\n\nCross-sectional validation survey.\n\nPrincipal component exploratory factor analysis assessed the construct validity click here of the questionnaire. Cronbachs alpha coefficients and Spearmans rank correlation coefficient estimated the reliability of the instrument. Acceptability of the questionnaire

regarding the percentage of missing value of individual items was also assessed.\n\nA total of 511 patients discharged from public hospitals in HK were interviewed. Low percentage of missing value (0.2 to 21.3) showed high acceptability. Nine dimensions of hospital care explaining 75.4 of the variance were derived from factor analysis and content validity. These items showed satisfactory internal reliability consistency (0.49 to 0.97). Testretest reliability ranged from 0.36 to 0.96.\n\nThe HKIEQ performed well on several psychometric indicators and is a promising measure of patient experience with public hospital inpatient care in HK. The findings provided important insight on developing tools to measure patient experience in hospitals to VX-680 improve the quality of care and to lay the foundation for further research on patient expectations and needs regarding hospitalization.”
“Ventilated post-mortem computed tomography (VPMCT) has been shown to achieve lung expansion

in cadavers and has been proposed to enhance the diagnosis of lung pathology. Two key problems of the method of ventilation have been identified: firstly, the presence of head and neck rigor making airway insertion challenging and, secondly, air leak, if there is not a good seal around the airway, which diminishes Proteasome inhibition assay lung expansion

and causes inflation of the stomach. Simple procedures to insert a ‘definitive’ cuffed airway, which has a balloon inflated within the trachea, are therefore desirable. This study aims to test different procedures for inserting cuffed airways in cadavers and compare their ventilation efficacy and to propose a decision algorithm to select the most appropriate method. We prospectively tested variations on two ways of inserting a cuffed airway into the trachea: firstly, using an endotracheal tube (ET) approach, either blind or by direct visualisation, and, secondly, using a tracheostomy incision, either using a standard tracheostomy tube or shortened ET tube. We compare these approaches with a retrospective analysis of a previously reported series using supraglottic airways. All techniques, except ‘blind’ insertion of ET tubes, were possible with adequate placement of the airway in most cases. However, achieving both adequate insertion and a complete tracheal seal was better for definitive airways with 56 successful cases from 59 (95 %), compared with 9 cases from 18 (50 %) using supraglottic airways (p smaller than 0.0001).