Project description:Background: Patient-reported outcome measures are gaining increasing importance in clinical research and quality control. Clinical impairment through limb deformities can appear in various forms. This study aimed at translating and culturally adaptating the Limb Deformity-Scoliosis Research Society (LD-SRS) patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) into German by following the scientific rigor of the cross-cultural adaptation process as well as ensuring the reliability of the translated version. The LD-SRS is applicable in children and adults. Methods: The translation was performed in accordance with the creators of the LD-SRS following the Professional Society for Health Economics and Outcomes Research (ISPOR) guidelines for translation and cultural adaptation. Two forward translations were performed, and after a consensus meeting, a professional translator translated the PROM back to English. The creators reviewed the back translation of the preliminary German version. Thirty patients with upper and lower limb deformities participated in cognitive debriefing interviews. The version was proofread and, finally, the test-retest reliability was estimated. Results: The mean age was 19 years (range 6–61). Twenty-six patients (87%) completed the retest after 6 days (range 3–26). The internal consistency was estimated with a Cronbach’s alpha of 0.96 (range 0.94–0.97), and the intraclass correlation was 0.92 (range 0.89–0.94), indicating an excellent reliability. The scores were normally distributed. Thereafter, the German version was proofread and finalized. Conclusions: The German translation and cross-cultural adaptation of the LD-SRS score resulted in a high reliability and internal consistency. The German LD-SRS score is readily usable and may be applied in future studies of German-speaking limb deformity patients.
Project description:BackgroundNonopioid analgesics are frequently used for perioperative analgesia; however, insufficient research is available on several practical issues. Often hospitals have no strategy for how to proceed, e.g., for informing patients or for the timing of perioperative administration of nonopioid analgesics.MethodsAn expert panel representing the German national societies of pain, anaesthesiology and intensive care medicine and surgery developed recommendations for the perioperative use of nonopioid analgesics within a formal, structured consensus process.ResultsThe panel agreed that nonopioid analgesics shall be part of a multimodal analgesia concept and that patients have to be informed preoperatively about possible complications and alternative treatment options. Patients' history of pain and analgesic intake shall be evaluated. Patients at risk of severe postoperative pain and possible chronification of postsurgical pain shall be identified. Depending on the duration of surgery, nonopioid analgesics can already be administered preoperatively or intraoperatively so that plasma concentrations are sufficient after emergence from anesthesia. Nonopioid analgesics or combinations of analgesics shall be administered for a limited time only. An interdisciplinary written standard of care, comprising the nonopioid analgesic of choice, possible alternatives, adequate dosing and timing of administration as well as surgery-specific policies, have to be agreed upon by all departments involved. At discharge, the patient's physician shall be informed of analgesics given and those necessary after discharge. Patients shall be informed of possible side effects and symptoms and timely discontinuation of analgesic drugs.ConclusionThe use of nonopioid analgesics as part of a perioperative multimodal concept should be approved and established as an interdisciplinary and interprofessional concept for the adequate treatment of postoperative pain.
Project description:This article is an abridged version of the AWMF mould guideline "Medical clinical diagnostics of indoor mould exposure" presented in April 2016 by the German Society of Hygiene, Environmental Medicine and Preventive Medicine (Gesellschaft für Hygiene, Umweltmedizin und Präventivmedizin, GHUP), in collaboration with the above-mentioned scientific medical societies, German and Austrian societies, medical associations and experts. Indoor mould growth is a potential health risk, even if a quantitative and/or causal relationship between the occurrence of individual mould species and health problems has yet to be established. Apart from allergic bronchopulmonary aspergillosis (ABPA) and mould-caused mycoses, only sufficient evidence for an association between moisture/mould damage and the following health effects has been established: allergic respiratory disease, asthma (manifestation, progression and exacerbation), allergic rhinitis, hypersensitivity pneumonitis (extrinsic allergic alveolitis), and increased likelihood of respiratory infections/bronchitis. In this context the sensitizing potential of moulds is obviously low compared to other environmental allergens. Recent studies show a comparatively low sensitizing prevalence of 3-10% in the general population across Europe. Limited or suspected evidence for an association exist with respect to mucous membrane irritation and atopic eczema (manifestation, progression and exacerbation). Inadequate or insufficient evidence for an association exist for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, acute idiopathic pulmonary hemorrhage in children, rheumatism/arthritis, sarcoidosis and cancer. The risk of infection posed by moulds regularly occurring indoors is low for healthy persons; most species are in risk group 1 and a few in risk group 2 (Aspergillus fumigatus, A. flavus) of the German Biological Agents Act (Biostoffverordnung). Only moulds that are potentially able to form toxins can be triggers of toxic reactions. Whether or not toxin formation occurs in individual cases is determined by environmental and growth conditions, above all the substrate. In the case of indoor moisture/mould damage, everyone can be affected by odour effects and/or mood disorders. However, this is not a health hazard. Predisposing factors for odour effects can include genetic and hormonal influences, imprinting, context and adaptation effects. Predisposing factors for mood disorders may include environmental concerns, anxiety, condition, and attribution, as well as various diseases. Risk groups to be protected particularly with regard to an infection risk are persons on immunosuppression according to the classification of the German Commission for Hospital Hygiene and Infection Prevention (Kommission für Krankenhaushygiene und Infektionsprävention, KRINKO) at the Robert Koch- Institute (RKI) and persons with cystic fibrosis (mucoviscidosis); with regard to an allergic risk, persons with cystic fibrosis (mucoviscidosis) and patients with bronchial asthma should be protected. The rational diagnostics include the medical history, physical examination, and conventional allergy diagnostics including provocation tests if necessary; sometimes cellular test systems are indicated. In the case of mould infections the reader is referred to the AWMF guideline "Diagnosis and Therapy of Invasive Aspergillus Infections". With regard to mycotoxins, there are currently no useful and validated test procedures for clinical diagnostics. From a preventive medicine standpoint it is important that indoor mould infestation in relevant dimension cannot be tolerated for precautionary reasons. With regard to evaluating the extent of damage and selecting a remedial procedure, the reader is referred to the revised version of the mould guideline issued by the German Federal Environment Agency (Umweltbundesamt, UBA).