96 research outputs found

    Organism-sediment interactions govern post-hypoxia recovery of ecosystem functioning

    Get PDF
    Hypoxia represents one of the major causes of biodiversity and ecosystem functioning loss for coastal waters. Since eutrophication-induced hypoxic events are becoming increasingly frequent and intense, understanding the response of ecosystems to hypoxia is of primary importance to understand and predict the stability of ecosystem functioning. Such ecological stability may greatly depend on the recovery patterns of communities and the return time of the system properties associated to these patterns. Here, we have examined how the reassembly of a benthic community contributed to the recovery of ecosystem functioning following experimentally-induced hypoxia in a tidal flat. We demonstrate that organism-sediment interactions that depend on organism size and relate to mobility traits and sediment reworking capacities are generally more important than recovering species richness to set the return time of the measured sediment processes and properties. Specifically, increasing macrofauna bioturbation potential during community reassembly significantly contributed to the recovery of sediment processes and properties such as denitrification, bedload sediment transport, primary production and deep pore water ammonium concentration. Such bioturbation potential was due to the replacement of the small-sized organisms that recolonised at early stages by large-sized bioturbating organisms, which had a disproportionately stronger influence on sediment. This study suggests that the complete recovery of organism-sediment interactions is a necessary condition for ecosystem functioning recovery, and that such process requires long periods after disturbance due to the slow growth of juveniles into adult stages involved in these interactions. Consequently, repeated episodes of disturbance at intervals smaller than the time needed for the system to fully recover organism-sediment interactions may greatly impair the resilience of ecosystem functioning.

    International development and implementation of a core measurement set for research and audit studies in implant-based breast reconstruction:A study protocol

    Get PDF
    Introduction Outcome reporting in research studies of breast reconstruction is inconsistent and lacks standardisation. The results of individual studies therefore cannot be meaningfully compared or combined limiting their value. A core outcome set (COS) has been developed to address these issues and identified 11 key outcomes to be measured and reported in all future research and audit studies in reconstructive breast surgery (RBS). A COS represents what key outcomes should be measured. The next step is to determine how and when this should be done. The aim of this study is to develop a core measurement set (CMS) for use in research and audit studies in implant-based breast reconstruction.Methods and analysis The CMS will be developed in accordance with the guidance developed by the Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials initiative (COMET) and COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) group for the selection of outcome measurement instruments (OMIs) for relevant outcome domains included in the RBS COS. This will involve three phases with strategies to promote implementation as a final additional phase. The phases are (1) conceptual considerations in which the target population, procedures and settings are defined; (2) systematic reviews to identify existing clinical, patient-reported and cosmetic OMIs and, if appropriate, assess their quality using COSMIN methodology; (3) a modified Delphi process including sequential Delphi surveys involving approximately 100 healthcare professionals and a face to face consensus meeting to agree and ratify which outcome definitions and OMIs should be used and standardised time points for assessment; (4) strategies to promote dissemination and adoption of the CMS.Ethics and dissemination Ethical approval has been granted by University of Bristol Faculty Research Ethics Committee FREC ID 60221. Dissemination strategies will include scientific meeting presentations and peer-reviewed journal publications. Implementation activities will include engagement with journal editors and funders to promote uptake and use of the CMS

    Best-BRA (Is subpectoral or pre-pectoral implant placement best in immediate breast reconstruction?) A protocol for a pilot randomised controlled trial of subpectoral versus pre-pectoral immediate implant-based breast reconstruction in women following mastectomy

