Comparison of postoperative outcomes among patients treated by male and female surgeons: a population based matched cohort study. BMJ 2017; 359: j4366. 24 Greenwood B, Carnahan S, Huang L. Patient-physician gender concordance and increased mortality among female heart attack patients.

Background: There are no specific generally accepted therapies for the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). The full spectrum of COVID-19 ranges from asymptomatic disease to mild respiratory tract illness to severe pneumonia, acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), multisystem organ failure, and death. The efficacy of corticosteroids in viral ARDS remains unknown. We postulated that adjunctive treatment of established ARDS caused by COVID-19 with intravenous dexamethasone might change the pulmonary and systemic inflammatory response and thereby reduce morbidity, leading to a decrease in duration of mechanical ventilation and in mortality. Methods/design: This is a multicenter, randomized, controlled, parallel, open-label, superiority trial testing dexamethasone in 200 mechanically ventilated adult patients with established moderate-to-severe ARDS caused by confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection. Established ARDS is defined as maintaining a PaO 2 /FiO 2 ≤ 200 mmHg on PEEP ≥ 10 cmH 2 O and FiO 2 ≥ 0.5 after 12 ± 3 h of routine intensive care. Eligible patients will be randomly assigned to receive either dexamethasone plus standard intensive care or standard intensive care alone. Patients in the dexamethasone group will receive an intravenous dose of 20 mg once daily from day 1 to day 5, followed by 10 mg once daily from day 6 to day 10. The primary outcome is 60-day mortality. The secondary outcome is the number of ventilator-free days, defined as days alive and free from mechanical ventilation at day 28 after randomization. All analyses will be done according to the intention-to-treat principle.

BackgroundMaternal obesity is a risk factor for adverse maternal, fetal, and neonatal events. Numerous clinical trials are currently exploring the effectiveness of antenatal and peripartum interventions in improving pregnancy outcomes that can in future inform clinical practice. However, the heterogeneity in outcome reporting limits our ability to compare outcomes across studies, and there is a lack of stakeholder representation in outcome choice. A pragmatic solution to this problem is the development of a core outcome set (COS) that defines the minimum criteria for outcome reporting in clinical trials undertaken in this population, arrived at by the involvement of relevant stakeholders.MethodsThe development of a COS for studies on obesity in pregnant patients (COSSOPP) will comprise five steps. First, a systematic review of published literature will identify the long list of outcomes, their definitions and measurements if applicable, and outcome reporting quality. This will be followed by a meta-synthesis of qualitative studies with patients, and qualitative interviews in Toronto with patients, clinicians, researchers, hospital administrators, and policy-makers, to identify novel outcomes that were not obtained through systematic review. Third, the long list of outcomes will be narrowed down through online Delphi surveys involving an international group of patients and relevant stakeholders. This will be followed by a face-to-face consensus meeting with representatives of all stakeholder groups to arrive at a consensus on the final COS. Finally, in order to determine how the identified core outcomes should be measured, we will conduct another literature review and Delphi process.DiscussionCOSSOPP will engage patients, clinicians, researchers, and other relevant stakeholders in determining the core set of outcomes that should be reported and measured in order to harmonize outcome reporting in studies evaluating the effectiveness of antepartum and peripartum interventions in obese pregnant women. This protocol provides a detailed overview of the steps involved in the development of a COS, to guide researchers in developing COS within their areas of specialization.COMET Core Outcome Set Registrationhttp://www.comet-initiative.org/studies/details/939.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1186/s13063-018-3029-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Aim: To investigate and comprehend patient satisfaction with nursing care in the Intensive Care Unit in order to identify the scope of the concept of "satisfaction" from the patient's point of view. To design and validate a questionnaire that measures satisfaction levels in critical patients.Background: There are many instruments capable of measuring satisfaction

Dravet syndrome (DS) is an intractable developmental and epileptic encephalopathy significantly impacting affected children and their families. A novel, one-time, adeno-associated virus (AAV)-mediated gene regulation therapy was designed to treat the underlying cause of DS, potentially improving the full spectrum of DS manifestations. To ensure the first-in-human clinical trial addresses meaningful outcomes for patients and families, we examined their perspectives, priorities, goals, and desired outcomes in the design phase through a mixed methods approach (quantitative and qualitative). We conducted a non-identifiable parent caregiver survey, shared through a patient advocacy organization (n = 36 parents; children age 6 years). Parents were also engaged via three group discussions (n = 10; children age 2-20 years) and optional follow-up in-depth individual interviews (n = 6). Qualitative data analysis followed an inductive interpretive process, and qualitative researchers conducted a thematic analysis with a narrative approach. Survey results revealed most children (94%) were diagnosed by age 1, with onset of seizures at mean age 6.2 months and other DS manifestations before 2 years. The most desired disease aspects to address with potential new disease-modifying therapies were severe seizures (ranked by 92% of caregivers) and communication issues (development, expressive, receptive; 72-83%). Qualitative results showed the need for trial outcomes that recognize the impact of DS on the whole family. Parents eventually hope for trials including children of all ages and were both excited about the potential positive impact of a one-time disease-modifying therapy and mindful of potential long-term implications. Participants reflected on the details and risks of a clinical trial design (e.g., sham procedures) and described the different factors that relate to their decision to participate in a trial. Their main aspirations were to stop neurodevelopmental stagnation, to reduce seizures, and to reduce the impact on their families' wellbeing. To our knowledge, this is the first study within a patient-oriented research framework that specifically explored parents' needs and perceptions regarding clinical trials of a potential disease-modifying therapy for children with a severe, developmental disease, such as DS.