Bleeding risk assessment and management in atrial fibrillation patients: Executive summary# of a position document from the european heart rhythm association [EHRA], endorsed by the european society of cardiology [ESC] working group on thrombosis
Lip G.Y.H.,University of Birmingham |
Andreotti F.,melli University Hospital |
Fauchier L.,University of Tours |
Huber K.,Cardiology and Emergency Medicine |
And 8 more authors.
Thrombosis and Haemostasis | Year: 2011
In this executive summary of a Consensus Document from the European Heart Rhythm Association, endorsed by the European Society of Cardiology Working Group on Thrombosis, we comprehensively review the published evidence and propose a consensus on bleeding risk assessments in atrial fibrillation (AF) patients. The main aim of the document was to summarise 'best practice' in dealing with bleeding risk in AF patients when approaching antithrombotic therapy, by addressing the epidemiology and size of the problem, and review established bleeding risk factors. We also summarise definitions of bleeding in the published literature. Patient values and preferences balancing the risk of bleeding against thromboembolism as well as the prognostic implications of bleeding are reviewed. We also provide an overview of published bleeding risk stratification and bleeding risk schema. Brief discussion of special situations (e.g. periablation, peri-devices such as implantable cardioverter defibrillators [ICD] or pacemakers, presentation with acute coronary syndromes and/or requiring percutanous coronary interventions/stents and bridging therapy) is made, as well as a discussion of the prevention of bleeds and managing bleeding complications. Finally, this document puts forwards consensus statements that may help to define evidence gaps and assist in everyday clinical practice. © Schattauer 2011.
Lorell B.H.,FDA and Life science Group |
Mikita J.S.,Patient Representative |
Anderson A.,Center for Information and Study on Clinical Research Participation |
Hallinan Z.P.,Center for Information and Study on Clinical Research Participation |
Forrest A.,Clinical Trials Transformation Initiative CTTI
Clinical Trials | Year: 2015
Background Informed consent is the cornerstone for protection of human subjects in clinical trials. However, a growing body of evidence suggests that reform of the informed consent process in the United States is needed. Methods The Clinical Trials Transformation Initiative conducted interviews with 25 experienced observers of the informed consent process to identify limitations and actionable recommendations for change. Results There was broad consensus that current practices often fail to meet the ethical obligation to inform potential research participants during the informed consent process. The most frequent single recommendation, which would affect all participants in federally regulated clinical research, was reform of the informed consent document. The interviews also identified the need for reform of clinical research review by institutional review boards, including transitioning to a single institutional review board for multi-site trials. Conclusion The consensus recommendations from the interviewees provide a framework for meaningful change in the informed consent process. Although some proposed changes are feasible for rapid implementation, others such as substantive reform of the informed consent document may require change in federal regulations. © 2015 The Author(s).
Greenhalgh J.,University of Leeds |
Pawson R.,University of Leeds |
Wright J.,University of Leeds |
Black N.,London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine |
And 7 more authors.
BMJ Open | Year: 2014
Introduction: The feedback and public reporting of PROMs data aims to improve the quality of care provided to patients. Existing systematic reviews have found it difficult to draw overall conclusions about the effectiveness of PROMs feedback. We aim to execute a realist synthesis of the evidence to understand by what means and in what circumstances the feedback of PROMs data leads to the intended service improvements. Methods and analysis: Realist synthesis involves (stage 1) identifying the ideas, assumptions or 'programme theories' which explain how PROMs feedback is supposed to work and in what circumstances and then (stage 2) reviewing the evidence to determine the extent to which these expectations are met in practice. For stage 1, six provisional 'functions' of PROMs feedback have been identified to structure our review (screening, monitoring, patient involvement, demand management, quality improvement and patient choice). For each function, we will identify the different programme theories that underlie these different goals and develop a logical map of the respective implementation processes. In stage 2, we will identify studies that will provide empirical tests of each component of the programme theories to evaluate the circumstances in which the potential obstacles can be overcome and whether and how the unintended consequences of PROMs feedback arise. We will synthesise this evidence to (1) identify the implementation processes which support or constrain the successful collation, interpretation and utilisation of PROMs data; (2) identify the implementation processes through which the unintended consequences of PROMs data arise and those where they can be avoided. Ethics and dissemination: The study will not require NHS ethics approval. We have secured ethical approval for the study from the University of Leeds (LTSSP-019). We will disseminate the findings of the review through a briefing paper and dissemination event for National Health Service stakeholders, conferences and peer reviewed publications.
Potter S.,University of Bristol |
Harcourt D.,University of the West of England |
Cawthorn S.,Breast Care Unit |
Warr R.,Frenchay Hospital |
And 3 more authors.
Annals of Surgical Oncology | Year: 2011
Background. Breast reconstruction (BR) is undertaken to improve cosmetic outcomes, but how this is optimally assessed is uncertain. This review summarises current methods for assessing cosmesis after reconstructive surgery and makes recommendations for future practice. Methods. A comprehensive systematic review identified all studies with 20 or more participants that evaluated the cosmetic outcome of BR. Four evaluation criteria (reporting of study inclusion criteria, type and timing of BR and timing of assessment) were used to assess study quality. Articles reporting at least three of the four criteria were considered robust and further summarised to report methods of cosmetic assessment, assessor details and the scoring systems used. Results. 122 primary papers assessed cosmesis in 11,308 women with median follow-up of 28.8 months (range 18.0-42.9 months). Cosmesis was assessed by either healthcare professionals or patients in 33 (27.1%) and 37 studies (30.3%), respectively, and by both professionals and patients in 52 (42.6%). Professional assessments included 43 (40.2%) clinical, 49 (45.8%) photographic and 13 (12.1%) geometric assessments conducted by between 1 and 26 observers. Surgeons were most frequently involved in assessments (n = 71, 67.6%), but in 38 (36.1%) papers the assessor's profession was not reported. Twenty-seven (25.7%) papers used previously published assessment scale. Patients' views were assessed in 89 studies, using questionnaires (n = 63) or interviews (n = 12); 14 (15.7%) did not report how patients' views were obtained. Conclusions. Current methods for assessing the cosmetic outcome of BR vary widely. A valid patient-centred assessment method is required to fully understand the outcomes of BR and to inform decision-making. © Society of Surgical Oncology 2010.
Sabbatini A.K.,University of Washington |
Merck L.H.,Brown University |
Froemming A.T.,Mayo Medical School |
Vaughan W.,Patient Representative |
And 5 more authors.
Academic Emergency Medicine | Year: 2015
Patient-centered emergency diagnostic imaging relies on efficient communication and multispecialty care coordination to ensure optimal imaging utilization. The construct of the emergency diagnostic imaging care coordination cycle with three main phases (pretest, test, and posttest) provides a useful framework to evaluate care coordination in patient-centered emergency diagnostic imaging. This article summarizes findings reached during the patient-centered outcomes session of the 2015 Academic Emergency Medicine consensus conference "Diagnostic Imaging in the Emergency Department: A Research Agenda to Optimize Utilization." The primary objective was to develop a research agenda focused on 1) defining component parts of the emergency diagnostic imaging care coordination process, 2) identifying gaps in communication that affect emergency diagnostic imaging, and 3) defining optimal methods of communication and multidisciplinary care coordination that ensure patient-centered emergency diagnostic imaging. Prioritized research questions provided the framework to define a research agenda for multidisciplinary care coordination in emergency diagnostic imaging. © 2015 by the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine.