The randomised controlled trial (RCT) is the most robust design for assessing the efficacy and effectiveness of treatments.1 As a result, clinical decision-making has over decades been directed away from reliance based solely on the doctor's clinical experience towards a paradigm based on evidence derived from RCTs. The results of RCTs have subsequently been translated into guidelines containing evidence-graded recommendations which clinicians are encouraged to use as the basis of good clinical practice.2 If, however, the 'raw material' or trial is flawed, the conclusions cannot be trusted, hence the need to appraise critically the quality of the underpinning trial evidence.3 Quality is a multidimensional concept which relates to the design, conduct, and analysis of a trial, its clinical relevance, and its reporting.3 In most cases the RCT report is the only source for clinicians, guideline developers, and other researchers to judge the validity and generalisability of the results, so the quality of reporting of trials is of inherent interest. 4 It is then of considerable concern that Prim Care Respir J 2013; 22(4): 417-424 RESEARCH PAPERThe quality of reporting of randomised controlled trials in asthma: a systematic review AbstractBackground: There are concerns about the reporting quality of asthma trials.

Surgical site infections (SSIs) of groin wounds are a common and potentially preventable cause of morbidity, mortality, and healthcare costs in vascular surgery. Our aim was to define the contemporaneous rate of groin SSIs, determine clinical sequelae, and identify risk factors for SSI. An international multicentre prospective observational cohort study of consecutive patients undergoing groin incision for femoral vessel access in vascular surgery was undertaken over 3 months, follow-up was 90 days. The primary outcome was the incidence of groin wound SSI. 1337 groin incisions (1039 patients) from 37 centres were included. 115 groin incisions (8.6%) developed SSI, of which 62 (4.6%) were superficial. Patients who developed an SSI had a significantly longer length of hospital stay (6 versus 5 days, P = .005), a significantly higher rate of post-operative acute kidney injury (19.6% versus 11.7%, P = .018), with no significant difference in 90-day mortality. Female sex, Body mass index≥30 kg/m 2 , ischaemic heart disease, aqueous betadine skin preparation, bypass/patch use (vein, xenograft, or prosthetic), and increased operative time were independent predictors of SSI. Groin infections, which are clinically apparent to the treating vascular unit, are frequent and their development carries significant clinical sequelae. Risk factors include modifiable and non-modifiable variables.

No abstract

No abstract

Introduction The Vascular Society of Great Britain and Ireland (VSGBI) Peripheral Arterial Disease Quality Improvement Framework (PAD QIF) stipulates targets for managing patients with chronic limb-threatening ischaemia (CLTI); however, it is unknown whether these are achievable. This survey aims to evaluate contemporary practice for managing CLTI in the UK. Methods A questionnaire was developed in conjunction with the VSGBI to survey the management of CLTI and canvass opinions on the PAD QIF. The survey was distributed to all consultant members of the VSGBI and through a targeted social media campaign. Results Forty-seven consultant vascular surgeons based at 36 arterial centres across the UK responded (response rate from arterial centres = 46%). Only 14.3% of centres provided outpatient consultation within the target of seven days from referral, with only one centre providing revascularisation within the target of seven days from consultation. For inpatient management, 31.6% provided surgical and 23.8% endovascular revascularisation within the target of three days from assessment. While 60% of participants believe the PAD QIF’s 5-day ‘admitted care’ pathway is achievable, only 28.6% thought the 14-day ‘non-admitted care’ pathway was feasible. Challenges to meeting these targets include the availability of theatre space and angiography lists, and availability of outpatient appointments for patient assessment. Conclusions The opinion of UK vascular surgeons indicates that achieving the targets of the PAD QIF represents a major challenge based upon current services. Adapting existing services with a greater focus on providing an ‘urgent’ model of care may help to potentially overcome these challenges.