Practical sources of error in measuring pulmonary artery occlusion pressure: a study in participants of a special intensivist training program of The Scandinavian Society of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine (SSAI)

BACKGROUND: Physiological data obtained with the pulmonary artery catheter (PAC) are susceptible to errors in measurement and interpretation. Little attention has been paid to the relevance of errors in hemodynamic measurements performed in the intensive care unit (ICU). The aim of this study was to assess the errors related to the technical aspects (zeroing and reference level) and actual measurement (curve interpretation) of the pulmonary artery occlusion pressure (PAOP). METHODS: Forty-seven participants in a special ICU training program and 22 ICU nurses were tested without pre-announcement. All participants had previously been exposed to the clinical use of the method. The first task was to set up a pressure measurement system for PAC (zeroing and reference level) and the second to measure the PAOP. RESULTS: The median difference from the reference mid-axillary zero level was - 3 cm (-8 to + 9 cm) for physicians and -1 cm (-5 to + 1 cm) for nurses. The median difference from the reference PAOP was 0 mmHg (-3 to 5 mmHg) for physicians and 1 mmHg (-1 to 15 mmHg) for nurses. When PAOP values were adjusted for the differences from the reference transducer level, the median differences from the reference PAOP values were 2 mmHg (-6 to 9 mmHg) for physicians and 2 mmHg (-6 to 16 mmHg) for nurses. CONCLUSIONS: Measurement of the PAOP is susceptible to substantial error as a result of practical mistakes. Comparison of results between ICUs or practitioners is therefore not possible.

Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE): explanation and elaboration

Much medical research is observational. The reporting of observational studies is often of insufficient quality. Poor reporting hampers the assessment of the strengths and weaknesses of a study and the generalizability of its results. Taking into account empirical evidence and theoretical considerations, a group of methodologists, researchers, and editors developed the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) recommendations to improve the quality of reporting of observational studies.The STROBE Statement consists of a checklist of 22 items, which relate to the title, abstract, introduction, methods, results and discussion sections of articles. Eighteen items are common to cohort studies, case-control studies and cross-sectional studies and four are specific to each of the three study designs. The STROBE Statement provides guidance to authors about how to improve the reporting of observational studies and facilitates critical appraisal and interpretation of studies by reviewers, journal editors and readers.This explanatory and elaboration document is intended to enhance the use, understanding, and dissemination of the STROBE Statement. The meaning and rationale for each checklist item are presented. For each item, one or several published examples and, where possible, references to relevant empirical studies and methodological literature are provided. Examples of useful flow diagrams are also included. The STROBE Statement, this document, and the associated web site (http://www.strobe-statement.org) should be helpful resources to improve reporting of observational research.

Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE): explanation and elaboration

Much medical research is observational. The reporting of observational studies is often of insufficient quality. Poor reporting hampers the assessment of the strengths and weaknesses of a study and the generalisability of its results. Taking into account empirical evidence and theoretical considerations, a group of methodologists, researchers, and editors developed the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) recommendations to improve the quality of reporting of observational studies. The STROBE Statement consists of a checklist of 22 items, which relate to the title, abstract, introduction, methods, results and discussion sections of articles. Eighteen items are common to cohort studies, case-control studies and cross-sectional studies and four are specific to each of the three study designs. The STROBE Statement provides guidance to authors about how to improve the reporting of observational studies and facilitates critical appraisal and interpretation of studies by reviewers, journal editors and readers. This explanatory and elaboration document is intended to enhance the use, understanding, and dissemination of the STROBE Statement. The meaning and rationale for each checklist item are presented. For each item, one or several published examples and, where possible, references to relevant empirical studies and methodological literature are provided. Examples of useful flow diagrams are also included. The STROBE Statement, this document, and the associated Web site (http://www.strobe-statement.org/) should be helpful resources to improve reporting of observational research.

