Publications by authors named "Mark Fitzgerald"

614 Publications

Randomised controlled trial in cadavers investigating methods for intubation via a supraglottic airway device: Comparison of flexible airway scope guided versus a retrograde technique.

Emerg Med Australas 2021 Nov 27. Epub 2021 Nov 27.

National Trauma Research Institute, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.

Objective: A supraglottic airway device (SAD) may be utilised for rescue re-oxygenation following a failed attempt at endotracheal intubation with direct or video laryngoscopy. However, the choice of subsequent method to secure a definitive airway is not clearly established. The aim of the present study was to compare two techniques for securing a definitive airway via the in-situ SAD.

Methods: A randomised controlled trial was undertaken. The population studied was emergency physicians (EPs) attending a cadaveric airway course. The intervention was intubation through a SAD using a retrograde intubation technique (RIT). The comparison was intubation through a SAD guided by a flexible airway scope (FAS). The primary outcome was time to intubation. The trial was registered with ANZCTR.org.au (ACTRN12621000995875).

Results: Four EPs completed intubations using both methods on four cadavers for a total of 32 experiments. The mean time to intubation was 18.2 s (standard deviation 8.8) in the FAS group compared with 52.9 s (standard deviation 11.7) in the RIT group; a difference of 34.7 s (95% confidence interval 27.1-42.3, P < 0.001). All intubations were completed within 2 min and there were no equipment failures or evidence of airway trauma.

Conclusion: Successful tracheal intubation of cadavers by EPs is achievable, without iatrogenic airway trauma, via a SAD using either a FAS or RIT, but was 35 s quicker with the FAS.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1742-6723.13908DOI Listing
November 2021

Impact of Socioeconomic Status on Adult Patients with Asthma: A Population-Based Cohort Study from UK Primary Care.

J Asthma Allergy 2021 10;14:1375-1388. Epub 2021 Nov 10.

Wellcome-Wolfson Centre for Experimental Medicine, Queen's University Belfast, Belfast, Northern Ireland.

Introduction: Asthma morbidity and health-care utilization are known to exhibit a steep socioeconomic gradient. Further investigation into the modulators of this effect is required to identify potentially modifiable factors.

Methods: We identified a cohort of patients with asthma from the Optimum Patient Care Research Database (OPCRD). We compared demographics, clinical variables, and health-care utilization by quintile of the UK 2011 Indices of Multiple Deprivation based on the location of the patients' general practice. Multivariable analyses were conducted using generalized linear models adjusting for year, age, and sex. We conducted subgroup analyses and interaction tests to investigate the impact of deprivation by age, sex, ethnicity, and treatment step.

Results: Our analysis included 127,040 patients with asthma. Patients from the most deprived socio-economic status (SES) quintile were more likely to report uncontrolled disease (OR: 1.54, 95% CI: 1.16, 2.05) and to have an exacerbation during follow-up (OR: 1.27, 95% CI: 1.13, 1.42) than the least deprived quintile. They had higher blood eosinophils (ratio: 1.03; 95% CI: 1.00, 1.06) and decreased peak flow (ratio: 0.95, 95% CI: 0.94, 0.97) when compared to those in the least deprived quintile. The effect of deprivation on asthma control was greater among those aged over 75 years (OR = 1.81, 95% CI: 1.20, 2.73) compared to those aged less than 35 years (OR: 1.22, 95% CI: 0.85, 1.74; p=0.019). Similarly, socioeconomic disparities in exacerbations were larger among those from ethnic minority groups (OR: 1.94, 95% CI: 1.40, 2.68) than white patients (OR: 1.24, 95% CI: 1.10, 1.39; p=0.012).

Conclusion: We found worse disease control and increased exacerbation rates among patients with asthma from more deprived areas. There was evidence that the magnitude of socioeconomic disparities was elevated among older patients and those from ethnic minority groups. The drivers of these differences require further exploration.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/JAA.S326213DOI Listing
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8591110PMC
November 2021

Bronchial Thermoplasty in Severe Asthmatics At 5 Years: The PAS2 Study.

Chest 2021 Nov 10. Epub 2021 Nov 10.

Laval University - Québec, QC/CA.

Background: Bronchial thermoplasty is a device-based treatment for subjects ≥18 years with severe asthma poorly controlled with inhaled corticosteroids and long-acting beta-agonists. The Post-FDA Approval Clinical Trial Evaluating Bronchial Thermoplasty in Severe Persistent Asthma (PAS2) study collected data on severe asthmatics undergoing this procedure.

Research Question: What are the 5-year efficacy and safety results in severe asthmatics who have undergone bronchial thermoplasty?

