QUITE apart from the academic consideration that vital and medical statistics now form an obligatory part of the education of students seeking the University of London's diploma in public health, the demand for information about the methods of vital and medical statistics is increasing. The most casual reader of the newspapers is now aware that population problems are of serious practical importance and that the publications of the General Register Office cannot be ignored. It is scarcely an exaggeration to say that the recently issued preliminary report on the census of 1931 is one of the most sensational documents which has appeared for years, and that he who reads it intelligently will understand what is meant by saying that civilisation is in the melting pot. An Introduction to Medical Statistics. By Hilda M. Woods William T. Russell. Pp. x + 125. (London: P. S. King and Son, Ltd., 1931.) 7s. 6d.

/pdf/an-introduction-to-medical-statistics-58gm2cuxfv.pdf

An Introduction to Medical Statistics

https://rapm.bmj.com/content/rapm/43/2/113.full.pdf

The Third American Society of Regional Anesthesia and Pain Medicine Practice Advisory on Local Anesthetic Systemic Toxicity: Executive Summary 2017.

Background
Clinical practice does not always reflect best practice and evidence, partly because of unconscious acts of omission, information overload, or inaccessible information. Reminders may help clinicians overcome these problems by prompting them to recall information that they already know or would be expected to know and by providing information or guidance in a more accessible and relevant format, at a particularly appropriate time. This is an update of a previously published review.

Objectives
To evaluate the effects of reminders automatically generated through a computerized system (computer-generated) and delivered on paper to healthcare professionals on quality of care (outcomes related to healthcare professionals' practice) and patient outcomes (outcomes related to patients' health condition).

Search methods
We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, six other databases and two trials registers up to 21 September 2016 together with reference checking, citation searching and contact with study authors to identify additional studies.

Selection criteria
We included individual- or cluster-randomized and non-randomized trials that evaluated the impact of computer-generated reminders delivered on paper to healthcare professionals, alone (single-component intervention) or in addition to one or more co-interventions (multi-component intervention), compared with usual care or the co-intervention(s) without the reminder component.

Data collection and analysis
Review authors working in pairs independently screened studies for eligibility and abstracted data. For each study, we extracted the primary outcome when it was defined or calculated the median effect size across all reported outcomes. We then calculated the median improvement and interquartile range (IQR) across included studies using the primary outcome or median outcome as representative outcome. We assessed the certainty of the evidence according to the GRADE approach.

Main results
We identified 35 studies (30 randomized trials and five non-randomized trials) and analyzed 34 studies (40 comparisons). Twenty-nine studies took place in the USA and six studies took place in Canada, France, Israel, and Kenya. All studies except two took place in outpatient care. Reminders were aimed at enhancing compliance with preventive guidelines (e.g. cancer screening tests, vaccination) in half the studies and at enhancing compliance with disease management guidelines for acute or chronic conditions (e.g. annual follow-ups, laboratory tests, medication adjustment, counseling) in the other half.

Computer-generated reminders delivered on paper to healthcare professionals, alone or in addition to co-intervention(s), probably improves quality of care slightly compared with usual care or the co-intervention(s) without the reminder component (median improvement 6.8% (IQR: 3.8% to 17.5%); 34 studies (40 comparisons); moderate-certainty evidence).

Computer-generated reminders delivered on paper to healthcare professionals alone (single-component intervention) probably improves quality of care compared with usual care (median improvement 11.0% (IQR 5.4% to 20.0%); 27 studies (27 comparisons); moderate-certainty evidence). Adding computer-generated reminders delivered on paper to healthcare professionals to one or more co-interventions (multi-component intervention) probably improves quality of care slightly compared with the co-intervention(s) without the reminder component (median improvement 4.0% (IQR 3.0% to 6.0%); 11 studies (13 comparisons); moderate-certainty evidence).

We are uncertain whether reminders, alone or in addition to co-intervention(s), improve patient outcomes as the certainty of the evidence is very low (n = 6 studies (seven comparisons)). None of the included studies reported outcomes related to harms or adverse effects of the intervention.

Authors' conclusions
There is moderate-certainty evidence that computer-generated reminders delivered on paper to healthcare professionals probably slightly improves quality of care, in terms of compliance with preventive guidelines and compliance with disease management guidelines. It is uncertain whether reminders improve patient outcomes because the certainty of the evidence is very low. The heterogeneity of the reminder interventions included in this review also suggests that reminders can probably improve quality of care in various settings under various conditions.