Visual and quantitative electroencephalographic analysis of healthy young and adult cats under medetomidine sedation

A study was designed to investigate the effect of medetomidine sedation on quantitative electroencephalography (q-EEG) in healthy young and adult cats to determine objective guidelines for diagnostic EEG recordings and interpretation. Preliminary visual examination of EEG recordings revealed high-voltage low-frequency background activity. Spindles, k-complexes and vertex sharp transients characteristic of sleep or sedation were superimposed on a low background activity. Neither paroxysmal activity nor EEG burst-suppression were observed. The spectral analysis of q-EEG included four parameters, namely, relative power (%), and mean, median and peak frequency (Hz) of all four frequency bands (delta, theta, alpha and beta). The findings showed a prevalence of slow delta and theta rhythms as opposed to fast alpha and beta rhythms in both young (group A) and adult (group B) cats. A posterior gradient was reported for the theta band and an anterior gradient for the alpha and beta bands in both groups, respectively. The relative power value in group B compared to group A was significantly higher for theta, alpha and beta bands, and lower for the delta band. The mean and median frequency values in group B was significantly higher for delta, theta and beta bands and lower for the alpha band. The study has shown that a medetomidine sedation protocol for feline EEG may offer a method for investigating bio-electrical cortical activity. The use of q-EEG analysis showed a decrease in high frequency bands and increased activity of the low frequency band in healthy cats under medetomidine sedation.

[Strengthening the reporting of observational studies in epidemiology (STROBE): explanation and elaboration]

Much medical research is observational. The reporting of observational studies is often of insufficient quality. Poor reporting hampers the assessment of the strengths and weaknesses of a study and the generalisability of its results. Taking into account empirical evidence and theoretical considerations, a group of methodologists, researchers, and editors developed the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) recommendations to improve the quality of reporting of observational studies. The STROBE Statement consists of a checklist of 22 items, which relate to the title, abstract, introduction, methods, results and discussion sections of articles. Eighteen items are common to cohort studies, case-control studies and cross-sectional studies and four are specific to each of the three study designs. The STROBE Statement provides guidance to authors about how to improve the reporting of observational studies and facilitates critical appraisal and interpretation of studies by reviewers, journal editors and readers. This explanatory and elaboration document is intended to enhance the use, understanding, and dissemination of the STROBE Statement. The meaning and rationale for each checklist item are presented. For each item, one or several published examples and, where possible, references to relevant empirical studies and methodological literature are provided. Examples of useful flow diagrams are also included. The STROBE Statement, this document, and the associated Web site (http://www.strobe-statement.org/) should be helpful resources to improve reporting of observational research.

Market, Management and Profession. Social Business in the Polder

In a recent policy document of the organized employers in the care and welfare sector in The Netherlands (the MO Group), directors and board members of care and welfare institutions present themselves as "social entrepreneurs", managing their institutions as look-a like commercial companies. They are hardly criticized and there is not any countervailing power of significance. The workers are focusing on their own specialized professional fields and divided as a whole. Many government officials are in favour or do not bother. The relatively small number of intellectual workers in Dutch care and welfare are fragmented and pragmatic. From a democratic point of view this is a worrying situation. From a professional point of view the purpose and functions of professional care and welfare work are at stake. The penetration of market mechanisms and the take-over by commercially orientated managers result from unquestioned adaptation of Anglo-Saxon policy in The Netherlands in the 1990's, following the crisis of the Welfare State in the late 1980's. The polder country is now confronted fully with the pressure and negative effects of unbalanced powers in the institutions, i.e. Managerialism. After years of silence, the two principal authentic critics of Dutch care and welfare, Harry Kunneman and Andries Baart, are no longer voices crying in the wilderness, but are getting a response from a growing number of worried workers and intellectuals. Kunneman and Baart warn against the restriction of professional space and the loss of normative values and standards in the profession. They are right. It is high time to make room for criticism and to start a debate about the future of the social professions in The Netherlands, better: in Europe. Research, discussion and action have to prove how worrying the everyday situation of professional workers is, what goals have to be set and what strategy to be chosen.

Legal Translation and the Bilingual Publication of Roman Imperial Constitutions

The present paper aims at investigating translation techniques and publication methods of Roman imperial constitutions published in Greek in the eastern provinces of the empire, where the official Latin was not well-established. Language, being a tool for normative communication must be comprehensible to the addressees of the norm, therefore publication of a normative text in a multilingual society brings along difficulties related in particular to the translatability of legal terminology. Language problems appear, however, not only in the level of communication, but also in those of implementation and interpretation of norms. Linguistic diversity, which currently afflicts legislators in the EU, has already been a challenge for the legislators in the Roman Empire. Major difficulty was the necessity of expressing Roman legal concepts in Greek language. Centralized translation system and consequent use of terminology helped to adapt Greek for the purposes of Roman legislator creating new technical vocabulary.

