With the advancement of research on rare ocular diseases such as inherited retinal dystrophy (IRD) has advanced in recent years, especially breakthroughs in therapeutic approaches represented by cell and gene therapy, potential intervention strategies have emerged for these conditions. Establishing standardized endpoints and evaluation methods for visual function in patients with IRD has become crucial for assessing disease progression, safety, and therapeutic efficacy of innovative treatments. Best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) is widely recognized as one of the primary endpoints for assessing visual function. However, for IRD patients with severe rod photoreceptor dysfunction, who often present with profound low vision or even legal blindness, the applicability of BCVA as a traditional visual function indicator is limited. The multi-luminance mobility test (MLMT) has emerged as a functional visual assessment tool that evaluates the ability to navigate obstacle courses under varying illumination levels. By establishing graded evaluation standards, MLMT objectively quantifies the impact of lighting conditions on patients’ nobility and spatial orientation, providing a novel quantitative tool for assessing visual function in IRD clinical trials. Currently, there is a lack of unified and standardized guidelines for the use of MLMT in China, posing challenges to its implementation in practical clinical research. To address this, Ocular Fundus Disease Society of Chinese Medical Association and Chinese Medical Doctor Association convened a multidisciplinary team comprising clinical experts in genetic retinal diseases, statisticians, and optical specialists to investigate the current applications and technical characteristics of MLMT, ultimately formulating consensus recommendations for its use as a clinical trial endpoint for IRD gene therapies. This consensus aims to provide a set of MLMT operating norms applicable to China's national conditions, guide clinical practice and research in ophthalmology and related disciplines, and promote the standardization process of IRD clinical trials in China, so as to better serve the IRD patient population and promote the development of related fields.
Objective To analyze the progress of evaluation indexes for enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) model at home and abroad, and to propose suggestions for constructing systematic evaluation model of ERAS. Methods Atfirst checked the Chinese and English databases, including Medline, Embase, Sciencedirect, ACP Journal Club, BioMed Central, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Science Citation Index Expanded, Cochrane Library, NHS Economic Evaluation Database, CNKI, VIP, and Wanfang databases (retrieval time was from January 1997 to December 2017), and then filtered the literatures, excluded duplicate documents, a total of 1 020 English literatures and 786 Chinese literatures were enrolled eventually to make an review. Results The literatures showed that, at present, there was no comprehensive and systematic evaluation index system about ERAS at home and abroad. The existing evaluation indexes mainly included the following deficiencies: localization and fragmentation of evaluation indicators, lack of evaluation indicators of ERAS organizational framework and process management, as well as lack of standardized operational definition of evaluation indicators. Conclusions The evaluation indexes of ERAS at home and abroad do not constitute a systematic evaluation index system according to scientific principles, which will restrict the standardization of accelerated surgical rehabilitation in our country. To establish a multidimensional and comprehensive quality evaluation index system based on multi-evaluation of hospital, patient, social, and medical management institutions, which covers ERAS organizational structure, process management, and clinical outcomes, is a necessary condition for the development of ERAS model.
ObjectiveTo summarize the evaluation indexes of health resource utilization efficiency in enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) , so as to provide reference for the construction of evaluation index system.MethodLiteratures on the allocation, utilization, and efficiency of ERAS health resources at home and abroad in recent years were reviewed and analyzed.ResultsAt present, no systematic evaluation index system of ERAS health resources utilization efficiency had been formed at home and abroad. In the research, the formulation direction of input index mainly included ERAS human resources allocation and material resources allocation, while the formulation direction of output index mainly included ERAS medical resources utilization.ConclusionsThe evaluation system of ERAS health resources utilization efficiency is not perfect and the research scope of its index system is too small, which restricts the standardization promotion of ERAS. It is an urgent problem to construct a scientific evaluation index system for ERAS health resources utilization efficiency.
OBJECTIVE: To set up some objective and accurate criteria to evaluate wound healing. METHODS: Documents about wound healing were reviewed and summarized in detail. RESULTS: Wound healing rate, wound healing time, histopathology analysis, quantity assay of macrophage, determination of hydroxyproline, proliferation of cell, assay of DNA contents and circle of cells, level of transforming growth factor-alpha, levels of interleukin-1, interleukin-6 and tumor necrosis factor, assay of keratinocyte collagenase-1, level of fibroblast growth factor receptor-1, level of monocyte chemoattractant protein-1 and level of keratinocyte plasminogen activator inhabitor type 2 were selected as the evaluation criteria of wound healing. CONCLUSION: Wound healing rate, wound healing time and histopathology analysis are direct and efficient criteria of wound healing.
