No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

Background The impact of anemia treatment with erythropoietin stimulating agents (ESA) on health-related quality of life (HRQOL) in chronic kidney disease (CKD) patients is controversial, particularly regarding optimal hemoglobin (Hb) target ranges. Methods We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies and randomized controlled trials (RCT) with ESA to estimate the effect of different achieved Hb values on physical HRQOL and functionality. We searched PubMed, EMBASE, CENTRAL, PEDro, PsycINFO and Web of Science databases, until May 2020. Two authors independently extracted data from studies. We included observational and RCTs that enrolled CKD patients undergoing anemia treatment with ESA with different achieved Hb levels among groups. We excluded studies with achieved Hb < 9 g/dL. For the meta-analysis, we included RCTs with control groups achieving Hb 10–11.5 g/dL and active groups with Hb > 11.5 g/dL. We analyzed the standardized mean difference (SMD) between groups for physical HRQOL. Results Among 8496 studies, fifteen RCTs and five observational studies were included for the systematic review. We performed the meta-analysis in a subset of eleven eligible RCTs. For physical role and physical function, SMDs were 0.0875 [95% CI: − 0.0025 – 0.178] and 0.08 [95% CI: − 0.03 – 0.19], respectively. For fatigue, SMD was 0.16 [95% CI: 0.09–0.24]. Subgroup analysis showed that trials with greater achieved Hb had greater pooled effects sizes — 0.21 [95% CI: 0.07–0.36] for Hb > 13 g/dL vs. 0.09 [95% CI: 0.02–0.16] for Hb 11.5–13 g/dL. Proportion of older and long-term diabetic patients across studies were associated with lower effect sizes. Conclusion Achieved hemoglobin higher than currently recommended targets may be associated with small but potentially clinically significant improvement in fatigue, but not in physical role or physical function. Younger and non-diabetic patients may experience more pronounced benefits of higher Hb levels after treatment with ESAs.

No abstract

No abstract

ImportanceA growing body of literature has been developed with the goal of attempting to understand the experiences of female surgeons. While it has helped to address inequities and promote important programmatic improvements, work remains to be done.ObjectiveTo explore how practicing male and female surgeons’ experiences with gender compare across 5 qualitative/quantitative domains: career aspirations, gender-based discrimination, mentor-mentee relationships, perceived barriers, and recommendations for change.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsThis national concurrent mixed-methods survey of Fellows of the American College of Surgeons (FACS) compared differences between male and female FACS. Differences between female FACS and female members of the Association of Women Surgeons (AWS) were also explored. A randomly selected 3:1 sample of US-based male and female FACS was surveyed between January and June 2020. Female AWS members were surveyed in May 2020.ExposureSelf-reported gender.Main Outcomes and MeasuresSelf-reported experiences with career aspirations (quantitative), gender-based discrimination (quantitative), mentor-mentee relationships (quantitative), perceived barriers (qualitative), and recommendations for change (qualitative).ResultsA total of 2860 male FACS (response rate: 38.1% [2860 of 7500]) and 1070 female FACS (response rate: 42.8% [1070 of 2500]) were included, in addition to 536 female AWS members. Demographic characteristics were similar between randomly selected male and female FACS, with the notable exception that female FACS were less likely to be married (720 [67.3%] vs 2561 [89.5%]; nonresponse-weighted P &amp;lt; .001) and have children (660 [61.7%] vs 2600 [90.9%]; P &amp;lt; .001). Compared with female FACS, female AWS members were more likely to be younger and hold additional graduate degrees (320 [59.7%] were married; 238 [44.4%] had children). FACS of both genders acknowledged positive and negative aspects of dealing with gender in a professional setting, including shared experiences of gender-based harassment, discrimination, and blame. Female FACS were less likely to have had gender-concordant mentors. They were more likely to emphasize the importance of gender when determining career aspirations and prioritizing future mentor-mentee relationships. Moving forward, female FACS emphasized the importance of avoiding competition among female surgeons. They encouraged male surgeons to acknowledge gender bias and admit their potential role. Male FACS encouraged male and female surgeons to treat everyone the same.Conclusions and RelevanceExperiences with gender are not limited to supportive female surgeons. The results of this study emphasize the importance of recognizing the voices of all stakeholders involved when striving to promote workforce diversity and the related need to develop quality improvement/surgical education initiatives that enhance inclusion through open, honest discourse.

Background: Patients undergoing pancreatic resection frequently require rehabilitation facilities after hospital discharge. We evaluated the predictive role of validated markers of frailty on rehabilitation facility placement to identify patients who may require this service.Methods: Single-center retrospective cohort study of patients who underwent pancreatic resection from 2010 to 2015. 90-day morbidity and mortality were calculated. Postoperative validated markers of frailty (Activities of Daily Living scale, Braden scale [assesses pressure ulcer risk, lower scores = higher risk] and Morse fall scale) were evaluated via multivariate regression to identify predictors of discharge to rehabilitation facility.Results: 470 patients with complete data were included. Mean age was 62 and 49.2% were male.Postoperative median length of stay (LOS) was 8 (IQR 7-10). 92 (19.66%) patients were discharged to rehabilitation facilities and 138 (29.49%) patients were readmitted within 90 days. On multivariate analysis, age, sex, LOS > 8 days, inpatient Comprehensive Complication Index (CCI) and initial Braden scale were predictive of rehabilitation placement. Conclusion:A marker of frailty routinely collected daily by nursing staff, the Braden scale, is available to help surgeons predict the need for postoperative rehabilitation placement after pancreatic resection. Engaging discharge planning services for at-risk patients may help prevent delayed hospital discharge and should be further evaluated.