Study Design And Methods: This was a prospective, open-label, observational, multi-center study conducted in the United States and Canada. Subjects aged 18-65, taking inhaled corticosteroids ≥1000μg/day (beclomethasone or equivalent) and long-acting β-agonists ≥80μg/day (salmeterol or equivalent) were included. Severe exacerbations, hospitalization, emergency department visits, and medication usage were evaluated for the 12 months prior to and at years 1-5 post-treatment. Spirometry was evaluated at baseline and at years 1-5 post-treatment.

Results: 284 subjects were enrolled at 27 centers; 227 subjects (80%) completed 5 years of follow-up. By year 5 post-treatment, the proportion of subjects with severe exacerbations, emergency department visits, and hospitalizations was 42.7%, 7.9%, and 4.8%, respectively, compared to 77.8%, 29.4%, and 16.1% in the 12 months prior to treatment. The proportion of subjects on maintenance oral corticosteroids decreased from 19.4% at baseline to 9.7% at 5 years. Analyses of subgroups based on baseline clinical and biomarker characteristics revealed a statistically significant clinical improvement among all subgroups.

Interpretation: Five years after treatment, subjects experienced decreases in severe exacerbations, hospitalizations, emergency department visits and corticosteroid exposure. All subgroups demonstrated clinically significant improvement, suggesting that bronchial thermoplasty improves asthma control in different asthma phenotypes.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chest.2021.10.044DOI Listing
November 2021

Effective Management of Severe Asthma with Biologic Medications in Adult Patients: A Literature Review and International Expert Opinion.

J Allergy Clin Immunol Pract 2021 Nov 8. Epub 2021 Nov 8.

University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ, USA.

Severe asthma often remains uncontrolled despite effective treatments and evidence-based guidelines. A group of global experts in asthma and biologic medications from nine countries considered the most relevant clinical variables to manage severe asthma in adult patients and guide treatment choice. The resulting recommendations address the investigation of biomarker levels (blood eosinophil count along with fractional concentration of exhaled nitric oxide [FeNO]), clinical features (oral corticosteroid [OCS] dependency, specific comorbid disease entities associated with severe type 2 asthma), and safety considerations. Current evidence suggests that biomarkers, including both blood or sputum eosinophil counts as well as FeNO, add prognostic and predictive value and should be measured in all patients with severe asthma. OCS use is an important factor in biologic selection, especially given the documented ability of some biologics to reduce OCS dependency. Comorbid diseases and relevant safety considerations to each biologic should also be considered. More data are needed to determine whether biomarker profiles identify patients suited to one biologic versus another as limited data support differential predictors of response. Further prospective head-to-head trials and post hoc analyses of clinical trial data are warranted. The authors believe these recommendations have value as they offer expert opinion to assist health care providers in making difficult decisions regarding the quality of care in severe, type 2 asthma with biologic medications. They remain conditional and are based on limited data owing to a lack of head-to-head comparisons.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jaip.2021.10.059DOI Listing
November 2021

Long-term health and mobility of older adults following traumatic injury: a qualitative longitudinal study.

Disabil Rehabil 2021 Nov 9:1-11. Epub 2021 Nov 9.

School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia.

Purpose: The aim of this study was to explore older adults' experiences of and approaches to managing their long-term health and mobility after traumatic injury.

Methods: A longitudinal qualitative study was undertaken with older adults following traumatic injury in Victoria, Australia. Fifteen participants (≥65 years) were interviewed at three years post-injury ( = 15), and re-interviewed at four ( = 14) and five years ( = 12) post-injury. Using a framework approach, a longitudinal thematic analysis was performed.

Results: Older age at the time of injury was identified by participants as a key factor influencing their recovery. Many participants reported actively attempting to regain their strength and fitness in the first five years following injury. However, their age, injury impacts, other health conditions, and weight gain made it difficult to achieve recovery goals. Many older adults reported a decline in their physical function over time. While these experiences and persistent disability constrained or changed the quality of social relationships, community participation, and independence, several participants described adapting to their functional limitations, and managing their secondary conditions over time.

Conclusion: In our cohort, the intertwined combination of ageing, injury, and comorbid conditions negatively affected health and mobility, reinforcing the need for preventative strategies.Implications for rehabilitationOlder adults recovering from traumatic injury may benefit from specialised care pathways that offer long-term and tailored therapies, with programs and services specific to their needs and goals.An integrated service approach by injury insurers, health care, primary care, disability, and aged care could more clearly identify and effectively address the individual needs and goals of older adults with complex conditions.Health and social services that work with people with injuries to develop personalised coping strategies can reduce anxiety related to uncertainty about the future, promote well-being, and support participation in valued activities.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09638288.2021.1998671DOI Listing
November 2021

Reply to "As-needed budesonide-formoterol for adolescents with mild asthma: importance of lung function".

