Displaying all 2 publications

Abstract:
Sort:
  1. Klappenbach R, Lartigue B, Beauchamp M, Boietti B, Santero M, Bosque L, et al.
    Arch Osteoporos, 2023 Apr 17;18(1):51.
    PMID: 37067611 DOI: 10.1007/s11657-023-01241-x
    PURPOSE: The study aims to identify, describe, and organize the currently available evidence regarding hip fracture (HF) registries in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs).

    METHODS: We conducted a scoping review adhering to PRISMA-ScR guidelines. We searched MEDLINE (PubMed), Google Scholar, Global Index Medicus, websites related to HF, and study references for eligible studies. Two reviewers independently performed the study selection and data extraction, including studies describing the use of individual patient records with the aim to improve the quality of care in older people with HF in LMICs.

    RESULTS: A total of 222 abstracts were screened, 59 full-text articles were reviewed, and 10 studies regarding 3 registries were included in the analysis. Malaysia and Mexico implemented a HF registry in public hospitals whereas Argentina implemented a registry in the private setting. The Mexican registry, the most recent one, is the only one that publishes annual reports. There was significant variability in data fields between registries, particularly in functional evaluation and follow-up. The Ministry of Health finances the Malaysian registry, while Argentinian and Mexican registries founding was unclear.

    CONCLUSION: The adoption of HF registries in LMICs is scarce. The few experiences show promising results but higher support is required to develop more registries. Long-term sustainability remains a challenge.

  2. Agha R, Abdall-Razak A, Crossley E, Dowlut N, Iosifidis C, Mathew G, et al.
    Int J Surg, 2019 Nov 06;72:156-165.
    PMID: 31704426 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijsu.2019.11.002
    INTRODUCTION: The STROCSS guideline was developed in 2017 to improve the reporting quality of observational studies in surgery. Building on its impact and usefulness, we sought to update the guidelines two years after its publication.

    METHODS: A steering group was formed to review the existing guideline and propose amendments to the 17-item checklist. A Delphi consensus exercise was utilised to determine agreement across a list of proposed modifications to the STROCSS 2017 guideline. An expert panel of 46 surgeons were invited to assess the proposed updates via Google Forms.

    RESULTS: The response rate was 91% (n = 42/46). High agreement was reached across all the items and the guideline was finalised in the first round. The checklist maintained 17-items, with modifications primarily considered to improve content and readability.

    CONCLUSIONS: The STROCSS 2019 guideline is hereby presented as a considered update to improve reporting of cohort, cross-sectional and case-control studies in surgery.

Related Terms
Filters
Contact Us

Please provide feedback to Administrator ([email protected])

External Links