una hipótesis. Antes de esto, se ha llevado a cabo una “Fase 0”, donde se han analizado los antecedentes sobre el problema (i.e. adopción sistemática de la innovación en el cuidado crónico) desde una perspectiva multi-dominio y multi-disciplinar. Durante la fase 1, se ha desarrollado un Proceso de Traducción del Conocimiento, elaborado a partir del JBI Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) model of evidence-based healthcare (Pearson, 2005), y sobre el cual se han definido cuatro Bloques de Innovación. Estos bloques consisten en una descripción de elementos innovadores, definidos en la fase 0, que han sido añadidos a los cuatros elementos que componen el modelo JBI. El trabajo llevado a cabo en esta fase ha servido también para definir los materiales que el proceso de traducción tiene que ejecutar. La traducción que se ha llevado a cabo en la fase 2, y que traduce la mejor evidencia disponible de cuidado crónico en acción: resultado de este proceso de traducción es la parte descriptiva del marco de referencia, que consiste en una descripción de un modelo de cuidado crónico (se ha elegido el Chronic Care Model, Wagner, 1996) en términos de objetivos, especificaciones e indicadores clave de rendimiento y organizada en tres ciclos de innovación (diseño, implementación y evaluación). Este resultado ha permitido verificar la segunda hipótesis. Durante la fase 3, para demostrar la tercera hipótesis, se ha desarrollado un método-mixto de evaluación de equipos multidisciplinares que trabajan en innovaciones para el cuidado crónico. Este método se ha creado a partir del método mixto usado para la evaluación de equipo multidisciplinares translacionales (Wooden, 2013). El método creado añade una dimensión procedural al marco. El resultado de esta fase consiste, por lo tanto, en una primera versión del marco de referencia, lista para ser experimentada. En la fase 4, se ha validado el marco a través de un caso de estudio multinivel y con técnicas de observación-participante como método de recolección de datos. Como caso de estudio se han elegido las actividades de investigación que el grupo de investigación LifeStech ha desarrollado desde el 2008 para mejorar la gestión de la diabetes, actividades realizadas en un contexto internacional. Los resultados demuestran que el marco ha permitido mejorar las actividades de trabajo en distintos niveles: 1) la calidad y cantidad de las publicaciones; 2) se han conseguido dos contratos de investigación sobre diabetes: el primero es un proyecto de investigación aplicada, el segundo es un proyecto financiado para acelerar las innovaciones en el mercado; 3) a través de los indicadores claves de rendimiento propuestos en el marco, una prueba de concepto de un prototipo desarrollado en un proyecto de investigación ha sido transformada en una evaluación temprana de una intervención eHealth para el manejo de la diabetes, que ha sido recientemente incluida en Repositorio de prácticas innovadoras del Partenariado de Innovación Europeo en Envejecimiento saludable y activo. La verificación de las 4 hipótesis ha permitido demonstrar la hipótesis principal de este trabajo de investigación: es posible contribuir a crear un puente entre la atención sanitaria y la innovación y, por lo tanto, mejorar la manera en que el cuidado crónico sea procurado en los sistemas sanitarios. ABSTRACT Nowadays, for the first time in history, most people can expect to live into their sixties and beyond (United Nations, 2015). However, little evidence suggests that older people are experiencing better health than their parents, and most of the health problems of older age are linked to Chronic Diseases (WHO, 2015). The established health care systems in developed countries are well suited to the treatment of acute diseases but are mostly inadequate for dealing with CDs. Healthcare systems are challenging the burden of chronic diseases by putting more emphasis on the prevention of disease and by looking for new ways to reorient the provision of care (Kane et al., 2005). According to an evidence-based review commissioned by the British NHS Institute, few models have conceptualized effective components of care for CDs and these components have been not structured and articulated. “Consequently, there is limited evidence about the real impact of any of the existing models” (Ham, 2006). Innovations could support to achieve better diagnosis, treatment and management for patients across the continuum of care, by supporting health professionals and empowering patients to take responsibility. However, the way they are delivered is not sufficiently efficient, effective and consumer friendly. The improvement of innovation delivery, involves the creation of multidisciplinary research teams and taskforces, rather than just working teams. There are several actions to improve the adoption of innovations from healthcare systems that are tackling the epidemics of CDs: 1) Translate Evidence-Based Healthcare (EBH) into actionable knowledge; 2) Face the complexity of healthcare through multidisciplinary research; 3) Identify a systematic approach to support effective implementation of healthcare interventions through innovation. The framework proposed in this research work is an attempt to provide these improvements. The following hypotheses have been drafted: Hypothesis 1: it is possible to define a translation process to convert a model of chronic care into a structured description of goals, requirements and key performance indicators. Hypothesis 2: a translation process, if executed through evidence-based, multidisciplinary, holistic and business-oriented elements, can convert a model of chronic care in a descriptive framework, which defines the whole development cycle of innovative solutions for chronic disease management. Hypothesis 3: it is possible to design a method to evaluate processes, outcomes and skill acquisition capacities, and assist multidisciplinary research teams in the creation of innovative solutions for chronic disease management. Hypothesis 4: it is possible to assist the development of innovative solutions for chronic disease management through a reference framework and produce positive effects, measured through key performance indicators. In order to verify the hypotheses, a methodological approach, composed of four Phases that correspond to each one of the stated hypothesis, was defined. Prior to this, a “Phase 0”, consisting in a multi-domain and multi-disciplinary background analysis of the problem (i.e.: systematic adoption of innovation to chronic care), was carried out. During phase 1, in order to verify the first hypothesis, a Knowledge Translation Process (KTP) was developed, starting from the JBI Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) model of evidence-based healthcare was used (Pearson, 2005) and adding Four Innovation Blocks. These blocks represent an enriched description, added to the JBI model, to accelerate the transformation of evidence-healthcare through innovation; the innovation blocks are built on top of the conclusions drawn after Phase 0. The background analysis gave also indication on the materials and methods to be used for the execution of the KTP, carried out during phase 2, that translates the actual best available evidence for chronic care into action: this resulted in a descriptive Framework, which is a description of a model of chronic care (the Chronic Care Model was chosen, Wagner, 1996) in terms of goals, specified requirements and Key Performance Indicators, and articulated in the three development cycles of innovation (i.e. design, implementation and evaluation). Thanks to this result the second hypothesis was verified. During phase 3, in order to verify the third hypothesis, a mixed-method to evaluate multidisciplinary teams working on innovations for chronic care, was created, based on a mixed-method used for the evaluation of Multidisciplinary Translational Teams (Wooden, 2013). This method adds a procedural dimension to the descriptive component of the Framework, The result of this phase consisted in a draft version of the framework, ready to be tested in a real scenario. During phase 4, a single and multilevel case study, with participant-observation data collection, was carried out, in order to have a complete but at the same time multi-sectorial evaluation of the framework. The activities that the LifeStech research group carried out since 2008 to improve the management of diabetes have been selected as case study. The results achieved showed that the framework allowed to improve the research activities in different directions: the quality and quantity of the research publications that LifeStech has issued, have increased substantially; 2 project grants to improve the management of diabetes, have been assigned: the first is a grant funding applied research while the second is about accelerating innovations into the market; by using the assessment KPIs of the framework, the proof of concept validation of a prototype developed in a research project was transformed into an early stage assessment of innovative eHealth intervention for Diabetes Management, which has been recently included in the repository of innovative practice of the European Innovation Partnership on Active and Health Ageing initiative. The verification of the 4 hypotheses lead to verify the main hypothesis of this research work: it is possible to contribute to bridge the gap between healthcare and innovation and, in turn, improve the way chronic care is delivered by healthcare systems.

