Anterior and posterior drooling are prevalent comorbidities in children with neurodevelopmental disabilities. Considering the heterogeneity of the patient population and the multifactorial aetiology of drooling, an interdisciplinary and individualised treatment approach is indispensable. However, no tool for stepwise decision-making in the treatment of paediatric drooling has been developed previously. Within the Radboudumc Amalia Children\'s Hospital, care for children with anterior and/or posterior drooling secondary to neurodevelopmental disabilities is coordinated by a saliva control team with healthcare professionals from six disciplines. In alignment with international literature, published guidelines, and evidence gained from two decades of experience and research by our team, this paper proposes an algorithm reflecting the assessment and treatment approach applied in our clinic. First, directions are provided to decide on the necessity of saliva control treatment, taking type of drooling, the child\'s age, and the severity and impact of drooling into account. Second, the algorithm offers guidance on the choice between available treatment options, highlighting the importance of accounting for child characteristics and child and caregiver preferences in clinical (shared) decision-making.
CONCLUSIONS: With this algorithm, we aim to emphasise the importance of repeated stepwise decision-making in the assessment and treatment of drooling in children during their childhood, encouraging healthcare professionals to apply a holistic approach.
BACKGROUND: • Children with anterior or posterior drooling secondary to neurodevelopmental disabilities comprise a heterogeneous group, necessitating an individualised treatment approach. • No stepwise decision-making tool is available for the treatment of paediatric drooling.
BACKGROUND: • Deciding on the necessity of saliva control treatment should be a conscious process, based on type of drooling, age, and drooling severity and impact. • Type of drooling, age, cognition, oral motor skills, self-awareness, posture, diagnosis, and child/caregiver preferences need to be considered to decide on the optimal treatment.

OBJECTIVE: Clinical decision support (CDS) tools are designed to help primary care clinicians (PCCs) implement evidence-based guidelines for chronic disease care. CDS tools may also be helpful for opioid use disorder (OUD), but only if PCCs use them in their regular workflow. This study\'s purpose was to understand PCC and clinic leader perceptions of barriers to using an OUD-CDS tool in primary care.
METHODS: PCCs and leaders (n = 13) from clinics in an integrated health system in which an OUD-CDS tool was implemented participated in semistructured qualitative interviews. Questions aimed to understand whether the CDS tool design, implementation, context, and content were barriers or facilitators to using the OUD-CDS in primary care. Recruitment stopped when thematic saturation was reached. An inductive thematic analysis approach was used to generate overall themes.
RESULTS: Five themes emerged: (1) PCCs prefer to minimize conversations about OUD risk and treatment; (2) PCCs are enthusiastic about a CDS tool that addresses a topic of interest but lack interest in treating OUD; (3) contextual barriers in primary care limit PCCs\' ability to use CDS to manage OUD; (4) CDS needs to be simple and visible, save time, and add value to care; and (5) CDS has value in identifying and screening patients and facilitating referrals.
CONCLUSIONS: This study identified several factors that impact use of an OUD-CDS tool in primary care, including PCC interest in treating OUD, contextual barriers, and CDS design. These results may help others interested in implementing CDS for OUD in primary care.

Prompt diagnosis of lymphoma facilitates early treatment and improves outcomes for patients. For non-haemato-oncologists, it is important to have an understanding of how lymphoma can present and the initial work-up. This review is intended to provide clinicians with background to aid clinical decisional making at presentation and when managing treatment related complications. There will be particular emphasis on emergency presentations (tumour lysis syndrome, management of patients with a mediastinal mass, infections in lymphoma patients) and novel treatment options which have unique toxicities often requiring multi-specialty expertise.

UNASSIGNED: To identify factors and barriers, which affect the utilisation of spinal manipulation and mobilisation among infants, children, and adolescents.
UNASSIGNED: Twenty-six international expert physiotherapists in manual therapy and paediatrics were invited to participate in a Delphi investigation using QualtricsⓇ. In Round-1 physiotherapists selected from a list of factors and barriers affecting their decision to use spinal manipulation and mobilisation in the paediatric population and had opportunity to add to the list. Round-2 asked respondents to select as many factors and barriers that they agreed with, resulting in a frequency count. The subset of responses to questions around barriers and facilitators are the focus of this study.
UNASSIGNED: Twelve physiotherapists completed both rounds of the survey. Medical diagnosis, mechanism of injury, patient presentation, tolerance to handling, and therapist\'s knowledge of techniques were the dominant deciding factors to use spinal manipulation and mobilisation among infants, children, and adolescents across spinal levels. More than 90% of the respondents selected manipulation as inappropriate among infants as their top barrier. Additional dominant barriers to using spinal manipulation among infants and children identified by ≥ 75% of the respondents included fear of injuring the patient, fear of litigation, lack of communication, lack of evidence, lack of guardian consent, and precision of the examination to inform clinical reasoning.
UNASSIGNED: This international survey provides much needed insight regarding the factors and barriers physiotherapists should consider when contemplating the utilisation of spinal mobilisation and manipulation in the paediatric population.

