Priorities for content for a short-course on postoperative care relevant for low- and middle-income countries: an e-Delphi process with training facilitators

Most surgical and anaesthetic mortality and morbidity occurs postoperatively, disproportionately affecting low- and middle-income countries. Various short courses have been developed to improve patient outcomes in low- and middle-income countries, but none specifically to address postoperative care and complications. We aimed to identify key features of a proposed short-course addressing this topic using a Delphi process with low- and middle-income country anaesthesia providers trained as short-course facilitators. An initial questionnaire was co-developed from literature review and exploratory workshops to include 108 potential course features. Features included content; teaching method; appropriate participants; and appropriate faculty. Over three Delphi rounds (panellists numbered 86, 64 and 35 in successive cycles), panellists indicated which features they considered most important. Responses were analysed by geographical regions: Africa, the Americas, south-east Asia and Western Pacific. Ultimately, panellists identified 60, 40 and 54 core features for the proposed course in each region, respectively. There were high levels of consensus within regions on what constituted core course content, but not between regions. All panellists preferred the small group workshop teaching method irrespective of region. All regions considered anaesthetists to be key facilitators, while all agreed that both anaesthetists and operating theatre nurses were key participants. The African and Americas regional panels recommended more multidisciplinary healthcare professionals for participant roles. Faculty from high-income countries were not considered high priority. Our study highlights variability between geographical regions as to which course features were perceived as most locally relevant, supporting regional adaptation of short-course design rather than a one-size-fits-all model.     

结核病与糖尿病共病的治疗管理专家共识

结核病与糖尿病均是临床上的常见病和多发病,两者可合并存在,相互影响。活动性结核病作为感染因素可加重糖尿病病情,而糖尿病患者又是发生结核病的高危人群,结核病与糖尿病双重负担将成为重大的全球公共卫生问题。因此,需重视结核病与糖尿病共病的治疗管理。本共识重点介绍了结核病与糖尿病共病的危害、发病机制、双向筛查、临床特点、诊断、治疗和管理等内容。     

中国5~18岁人群遗尿症患病率的横断面调查

目的 了解中国儿童和青少年遗尿症的患病情况。方法 横断面调查，以中国医师协会肾脏专委会中国儿童遗尿疾病管理协作组（简称：协作组）成员与所在省、自治区和直辖市有工作联系的区县为抽样单位。遗尿症诊断标准为年龄≥5岁，3个月内出现尿床事件≥1次；尿床指夜间睡眠中排尿于床上或尿湿衣裤。调查时间为2017年4月20日至2017年5月12日；调查人群为中国5~18岁儿童及青少年，分为幼儿园（5~6岁）、小学（~12岁），初中（~15岁）和高中（~18岁）。每个区县样本量需＞3 073人。自行设计遗尿症调查问卷，本文主要分析基本人口学信息和尿床事件。由儿童或青少年的家长或照护者在手机或其他安装有微信应用终端设备上填写问卷。结果 24个协作组成员所在省、自治区和直辖市中的34个区县中的225所幼儿园和学校参与了调查，其中幼儿园82所，小学61所，初中49所，高中33所。调查目标样本人群129 952人，进入本文分析的调查问卷100 071份（77.0%）。男52 074份，平均年龄（11.0±3.4）岁，汉族占92.5%，幼儿园、小学、初中、高中人数比例约为1∶5∶2∶1。中国儿童和青少年遗尿症患病率为4.8%（4 821/100 071）；幼儿园、小学、初中、高中遗尿患病率分别为12.1%、5.1%、1.1%和1.4%；各年龄男孩遗尿症患病率均高于同年龄的女孩；中国境内6大行政区（华北、东北、华东、中南、西南、西北）以样本人群年龄构成比进行标准化后，其患病率分别为4.2%，3.7%、4.6%、5.8%、5.1%和4.9%；4 821名遗尿症患儿中，轻、中、重度遗尿症患儿分别占81.4%、13.5%和5.1%；重度遗尿症幼儿园、小学、初中和高中组比例为6.9%、3.7%、5.3%和10.0%。结论 中国幼儿园、小学、初中、高中人群遗尿患病率分别为12.1%、5.1%、1.1%和1.4%，儿童遗尿症患病率总体为4.8%。幼儿园及高中组重度遗尿症的比例较高。     

武汉同济医院－新型冠状病毒感染的肺炎流行期间孕产妇及新生儿管理指导意见(第一版)

2019年12月以来,湖北省武汉市发生多例新型冠状病毒感染的肺炎病例,后来我国其他省市和国外也陆续出现相关病例。孕产妇和新生儿如何防范,从哪些地方警惕,产检安排是否需要调整;疑似病例判断标准是什么,服药方案怎么制定;医护人员的配备怎么安排比较合适;分娩后新生儿的观察和隔离怎么制定方案,如何指导家属进行看护?面对这一系列问题,武汉华中科技大学同济医院妇产科联合新生儿科共同发布了《同济医院-新型冠状病毒感染的肺炎流行期间孕产妇及新生儿管理指导意见》,依据国家卫建委发布的《新型冠状病毒感染的肺炎诊疗方案(试行第四版)》和世界卫生组织、美国及各省份就肺炎或新型冠状病毒感染肺炎的相关指导意见,结合近期实际临床救治经验和体会,以问答方式,就上述问题进行了一一指导阐述。     

A multi-source feedback tool for measuring a subset of Pediatrics Milestones

Background: The Pediatrics Milestones Assessment Pilot employed a new multisource feedback (MSF) instrument to assess nine Pediatrics Milestones among interns and subinterns in the inpatient context.

Objective: To report validity evidence for the MSF tool for informing milestone classification decisions.

Methods: We obtained MSF instruments by different raters per learner per rotation. We present evidence for validity based on the unified validity framework.

Results: One hundred and ninety two interns and 41 subinterns at 18 Pediatrics residency programs received a total of 1084 MSF forms from faculty (40%), senior residents (34%), nurses (22%), and other staff (4%). Variance in ratings was associated primarily with rater (32%) and learner (22%). The milestone factor structure fit data better than simpler structures. In domains except professionalism, ratings by nurses were significantly lower than those by faculty and ratings by other staff were significantly higher. Ratings were higher when the rater observed the learner for longer periods and had a positive global opinion of the learner. Ratings of interns and subinterns did not differ, except for ratings by senior residents. MSF-based scales correlated with summative milestone scores.

Conclusion: We obtain moderately reliable MSF ratings of interns and subinterns in the inpatient context to inform some milestone assignments.