No abstract

ObjectivesTo determine the publication rate of abstracts presented at 10 European College of Veterinary Surgeons conferences from 2006 to 2015, report the key publication milestones, and determine variables associated with full manuscript publication.Study designLiterature review.Sample populationOne thousand thirty‐eight abstracts.MethodsAll conference abstracts (n = 1038) from the 2006 to 2015 annual ECVS scientific meetings were reviewed, and final publication was determined through a comprehensive bibliographic search. Categories for the level of evidence (LoE), subject, discipline, and institution affiliation were assigned for each abstract. Dates of manuscript submission, acceptance, and publication were recorded.ResultsThe overall publication rate for ECVS abstracts from 2006 to 2015 was 32%. Abstracts with levels 4 (60%) and 5 (23%) evidence were presented the most at ECVS conferences and had the highest publication rates at 38% and 36%, respectively. Key publication milestones showed that most abstracts (83%) received publication within the first 36 months with most LoE 2 abstracts (91%) being published within 24 months of presentation. Most published abstracts were affiliated with academic institutions (85%), on dog (29%) and horse (27%) subjects, focused on orthopedic (35%) and soft tissue disciplines (27%), and published in Veterinary Surgery (32%).ConclusionThe ECVS abstract publication rate was lower, and timeline was longer to publish than other veterinary surgical conferences. Publication occurred most frequently in academic institutions, in select journals, and was limited to orthopedic, soft‐tissue, dog, and horse studies.Clinical significanceResults from this study may help improve the publication fate of abstracts in veterinary surgery. Additionally, caution is warranted when using information from abstracts that have yet to be published to help guide clinical decisions.

Objective: The use of patient-rated outcome (PRO) measures in clinical practice can provide pertinent information regarding the limitations and restrictions in activities of daily living after an injury to the upper extremity from the patient’s perspective. The subjective information obtained is often vital to guide more client centered and hence effective therapy approach. This study specifically explored the current practice trends and the perception on the use of PRO measures among hand therapists in Singapore. This study aimed to identify the barriers that limit routine use of PRO measures locally. Materials and Methods: An online survey consisted of 10 questions was administered via SurveyMonkey. The link to the survey was distributed through e-mail to all hand therapists in the 7 acute general hospitals in Singapore on February 1, 2016. Occupational therapists who have more than 6 months of clinical experience in hand therapy were recruited. The survey was closed on February 29, 2016. Results: Information from 27 responses was analyzed in descriptive manner; 33.33% (n = 9) indicated that they use PRO measures with less than 25% of their patients and 2 therapists indicated they did not use PRO measures at all. Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH)/quickDASH and Patient-Rated Wrist/Hand Evaluation (PRWHE) were more commonly used. The barriers to routine use of PRO measures were identified: (1) PRO measures taking too much time to administer, (2) patients having difficulty completing PRO measures, and (3) use of objective standardized assessment is more applicable in the setting. About 81.5% (n = 22) indicated that it is important for occupational therapists in hand therapy setting to use PRO measures and it should be used more often; 68% (n=19) agreed that there should be a PRO measure that is specifically designed for use in Singapore. “Fast to administer” was rated as the most important feature in PRO measures for the therapists to incorporate its use routinely. Conclusion: This study suggested that while hand occupational therapists in Singapore agree that it is vital to use PRO measures with their patients, they face various limitations in routine administration. It was found that Singapore therapists would prefer a PRO measure that is more culturally relevant and one that is fast to administer. Further research into seeking solutions to improve utilization rate of PRO measures in Singapore is required.