    Get PDF
    Background: implant-based breast reconstruction (IBBR) is the most commonly performed reconstructive procedure following mastectomy. IBBR techniques are evolving rapidly, with mesh-assisted subpectoral reconstruction becoming the standard of care and more recently, prepectoral techniques being introduced. These muscle-sparing techniques may reduce postoperative pain, avoid implant animation and improve cosmetic outcomes and have been widely adopted into practice. Although small observational studies have failed to demonstrate any differences in the clinical or patient-reported outcomes of prepectoral or subpectoral reconstruction, high-quality comparative evidence of clinical or cost-effectiveness is lacking. A well-designed, adequately powered randomised controlled trial (RCT) is needed to compare the techniques, but breast reconstruction RCTs are challenging. We, therefore, aim to undertake an external pilot RCT (Best-BRA) with an embedded QuinteT Recruitment Intervention (QRI) to determine the feasibility of undertaking a trial comparing prepectoral and subpectoral techniques.Methods and analysis: best-BRA is a pragmatic, two-arm, external pilot RCT with an embedded QRI and economic scoping for resource use. Women who require a mastectomy for either breast cancer or risk reduction, elect to have an IBBR and are considered suitable for both prepectoral and subpectoral reconstruction will be recruited and randomised 1:1 between the techniques.The QRI will be implemented in two phases: phase 1, in which sources of recruitment difficulties are rapidly investigated to inform the delivery in phase 2 of tailored interventions to optimise recruitment of patients.Primary outcomes will be (1) recruitment of patients, (2) adherence to trial allocation and (3) outcome completion rates. Outcomes will be reviewed at 12 months to determine the feasibility of a definitive trial.Ethics and dissemination: the study has been approved by the National Health Service (NHS) Wales REC 6 (20/WA/0338). Findings will be presented at conferences and in peer-reviewed journals.Trial registration number: ISRCTN10081873.</p

    Adherence to best practice consensus guidelines for implant-based breast reconstruction: Results from the iBRA national practice questionnaire survey

    Get PDF
    Introduction: The 2008 National Mastectomy and Breast Reconstruction Audit demonstrated marked variation in the practice and outcomes of breast reconstruction in the UK. To standardise practice and improve outcomes for patients, the British professional associations developed best-practice guidelines with specific guidance for newer mesh-assisted implant-based techniques. We explored the degree of uptake of best-practice guidelines within units performing implant-based reconstruction (IBBR) as the first phase of the implant Breast Reconstruction Evaluation (iBRA) study. Methods: A questionnaire developed by the iBRA Steering Group was completed by trainee and consultant leads at breast and plastic surgical units across the UK. Simple summary statistics were calculated for each survey item to assess compliance with current best-practice guidelines. Results: 81 units from 79 NHS Trusts completed the questionnaire. Marked variation was observed in adherence to guidelines, especially those relating to clinical governance and infection prevention strategies. Less than half (n = 28, 47%) of units obtained local clinical governance board approval prior to offering new mesh-based techniques and prospective audit of the clinical, cosmetic and patient-reported outcomes of surgery was infrequent. Most units screened for methicillin-resistant staphylococcus aureus prior to surgery but fewer than 1 in 3 screened for methicillin-sensitive strains. Laminar-flow theatres (recommended for IBBR) were not widely-available with less than 1 in 5 units having regular access. Peri-operative antibiotics were widely-used, but the type and duration were highly-variable. Conclusions: The iBRA national practice questionnaire has demonstrated variation in reported practice and adherence to IBBR guidelines. High-quality evidence is urgently required to inform best practice

    Social-ecological connections across land, water, and sea demand a reprioritization of environmental management

    Get PDF
    Despite many sectors of society striving for sustainability in environmental management, humans often fail to identify and act on the connections and processes responsible for social-ecological tipping points. Part of the problem is the fracturing of environmental management and social-ecological research into ecosystem domains (land, freshwater, and sea), each with different scales and resolution of data acquisition and distinct management approaches. We present a perspective on the social-ecological connections across ecosystem domains that emphasize the need for management reprioritization to effectively connect these domains. We identify critical nexus points related to the drivers of tipping points, scales of governance, and the spatial and temporal dimensions of social-ecological processes. We combine real-world examples and a simple dynamic model to illustrate the implications of slow management responses to environmental impacts that traverse ecosystem domains. We end with guidance on management and research opportunities that arise from this cross-domain lens to foster greater opportunity to achieve environmental and sustainability goals.Peer reviewe

