This study aimed to estimate the frequency of hospital adverse events (AEs) and explore the rate of AEs over time, and across and within hospital populations.Methods: Validated search terms were run in MEDLINE and EMBASE; gray literature and references of included studies were also searched. Studies of any design or language providing an estimate of AEs within the hospital were eligible. Studies were excluded if they only provided an estimate for a specific AE, a subgroup of hospital patients or children. Data were abstracted in duplicate using a standardized data abstraction form. Study quality was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. A random-effects meta-analysis estimated the occurrence of hospital AEs, and meta-regression explored the association between hospital AEs, and patient and hospital characteristics.Results: A total of 45,426 unique references were identified; 1,265 full-texts were reviewed and 94 studies representing 590 million admissions from 25 countries from 1961 to 2014 were included. The incidence of hospital AEs was 8.6 per 100 patient admissions (95% confidence interval [CI], 8.3 to 8.9; I 2 = 100%, P < 0.001). Half of the AEs were preventable (52.6%), and a third resulted in moderate/significant harm (39.7%). The most evaluated AEs were surgical AEs, drug-related AEs, and nosocomial infections. The occurrence of AEs increased by year (95% CI, −0.05 to −0.04; P < 0.001) and patient age (95% CI = −0.15 to −0.14; P < 0.001), and varied by country income level and study characteristics. Patient sex, hospital type, hospital service, and geographical location were not associated with AEs.Conclusions: Hospital AEs are common, and reported rates are increasing in the literature. Given the increase in AEs over time, hospitals should reinvest in improving hospital safety with a focus on interventions targeted toward the more than half of AEs that are preventable.

IntroductionTransitions in Care (TiC) are vulnerable periods in care delivery associated with adverse events, increased cost and decreased patient satisfaction. Patients with cancer encounter many transitions during their care journey due to improved survival rates and the complexity of treatment. Collectively, improving TiC is particularly important among patients with cancer. The objective of this scoping review is to synthesise and map the existing literature regarding TiC among patients with cancer in order to explore opportunities to improve TiC among patients with cancer.Methods and analysisThis scoping review will follow the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis-Scoping Review Extension and the Joanna Briggs Institute methodology. The PubMed cancer filter and underlying search strategy will be tailored to each database (Embase, Cochrane, CINAHL and PsycINFO) and combined with search terms for TiC. Grey literature and references of included studies will be searched. The search will include studies published from database inception until 9 February 2020. Quantitative and qualitative studies will be included if they describe transitions between any type of healthcare provider or institution among patients with cancer. Descriptive statistics will summarise study characteristics and quantitative data of included studies. Qualitative data will be synthesised using thematic analysis.Ethics and disseminationOur objective is to synthesise and map the existing evidence; therefore, ethical approval is not required. Evidence gaps around TiC will inform a programme of research aimed to improve high-risk transitions among patients with cancer. The findings of this scoping review will be published in a peer-reviewed journal and widely presented at academic conferences. More importantly, decision makers and patients will be provided a summary of the findings, along with data from a companion study, to prioritise TiC in need of interventions to improve continuity of care for patients with cancer.

To date, sport-related concussion diagnosis and management is primarily based on subjective clinical tests in the absence of validated biomarkers. A major obstacle to clinical validation and application is a lack of studies exploring potential biomarkers in non-injured populations. This cross-sectional study examined the associations between saliva telomere length (TL) and multiple confounding variables in a healthy university athlete population. One hundred eighty-three (108 male and 75 female) uninjured varsity athletes were recruited to the study and provided saliva samples at either pre- or mid-season, for TL analysis. Multiple linear regression was used to determine the associations between saliva TL and history of concussion, sport contact type, time in season (pre vs. mid-season collection), age, and sex. Results showed no significant associations between TL and history of concussion, age, or sport contact type. However, TL from samples collected mid-season were longer than those collected pre-season [β = 231.4, 95% CI (61.9, 401.0), p = 0.008], and males had longer TL than females [β = 284.8, 95% CI (111.5, 458.2), p = 0.001] when adjusting for all other variables in the model. These findings population suggest that multiple variables may influence TL. Future studies should consider these confounders when evaluating saliva TL as a plausible fluid biomarker for SRC.

Background Post-traumatic headaches (PTH) are a common sequelae of traumatic brain injury (TBI) and greatly impact patient function and quality of life. Post-traumatic greater occipital neuralgia (GON) is a type of post-traumatic headache. Conventional treatment includes steroid/anesthetic injections which typically alleviate pain but have a short duration of effect. Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) is an emerging biological treatment for numerous degenerative disorders, including peripheral nerve disorders. The primary aim of this pilot study is to evaluate whether a randomized control trial of PRP for the treatment of GON in patients with post-traumatic headaches is feasible in regard to recruitment, adherence, retention, and adherence and adverse events. Exploratory aims include improvement in pain, function, and quality of life in patients with post-traumatic GON receiving PRP compared to steroid/anesthetic and normal saline injections. Methods Thirty adults (over 18 years of age) with post-traumatic GON will be randomized into one of three groups: (1) autologous PRP injection, (2) steroid/anesthetic injection (standard care), or (3) placebo injection with normal saline. Injections will be performed to the greater occipital nerve under ultrasound guidance by a trained physician. Daily headache intensity and frequency data will be collected pre-injection and for the duration of the study period. Feasibility will be defined as greater than 30% recruitment, 70% completion of intervention, 70% retention, and less than 2 minor adverse events. Exploratory outcomes will be explored using the Headache Impact Test-6 (HIT-6, a valid and reliable 6-item questionnaire for assessment of the impact of headaches across different diagnostic groups of headaches) and the quality of life in following brain injury questionnaire (QOILIBRI). Discussion This pilot study will be the first to evaluate the feasibility of PRP as a potential treatment of GON in patients with post-traumatic headache. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov - NCT04051203 (registered August 9, 2019).

