I.V. fluid therapy does not result in the extracellular volume distribution expected from Starling's original model of semi-permeable capillaries subject to hydrostatic and oncotic pressure gradients within the extracellular fluid. Fluid therapy to support the circulation relies on applying a physiological paradigm that better explains clinical and research observations. The revised Starling equation based on recent research considers the contributions of the endothelial glycocalyx layer (EGL), the endothelial basement membrane, and the extracellular matrix. The characteristics of capillaries in various tissues are reviewed and some clinical corollaries considered. The oncotic pressure difference across the EGL opposes, but does not reverse, the filtration rate (the 'no absorption' rule) and is an important feature of the revised paradigm and highlights the limitations of attempting to prevent or treat oedema by transfusing colloids. Filtered fluid returns to the circulation as lymph. The EGL excludes larger molecules and occupies a substantial volume of the intravascular space and therefore requires a new interpretation of dilution studies of blood volume and the speculation that protection or restoration of the EGL might be an important therapeutic goal. An explanation for the phenomenon of context sensitivity of fluid volume kinetics is offered, and the proposal that crystalloid resuscitation from low capillary pressures is rational. Any potential advantage of plasma or plasma substitutes over crystalloids for volume expansion only manifests itself at higher capillary pressures.

Improvement (defined broadly as purposive efforts to secure positive change) has become an increasingly important activity and field of inquiry within healthcare. This article offers an overview of possible methods for the study of improvement interventions. The choice of available designs is wide, but debates continue about how far improvement efforts can be simultaneously practical (aimed at producing change) and scientific (aimed at producing new knowledge), and whether the distinction between the practical and the scientific is a real and useful one. Quality improvement projects tend to be applied and, in some senses, self-evaluating. They are not necessarily directed at generating new knowledge, but reports of such projects if well conducted and cautious in their inferences may be of considerable value. They can be distinguished heuristically from research studies, which are motivated by and set out explicitly to test a hypothesis, or otherwise generate new knowledge, and from formal evaluations of improvement projects. We discuss variants of trial designs, quasi-experimental designs, systematic reviews, programme evaluations, process evaluations, qualitative studies, and economic evaluations. We note that designs that are better suited to the evaluation of clearly defined and static interventions may be adopted without giving sufficient attention to the challenges associated with the dynamic nature of improvement interventions and their interactions with contextual factors. Reconciling pragmatism and research rigour is highly desirable in the study of improvement. Trade-offs need to be made wisely, taking into account the objectives involved and inferences to be made.

ObjectivesWith a growing role for health services in managing population health, there is a need for early identification of populations with high need. Segmentation approaches partition the population based on demographics, long-term conditions (LTCs) or healthcare utilisation but have mostly been applied to adults. Our study uses segmentation methods to distinguish patterns of healthcare utilisation in children and young people (CYP) and to explore predictors of segment membership.DesignA retrospective cohort study.SettingRoutinely collected primary and secondary healthcare data in Northwest London from the Discover database.Participants378 309 CYP aged 0–15 years registered to a general practice in Northwest London with 1 full year of follow-up.Primary and secondary outcome measuresAssignment of each participant to a segment defined by seven healthcare variables representing primary and secondary care attendances, and description of utilisation patterns by segment. Predictors of segment membership described by age, sex, ethnicity, deprivation and LTCs.ResultsParticipants were grouped into six segments based on healthcare utilisation. Three segments predominantly used primary care, two moderate utilisation segments differed in use of emergency or elective care, and a high utilisation segment, representing 16 632 (4.4%) children accounted for the highest mean presentations across all service types. The two smallest segments, representing 13.3% of the population, accounted for 62.5% of total costs. Younger age, residence in areas of higher deprivation and the presence of one or more LTCs were associated with membership of higher utilisation segments, but 75.0% of those in the highest utilisation segment had no LTC.ConclusionsThis article identifies six segments of healthcare utilisation in CYP and predictors of segment membership. Demographics and LTCs may not explain utilisation patterns as strongly as in adults, which may limit the use of routine data in predicting utilisation and suggest children have less well-defined trajectories of service use than adults.