    Best-BRA (Is subpectoral or prepectoral implant placement best in immediate breast reconstruction?): A protocol for a pilot randomised controlled trial of subpectoral versus prepectoral immediate implant-based breast reconstruction in women following mastectomy

    Get PDF
    Background Implant-based breast reconstruction (IBBR) is the most commonly performed reconstructive procedure following mastectomy. IBBR techniques are evolving rapidly, with mesh-assisted subpectoral reconstruction becoming the standard of care and more recently, prepectoral techniques being introduced. These muscle-sparing techniques may reduce postoperative pain, avoid implant animation and improve cosmetic outcomes and have been widely adopted into practice. Although small observational studies have failed to demonstrate any differences in the clinical or patient-reported outcomes of prepectoral or subpectoral reconstruction, high-quality comparative evidence of clinical or cost-effectiveness is lacking. A well-designed, adequately powered randomised controlled trial (RCT) is needed to compare the techniques, but breast reconstruction RCTs are challenging. We, therefore, aim to undertake an external pilot RCT (Best-BRA) with an embedded QuinteT Recruitment Intervention (QRI) to determine the feasibility of undertaking a trial comparing prepectoral and subpectoral techniques. Methods and analysis Best-BRA is a pragmatic, two-arm, external pilot RCT with an embedded QRI and economic scoping for resource use. Women who require a mastectomy for either breast cancer or risk reduction, elect to have an IBBR and are considered suitable for both prepectoral and subpectoral reconstruction will be recruited and randomised 1:1 between the techniques. The QRI will be implemented in two phases: phase 1, in which sources of recruitment difficulties are rapidly investigated to inform the delivery in phase 2 of tailored interventions to optimise recruitment of patients. Primary outcomes will be (1) recruitment of patients, (2) adherence to trial allocation and (3) outcome completion rates. Outcomes will be reviewed at 12 months to determine the feasibility of a definitive trial. Ethics and dissemination The study has been approved by the National Health Service (NHS) Wales REC 6 (20/WA/0338). Findings will be presented at conferences and in peer-reviewed journals. Trial registration number ISRCTN10081873

    Variation in the provision and practice of implant-based breast reconstruction in the UK: Results from the iBRA national practice questionnaire

    Get PDF
    Introduction: The introduction of biological and synthetic meshes has revolutionised the practice of implant-based breast reconstruction (IBBR) but evidence for effectiveness is lacking. The iBRA (implant Breast Reconstruction evAluation) study is a national trainee-led project that aims to explore the practice and outcomes of IBBR to inform the design of a future trial. We report the results of the iBRA National Practice Questionnaire (NPQ) which aimed to comprehensively describe the provision and practice of IBBR across the UK. Methods: A questionnaire investigating local practice and service provision of IBBR developed by the iBRA Steering Group was completed by trainee and consultant leads at breast and plastic surgical units across the UK. Summary data for each survey item were calculated and variation between centres and overall provision of care examined. Results: 81 units within 79 NHS-hospitals completed the questionnaire. Units offered a range of reconstructive techniques, with IBBR accounting for 70% (IQR:50–80%) of participating units' immediate procedures. Units on average were staffed by 2.5 breast surgeons (IQR:2.0–3.0) and 2.0 plastic surgeons (IQR:1.0–3.0) performing 35 IBBR cases per year (IQR:20-50). Variation was demonstrated in the provision of novel different techniques for IBBR especially the use of biological (n = 62) and synthetic (n = 25) meshes and in patient selection for these procedures. Conclusions: The iBRA-NPQ has demonstrated marked variation in the provision and practice of IBBR in the UK. The prospective audit phase of the iBRA study will determine the safety and effectiveness of different approaches to IBBR and allow evidence-based best practice to be explored
    corecore