J Allergy Clin Immunol Pract 2021 Nov;9(11):4179-4180

Division of Pulmonology, Department of Medicine, University of Cape Town, Cape Town, South Africa.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jaip.2021.08.033DOI Listing
November 2021

Barriers and Enablers to Objective Testing for Asthma and COPD in Primary Care: A Systematic Review Using the Theoretical Domains Framework.

Chest 2021 Nov 2. Epub 2021 Nov 2.

Keenan Research Center, Li Ka Shing Knowledge Institute, St. Michael's Hospital, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Division of Respirology, Department of Medicine, St. Michael's Hospital, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. Electronic address:

Background: Although guidelines have long recommended objective pulmonary function testing to diagnose asthma and chronic obstructive lung disease (COPD), many primary care patients receive a clinical diagnosis of asthma or COPD without objective testing. This often leads to unnecessary treatment with associated incremental costs and side-effects, and delays actual diagnosis.

Research Question: What are the barriers and enablers to lung function testing for asthma and/or COPD in primary care?

Study Design And Methods: We searched the literature for qualitative and quantitative studies reporting barriers and/or enablers to in-office or out-of-office lung function testing for diagnosing asthma and/or COPD, in primary care. Two reviewers independently screened abstracts and full texts; assessed methodological quality using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool; and extracted data from included studies. Identified barriers and enablers were categorized using the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF), applying a pre-established coding manual.

Results: We identified 7988 unique articles, reviewed 336 full-text articles, and included 18 studies in this systematic review. Of these 18, 12 were quantitative, 3 were qualitative, and 3 used mixed methods. All 18 addressed in-office testing and 11 also addressed out-of-office testing. Barriers and enablers overlapped for asthma and COPD, and in- and out-of-office settings. We identified more reported barriers (e.g. lack of knowledge of the usefulness of spirometry) than enablers (e.g. skills for performing reliable spirometry). Barriers mapped to 9 (of a possible 14) TDF domains (for both in- and out-of-office settings). Enablers mapped to three domains for in-office testing and five domains for out-of-office testing.

Interpretation: Barriers to objective testing for airways disease in primary care are complex and span many theoretical domains. Correspondingly, a successful intervention must leverage multiple behaviour change techniques. A theory-based, multifaceted intervention to address underuse of diagnostic testing for asthma or COPD should now be developed and tested.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chest.2021.10.030DOI Listing
November 2021

Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA) Strategy 2021 - Executive summary and rationale for key changes.

J Allergy Clin Immunol Pract 2021 Oct 27. Epub 2021 Oct 27.

Québec Heart and Lung Institute, Université Laval, Québec, QC, Canada.

The Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA) Strategy Report provides clinicians with an annually updated evidence-based strategy for asthma management and prevention, which can be adapted for local circumstances (e.g., medication availability). This article summarizes key recommendations from GINA 2021, and the evidence underpinning recent changes. GINA recommends that asthma in adults and adolescents should not be treated solely with short-acting beta2-agonist (SABA), because of the risks of SABA-only treatment and SABA overuse, and evidence for benefit of inhaled corticosteroids (ICS). Large trials show that as-needed combination ICS-formoterol reduces severe exacerbations by ≥60% in mild asthma compared with SABA alone, with similar exacerbation, symptom, lung function and inflammatory outcomes as daily ICS plus as-needed SABA. Key changes in GINA 2021 include division of the treatment figure for adults and adolescents into two tracks. Track 1 (preferred) has low-dose ICS-formoterol as the reliever at all steps: as-needed only in Steps 1-2 (mild asthma), and with daily maintenance ICS-formoterol (maintenance-and-reliever therapy, MART) in Steps 3-5. Track 2 (alternative) has as-needed SABA across all steps, plus regular ICS (Step 2) or ICS-long-acting beta2-agonist (LABA) (Steps 3-5). For adults with moderate-to-severe asthma, GINA makes additional recommendations in Step 5 for add-on long-acting muscarinic antagonists and azithromycin, with add-on biologic therapies for severe asthma. For children 6-11 years, new treatment options are added at Steps 3-4. Across all age-groups and levels of severity, regular personalized assessment, treatment of modifiable risk factors, self-management education, skills training, appropriate medication adjustment and review remain essential to optimize asthma outcomes.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jaip.2021.10.001DOI Listing
October 2021

Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA) Strategy 2021 - Executive summary and rationale for key changes.

