This guideline was compiled according to the British Society for Haematology (BSH) process at https://b-s-h.org.uk/med ia/16732/bsh-guidance-development-process-dec-5-18.pdf. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) nomenclature was used to evaluate levels of evidence and to assess the strength of recommendations. The GRADE criteria can be found at http:// www.gradeworkinggroup.org. The references to support the recommendations are listed in the preceding discussion. Literature review The information contained in this review was gathered from several sources. These included references from a search of MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Cochrane databases to identify studies and reviews relevant to prophylaxis in patients with haemophilia, abstracts from international meetings and references known to the authors (Appendix S1). Review of the manuscript The writing group produced the draft guideline, which was subsequently revised by consensus. Review of the manuscript was performed by the BSH Guidelines Committee Haemostasis and Thrombosis Taskforce, the BSH Guidelines Committee and the Haemostasis and Thrombosis sounding board of the BSH. It was also on the members section of the BSH website for comment. It has also been reviewed by members of the United Kingdom Haemophilia Centre Doctors' Organisation (UKHCDO) Advisory Board, Haemophilia Nurses Association (HNA), Haemophilia Chartered Physiotherapists Association (HCPA); these organisations do not necessarily approve or endorse the contents.

Objective: With advancements in surgical equipment and procedures, human–system interactions in operating rooms affect surgeon workload and performance. Workload was measured across surgical specialties using surveys to identify potential predictors of high workload for future performance improvement. Summary Background Data: Surgical instrumentation and technique advancements have implications for surgeon workload and human–systems interactions. To understand and improve the interaction of components in the work system, NASA-Task Load Index can measure workload across various fields. Baseline workload measurements provide a broad overview of the field and identify areas most in need of improvement. Methods: Surgeons were administered a modified NASA-Task Load Index survey (0 = low, 20 = high) following each procedure. Patient and procedural factors were retrieved retrospectively. Results: Thirty-four surgeons (41% female) completed 662 surgery surveys (M = 14.85, SD = 7.94), of which 506 (76%) have associated patient and procedural data. Mental demand (M = 7.7, SD = 5.56), physical demand (M = 7.0, SD = 5.66), and effort (M = 7.8, SD = 5.77) were the highest rated workload subscales. Surgeons reported difficulty levels higher than expected for 22% of procedures, during which workload was significantly higher (P < 0.05) and procedural durations were significantly longer (P > 0.001). Surgeons reported poorer perceived performance during cases with unexpectedly high difficulty (P < 0.001). Conclusions: When procedural difficulty is greater than expected, there are negative implications for mental and physical demand that result in poorer perceived performance. Investigations are underway to identify patient and surgical variables associated with unexpected difficulty and high workload. Future efforts will focus on re-engineering the surgical planning process and procedural environment to optimize workload and performance for improved surgical care.

No abstract

As the intensity of pain in on-demand patients was highest, using prophylaxis treatment is suggested. Moreover, adolescent patients reported more pain; giving more self-care information to them and their parents is recommended. Since little evidence was published for pain assessment and management in children and adolescents with bleeding disorders, more research is recommended.