A high prevalence of suboptimal asthma control is attributable to known evidence–practice gaps. We developed a computerised clinical decision support system (the Electronic Asthma Management System (eAMS)) to address major care gaps and sought to measure its impact on care in adults with asthma.This was a 2-year interrupted time-series study of usual care (year 1)versuseAMS (year 2) at three Canadian primary care sites. We included asthma patients aged ≥16 years receiving an asthma medication within the last 12 months. The eAMS consisted of a touch tablet patient questionnaire completed in the waiting room, with real-time data processing producing electronic medical record-integrated clinician decision support.Action plan delivery (primary outcome) improved from zero out of 412 (0%) to 79 out of 443 (17.8%) eligible patients (absolute increase 0.18 (95% CI 0.14–0.22)). Time-series analysis indicated a 30.5% increase in physician visits with action plan delivery with the intervention (p<0.0001). Assessment of asthma control level increased from 173 out of 3497 (4.9%) to 849 out of 3062 (27.7%) eligible visits (adjusted OR 8.62 (95% CI 5.14–12.45)). Clinicians escalated controller therapy in 108 out of 3422 (3.2%) baseline visitsversus126 out of 3240 (3.9%) intervention visits (p=0.12). At baseline, a short-acting β-agonist alone was added in 62 visits and a controller added in 54 visits; with the intervention, this occurred in 33 and 229 visits, respectively (p<0.001).The eAMS improved asthma quality of care in real-world primary care settings. Strategies to further increase clinician uptake and a randomised controlled trial to assess impact on patient outcomes are now required.

Plastic pollution is a ubiquitous global environmental problem. Plastic ingestion by seabirds is an increasing issue even in remote areas, such as the Arctic, yet research and monitoring of plastic ingestion in Arctic seabird populations is limited and there are large knowledge gaps for many geographic regions. There is currently no standard technique for monitoring plastic debris in the Arctic, making it difficult to compare studies and monitor global trends. Here, we review the current state of knowledge of plastic ingestion by seabirds in the Arctic. We analyzed 38 published records that report plastic ingestion by seabirds in the Arctic region. Of the 51 seabird species examined for plastic ingestion in the Arctic, over half have ingested plastic, however the majority have a limited number of studies, small sample sizes, and/or data are more than 15 years old. Additionally, the spatial distribution of plastic ingestion reports in the Arctic varies widely, with large knowledge gaps in the northernmost areas of most countries. This indicates that we lack recent information on plastic ingestion for the majority of seabird species in the Arctic. Further, less than one third of studies references standardized methods from other regions, making it difficult to assess spatial and temporal trends. Long-term monitoring programs should be established in the Arctic to obtain an accurate assessment of plastic ingestion by seabirds in this region.

Introduction Barrier enclosure devices were introduced to protect against infectious disease transmission during aerosol generating medical procedures (AGMP). Recent discussion in the medical community has led to new designs and adoption despite limited evidence. A scoping review was conducted to characterize devices being used and their performance. Methods We conducted a scoping review of formal databases (MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, CENTRAL, Scopus), grey literature, and hand-searched relevant journals. Forward and reverse citation searching was completed on included articles. Article/full-text screening and data extraction was performed by two independent reviewers. Studies were categorized by publication type, device category, intended medical use, and outcomes (efficacy – ability to contain particles; efficiency – time to complete AGMP; and usability – user experience). Results Searches identified 6489 studies and 123 met criteria for inclusion (k = 0.81 title/abstract, k = 0.77 full-text). Most articles were published in 2020 (98%, n = 120) as letters/commentaries (58%, n = 71). Box systems represented 42% ( n = 52) of systems described, while plastic sheet systems accounted for 54% ( n = 66). The majority were used for airway management (67%, n = 83). Only half of articles described outcome measures (54%, n = 67); 82% ( n = 55) reporting efficacy, 39% ( n = 26) on usability, and 15% ( n = 10) on efficiency. Efficacy of devices in containing aerosols was limited and frequently dependent on use of suction devices. Conclusions While use of various barrier enclosure devices has become widespread during this pandemic, objective data of efficacy, efficiency, and usability is limited. Further controlled studies are required before adoption into routine clinical practice.

Objective Computerized clinical decision support systems (CCDSSs) promise improvements in care quality; however, uptake is often suboptimal. We sought to characterize system use, its predictors, and user feedback for the Electronic Asthma Management System (eAMS)—an electronic medical record system–integrated, point-of-care CCDSS for asthma—and applied the GUIDES checklist as a framework to identify areas for improvement. Materials and Methods The eAMS was tested in a 1-year prospective cohort study across 3 Ontario primary care sites. We recorded system usage by clinicians and patient characteristics through system logs and chart reviews. We created multivariable models to identify predictors of (1) CCDSS opening and (2) creation of a self-management asthma action plan (AAP) (final CCDSS step). Electronic questionnaires captured user feedback. Results Over 1 year, 490 asthma patients saw 121 clinicians. The CCDSS was opened in 205 of 1033 (19.8%) visits and an AAP created in 121 of 1033 (11.7%) visits. Multivariable predictors of opening the CCDSS and producing an AAP included clinic site, having physician-diagnosed asthma, and presenting with an asthma- or respiratory-related complaint. The system usability scale score was 66.3 ± 16.5 (maximum 100). Reported usage barriers included time and system accessibility. Discussion The eAMS was used in a minority of asthma patient visits. Varying workflows and cultures across clinics, physician beliefs regarding asthma diagnosis, and relevance of the clinical complaint influenced uptake. Conclusions Considering our findings in the context of the GUIDES checklist helped to identify improvements to drive uptake and provides lessons relevant to CCDSS design across diseases.