Respirology 2021 Oct 19. Epub 2021 Oct 19.

Québec Heart and Lung Institute, Université Laval, Québec, QC, Canada.

The Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA) Strategy Report provides clinicians with an annually updated evidence-based strategy for asthma management and prevention, which can be adapted for local circumstances (e.g., medication availability). This article summarizes key recommendations from GINA 2021, and the evidence underpinning recent changes. GINA recommends that asthma in adults and adolescents should not be treated solely with short-acting beta2-agonist (SABA), because of the risks of SABA-only treatment and SABA overuse, and evidence for benefit of inhaled corticosteroids (ICS). Large trials show that as- needed combination ICS-formoterol reduces severe exacerbations by ≥60% in mild asthma compared with SABA alone, with similar exacerbation, symptom, lung function and inflammatory outcomes as daily ICS plus as-needed SABA. Key changes in GINA 2021 include division of the treatment figure for adults and adolescents into two tracks. Track 1 (preferred) has low-dose ICS-formoterol as the reliever at all steps: as-needed only in Steps 1-2 (mild asthma), and with daily maintenance ICS-formoterol (maintenance-and-reliever therapy, MART) in Steps 3-5. Track 2 (alternative) has as-needed SABA across all steps, plus regular ICS (Step 2) or ICS-long-acting beta2-agonist (LABA) (Steps 3-5). For adults with moderate-to-severe asthma, GINA makes additional recommendations in Step 5 for add-on long-acting muscarinic antagonists and azithromycin, with add-on biologic therapies for severe asthma. For children 6-11 years, new treatment options are added at Steps 3-4. Across all age-groups and levels of severity, regular personalized assessment, treatment of modifiable risk factors, self-management education, skills training, appropriate medication adjustment and review remain essential to optimize asthma outcomes. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/resp.14174DOI Listing
October 2021

Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA) Strategy 2021 - Executive summary and rationale for key changes.

Eur Respir J 2021 Oct 19. Epub 2021 Oct 19.

Quebec Heart and Lung Institute, Universite Laval, Quebec, QC, Canada.

The Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA) Strategy Report provides clinicians with an annually updated evidence-based strategy for asthma management and prevention, which can be adapted for local circumstances (e.g., medication availability). This article summarizes key recommendations from GINA 2021, and the evidence underpinning recent changes.GINA recommends that asthma in adults and adolescents should not be treated solely with short-acting beta2-agonist (SABA), because of the risks of SABA-only treatment and SABA overuse, and evidence for benefit of inhaled corticosteroids (ICS). Large trials show that as- needed combination ICS-formoterol reduces severe exacerbations by >60% in mild asthma compared with SABA alone, with similar exacerbation, symptom, lung function and inflammatory outcomes as daily ICS plus as-needed SABA.Key changes in GINA 2021 include division of the treatment figure for adults and adolescents into two tracks. Track 1 (preferred) has low-dose ICS-formoterol as the reliever at all steps: as-needed only in Steps 1-2 (mild asthma), and with daily maintenance ICS-formoterol (maintenance-and-reliever therapy, MART) in Steps 3-5. Track 2 (alternative) has as-needed SABA across all steps, plus regular ICS (Step 2) or ICS-long-acting beta2-agonist (LABA) (Steps 3-5). For adults with moderate-to-severe asthma, GINA makes additional recommendations in Step 5 for add-on long-acting muscarinic antagonists and azithromycin, with add-on biologic therapies for severe asthma. For children 6-11  years, new treatment options are added at Steps 3-4.Across all age-groups and levels of severity, regular personalized assessment, treatment of modifiable risk factors, self-management education, skills training, appropriate medication adjustment and review remain essential to optimize asthma outcomes.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1183/13993003.02730-2021DOI Listing
October 2021

Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA) Strategy 2021 - Executive Summary and Rationale for Key Changes.

Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2021 Oct 18. Epub 2021 Oct 18.

Universite Laval, 4440, Quebec Heart and Lung Institute, Quebec, Quebec, Canada.

The Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA) Strategy Report provides clinicians with an annually updated evidence-based strategy for asthma management and prevention, which can be adapted for local circumstances (e.g., medication availability). This article summarizes key recommendations from GINA 2021, and the evidence underpinning recent changes. GINA recommends that asthma in adults and adolescents should not be treated solely with short-acting beta2-agonist (SABA), because of the risks of SABA-only treatment and SABA overuse, and evidence for benefit of inhaled corticosteroids (ICS). Large trials show that as-needed combination ICS-formoterol reduces severe exacerbations by ≥60% in mild asthma compared with SABA alone, with similar exacerbation, symptom, lung function and inflammatory outcomes as daily ICS plus as-needed SABA. Key changes in GINA 2021 include division of the treatment figure for adults/adolescents into two tracks. Track 1 (preferred) has low-dose ICS-formoterol as the reliever at all steps: as-needed only in Steps 1-2 (mild asthma), and with daily maintenance ICS formoterol (maintenance-and-reliever therapy, MART) in Steps 3-5. Track 2 (alternative) has as-needed SABA across all steps, plus regular ICS (Step 2) or ICS-long-acting beta2-agonist (LABA) (Steps 3-5). For adults with moderate-to-severe asthma, GINA makes additional recommendations in Step 5 for add-on long-acting muscarinic antagonists and azithromycin, with add-on biologic therapies for severe asthma. For children 6-11 years, new treatment options are added at Steps 3-4. Across all age-groups and levels of severity, regular personalized assessment, treatment of modifiable risk factors, self-management education, skills training, appropriate medication adjustment and review remain essential to optimize asthma outcomes.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1164/rccm.202109-2205PPDOI Listing
October 2021

Periodic and rhythmic patterns in critically ill children: Incidence, interrater agreement, and seizures.

Epilepsia 2021 Oct 12. Epub 2021 Oct 12.

Department of Pediatrics (Division of Neurology), Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA.

Objectives: We aimed to determine the incidence of periodic and rhythmic patterns (PRP), assess the interrater agreement between electroencephalographers scoring PRP using standardized terminology, and analyze associations between PRP and electrographic seizures (ES) in critically ill children.

Methods: This was a prospective observational study of consecutive critically ill children undergoing continuous electroencephalographic monitoring (CEEG). PRP were identified by one electroencephalographer, and then two pediatric electroencephalographers independently scored the first 1-h epoch that contained PRP using standardized terminology. We determined the incidence of PRPs, evaluated interrater agreement between electroencephalographers scoring PRP, and evaluated associations between PRP and ES.

Results: One thousand three hundred ninety-nine patients underwent CEEG. ES occurred in 345 (25%) subjects. PRP, ES + PRP, and ictal-interictal continuum (IIC) patterns occurred in 142 (10%), 81 (6%), and 93 (7%) subjects, respectively. The most common PRP were generalized periodic discharges (GPD; 43, 30%), lateralized periodic discharges (LPD; 34, 24%), generalized rhythmic delta activity (GRDA; 34, 24%), bilateral independent periodic discharges (BIPD; 14, 10%), and lateralized rhythmic delta activity (LRDA; 11, 8%). ES risk varied by PRP type (p < .01). ES occurrence was associated with GPD (odds ratio [OR] = 6.35, p < .01), LPD (OR = 10.45, p < .01), BIPD (OR = 6.77, p < .01), and LRDA (OR = 6.58, p < .01). Some modifying features increased the risk of ES for each of those PRP. GRDA was not significantly associated with ES (OR = 1.34, p = .44). Each of the IIC patterns was associated with ES (OR = 6.83-8.81, p < .01). ES and PRP occurred within 6 h (before or after) in 45 (56%) subjects.

Significance: PRP occurred in 10% of critically ill children who underwent CEEG. The most common patterns were GPD, LPD, GRDA, BIPD, and LRDA. The GPD, LPD, BIPD, LRDA, and IIC patterns were associated with ES. GRDA was not associated with ES.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/epi.17068DOI Listing
October 2021

The cost-effectiveness of as-needed budesonide-formoterol versus low-dose inhaled corticosteroid maintenance therapy in patients with mild asthma in Canada.

Allergy Asthma Clin Immunol 2021 Oct 12;17(1):108. Epub 2021 Oct 12.

Global Market Access and Pricing, BioPharmaceuticals R&D, AstraZeneca, Mölndal, 431 83, Gothenburg, Sweden.

Background: The Global Initiative for Asthma recommends the use of as-needed low-dose inhaled corticosteroid (ICS)-formoterol as a preferred controller therapy for patients with mild asthma. These recommendations were based, in part, on evidence from the SYGMA 1 and 2 studies of as-needed budesonide-formoterol. This analysis aimed to compare the cost-effectiveness of as-needed budesonide-formoterol to low-dose maintenance ICS plus as-needed short-acting β-agonist (SABA) in patients with mild asthma.

