Search

INTRODUCTION: A retained placenta is diagnosed when the placenta is not delivered following delivery of the baby. It is a major cause of postpartum haemorrhage and treated by the operative procedure of manual removal of placenta (MROP). METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The aim of this pragmatic, randomised, placebo-controlled, double-blind UK-wide trial, with an internal pilot and nested qualitative research to adjust strategies to refine delivery of the main trial, is to determine whether sublingual glyceryl trinitrate (GTN) is (or is not) clinically and cost-effective for (medical) management of retained placenta. The primary clinical outcome is need for MROP, defined as the placenta remaining undelivered 15 min poststudy treatment and/or being required within 15 min of treatment due to safety concerns. The primary safety outcome is measured blood loss between administration of treatment and transfer to the postnatal ward or other clinical area. The primary patient-sided outcome is satisfaction with treatment and a side effect profile. The primary economic outcome is net incremental costs (or cost savings) to the National Health Service of using GTN versus standard practice. Secondary outcomes are being measured over a range of clinical and economic domains. The primary outcomes will be analysed using linear models appropriate to the distribution of each outcome. Health service costs will be compared with multiple trial outcomes in a cost-consequence analysis of GTN versus standard practice. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval has been obtained from the North-East Newcastle & North Tyneside 2 Research Ethics Committee (13/NE/0339). Dissemination plans for the trial include the Health Technology Assessment Monograph, presentation at international scientific meetings and publication in high-impact, peer-reviewed journals. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISCRTN88609453; Pre-results.

Modelling patient flow is crucial in understanding resource demand and prioritization. To date, there has been limited work in predicting ward-level discharges. Our study investigates forecasting total next-day discharges from an open ward. In the absence of real-time clinical data, we propose to construct a feature set from patient demographics, ward data and discharge time series to derive a random forest model for forecasting daily discharge. Using data from a general ward of a large regional Australian hospital, we compared our random forest model with a classical auto-regressive integrated moving average (ARIMA) for 12,141 patient visits over 1826 days. Forecasting quality was measured using Mean Forecast Error, Mean Absolute Error, symmetric Mean Absolute Percentage Error and Root Mean Square Error. When compared to the baseline model, next day discharge forecasts using random forests achieved 17.4 % improvement in Mean Absolute Error, for all days in the year 2014.

To establish what is known regarding the psychological and social problems faced by adult cancer survivors (people who are living with and beyond a diagnosis of cancer) and identify areas future research should address.

BACKGROUND: Patients who have completed initial cancer treatment (cancer survivors) have been relatively neglected. We need data to help us better understand the needs of this group and to underpin evidence-based service development. METHODS: Scoping reviews of research published in the last two decades focussing on the problems faced by cancer survivors, and the effectiveness of interventions for these problems were undertaken. The aim was to identify what we know, what we do not know and opportunities where research could provide new information. We searched for, retrieved and rapidly appraised systematic reviews sourced from the most common electronic databases supplemented by more recently published individual studies. RESULTS: The research evidence is surprisingly limited. We have some knowledge of the prevalence and nature of depression, pain and fatigue in cancer survivors. We know much less about cognitive and physical impairment, employment, financial well-being and relationships. Even where we have evidence, it is mostly of only moderate quality, is most often only for breast cancer and focuses almost exclusively on the early phase of survivorship. We have good evidence for the effectiveness of drug treatments for pain and moderate evidence for fatigue and depression, but not for other symptoms. Interventions based on rehabilitative and self-management approaches remain in the early stages of evaluation. INTERPRETATION: There has been a substantial amount of research describing many of the problems experienced by the cancer survivors. This is strongest in the area of symptoms in the period soon after treatment. However, the quality of the evidence is often poor, and some topics have been little examined. We urgently need data on the natural evolution and scale of the problems of cancer survivors obtained from well-designed, large-scale cohort studies and the robust testing of interventions in clinical trials. Given the current financially constrained resea

Purpose: A rapid and comprehensive review to identify what is known and not known about the physical and practical problems faced by adult cancer survivors. Methods: A systematic literature review process was used. This focused on published reviews to enable a fast but rigorous identification of both the gaps and well-researched areas within survivorship. Results: The search identified 5121 reviews, of which 42 were screened and 9 met the quality and inclusion criteria. The majority of papers focused on physical well being (n = 6) with the remaining papers focusing on practical well being (employment and finance). The quality of the reviews varied (ranging from weak to good). Gaps identified include sexual function, lower-limb lymphoedema, peripheral neuropathy, bladder and GI problems, hormonal sequelae, older cancer survivors, work impact of cancer and context-specific unmet supportive care needs. The review found a lack of standardised nomenclature for survivorship and methodological limitations. Conclusions: Four main gaps in knowledge relating to the practical and physical problems associated with cancer survivorship have been identified. These are key symptoms, unmet supportive care needs, employment and older cancer survivors, and should be addressed by future research and systematic literature reviews. Work is also needed to address the nomenclature of survivorship and to improve the methodology of research into cancer survivors (including standardised measures, theoretical frameworks, longitudinal design, inclusion of older survivors and age-matched controls for comparison). The review highlighted the need for better research within the identified areas in order to improve the experiences of cancer survivors. (C) 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Purpose: A rapid and comprehensive review to identify what is known and not known about the physical and practical problems faced by adult cancer survivors. Methods: A systematic literature review process was used. This focused on published reviews to enable a fast but rigorous identification of both the gaps and well-researched areas within survivorship. Results: The search identified 5121 reviews, of which 42 were screened and 9 met the quality and inclusion criteria. The majority of papers focused on physical well being (n = 6) with the remaining papers focusing on practical well being (employment and finance). The quality of the reviews varied (ranging from weak to good). Gaps identified include sexual function, lower-limb lymphoedema, peripheral neuropathy, bladder and GI problems, hormonal sequelae, older cancer survivors, work impact of cancer and context-specific unmet supportive care needs. The review found a lack of standardised nomenclature for survivorship and methodological limitations. Conclusions: Four main gaps in knowledge relating to the practical and physical problems associated with cancer survivorship have been identified. These are key symptoms, unmet supportive care needs, employment and older cancer survivors, and should be addressed by future research and systematic literature reviews. Work is also needed to address the nomenclature of survivorship and to improve the methodology of research into cancer survivors (including standardised measures, theoretical frameworks, longitudinal design, inclusion of older survivors and age-matched controls for comparison). The review highlighted the need for better research within the identified areas in order to improve the experiences of cancer survivors. (C) 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.