A subset of patients with superficial venous thrombosis (SVT) experiences clot propagation towards deep venous thrombosis (DVT) and/or pulmonary embolism (PE). The aim of this systematic review is to identify all clinically relevant cross-sectional and prognostic factors for predicting thrombotic complications in patients with SVT.

Systematic review.

PubMed/MEDLINE and Embase were systematically searched until 3 March 2023.

Original research studies with patients with SVT, DVT and/or PE as the outcome and presenting cross-sectional or prognostic predictive factors.

The CHecklist for critical Appraisal and data extraction for systematic Reviews of prediction Modelling (CHARMS) checklist for prognostic factor studies was used for systematic extraction of study characteristics. Per identified predictive factor, relevant estimates of univariable and multivariable predictor—outcome associations were extracted, such as ORs and HRs. Estimates of association for the most frequently reported predictors were summarised in forest plots, and meta-analyses with heterogeneity were presented. The Quality in Prognosis Studies (QUIPS) tool was used for risk of bias assessment and Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) for assessing the certainty of evidence.

Twenty-two studies were included (n=10 111 patients). The most reported predictive factors were high age, male sex, history of venous thromboembolism (VTE), absence of varicose veins and cancer. Pooled effect estimates were heterogenous and ranged from OR 3.12 (95% CI 1.75 to 5.59) for the cross-sectional predictor cancer to OR 0.92 (95% CI 0.56 to 1.53) for the prognostic predictor high age. The level of evidence was rated very low to low. Most studies were scored high or moderate risk of bias.

Although the pooled estimates of the predictors high age, male sex, history of VTE, cancer and absence of varicose veins showed predictive potential in isolation, variability in study designs, lack of multivariable adjustment and high risk of bias prevent firm conclusions. High-quality, multivariable studies are necessary to be able to identify individual SVT risk profiles.

CRD42021262819.

Meta-analyses show postive effects of telemedicine in heart failure (HF) management on hospitalisation, mortality and costs. However, these effects are heterogeneous due to variation in the included HF population, the telemedicine components and the quality of the comparator usual care. Still, telemedicine is gaining acceptance in HF management. The current nationwide study aims to identify (1) in which subgroup(s) of patients with HF telemedicine is (cost-)effective and (2) which components of telemedicine are most (cost-)effective.

The RELEASE-HF (‘REsponsible roLl-out of E-heAlth through Systematic Evaluation – Heart Failure’) study is a multicentre, observational, registry-based cohort study that plans to enrol 6480 patients with HF using data from the HF registry facilitated by the Netherlands Heart Registration. Collected data include patient characteristics, treatment information and clinical outcomes, and are measured at HF diagnosis and at 6 and 12 months afterwards. The components of telemedicine are described at the hospital level based on closed-ended interviews with clinicians and at the patient level based on additional data extracted from electronic health records and telemedicine-generated data. The costs of telemedicine are calculated using registration data and interviews with clinicians and finance department staff. To overcome missing data, additional national databases will be linked to the HF registry if feasible. Heterogeneity of the effects of offering telemedicine compared with not offering on days alive without unplanned hospitalisations in 1 year is assessed across predefined patient characteristics using exploratory stratified analyses. The effects of telemedicine components are assessed by fitting separate models for component contrasts.

The study has been approved by the Medical Ethics Committee 2021 of the University Medical Center Utrecht (the Netherlands). Results will be published in peer-reviewed journals and presented at (inter)national conferences. Effective telemedicine scenarios will be proposed among hospitals throughout the country and abroad, if applicable and feasible.

NCT05654961.

Healthcare workers (HCWs) are on the frontline of combating COVID-19, hence are at elevated risk of contracting an infection with SARS-CoV-2. The present study aims to measure the impact of SARS-CoV-2 on HCWs in central sub-Saharan Africa.

A cross-sectional serological study was conducted at six urban and five rural hospitals during the first pandemic wave in the South Kivu province, Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC).

Serum specimens from 1029 HCWs employed during the first pandemic wave were collected between August and October 2020, and data on demographics and work-related factors were recorded during structured interviews.

The presence of IgG antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 was examined by ELISA. Positive specimens were further tested using a micro-neutralisation assay. Factors driving SARS-CoV-2 seropositivity were assessed by multivariable analysis.

Overall SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence was high among HCWs (33.1%), and significantly higher in urban (41.5%) compared with rural (19.8%) hospitals. Having had presented with COVID-19-like symptoms before was a strong predictor of seropositivity (31.5%). Personal protective equipment (PPE, 88.1% and 11.9%) and alcohol-based hand sanitizer (71.1% and 28.9%) were more often available, and hand hygiene was more often reported after patient contact (63.0% and 37.0%) in urban compared with rural hospitals, respectively. This may suggest that higher exposure during non-work times in high incidence urban areas counteracts higher work protection levels of HCWs.

High SARS-CoV-2 seropositivity indicates widespread transmission of the virus in this region of DRC. Given the absence of publicly reported cases during the same time period at the rural sites, serological studies are very relevant in revealing infection dynamics especially in regions with low diagnostic capacities. This, and discrepancies in the application of PPE between urban and rural sites, should be considered in future pandemic response programmes.

Benefit–risk assessment (BRA) is used in multiple phases along the health technology’s life-cycle to evaluate the balance between the benefits and risks, as it is fundamental to all stakeholders. BRA and its methodological approaches have been applied primarily in the context of regulatory agencies. However, BRA’s application and extent in the context of health technology assessment (HTA) bodies remain less clear. Our goal is to perform a scoping review to identify and map methodological guidelines and publications on methods of BRA. This will be done considering the different phases of the life-cycle of health technologies to underline both the depth and extent of research concerning BRA, especially in the context of HTA.

This scoping review protocol was developed following the framework proposed by Arksey and O’Malley, and the updated guidelines by the Joanna Briggs Institute. We will include methodological publications that provide recommendations or guidelines on methods for BRA. We will conduct electronic searches on Medline (PubMed) and EMBASE (Ovid) databases; manual searches on the main websites of HTA bodies and drug regulatory organisations; and contact experts in the field. Systematic extraction forms will be used to screen and assess the identified publications by independent assessors. We will provide a qualitative synthesis using descriptive statistics and visual tools. Results will be summarised in systematic evidence tables and comparative evidence scoping charts.

This review will use data publicly available and does not require ethics approval. The results of this scoping review will contribute to scientific knowledge and act as a basis for methodologists, guideline developers and researchers for the development of BRA to inform regulatory decisions, reimbursement and coverage decision making. The results will be disseminated through peer-reviewed articles, conferences, policy briefs and workshops.

Open Science Framework (https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/69T3V).