Methods: A Markov cohort model was designed that included three possible health states (non-exacerbation, severe exacerbation, and death) to compare as-needed budesonide-formoterol 200-6 μg to twice-daily budesonide 200 μg maintenance therapy (low-dose ICS) plus as-needed terbutaline 0.5 mg (SABA). The deterministic base-case analysis used severe exacerbation, adverse event (AE), and healthcare resource use data from SYGMA 2, and was conducted from a Canadian public payer perspective with a 50-year time horizon, and a discount rate of 1.5% per annum. Moderate exacerbation was modelled on data from SYGMA 1 in sensitivity analyses. Utility values were derived from SYGMA 2 quality of life data. All-cause- and asthma-related mortality rates and costs (reported in 2019 Canadian dollars) were based on published data, using Canada-specific values where available. One-way deterministic sensitivity, probabilistic sensitivity, and eight scenario analyses were conducted to examine the robustness of the results.

Results: As-needed budesonide-formoterol was the dominant treatment option in the base-case analysis, providing incremental cost savings of $9882 per patient and quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gains of 0.002 versus low-dose maintenance ICS plus as-needed SABA over a 50-year time horizon. Using a willingness-to-pay threshold of $50,000/QALY ($100,000/QALY), as-needed budesonide-formoterol had a 94% (95%) probability of being cost-effective compared with maintenance ICS plus as-needed SABA. Cost-saving was mostly driven by lower overall medication and AE-related costs. As-needed budesonide-formoterol remained the dominant treatment in sensitivity and scenario analyses.

Conclusions: As-needed budesonide-formoterol is a cost-saving option for the treatment of mild asthma from the perspective of the Canadian public payer compared with low-dose maintenance ICS plus as-needed SABA.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13223-021-00610-wDOI Listing
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8507225PMC
October 2021

Effect of Convalescent Plasma on Organ Support-Free Days in Critically Ill Patients With COVID-19: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

JAMA 2021 Nov;326(17):1690-1702

School of Immunology and Microbial Sciences, Kings College London, London, England.

Importance: The evidence for benefit of convalescent plasma for critically ill patients with COVID-19 is inconclusive.

Objective: To determine whether convalescent plasma would improve outcomes for critically ill adults with COVID-19.

Design, Setting, And Participants: The ongoing Randomized, Embedded, Multifactorial, Adaptive Platform Trial for Community-Acquired Pneumonia (REMAP-CAP) enrolled and randomized 4763 adults with suspected or confirmed COVID-19 between March 9, 2020, and January 18, 2021, within at least 1 domain; 2011 critically ill adults were randomized to open-label interventions in the immunoglobulin domain at 129 sites in 4 countries. Follow-up ended on April 19, 2021.

Interventions: The immunoglobulin domain randomized participants to receive 2 units of high-titer, ABO-compatible convalescent plasma (total volume of 550 mL ± 150 mL) within 48 hours of randomization (n = 1084) or no convalescent plasma (n = 916).

Main Outcomes And Measures: The primary ordinal end point was organ support-free days (days alive and free of intensive care unit-based organ support) up to day 21 (range, -1 to 21 days; patients who died were assigned -1 day). The primary analysis was an adjusted bayesian cumulative logistic model. Superiority was defined as the posterior probability of an odds ratio (OR) greater than 1 (threshold for trial conclusion of superiority >99%). Futility was defined as the posterior probability of an OR less than 1.2 (threshold for trial conclusion of futility >95%). An OR greater than 1 represented improved survival, more organ support-free days, or both. The prespecified secondary outcomes included in-hospital survival; 28-day survival; 90-day survival; respiratory support-free days; cardiovascular support-free days; progression to invasive mechanical ventilation, extracorporeal mechanical oxygenation, or death; intensive care unit length of stay; hospital length of stay; World Health Organization ordinal scale score at day 14; venous thromboembolic events at 90 days; and serious adverse events.

Results: Among the 2011 participants who were randomized (median age, 61 [IQR, 52 to 70] years and 645/1998 [32.3%] women), 1990 (99%) completed the trial. The convalescent plasma intervention was stopped after the prespecified criterion for futility was met. The median number of organ support-free days was 0 (IQR, -1 to 16) in the convalescent plasma group and 3 (IQR, -1 to 16) in the no convalescent plasma group. The in-hospital mortality rate was 37.3% (401/1075) for the convalescent plasma group and 38.4% (347/904) for the no convalescent plasma group and the median number of days alive and free of organ support was 14 (IQR, 3 to 18) and 14 (IQR, 7 to 18), respectively. The median-adjusted OR was 0.97 (95% credible interval, 0.83 to 1.15) and the posterior probability of futility (OR <1.2) was 99.4% for the convalescent plasma group compared with the no convalescent plasma group. The treatment effects were consistent across the primary outcome and the 11 secondary outcomes. Serious adverse events were reported in 3.0% (32/1075) of participants in the convalescent plasma group and in 1.3% (12/905) of participants in the no convalescent plasma group.