A multidisciplinary approach for improving services in primary care: randomised controlled trial of screening for haemoglobin disorders

Objective: To investigate the feasibility of improving screening for carriers of haemoglobin disorders in general practice by using a nurse facilitator to work with primary care teams and the relevant haematology laboratories; to identify problems in communication between all those involved in delivering the service, and to implement solutions.

Getting the most out of multidisciplinary teams: a multi-sample study of team innovation in health care

Driven by the assumption that multidisciplinarity contributes positively to team outcomes teams are often deliberately staffed such that they comprise multiple disciplines. However, the diversity literature suggests that multidisciplinarity may not always benefit a team. This study departs from the notion of a linear, positive effect of multidisciplinarity and tests its contingency on the quality of team processes. It was assumed that multidisciplinarity only contributes to team outcomes if the quality of team processes is high. This hypothesis was tested in two independent samples of health care workers (N = 66 and N = 95 teams), using team innovation as the outcome variable. Results support the hypothesis for the quality of innovation, rather than the number of innovations introduced by the teams.

Late Entry into HIV Care: Estimated Impact on AIDS Mortality Rates in Brazil, 2003-2006

Background: Worldwide, a high proportion of HIV-infected individuals enter into HIV care late. Here, our objective was to estimate the impact that late entry into HIV care has had on AIDS mortality rates in Brazil. Methodology/Principal Findings: We analyzed data from information systems regarding HIV-infected adults who sought treatment at public health care facilities in Brazil from 2003 to 2006. We initially estimated the prevalence of late entry into HIV care, as well as the probability of death in the first 12 months, the percentage of the risk of death attributable to late entry, and the number of avoidable deaths. We subsequently adjusted the annual AIDS mortality rate by excluding such deaths. Of the 115,369 patients evaluated, 50,358 (43.6%) had entered HIV care late, and 18,002 died in the first 12 months, representing a 16.5% probability of death in the first 12 months (95% CI: 16.3-16.7). By comparing patients who entered HIV care late with those who gained timely access, we found that the risk ratio for death was 49.5 (95% CI: 45.1-54.2). The percentage of the risk of death attributable to late entry was 95.5%, translating to 17,189 potentially avoidable deaths. Averting those deaths would have lowered the 2003-2006 AIDS mortality rate by 39.5%. Including asymptomatic patients with CD4(+) T cell counts >200 and <= 350 cells/mm(3) in the group who entered HIV care late increased this proportion by 1.8%. Conclusions/Significance: In Brazil, antiretroviral drugs reduced AIDS mortality by 43%. Timely entry would reduce that rate by a similar proportion, as well as resulting in a 45.2% increase in the effectiveness of the program for HIV care. The World Health Organization recommendation that asymptomatic patients with CD4(+) T cell counts <= 350 cells/mm(3) be treated would not have a significant impact on this scenario.