No abstract

Background In response to the COVID‐19 pandemic, public health measures were implemented that closed essential businesses, mandated social distancing, and imposed substantial changes to the routine care experienced by patients with mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI) and persistent postconcussive symptoms (PPCS). Patients with PPCS often rely on a comprehensive care team, requiring in‐person treatments and consistent care. Little information exists regarding how access to these services have been affected by public health measures and what outcome the measures have had on the recovery of patients with PPCS. Objective To explore the impact of the restriction of in‐person treatments, shifts to virtual care, and global public health measures on the recovery and psychological well‐being of patients with PPCS. Design Qualitative interviews were recorded, transcribed, and analyzed using a reflexive thematic analysis approach to identify the main impacts of the public health measures on participants with PPCS. Setting Participant interviews were completed remotely via telephone or video‐calling software during province‐wide shutdowns. Participants 20 individuals with PPCS who attended the institution's Brain Injury Program consented to participate. Interventions Not applicable. Results The impacts of the public health measures emerged most prominently in three main categories: (1) day‐to‐day lived experiences, (2) personal health status, and (3) health service experiences and barriers. Conclusions This in‐depth investigation of the lived experiences of patients with PPCS outlines how the COVID‐19 public health measures negatively affected their care and well‐being. The analysis identified that through increasing social support systems, providing better access to standard or remote treatment, and developing more effective telehealth strategies, this population could be better supported in the event of future public health measures.

Background: Traumatic brain injury (TBI) is a leading cause of death and disability worldwide. Post-traumatic headaches (PTH) are a common sequalae of TBI and greatly impact patient function and quality of life. Post-traumatic greater occipital neuralgia (GON) is a type of post-traumatic headache. Conventional treatment includes steroid/anesthetic injections which typically alleviate pain, but have a short duration of effect. Platelet rich plasma (PRP) is an emerging biological treatment for numerous degenerative disorders, including peripheral nerve disorders. The primary aim of this study is to evaluate the pain response of a single perineural PRP injection in the treatment of post-traumatic GON.Methods: Thirty adults (over 18 years of age) with post-traumatic GON will be randomized into one of three groups: 1) autologous PRP injection 2) steroid/anesthetic injection (standard care) or 3) placebo injection with normal saline. Injections will be performed to the greater occipital nerve under ultrasound guidance by a trained physician. Daily headache intensity and frequency data will be collected pre-injection and for the duration of the study period. The primary outcome will be the change in headache intensity, as measured by a reduction on the numerical pain rating scale (NPRS) at 3 months post-injection in the PRP group, versus the normal saline and steroid groups. Secondary outcomes will include adverse effects, prn medication usage, and impact on function and quality of life as measured by the Headache Impact Test 6 (HIT-6) and Quality of Life following Brain Injury (QOILIBRI) questionnaires. Discussion: This trial will evaluate the efficacy of PRP injections as a treatment for post-traumatic GON. This research will further our understanding of PTH, GON, and the treatment of peripheral neuralgias.Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov - NCT04051203 (registered August 9, 2019), available at https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04051203?cond=greater+occipital+neuralgia&draw=2&rank=1

Background: Post-traumatic headaches (PTH) are a common sequalae of TBI and greatly impact patient function and quality of life. Post-traumatic greater occipital neuralgia (GON) is a type of post-traumatic headache. Conventional treatment includes steroid/anesthetic injections which typically alleviate pain but have a short duration of effect. Platelet rich plasma (PRP) is an emerging biological treatment for numerous degenerative disorders, including peripheral nerve disorders. The primary aim of this pilot study is to evaluate whether a randomized control trial of PRP for the treatment of GON in patients with post-traumatic headaches is feasible in regard to recruitment, adherence, retention, and adherence and adverse events. Exploratory aims includes improvement in pain, function and quality of life in patients with post-traumatic GON receiving PRP compared to steroid/anesthetic and normal saline injections. Methods: Thirty adults (over 18 years of age) with post-traumatic GON will be randomized into one of three groups: 1) autologous PRP injection 2) steroid/anesthetic injection (standard care) or 3) placebo injection with normal saline. Injections will be performed to the greater occipital nerve under ultrasound guidance by a trained physician. Daily headache intensity and frequency data will be collected pre-injection and for the duration of the study period. Feasibility will be defined as greater than 30% recruitment, 70% completion of intervention, 70% retention and less than 2 minor adverse events. Exploratory outcomes will be explored using the (HIT-6; a valid and reliable 6-item questionnaire for assessment of the impact of headaches across different diagnostic groups of headaches (42, 43)) and the quality of life in following brain injury questionnaire (QOILIBRI). Discussion: This pilot study will be the first to evaluate the feasibility of PRP as a potential treatment of GON in patients with post-traumatic headache. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov - NCT04051203 (registered August 9, 2019), available at https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04051203?cond=greater+occipital+neuralgia&draw=2&rank=1