Conclusions And Relevance: Among critically ill adults with confirmed COVID-19, treatment with 2 units of high-titer, ABO-compatible convalescent plasma had a low likelihood of providing improvement in the number of organ support-free days.

Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02735707.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1001/jama.2021.18178DOI Listing
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8491132PMC
November 2021

Structural Characterization of Degrader-Induced Ternary Complexes Using Hydrogen-Deuterium Exchange Mass Spectrometry and Computational Modeling: Implications for Structure-Based Design.

ACS Chem Biol 2021 11 28;16(11):2228-2243. Epub 2021 Sep 28.

C4 Therapeutics, Inc., 490 Arsenal Way Suite 200, Watertown, Massachusetts 02472, United States.

The field of targeted protein degradation (TPD) has grown exponentially over the past decade with the goal of developing therapies that mark proteins for destruction leveraging the ubiquitin-proteasome system. One common approach to achieve TPD is to employ a heterobifunctional molecule, termed as a degrader, to recruit the protein target of interest to the E3 ligase machinery. The resultant generation of an intermediary ternary complex (target-degrader-ligase) is pivotal in the degradation process. Understanding the ternary complex geometry offers valuable insight into selectivity, catalytic efficiency, linker chemistry, and rational degrader design. In this study, we utilize hydrogen-deuterium exchange mass spectrometry (HDX-MS) to identify degrader-induced protein-protein interfaces. We then use these data in conjunction with constrained protein docking to build three-dimensional models of the ternary complex. The approach was used to characterize complex formation between the E3 ligase CRBN and the first bromodomain of BRD4, a prominent oncology target. We show marked differences in the ternary complexes formed in solution based on distinct patterns of deuterium uptake for two degraders, CFT-1297 and dBET6. CFT-1297, which exhibited positive cooperativity, altered the deuterium uptake profile revealing the degrader-induced protein-protein interface of the ternary complex. For CFT-1297, the ternary complexes generated by the highest scoring HDX-constrained docking models differ markedly from those observed in the published crystal structures. These results highlight the potential utility of HDX-MS to provide rapidly accessible structural insights into degrader-induced protein-protein interfaces in solution. They further suggest that degrader ternary complexes exhibit significant conformation flexibility and that biologically relevant complexes may well not exhibit the largest interaction surfaces between proteins. Taken together, the results indicate that methods capable of incorporating linker conformation uncertainty may prove an important component in degrader design moving forward. In addition, the development of scoring functions modified to handle interfaces with no evolved complementarity, for example, through consideration of high levels of water infiltration, may prove valuable. Furthermore, the use of crystal structures as validation tools for novel degrader methods needs to be considered with caution.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/acschembio.1c00376DOI Listing
November 2021

Entrustable professional activities framework for assessment of patient handoffs in dentistry.

J Dent Educ 2021 Sep 23. Epub 2021 Sep 23.

Director of Engaged Learning and Assessment, University of Michigan School of Dentistry, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA.

Purpose/objectives: The aim of this study is to report data on the lack of a proper patient handoff system in dentistry and dental education and to present a possible solution to integrate this into curriculum using the "entrustable professional activities" (EPAs) framework.

Methods: Delphi participants from seven US dental schools provided feedback on a preliminary definition of handoff, a mnemonic and an assessment rubric. 2019 American Dental Education Association Commission on Change and Innovation in Dental Education (ADEA CCI) participants further evaluated the handoff EPA using the EQual rubric for EPA quality and structure.

Results: Delphi participants identified points of transition in dentistry, selected the D-PASS as a mnemonic, and agreed with the evaluation rubric. The ADEA CCI participants agreed the handoff EPA describes work that is essential for the profession and suitable for entrustment.

Conclusion: The D-PASS rubric is an effective way to assess patient handoffs.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jdd.12787DOI Listing
September 2021

Establishing determinants and quality indicators for getting home alive following moderate to severe traumatic brain injury: the Australian Traumatic Brain Injury National Data Project.

Emerg Med Australas 2021 12 15;33(6):1121-1123. Epub 2021 Sep 15.

National Trauma Research Institute, Alfred Health, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.

