Hirslanden Private Hospital Group

ObjectiveTo compare the effect of arm positioning on radiation dose, scan length, and image noise in computed tomography (CT) scans of the medial clavicular epiphysis for forensic age estimation performed with the arms alongside the body (arms-down) versus elevated above the head (arms-up).MethodsTwenty consecutive CT scans were analysed, ten performed with arms-down and ten with arms-up. The scans were conducted at 120 kVp and 37 mAs reference tube current. Scan length extended from 10 mm above to 10 mm below the medial clavicular epiphysis. Dose-relevant parameters (effective CT tube current, volume CT dose index (CTDIvol), CT dose length product (DLP), and effective dose) as well as scan length and image noise were compared between arms-up and arms-down CT scans.ResultsPopulation characteristics: 19 males, 1 female; mean weight 65.8 ± 9.2 kg; height 174.6 ± 7.8 cm; and body mass index (BMI) 21.6 ± 2.5 kg/m². Dose-relevant parameters were significantly lower with arms-up compared to arms-down (effective tube current: 80.9 ± 21.7 mAs vs. 146.0 ± 47.5 mAs, p = 0.001; CTDIvol: 5.5 ± 1.5 mGy vs. 9.9 ± 3.2 mGy, p = 0.001; DLP: 40.2 ± 13.7 mGy*cm vs. 63.8 ± 21.9 mGy*cm, p = 0.010; effective dose: 0.6 ± 0.2 mSv vs. 0.9 ± 0.3 mSv, p = 0.010). No significant differences were found in scan length, image noise, or population characteristics.ConclusionsRemoving the arms from the CT beam path reduced radiation dose by 33% without affecting scan length or image noise. Given the importance of dose optimisation in non-medical examinations of potentially minor individuals, CT scans of the medial clavicular epiphysis should be performed with arms elevated above the head.

ObjectivesTo evaluate effects of dose intensified salvage radiotherapy (sRT) on erectile function in biochemically recurrent prostate cancer (PC) after radical prostatectomy (RP). Materials and methodsEligible patients had evidence of biochemical failure after RP and a PSA at randomization of ≤ 2 ng/ml. Erectile dysfunction (ED) was investigated as secondary endpoint within the multicentre randomized trial (February 2011 to April 2014) in patients receiving either 64 Gy or 70 Gy sRT. ED and quality of life (QoL) were assessed using CTCAE v4.0 and the EORTC QoL questionnaires C30 and PR25 at baseline and up to 5 years after sRT. Results344 patients were evaluable. After RP 197 (57.3 %) patients had G0-2 ED while G3 ED was recorded in 147 (42.7 %) patients. Subsequently, sexual activity and functioning was impaired. 5 years after sRT, 101 (29.4 %) patients noted G0-2 ED. During follow-up, 44.2 % of patients with baseline G3 ED showed any improvement and 61.4 % of patients with baseline G0-2 ED showed worsening. Shorter time interval between RP and start of sRT (p = 0.007) and older age at randomization (p = 0.005) were significant predictors to more baseline ED and low sexual activity in the long-term. Age (p = 0.010) and RT technique (p = 0.031) had a significant impact on occurrence of long-term ED grade 3 and worse sexual functioning. During follow-up, no differences were found in erectile function, sexual activity, and sexual functioning between the 64 Gy and 70 Gy arm. ConclusionED after RP is a known long-term side effect with significant impact on patients’ QoL. ED was further affected by sRT, but dose intensification of sRT showed no significant impact on erectile function recovery or prevalence of de novo ED after sRT. Age, tumor stage, prostatectomy and RT-techniques, nerve-sparing and observation time were associated with long-term erectile function outcome.ClinicalTrials.gov. Identifier: NCT01272050.

Background: While first applied in thoracic surgery two decades ago, different studies over the past 10 years confirmed the safety and feasibility of robotic-assisted thoracic surgery (RATS). While initially performed with a multiportal approach (mRATS), the technological advancement now allows a uniportal technique for anatomic lung resections without the use of carbon dioxide (CO2) insufflation.

ABSTRACTSimulation has been shown to improve clinical learning outcomes, speed up the learning process and improve learner confidence, whilst initially taking pressure off busy clinical lists. The World Federation for Ultrasound in Medicine and Biology (WFUMB) state of the art paper on the use of simulators in ultrasound education introduces ultrasound simulation, its advantages and challenges. It describes different simulator types, including low and high-fidelity simulators, the requirements and technical aspects of simulators, followed by the clinical applications of ultrasound simulation. The paper discusses the role of ultrasound simulation in ultrasound clinical training, referencing established literature. Requirements for successful ultrasound simulation acceptance into educational structures are explored. Despite being in its infancy, ultrasound simulation already offers a wide range of training opportunities and likely holds the key to a broader point of care ultrasound education for medical students, practicing doctors, and other health care professionals. Despite the drawbacks of simulation, there are also many advantages, which are expanding rapidly as the technology evolves.

