No abstract

A CDSS embedded in an EHR had a modest effect in changing prescribing for adults where antibiotics were inappropriate but had a substantial impact on changing the overall prescribing of broad-spectrum antibiotics among pediatric and adult patients.

Despite the efforts of international health agencies to reduce global health inequalities, indigenous populations around the world remain largely unaffected by such initiatives. This chapter reviews the biomedical literature indexed by the PubMed database published between 1963 and 2003 on South American indigenous populations, a total of 1864 studies that include 63,563 study participants. Some language family groupings are better represented than are others, and lowland groups are better represented than are highland groups. Very few studies focus on major health threats (e.g., tuberculosis, influenza), public health interventions, or mestizo-indigenous epidemiological comparisons. The prevalence rates of three frequently studied infections—parasitism, human T-cell lymphotropic viral infection (HTLV), and hepatitis—are extraordinarily high, but these facts have been overlooked by national and international health agencies. This review underscores the urgent need for interventions based on known disease prevalence rates to reduce the burden of infectious diseases in indigenous communities.

on behalf of the Steering Committee of The PEPPER Trial Disclosure: The PEPPER Trial is supported by the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI). On the Disclosure of Potential Conflicts of Interest forms, which are provided with the online version of the article, one or more of the authors checked "yes" to indicate that the author had a relevant financial relationship in the biomedical arena outside the submitted work (http://links.lww.com/JBJS/F670).

IntroductionMore than 1 million elective total hip and knee replacements are performed annually in the USA with 2% risk of clinical pulmonary embolism (PE), 0.1%–0.5% fatal PE, and over 1000 deaths. Antithrombotic prophylaxis is standard of care but evidence is limited and conflicting. We will compare effectiveness of three commonly used chemoprophylaxis agents to prevent all-cause mortality (ACM) and clinical venous thromboembolism (VTE) while avoiding bleeding complications.Methods and analysisPulmonary Embolism Prevention after HiP and KneE Replacement is a large randomised pragmatic comparative effectiveness trial with non-inferiority design and target enrolment of 20 000 patients comparing aspirin (81 mg two times a day), low-intensity warfarin (INR (International Normalized Ratio) target 1.7–2.2) and rivaroxaban (10 mg/day). The primary effectiveness outcome is aggregate of VTE and ACM, primary safety outcome is clinical bleeding complications, and patient-reported outcomes are determined at 1, 3 and 6 months. Primary data analysis is per protocol, as preferred for non-inferiority trials, with secondary analyses adherent to intention-to-treat principles. All non-fatal outcomes are captured from patient and clinical reports with independent blinded adjudication. Study design and oversight are by a multidisciplinary stakeholder team including a 10-patient advisory board.Ethics and disseminationThe Institutional Review Board of the Medical University of South Carolina provides central regulatory oversight. Patients aged 21 or older undergoing primary or revision hip or knee replacement are block randomised by site and procedure; those on chronic anticoagulation are excluded. Recruitment commenced at 30 North American centres in December 2016. Enrolment currently exceeds 13 500 patients, representing 33% of those eligible at participating sites, and is projected to conclude in July 2024; COVID-19 may force an extension. Results will inform antithrombotic choice by patients and other stakeholders for various risk cohorts, and will be disseminated through academic publications, meeting presentations and communications to advocacy groups and patient participants.Trial registrationNCT02810704.