[Swiss Research Agenda for Nursing (SRAN): the development of an agenda for clinical nursing research in Switzerland]

In many Anglo-Saxon and North European countries nursing research agendas have been developed to address priorities in nursing research in accordance with a nationally defined health policy. In Switzerland, due to lack of a nationwide governmental health policy, co-ordination of nursing research so far was scarce. The "Swiss Research Agenda for Nursing (SRAN)" project developed an agenda for clinical nursing research between 2005 and 2007. Based on literature reviews, expert panels and a national survey a project team formulated an agenda which passed a consensus conference. The agenda recommends aspects that should lead research and defines seven research priorities for nursing in Switzerland for the time between 2007 and 2017. Nursing research should prioritize to investigate 1) the effectiveness of nursing interventions; 2) the influences of service adaptations in a changing health care system; 3) the phenomena in patients requiring nursing care; 4) the influence of the work environment on the quality of nursing care; 5) the functioning of family and social systems; 6) varieties of life circumstances and their integration; and 7) the implementation of ethical principles in nursing. Written in German and French, the Swiss Research Agenda for Nursing for the first time formulates priorities for nursing research in Switzerland and can be used for strategic discussions. As a next step, the development of an action plan to enhance nursing research will take place in Switzerland.

Developing ICF Core Sets for persons with sleep disorders based on the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health

BACKGROUND: With the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF), we can now rely on a globally agreed-upon framework and system for classifying the typical spectrum of problems in the functioning of persons given the environmental context in which they live. ICF Core Sets are subgroups of ICF items selected to capture those aspects of functioning that are most likely to be affected by sleep disorders. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this paper is to outline the developmental process for the ICF Core Sets for Sleep. METHODS: The ICF Core Sets for Sleep will be defined at an ICF Core Sets Consensus Conference, which will integrate evidence from preliminary studies, namely (a) a systematic literature review regarding the outcomes used in clinical trials and observational studies, (b) focus groups with people in different regions of the world who have sleep disorders, (c) an expert survey with the involvement of international clinical experts, and (d) a cross-sectional study of people with sleep disorders in different regions of the world. CONCLUSION: The ICF Core Sets for Sleep are being designed with the goal of providing useful standards for research, clinical practice and teaching. It is hypothesized that the ICF Core Sets for Sleep will stimulate research that leads to an improved understanding of functioning, disability, and health in sleep medicine. It is of further hope that such research will lead to interventions and accommodations that improve the restoration and maintenance of functioning and minimize disability among people with sleep disorders throughout the world.

A paradigm shift in mechanical biofilm management? Subgingival air polishing: a new way to improve mechanical biofilm management in the dental practice

In the past few years indications for the use of the air polishing technology have been expanded from supragingival use (airflow) to subgingival air polishing (perioflow) by the development of new low-abrasive glycine-based powders and devices with a subgingival nozzle. Several studies on the subgingival use of air polishing have been completed. On 7 June 2012, during the Europerio 7 Congress in Vienna, a consensus conference on mechanical biofilm management took place aiming to review the current evidence from the literature on the clinical relevance of the subgingival use of air polishing and to make practical recommendations for the clinician. Bernita Bush (Bern), Prof Johannes Einwag (Stuttgart), Prof Thomas Flemmig (Seattle), Carmen Lanoway (Munich), Prof Ursula Platzer (Hamburg), Prof Petra Schmage (Hamburg), Brigitte Schoeneich (Zurich), Prof Anton Sculean (Bern), Dr Clemens Walter (Basel), and Prof Jan Wennström (Gothenburg) discussed under the moderation of Klaus-Dieter Bastendorf and Christian Becker (both ADIC Association for Dental Infection Control) the available clinical studies to reach a consensus on available clinical evidence. This paper summarizes the main conclusions of the consensus conference and points to the clinical relevance of the findings for the dental practitioner.