Knowledge about protection conferred by previous Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection and/or vaccination against emerging viral variants allows clinicians, epidemiologists, and health authorities to predict and reduce the future Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) burden. We investigated the risk and symptoms of SARS-CoV-2 (re)infection and vaccine breakthrough infection during the Delta and Omicron waves, depending on baseline immune status and subsequent vaccinations. In this prospective, multicentre cohort performed between August 2020 and March 2022, we recruited hospital employees from ten acute/nonacute healthcare networks in Eastern/Northern Switzerland. We determined immune status in September 2021 based on serology and previous SARS-CoV-2 infections/vaccinations: Group N (no immunity); Group V (twice vaccinated, uninfected); Group I (infected, unvaccinated); Group H (hybrid: infected and ≥1 vaccination). Date and symptoms of (re)infections and subsequent (booster) vaccinations were recorded until March 2022. We compared the time to positive SARS-CoV-2 swab and number of symptoms according to immune status, viral variant (i.e., Delta-dominant before December 27, 2021; Omicron-dominant on/after this date), and subsequent vaccinations, adjusting for exposure/behavior variables. Among 2,595 participants (median follow-up 171 days), we observed 764 (29%) (re)infections, thereof 591 during the Omicron period. Compared to group N, the hazard ratio (HR) for (re)infection was 0.33 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.22 to 0.50, p < 0.001) for V, 0.25 (95% CI 0.11 to 0.57, p = 0.001) for I, and 0.04 (95% CI 0.02 to 0.10, p < 0.001) for H in the Delta period. HRs substantially increased during the Omicron period for all groups; in multivariable analyses, only belonging to group H was associated with protection (adjusted HR [aHR] 0.52, 95% CI 0.35 to 0.77, p = 0.001); booster vaccination was associated with reduction of breakthrough infection risk in groups V (aHR 0.68, 95% CI 0.54 to 0.85, p = 0.001) and H (aHR 0.67, 95% CI 0.45 to 1.00, p = 0.048), largely observed in the early Omicron period. Group H (versus N, risk ratio (RR) 0.80, 95% CI 0.66 to 0.97, p = 0.021) and participants with booster vaccination (versus nonboosted, RR 0.79, 95% CI 0.71 to 0.88, p < 0.001) reported less symptoms during infection. Important limitations are that SARS-CoV-2 swab results were self-reported and that results on viral variants were inferred from the predominating strain circulating in the community at that time, rather than sequencing. Our data suggest that hybrid immunity and booster vaccination are associated with a reduced risk and reduced symptom number of SARS-CoV-2 infection during Delta- and Omicron-dominant periods. For previously noninfected individuals, booster vaccination might reduce the risk of symptomatic Omicron infection, although this benefit seems to wane over time.

IntroductionOlfactory dysfunction (OD) is often a devaluated sensorial affection. The objective evaluation of this dysfunction doesn’t evaluate its compromise in patients’ daily life. Therefore, the use of a Portuguese-validated tool is of uttermost importance to objectively scale the pathology presented by these patients.ObjectiveWe aim to validate and cross-culturally adapt the Olfactory Disorders Questionnaire (ODQ) in the Portuguese language.MethodsA prospective study was carried out to evaluate and compare 56 consecutive patients who had olfactory disorders and 54 asymptomatic controls. A cross-cultural adaptation process was taken into account in order to transform the original English tool into a valid Portuguese version. We explored the psychometric properties of the European-Portuguese version of the Portuguese version of ODQ (PT-ODQ) concerning its internal consistency, reproducibility, feasibility, and discriminatory validity.ResultsCronbach alpha for the tool was 0.924 showing strong internal consistency. We also found a statistically significant difference in PT-ODQ between patients with olfactory disorders and patients without olfactory disorders, according to the Mann-Whitney test.ConclusionsThe PT-ODQ seems to be a valid tool for assessing the individual effect of olfactory disorders on patients’ quality of life and, therefore, could be applied in olfactory disorders research and daily practice.

BackgroundA hospitalization phase represents a challenge to medication safety especially for multimorbid patients as acute medical needs might interact with pre-existing medications or evoke adverse drug effects. This project aimed to examine the prevalence and risk factors of potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs) and medication combinations (PIMCs) in the context of hospitalizations.MethodsAnalyses are based on claims data of patients (≥65 years) with basic mandatory health insurance at the Helsana Group, and on data from the Hirslanden Swiss Hospital Group. We assessed PIMs and PIMCs of patients who were hospitalized in 2013 at three different time points (quarter prior, during, after hospitalization). PIMs were identified using the PRISCUS list, whereas PIMCs were derived from compendium.ch. Zero-inflated Poisson regression models were applied to determine risk factors of PIMs and PIMCs.ResultsThroughout the observation period, more than 80% of patients had at least one PIM, ranging from 49.7% in the pre-hospitalization, 53.6% in the hospitalization to 48.2% in the post-hospitalization period. PIMCs were found in 46.6% of patients prior to hospitalization, in 21.3% during hospitalization, and in 25.0% of patients after discharge. Additional medication prescriptions compared to the preceding period and increasing age were the main risk factors, whereas managed care was associated with a decrease in PIMs and PIMCs.ConclusionWe conclude that a patient’s hospitalization offers the possibility to increase medication safety. Nevertheless, the prevalence of PIMs and PIMCs is relatively high in the study population. Therefore, our results indicate a need for interventions to increase medication safety in the Swiss healthcare setting.