PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

Craig Crippen

Publications and source records attributed to Craig Crippen.

2 recordsLinked to original sources

Do we heed the endophthalmitis vitrectomy study in Canada?

BACKGROUND: The Endophthalmitis Vitrectomy Study (EVS) was a multicentre randomized clinical trial designed to guide the management of postoperative bacterial endophthalmitis. There is speculation that many physicians do not follow its recommendations, despite its intent. We surveyed Canadian vitreoretinal surgeons to determine whether surgeons are adopting the EVS recommendations in their management of bacterial endophthalmitis after cataract surgery. METHODS: A survey was sent to 98 vitreoretinal surgeons across Canada who manage postoperative endophthalmitis following cataract surgery. The survey explored the management of patients presenting with a hypopyon or suspected endophthalmitis, or both, early (up to 2 weeks) after cataract surgery. For purposes of comparison with the EVS, the questions were divided into presenting visual acuity categories. RESULTS: Of the 98 surgeons 30 (30.6%) responded to the survey. The preferred treatment for patients presenting with no light perception visual acuity was pars plana vitrectomy (23 respondents [76.7%]); 7 respondents (23.3%) preferred vitreous tap/biopsy. All but one of the respondents stated that they prefer pars plana vitrectomy for patients presenting with light perception vision; the remaining physician preferred either pars plana vitrectomy or vitreous tap/biopsy. For patients with hand motions visual acuity, 17 respondents (56.7%) would perform pars plana vitrectomy, 11 (36.7%) would perform vitreous tap/biopsy, and 2 (6.7%) would perform either procedure. Most of the respondents (20 [66.7%]) would perform vitreous tap/biopsy for patients with visual acuity of counting fingers, whereas 9 (30.0%) would perform pars plana vitrectomy, and 1 (3.3%) would perform either procedure. All the respondents indicated that they would use intraocular antibiotic therapy for initial treatment, 29 (96.7%) would use topical antibiotic therapy, 17 (56.7%) would inject antibiotics subconjunctivally, and 1 (3.3%) would use intravenous antibiotic therapy. Fourteen respondents (46.7%) would use intraocular steroid therapy. INTERPRETATION: Most of the Canadian vitreoretinal surgeons who responded to this survey do not follow the recommendations of the EVS.

Anti-Bacterial Agents↗

Are patients informed when they consent to ERCP?

BACKGROUND: Only the British Society of Gastroenterology has published consent guidelines that are inclusive for endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). Previous research has shown that there are variations in the information discussed with patients who are undergoing ERCP. PURPOSE: To examine the informed consent practices for ERCP in Ontario. METHODS: A self-report questionnaire was sent to ERCP endoscopists in Ontario, who were identified through a pre-existing database. The 14-item questionnaire included questions pertaining to the risks, benefits and alternatives discussed, how consent was obtained and whether the consent process was modified for patients older than 75 years. RESULTS: Of the 82 surveys sent, 36 responses were received, with three respondents indicating that they no longer performed ERCP; the total response rate was 40%. Ninety-four per cent of those who responded noted that they obtained written consent, and 6% obtained verbal consent. When discussing risks with their patients, 91% of respondents always mentioned pancreatitis, 88% always mentioned bleeding, 73% always mentioned perforation and 30% always mentioned the risk of infection; only 24% always mentioned the possibility of being allergic to the contrast agent, and 73% rarely or never mentioned death. When dealing with patients older than 75 years, 38% of respondents tended to be more brief in their explanations, 31% gave the same details in their explanation and 31% gave more detailed information than they gave to younger patients. Seventy-nine per cent mentioned the possibility of diagnostic failure and 82% mentioned the possibility of therapeutic failure, while only 27% mentioned the possibility of missing a diagnosis. CONCLUSIONS: Variability exists in terms of 'important information' given to patients undergoing ERCP. Standard informed consent guidelines specific to ERCP may help endoscopists uphold their responsibility to the patient, enhance patient understanding and reduce the risk of liability.

Cholangiopancreatography, Endoscopic Retrograde↗