A Research Roadmap for Complementary and Alternative Medicine – What We Need to Know by 2020

Background: The CAMbrella coordination action was funded within the Framework Programme 7. Its aim is to provide a research roadmap for clinical and epidemiological research for complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) that is appropriate for the health needs of European citizens and acceptable to their national research institutes and healthcare providers in both public and private sectors. One major issue in the European research agenda is the demographic change and its impact on health care. Our vision for 2020 is that there is an evidence base that enables European citizens to make informed decisions about CAM, both positive and negative. This roadmap proposes a strategic research agenda for the field of CAM designed to address future European health care challenges. This roadmap is based on the results of CAMbrella’s several work packages, literature reviews and expert discussions including a consensus meeting. Methods: We first conducted a systematic literature review on key issues in clinical and epidemiological research in CAM to identify the general concepts, methods and the strengths and weaknesses of current CAM research. These findings were discussed in a workshop (Castellaro, Italy, September 7–9th 2011) with international CAM experts and strategic and methodological recommendations were defined in order to improve the rigor and relevance of CAM research. These recommendations provide the basis for the research roadmap, which was subsequently discussed in a consensus conference (Järna, Sweden, May 9–11th 2012) with all CAMbrella members and the CAMbrella advisory board. The roadmap was revised after this discussion in CAMbrella Work Package (WP) 7 and finally approved by CAMbrella’s scientific steering committee on September 26th 2012. Results: Our main findings show that CAM is very heterogenous in terms of definitions and legal regulations between the European countries. In addition, citizens’ needs and attitudes towards CAM as well as the use and provision of CAM differ significantly between countries. In terms of research methodology, there was consensus that CAM researchers should make use of all the commonly accepted scientific research methods and employ those with utmost diligence combined in a mixed methods framework. Conclusions: We propose 6 core areas of research that should be investigated to achieve a robust knowledge base and to allow stakeholders to make informed decisions. These are: Research into the prevalence of CAM in Europe: Reviews show that we do not know enough about the circumstances in which CAM is used by Europeans. To enable a common European strategic approach, a clear picture of current use is of the utmost importance. Research into differences regarding citizens’ attitudes and needs towards CAM: Citizens are the driver for CAM utilization. Their needs and views on CAM are a key priority, and their interests must be investigated and addressed in future CAM research. Research into safety of CAM: Safety is a key issue for European citizens. CAM is considered safe, but reliable data is scarce although urgently needed in order to assess the risk and cost-benefit ratio of CAM. Research into the comparative effectiveness of CAM: Everybody needs to know in what situation CAM is a reasonable choice. Therefore, we recommend a clear emphasis on concurrent evaluation of the overall effectiveness of CAM as an additional or alternative treatment strategy in real-world settings. Research into effects of context and meaning: The impact of effects of context and meaning on the outcome of CAM treatments must be investigated; it is likely that they are significant. Research into different models of CAM health care integration: There are different models of CAM being integrated into conventional medicine throughout Europe, each with their respective strengths and limitations. These models should be described and concurrently evaluated; innovative models of CAM provision in health care systems should be one focus for CAM research. We also propose a methodological framework for CAM research. We consider that a framework of mixed methodological approaches is likely to yield the most useful information. In this model, all available research strategies including comparative effectiveness research utilising quantitative and qualitative methods should be considered to enable us to secure the greatest density of knowledge possible. Stakeholders, such as citizens, patients and providers, should be involved in every stage of developing the specific and relevant research questions, study design and the assurance of real-world relevance for the research. Furthermore, structural and sufficient financial support for research into CAM is needed to strengthen CAM research capacity if we wish to understand why it remains so popular within the EU. In order to consider employing CAM as part of the solution to the health care, health creation and self-care challenges we face by 2020, it is vital to obtain a robust picture of CAM use and reliable information about its cost, safety and effectiveness in real-world settings. We need to consider the availability, accessibility and affordability of CAM. We need to engage in research excellence and utilise comparative effectiveness approaches and mixed methods to obtain this data. Our recommendations are both strategic and methodological. They are presented for the consideration of researchers and funders while being designed to answer the important and implicit questions posed by EU citizens currently using CAM in apparently increasing numbers. We propose that the EU actively supports an EUwide strategic approach that facilitates the development of CAM research. This could be achieved in the first instance through funding a European CAM coordinating research office dedicated to foster systematic communication between EU governments, public, charitable and industry funders as well as researchers, citizens and other stakeholders. The aim of this office would be to coordinate research strategy developments and research funding opportunities, as well as to document and disseminate international research activities in this field. With the aim to develop sustainability as second step, a European Centre for CAM should be established that takes over the monitoring and further development of a coordinated research strategy for CAM, as well as it should have funds that can be awarded to foster high quality and robust independent research with a focus on citizens health needs and pan-European collaboration. We wish to establish a solid funding for CAM research to adequately inform health care and health creation decision-making throughout the EU. This centre would ensure that our vision of a common, strategic and scientifically rigorous approach to CAM research becomes our legacy and Europe’s reality. We are confident that our recommendations will serve these essential goals for EU citizens.