Objective To analyze the research hotspots and trends of Chinese literature on medical quality evaluation indicators in China in recent years. Methods We searched for relevant Chinese literature on medical quality evaluation indicators on China National Knowledge Infrastructure from January 2000 to December 2024, and analyzed the annual publication volume, authors and institutions, research hotspots and frontiers. Results Finally, 177 articles were included in the literature. From 2000 to 2024, the number of Chinese literature on medical quality evaluation indicators in China showed a fluctuating upward trend, reaching 15 articles per year in both 2015 and 2024. The issuing units mainly included the National Institute of Hospital Administration, the School of Public Health of Peking University, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, etc. The publishing team mainly included author teams such as MA Xiemin, LIANG Minghui, XIA Ping, etc. The high frequency keywords and top 10 keywords for centrality ranking included medical quality, evaluation indicators, indicator system, Delphi method, evaluation, evaluation system, quality evaluation, indicators, clinical pathways, and hospital management. “Case classification” was the earliest emerging term in the study of medical quality evaluation indicators. In terms of burst intensity, the top 5 keywords for burst intensity included Delphi method, case classification, problem, data quality, and evidence-based evaluation. Conclusion The publishing institutions and research teams of Chinese literature on medical quality evaluation indicators in China are relatively loose, and there are still problems such as insufficient practical application of medical quality evaluation indicators and single research tools and methods.
Since 2015, when the day surgery mode was officially reckoned and supported by the National Health Commission, the day surgery model has entered the new period of rapid development. But at the same time, challenges in the vacancy of the evaluation indexes of the medical quality and safety of day surgery still pose obstacles to its growth. At present, there is no nationally unified evaluating index or appraising system for the day surgery-related medical quality and safety. In this paper, based on structure-process-outcome theory, the day surgery practice and involved researching literature were retrieved, reviewed, and analyzed. Also, the practice model at West China Hospital of Sichuan University (a pioneer day surgery hospital in China) was comprehensively compared with the National Clinical Improvement System. From the aspect of day surgery medical quality and safety evaluation indicators, it is hoped to provide an evidence-based method and evaluation of day surgery, and a theoretical basis for establishing policies and data reference.
ObjectiveTo set up the evaluation form for classroom teaching quality in nursing humanities concern education, in order to conduct the evaluation on nursing teachers in their teaching of humanistic concern in their nursing class teaching. MethodsWe applied the Delphi approach to consult 16 nursing experts to screen the evaluation indicators combining with the method of dispersion degree. Analytic hierarchy process was carried out to determine the indicator weight to establish the evaluation form. Then we used the form to investigate a small sample of 37 nursing teachers. According to the test results, we checked the reliability and validity of the evaluation form. ResultsThe evaluation form was finally determined. It consisted of five level-1 indicators as well as 23 level-2 indicators. The results of Cranach's α showed that the internal consistency reliability and sensitivity of the evaluation form were very high. The results of Spearman correlation analysis showed that the construction of the evaluation form was quite reasonable. The results of factor analysis showed that the discriminant validity of the evaluation form was quite good. ConclusionThe evaluation form is true, credible and reasonably built. It may be used for self-assessment by the teachers, mutual evaluation as well as evaluation of teachers by leaders or experts for the assessment of humanistic teaching in nursing classes.
Under the background of promoting day surgery nationwide and ensure the medical quality, fine management is crucial and in trend. As one of the earliest central health organizations that started day surgery service in China, West China Hospital of Sichuan University has conducted approximate 140 000 day surgery cases in the past nearly 10 years. Based on the experience of practice, West China Hospital of Sichuan University has summarized 26 clinical indicators from 5 aspects to evaluate and monitor the economic efficacy and medical quality and safety of day surgery, including the input and output, the efficiency, the patient experience, the medical quality and safety, and the difficulty evaluation of surgery. The aim is to explore and establish an appraisal and monitoring system for day surgery, promote the stable development of day surgery, improve the work efficiency, and take the government plan of implementation day surgery to improve medical services into action.
ObjectiveTo describe the current status of the evaluation index for the performance of diagnostic reagents compared with gold standards in systematic reviews and develop the list of evaluation indexes. MethodsPubMed, Embase (OVID), Cochrane Library (OVID), CBM, WanFang Data and CNKI databases were searched for systematic reviews about the performance of diagnostic reagents compared with gold standards from inception to 28th April, 2023. Two reviewers independently screened literature and extracted data. The frequency and ratio were used to describe the current status, while the qualitative synthesis was used to develop the list. ResultsA total of 133 systematic reviews were included. Sensitivity (133/133, 100.0%), specificity (131/133, 98.5%) and AUC (80/133, 60.2%) were used more frequently than 50%. Q index (6/133, 4.5%), false positive rate (3/133, 2.3%), Kappa value (2/133, 1.5%), false negative rate (1/133, 5%) and Youden's index were used less frequently than 5%. In order to evaluate the performance of diagnostic reagents compared with gold standards in systematic reviews comprehensively, a total of 14 index related to validity and predictability could be considered. ConclusionThe evaluation index for the performance of diagnostic reagents in systematic reviews are inconsistent and limited, so there is an urgent need to develop standardized evaluation indicators based on expert consensus.