Conectar
by Verena Schöneberger, Volkan Tahmaz, Mario Matthaei, Sigrid Roters, Simona L. Schlereth, Friederike Schaub, Claus Cursiefen, Björn O. Bachmann
PurposeTo describe a novel corneal surgical technique combining Deep Anterior Lamellar Keratoplasty (DALK) with grafting of allogeneic limbus (Limbo-DALK) for the treatment of eyes with corneal stromal pathology and limbal stem cell deficiency (LSCD).
MethodsClinical records of six Limbo-DALKs performed in five patients diagnosed with LSCD and corneal stromal pathology requiring keratoplasty were retrospectively reviewed. All patients were diagnosed with LSCD due to various pathologies including thermal and chemical burns, congenital aniridia or chronic inflammatory ocular surface disease. Parameters analysed included demographics, diagnoses, clinical history, thickness measurements using anterior segment OCT, visual acuity, and epithelial status. Regular follow-up visits were scheduled at 6 weeks as well as 3, 6, 9, and 12 and 18 months postoperatively. Main outcome measures were time to graft epithelialisation and the occurrence of corneal endothelial decompensation.
ResultsTwo grafts showed complete epithelial closure at 2 days, two at 14 days. In one eye, complete epithelial closure was not achieved after the first Limbo-DALK, but was achieved one month after the second Limbo-DALK. No endothelial decompensation occurred except in one patient with silicone oil associated keratopathy. Endothelial graft rejection was not observed in any of the grafts.
ConclusionBased on the data from this pilot series, limbo-DALK appears to be a viable surgical approach for eyes with severe LSCD and corneal stromal pathology, suitable for emergency situations (e.g. corneal ulceration with impending corneal perforation), while minimising the risk of corneal endothelial decompensation.
This systematic review aimed to identify, describe and evaluate questionnaires measuring health professionals’ attitudes towards restraints in mental healthcare.
A systematic review was undertaken in accordance with the COSMIN protocol for systematic review and the relevant sections of the 2020 Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses.
OVID Medline, OVID nursing, Psychinfo, Embase and Cinahl were systematically searched from databases inception, with an initial search in December 2021 and updated in April 2022.
The inclusion criteria compromised articles reporting on self-reported instruments of attitudes or perceptions, development or validation of instruments and the evaluation of one or more measurement properties. Articles using multiple instruments in one study or not published in English were excluded. Two researchers independently extracted the data and appraised the methodological quality using the COSMIN guidelines and standards (consensus-based standards for the selection of health measurement instrument). A narrative synthesis without meta-analysis was performed. The systematic review was registered in PROSPERO Protocol ID CRD42022308818.
A total of 23 studies reporting ten instruments were included. The findings revealed a broad variation in the content of the questionnaires, the use of terms/constructs and the context in which the various instruments measure attitudes towards coercive measures. Many studies lacked sufficient details on report of psychometric properties. Finally, the results were not summarized and the evidence not GRADED.
There is a need for updated and adapted instruments with origins in theory and clear joint definitions such that attitudes towards coercive measures can be reliably assessed regarding the validity and reliability of instruments, which will be of importance to facilitate the use of instruments in research and clinical settings.
Reviews addressing surveys, self-reported attitudes towards restraints in mental healthcare and examination of psychometric properties seem limited. We highlight distinct complexity, psychometric limitations and broad variation in the context and content measuring attitudes towards coercive measures, and their various use of terms/constructs in the existing questionnaires. These findings contribute to further research regarding the development of questionnaires and the need of representing the concept well – carefully denoted by the indicators, likewise the importance of applying questionnaires with properly reported measurement properties in terms of validity and reliability to ensure the use in research and clinical settings.
Approximately 30% of somatic hospital inpatients experience psychosocial distress, contributing to increased (re-)hospitalisation rates, treatment resistance, morbidity, and direct and indirect costs. However, such distress often remains unrecognised and unaddressed. We established ‘SomPsyNet’, a ‘stepped and collaborative care model’ (SCCM) for somatic hospital inpatients, aiming at alleviating this issue through early identification of distress and provision of appropriate care, providing problem-focused pathways and strengthening collaborative care. We report the protocol of the ‘SomPsyNet’ study, aiming to evaluate implementation and impact of the SCCM on distressed patients’ health-related quality of life. Secondary objectives include assessing efficacy of the screening procedures, influence of SCCM on other health outcomes and associated costs.
Our stepped wedge cluster randomised trial conducted at three tertiary hospitals comprises three conditions: treatment as usual (TAU) without screening for distress (phase 0), TAU with screening but without consequences (phase I, main comparator) and TAU with screening and psychosomatic-psychiatric consultations for those distressed (phase II). The time-of-transition between phases I and II was randomised. Sample size target is N=2200–2500 participants, with 6 month follow-up for distressed (anticipated n=640–700) and a subsample of non-distressed (anticipated n=200) patients. Primary outcome is mental health-related quality of life (SF-36 ‘Mental Health Component Summary score’); secondary outcomes include psychosocial distress, anxiety, depressive and somatic symptoms, symptom burden and distress, resilience, social support and qualitative of life, assessed by internationally accepted instruments, with good psychometric properties. Further, health claims data will be used to assess SCCM’s impact on direct and indirect costs.
SomPsyNet adheres to the Helsinki Declaration and is approved by the ‘Ethikkommission Nordwest- und Zentralschweiz’ (2019–01724). Findings will be published in peer-reviewed journals and communicated to participants, healthcare professionals and the public.
Swiss National Clinical Trials Portal; ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04269005, updated 19.09.2023).
FreshRSS 