/pdf/computer-generated-reminders-delivered-on-paper-to-7wng4f9shs.pdf

Computer-generated reminders delivered on paper to healthcare professionals: effects on professional practice and healthcare outcomes

The Checklist Manifesto—How to Get Things Right

Despite improving patient safety in some perioperative settings, some checklists are not living up to their potential and complaints of "checklist fatigue" and outright rejection of checklists are growing. Problems reported often concern human factors: poor design, inadequate introduction and training, duplication with other safety checks, poor integration with existing workflow, and cultural barriers. Each medical setting-such as an operating room or a critical care unit-and different clinical needs-such as a shift handover or critical event response-require a different checklist design. One size will not fit all, and checklists must be built around the structure of medical teams and the flow of their work in those settings. Useful guidance can be found in the literature; however, to date, no integrated and comprehensive framework exists to guide development and design of checklists to be effective and harmonious with the flow of medical and perioperative tasks. We propose such a framework organized around the 5 stages of the checklist life cycle: (1) conception, (2) determination of content and design, (3) testing and validation, (4) induction, training, and implementation, and (5) ongoing evaluation, revision, and possible retirement. We also illustrate one way in which the design of checklists can better match user needs in specific perioperative settings (in this case, the operating room during critical events). Medical checklists will only live up to their potential to improve the quality of patient care if their development is improved and their designs are tailored to the specific needs of the users and the environments in which they are used.

More Than a Tick Box: Medical Checklist Development, Design, and Use

Adherence to guidelines for the management of local anesthetic systemic toxicity is improved by an electronic decision support tool and designated "Reader".

The primary aim was to determine whether EACA affected transfusion requirements. Secondary outcomes were effect of EACA use on fibrinogen level, operative time, and hepatic artery or portal vein thrombus formation. We examined the association between EACA and RBC and FFP transfusion volume; factor 7 administrations, presence of thrombosis, mortality, change in fibrinogen levels, and MELD score. Chi-square tests and Fisher’s exact test were used for comparing categorical variables. Student’s t-test or Mann-Whitney U test was used to examine associations between EACA usage and all continuous outcomes. All analyses were conducted in SAS v. 9.3 (SAS Institute, Cary, NC).

Epsilon-Aminocaproic Acid in Liver Transplantation: A Three-Year, Retrospective Review

This unique and interesting case report involves a patient who recently underwent a combined liver and kidney transplant (due to autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease) and subsequently suffered from episodes of supraventricular tachycardia (SVT) secondary to the new liver graft compressing the right atrium and ventricle. After this was diagnosed, the patient underwent operative plication of the right hemidiaphragm. Intraoperative transesophageal echocardiography was used to demonstrate cardiac compression from the liver and demonstrate resolution of compression after plication of the hemidiaphragm.

/pdf/utilization-of-intraoperative-tee-to-assess-supraventricular-33656r1wka.pdf

Utilization of Intraoperative TEE to Assess Supraventricular Tachycardia-Inducing Right-Sided Cardiac Compression by the Liver, Post-Liver-Transplantation Status

Preoperative cardiac functional assessment has been a long-debated topic in liver transplantation. Debate continues to exist regarding the use of invasive cardiac studies, and the utility of each prior to transplant. Despite the debate, a 7% mortality can be attributed to significant cardiac events. We present a case series of 3 patients who underwent orthotopic liver transplantation and developed significant cardiac dysfunction postoperatively. All preoperative cardiac assessments in each patient were normal with no hemodynamically significant abnormalities. Interestingly enough, each patient developed cardiac failure due to completely different diagnoses.

W. David Stoll

Papers

Adherence to guidelines for the management of local anesthetic systemic toxicity is improved by an electronic decision support tool and designated "Reader".

Epsilon-Aminocaproic Acid in Liver Transplantation: A Three-Year, Retrospective Review

Utilization of Intraoperative TEE to Assess Supraventricular Tachycardia-Inducing Right-Sided Cardiac Compression by the Liver, Post-Liver-Transplantation Status

Cirrhotic Cardiomyopathy and Cardiac Failure after Liver Transplantation: A Case Series.