@article{SaundersDavisKrankeetal.2018, author = {Saunders, Rhodri and Davis, Jason A. and Kranke, Peter and Weissbrod, Rachel and Whitaker, David K and Lightdale, Jenifer R}, title = {Clinical and economic burden of procedural sedation-related adverse events and their outcomes: analysis from five countries}, series = {Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management}, volume = {14}, journal = {Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management}, doi = {10.2147/TCRM.S154720}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-227508}, pages = {393-401}, year = {2018}, abstract = {Background: Studies have reported on the incidence of sedation-related adverse events (AEs), but little is known about their impact on health care costs and resource use. Methods: Health care providers and payers in five countries were recruited for an online survey by independent administrators to ensure that investigators and respondents were blinded to each other. Surveys were conducted in the local language and began with a "screener" to ensure that respondents had relevant expertise and experience. Responses were analyzed using Excel and R, with the Dixon's Q statistic used to identify and remove outliers. Global and country-specific average treatment patterns were calculated via bootstrapping; costs were mean values. The sum product of costs and intervention probability gave a cost per AE. Results: Responses were received from 101 providers and 26 payers, the majority having. 5 years of experience. At a minimum, the respondents performed a total of 3,430 procedural sedations per month. All AEs detailed occurred in clinical practice in the last year and were reported to cause procedural delays and cancellations in some patients. Standard procedural sedation costs ranged from (sic)74 (Germany) to \$2,300 (US). Respondents estimated that AEs would increase costs by between 16\% (Italy) and 179\% (US). Hypotension was reported as the most commonly observed AE with an associated global mean cost (interquartile range) of \$43 (\$27-\$68). Other frequent AEs, including mild hypotension, bradycardia, tachycardia, mild oxygen desaturation, hypertension, and brief apnea, were estimated to increase health care spending on procedural sedation by \$2.2 billion annually in the US. Conclusion: All sedation-related AEs can increase health care costs and result in substantial delays or cancellations of subsequent procedures. The prevention of even minor AEs during procedural sedation may be crucial to ensuring its value as a health care service.}, language = {en} } @article{KurzZanzingerHagenetal.2021, author = {Kurz, Anja and Zanzinger, Maren and Hagen, Rudolf and Rak, Kirsten}, title = {The impact of cochlear implant microphone settings on the binaural hearing of experienced cochlear implant users with single sided deafness}, series = {European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology}, journal = {European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology}, edition = {corrected version}, issn = {0937-4477}, doi = {10.1007/s00405-020-06450-5}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-231750}, year = {2021}, abstract = {Objective Cochlear implantation has become a well-accepted treatment option for people with single-sided deafness (SSD) and has become a clinical standard in many countries. A cochlear implant (CI) is the only device which restores binaural hearing. The effect of microphone directionality (MD) settings has been investigated in other CI indication groups, but its impact on speech perception in noise has not been established in CI users with SSD. The focus of this investigation was, therefore, to assess binaural hearing effects using different MD settings in CI users with SSD. Methods Twenty-nine experienced CI users with SSD were recruited to determine speech reception thresholds with varying target and noise sources to define binaural effects (head shadow, squelch, summation, and spatial release from masking), sound localization, and sound quality using the SSQ12 and HISQUI19 questionnaires. Outcome measures included the MD settings "natural", "adaptive", and "omnidirectional". Results The 29 participants involved in the study were divided into two groups: 11 SONNET users and 18 OPUS 2/RONDO users. In both groups, a significant head shadow effect of 7.4-9.2 dB was achieved with the CI. The MD setting "adaptive" provided a significant head shadow effect of 9.2 dB, a squelch effect of 0.9 dB, and spatial release from masking of 7.6 dB in the SONNET group. No significant summation effect could be determined in either group with CI. Outcomes with the omnidirectional setting were not significantly different between groups. For both groups, localization improved significantly when the CI was activated and was best when the omnidirectional setting was used. The groups' sound quality scores did not significantly differ. Conclusions Adaptive directional microphone settings improve speech perception and binaural hearing abilities in CI users with SSD. Binaural effect measures are valuable to quantify the benefit of CI use, especially in this indication group.}, language = {en} } @article{GuckenbergerSweeneyFlickingeretal.2011, author = {Guckenberger, Matthias and Sweeney, Reinhart A. and Flickinger, John C. and Gerszten, Peter C. and Kersh, Ronald and Sheehan, Jason and Sahgal, Arjun}, title = {Clinical practice of image-guided spine radiosurgery - results from an international research consortium}, series = {Radiation Oncology}, volume = {6}, journal = {Radiation Oncology}, number = {172}, doi = {10.1186/1748-717X-6-172}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-138006}, year = {2011}, abstract = {Background Spinal radiosurgery is a quickly evolving technique in the radiotherapy and neurosurgical communities. However, the methods of spine radiosurgery have not been standardized. This article describes the results of a survey about the methods of spine radiosurgery at five international institutions. Methods All institutions are members of the Elekta Spine Radiosurgery Research Consortium and have a dedicated research and clinical focus on image-guided radiosurgery. The questionnaire consisted of 75 items covering all major steps of spine radiosurgery. Results Strong agreement in the methods of spine radiosurgery was observed. In particular, similarities were observed with safety and quality assurance playing an important role in the methods of all institutions, cooperation between neurosurgeons and radiation oncologists in case selection, dedicated imaging for target- and organ-at-risk delineation, application of proper safety margins for the target volume and organs-at-risk, conformal planning and precise image-guided treatment delivery, and close clinical and radiological follow-up. In contrast, three major areas of uncertainty and disagreement were identified: 1) Indications and contra-indications for spine radiosurgery; 2) treatment dose and fractionation and 3) tolerance dose of the spinal cord. Conclusions Results of this study reflect the current practice of spine radiosurgery in large academic centers. Despite close agreement was observed in many steps of spine radiosurgery, further research in form of retrospective and especially prospective studies is required to refine the details of spinal radiosurgery in terms of safety and efficacy.}, language = {en} }