暂无摘要。

BACKGROUND: Artificial intelligence, particularly chatbot systems, is becoming an instrumental tool in health care, aiding clinical decision-making and patient engagement.
OBJECTIVE: This study aims to analyze the performance of ChatGPT-3.5 and ChatGPT-4 in addressing complex clinical and ethical dilemmas, and to illustrate their potential role in health care decision-making while comparing seniors\' and residents\' ratings, and specific question types.
METHODS: A total of 4 specialized physicians formulated 176 real-world clinical questions. A total of 8 senior physicians and residents assessed responses from GPT-3.5 and GPT-4 on a 1-5 scale across 5 categories: accuracy, relevance, clarity, utility, and comprehensiveness. Evaluations were conducted within internal medicine, emergency medicine, and ethics. Comparisons were made globally, between seniors and residents, and across classifications.
RESULTS: Both GPT models received high mean scores (4.4, SD 0.8 for GPT-4 and 4.1, SD 1.0 for GPT-3.5). GPT-4 outperformed GPT-3.5 across all rating dimensions, with seniors consistently rating responses higher than residents for both models. Specifically, seniors rated GPT-4 as more beneficial and complete (mean 4.6 vs 4.0 and 4.6 vs 4.1, respectively; P<.001), and GPT-3.5 similarly (mean 4.1 vs 3.7 and 3.9 vs 3.5, respectively; P<.001). Ethical queries received the highest ratings for both models, with mean scores reflecting consistency across accuracy and completeness criteria. Distinctions among question types were significant, particularly for the GPT-4 mean scores in completeness across emergency, internal, and ethical questions (4.2, SD 1.0; 4.3, SD 0.8; and 4.5, SD 0.7, respectively; P<.001), and for GPT-3.5\'s accuracy, beneficial, and completeness dimensions.
CONCLUSIONS: ChatGPT\'s potential to assist physicians with medical issues is promising, with prospects to enhance diagnostics, treatments, and ethics. While integration into clinical workflows may be valuable, it must complement, not replace, human expertise. Continued research is essential to ensure safe and effective implementation in clinical environments.

OBJECTIVE: There is limited information about the clinical utility of targeted next-generation sequencing (NGS) panel testing to inform decision making for patients with advanced solid tumors. The Ontario-wide Cancer Targeted Nucleic Acid Evaluation (OCTANE) is a prospective study that enrolled more than 4,500 patients with solid tumor for NGS panel testing. We performed a retrospective survey of medical oncologists to evaluate the impact of NGS testing on treatment decisions.
METHODS: Patients and treating oncologists were identified at the Princess Margaret Cancer Center between 2016 and 2021. Tumor-only sequencing was performed using a gene panel of either 555 or 161 cancer genes. Oncologists were asked to review testing results and complete a survey indicating whether NGS testing affected treatment decisions. The primary outcome of this study was rate of treatment change on the basis of mutation results. Patient, test, and physician factors were evaluated for association with treatment changes using univariate analyses and a mixed-effects model.
RESULTS: Of the 582 surveys sent, 394 (67.7%) were completed. We found that 188 (47.7%) patients had testing results classified as actionable by the oncologist and 62 (15.7%) patients were matched to treatment, of whom 37 (60%) were enrolled in a clinical trial, 13 (21%) received an approved drug, four (6%) were prescribed off-label therapy, and eight (13%) avoided ineffective treatment. Patient, test, and physician characteristics were not significantly associated with treatment change. There was no difference in overall survival between patients who received matched treatment versus those who did not (P = .55, median survival not reached).
CONCLUSIONS: OCTANE testing led to a change in drug treatment in 15.7% of patients, supporting the clinical utility of NGS panel testing for patients with advanced solid tumors.

暂无摘要。

Positron emission tomography (PET) imaging has moved forward the development of medical diagnostics and research across various domains, including cardiology, neurology, infection detection, and oncology. The integration of machine learning (ML) algorithms into PET data analysis has further enhanced their capabilities of including disease diagnosis and classification, image segmentation, and quantitative analysis. ML algorithms empower researchers and clinicians to extract valuable insights from complex big PET datasets, which enabling automated pattern recognition, predictive health outcome modeling, and more efficient data analysis. This review explains the basic knowledge of PET imaging, statistical methods for PET image analysis, and challenges of PET data analysis. We also discussed the improvement of analysis capabilities by combining PET data with machine learning algorithms and the application of this combination in various aspects of PET image research. This review also highlights current trends and future directions in PET imaging, emphasizing the driving and critical role of machine learning and big PET image data analytics in improving diagnostic accuracy and personalized medical approaches. Integration between PET imaging will shape the future of medical diagnosis and research.

While urinary polymerase chain reaction (PCR) testing is effective in organism identification in patients with complex urinary tract infections (cUTI), limited data exists on the clinical usefulness of this test. We serially surveyed physicians treating symptomatic patients with cUTI both at presentation and after PCR, and urine culture (UC) results were available to ascertain how the test results modified the therapy. A total of 96 unique surveys completed by 21 providers were included in the data analysis. The mean age for female and male patients was 69.4 ± 15.5 and 71.6 ± 12.7 years, respectively. The test positivity and line-item concordance for UC and PCR were consistent with prior reports. The PCR results modified or confirmed treatment in 59/96 (61.5%) and 25/96 (26.0%) of the cases, respectively, with 12/29 (41.4%) and 47/67 (70.1%) having negative and positive PCR results, respectively, resulting in treatment change (difference 28.7%, p < 0.01). Of these, 55/59 (57.3%) were alterations in the antibiotic regimen. PCR use to modify treatment was similar across providers and not statistically different when stratified by patient age, gender, or prior empiric therapy. In 31/59 (52.5%) of the cases, the PCR results modified the treatment where UC would not; conversely, UC would have modified the treatment in 3/37 (8.1%) of the cases where PCR did not (difference 44.4%, p < 0.01). We find that PCR test results are used by clinicians in managing cUTI, and use of this test provides an opportunity to improve antibiotic stewardship in this difficult-to-treat subset of patients.