High prevalence but limited evidence in complementary and alternative medicine: guidelines for future research

The use of complementary and alternative Medicine (CAM) has increased over the past two decades in Europe. Nonetheless, research investigating the evidence to support its use remains limited. The CAMbrella project funded by the European Commission aimed to develop a strategic research agenda starting by systematically evaluating the state of CAM in the EU. CAMbrella involved 9 work packages covering issues such as the definition of CAM; its legal status, provision and use in the EU; and a synthesis of international research perspectives. Based on the work package reports, we developed a strategic and methodologically robust research roadmap based on expert workshops, a systematic Delphi-based process and a final consensus conference. The CAMbrella project suggests six core areas for research to examine the potential contribution of CAM to the health care challenges faced by the EU. These areas include evaluating the prevalence of CAM use in Europe; the EU cititzens’ needs and attitudes regarding CAM; the safety of CAM; the comparative effectiveness of CAM; the effects of meaning and context on CAM outcomes; and different models for integrating CAM into existing health care systems. CAM research should use methods generally accepted in the evaluation of health services, including comparative effectiveness studies and mixed-methods designs. A research strategy is urgently needed, ideally led by a European CAM coordinating research office dedicated to fostering systematic communication between EU governments, the public, charitable and industry funders, researchers and other stakeholders. A European Centre for CAM should also be established to monitor and further a coordinated research strategy with sufficient funds to commission and promote high quality, independent research focusing on the public’s health needs and pan-European collaboration. There is a disparity between highly prevalent use of CAM in Europe and solid knowledge about it. A strategic approach on CAM research should be established to investigate the identified gaps of knowledge and to address upcoming health care challenges.

SADMFR guidelines for the use of Cone-Beam Computed Tomography/ Digital Volume Tomography

Cone-Beam Computed Tomography (CBCT) has been introduced in 1998. This radiological imaging procedure has been provided for dentistry and is comparable to computed tomography (CT) in medicine. It is expected that CBCT will have the same success in dental diagnostic imaging as computed tomography had in medicine. Just as CT is responsible for a significant rise in radiation dose to the population from medical X-ray diagnostics, CBCT studies will be accompanied by a significant increase of the dose to our patients by dentistry. Because of the growing concern for an uncritical and consequently rapidly increasing use of CBCT the Swiss Society of Dentomaxillofacial Radiology convened a first consensus conference in 2011 to formulate indications for CBCT, which can be used as guidelines. In this meeting, oral and maxillofacial surgery, orthodontics and temporomandibular joint disorders and diseases were treated and the most important and most experienced users of DVT in these areas were asked to participate. In general, a highly restrictive use of CBCT is required. Justifying main criterion for CBCT application is that additional, therapy-relevant information is expected that should lead to a significant benefit in patient care. All users of CBCT should have completed a structured, high-level training, just like that offered by the Swiss Society of Dentomaxillofacial Radiology.

SADMFR Guidelines for the Use of Cone-Beam Computed Tomography/Digital Volume Tomography

In 2011, the first consensus conference on guidelines for the use of cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) was convened by the Swiss Society of Dentomaxillofacial Radiology (SGDMFR). This conference covered topics of oral and maxillofacial surgery, temporomandibular joint dysfunctions and disorders, and orthodontics. In 2014, a second consensus conference was convened on guidelines for the use of CBCT in endodontics, periodontology, reconstructive dentistry and pediatric dentistry. The guidelines are intended for all dentists in order to facilitate the decision as to when the use of CBCT is justified. As a rule, the use of CBCT is considered restrictive, since radiation protection reasons do not allow its routine use. CBCT should therefore be reserved for complex cases where its application can be expected to provide further information that is relevant to the choice of therapy. In periodontology, sufficient information is usually available from clinical examination and periapical radiographs; in endodontics alternative methods can often be used instead of CBCT; and for implant patients undergoing reconstructive dentistry, CT is of interest for the workflow from implant planning to the superstructure. For pediatric dentistry no application of CBCT is seen for caries diagnosis.