Cancer, meta-analysis and reporting biases: the case of erythropoiesis-stimulating agents.

Reporting and publication bias is a well-known problem in meta-analysis and healthcare research. In 2002 we conducted a meta-analysis on the effects of erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESAs) on overall survival in cancer patients, which suggested some evidence for improved survival in patients receiving ESAs compared with controls. However, a meta-analysis of individual patient data conducted several years later showed the opposite of our first meta-analysis, that is, evidence for increased on-study mortality and reduced overall survival in cancer patients receiving ESAs. We aimed to determine whether the results of our first meta-analysis could have been affected by publication and reporting biases and, if so, whether timely access to clinical study reports and individual patient data could have prevented this. We conducted a hypothetical meta-analysis for overall survival including all studies and study data that could have been available in 2002, at the time when we conducted our first meta-analysis. Compared with our original meta-analysis, which suggested an overall survival benefit for cancer patients receiving ESAs [hazard ratio (HR) 0.81, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.67‒0.99], our hypothetical meta-analysis based on the results of all studies conducted at the time of the first analysis did not show evidence for a beneficial effect of ESAs on overall survival (HR 0.97, 95% CI 0.83‒1.12). Thus we have to conclude that our first meta-analysis showed misleading overall survival benefits due to publication and reporting biases, which could have been prevented by timely access to clinical study reports and individual patient data. Unrestricted access to clinical study protocols including amendments, clinical study reports and individual patient data is needed to ensure timely detection of both beneficial and harmful effects of healthcare interventions.

Vancomycin: Predictive risk factors for nephrotoxicity and implication for monitoring

The increased use of vancomycin in hospitals has resulted in a standard practice to monitor serum vancomycin levels because of possible nephrotoxicity. However, the routine monitoring of vancomycin serum concentration is under criticism and the cost effectiveness of such routine monitoring is in question because frequent monitoring neither results in increase efficacy nor decrease nephrotoxicity. The purpose of the present study is to determine factors that may place patients at increased risk of developing vancomycin induced nephrotoxicity and for whom monitoring may be most beneficial.^ From September to December 1992, 752 consecutive in patients at The University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, were prospectively evaluated for nephrotoxicity in order to describe predictive risk factors for developing vancomycin related nephrotoxicity. Ninety-five patients (13 percent) developed nephrotoxicity. A total of 299 patients (40 percent) were considered monitored (vancomycin serum levels determined during the course of therapy), and 346 patients (46 percent) were receiving concurrent moderate to highly nephrotoxic drugs.^ Factors that were found to be significantly associated with nephrotoxicity in univariate analysis were: gender, base serum creatinine greater than 1.5mg/dl, monitor, leukemia, concurrent moderate to highly nephrotoxic drugs, and APACHE III scores of 40 or more. Significant factors in the univariate analysis were then entered into a stepwise logistic regression analysis to determine independent predictive risk factors for vancomycin induced nephrotoxicity.^ Factors, with their corresponding odds ratios and 95% confidence limits, selected by stepwise logistic regression analysis to be predictive of vancomycin induced nephrotoxicity were: Concurrent therapy with moderate to highly nephrotoxic drugs (2.89; 1.76-4.74), APACHE III scores of 40 or more (1.98; 1.16-3.38), and male gender (1.98; 1.04-2.71).^ Subgroup (monitor and non-monitor) analysis showed that male (OR = 1.87; 95% CI = 1.01, 3.45) and moderate to highly nephrotoxic drugs (OR = 4.58; 95% CI = 2.11, 9.94) were significant for nephrotoxicity in monitored patients. However, only APACHE III score (OR = 2.67; 95% CI = 1.13,6.29) was significant for nephrotoxicity in non-monitored patients.^ The conclusion drawn from this study is that not every patient receiving vancomycin therapy needs frequent monitoring of vancomycin serum levels. Such routine monitoring may be appropriate in patients with one or more of the identified risk factors and low risk patients do not need to be subjected to the discomfort and added cost of multiple blood sampling. Such prudent selection of patients to monitor may decrease cost to patients and hospital. ^