Moderate to severe traumatic brain injury (TBI) contributes to a significant burden across Australia. However, the data required to inform targeted equitable system-level improvements in emergency TBI care do not exist. The incidence and determinants of outcomes following moderate to severe TBI in Australia remain unknown. The variation in the impact of moderate to severe TBI, according to patient demographics and injury mechanism, is poorly defined. The Australian Traumatic Brain Injury National Data Project will lead to a clear understanding, across Australia and pre-specified subgroups (including Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples), of the incidence, determinants and impact of priority outcomes following moderate to severe TBI, including survival to discharge home. Furthermore, this project will establish a set of national clinical quality indicators for patients experiencing a moderate to severe TBI. The Australian Traumatic Brain Injury National Data Project will inform where to target emergency care system-wide improvements. Without baseline data, efforts are wasted.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1742-6723.13861DOI Listing
December 2021

An Integrated Framework to Conceptualize and Develop the Vancouver Airways Health Literacy Tool (VAHLT).

Int J Environ Res Public Health 2021 08 16;18(16). Epub 2021 Aug 16.

Faculty of Medicine, Respiratory Medicine Division, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC V5Z 1M9, Canada.

There is currently no comprehensive tool to assess the functional health literacy (HL) skills of chronic airway disease (CAD) patients. The purpose of this article is to describe the development of a new HL measure, the Vancouver Airways Health Literacy Tool (VAHLT). The tool was developed through the following phases: (1) , consisting of: (A) a systematic review (SR), (B) focus group sessions with CAD patients to understand barriers and facilitators to CAD management, (C) a survey with key-informants to obtain strategies to mitigate self-management barriers and validate patient-derived topics, and (D) respiratory physicians' review of the topics; (2) and (3) . The SR identified the lack of a valid HL measurement tool for CAD patients. Patients provided an initial shortlist of disease-related self-care topics. Key-informants helped to finalize topics for inclusion. Respiratory physicians and patients contributed to the development of a scenario-based questionnaire, which was refined during three rounds of testing to develop a 44-item instrument comprising nine self-management passages. We highlight the holistic process of integrating information from the literature with knowledge gained from key stakeholders into our tool framework. Our approach to stakeholder engagement may be of interest to researchers developing similar tools, and could facilitate the development and testing of HL-based interventions to ultimately improve patient outcomes and reduce the burden on the healthcare system.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18168646DOI Listing
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8393669PMC
August 2021

Genotype-phenotype correlations in SCN8A-related disorders reveal prognostic and therapeutic implications.

Brain 2021 Aug 25. Epub 2021 Aug 25.

National Centre for Rare Epilepsy-Related Disorders, Oslo University Hospital, 0001 Oslo, Norway.

We report detailed functional analyses and genotype-phenotype correlations in 392 individuals carrying disease-causing variants in SCN8A, encoding the voltage-gated Na+ channel NaV1.6, with the aim of describing clinical phenotypes related to functional effects. Six different clinical subgroups could be identified: 1) Benign familial infantile epilepsy (BFIE) (n = 15, normal cognition, treatable seizures), 2) intermediate epilepsy (n = 33, mild ID, partially pharmaco-responsive), 3) developmental and epileptic encephalopathy (DEE, n = 177, severe ID, majority pharmaco-resistant), 4) generalized epilepsy (n = 20, mild to moderate ID, frequently with absence seizures), 5) unclassifiable epilepsy (n = 127), and 6) neurodevelopmental disorder without epilepsy (n = 20, mild to moderate ID). Groups 1-3 presented with focal or multifocal seizures (median age of onset: four months) and focal epileptiform discharges, whereas the onset of seizures in group 4 was later (median: 42 months) with generalized epileptiform discharges. We performed functional studies expressing missense variants in ND7/23 neuroblastoma cells and primary neuronal cultures using recombinant tetrodotoxin-insensitive human NaV1.6 channels and whole-cell patch-clamping. Two variants causing DEE showed a strong gain-of-function (GOF, hyperpolarising shift of steady-state activation, strongly increased neuronal firing rate), and one variant causing BFIE or intermediate epilepsy showed a mild GOF (defective fast inactivation, less increased firing). In contrast, all three variants causing generalized epilepsy induced a loss-of-function (LOF, reduced current amplitudes, depolarising shift of steady-state activation, reduced neuronal firing). Including previous studies, functional effects were known for 170 individuals. All 136 individuals carrying a functionally tested GOF variant had either focal (97, groups 1-3), or unclassifiable epilepsy (39), whereas 34 with a LOF variant had either generalized (14), no (11) or unclassifiable (6) epilepsy; only three had DEE. Computational modeling in the GOF group revealed a significant correlation between the severity of the electrophysiological and clinical phenotypes. GOF variant carriers responded significantly better to sodium channel blockers (SCBs) than to other anti-seizure medications, and the same applied for all individuals of groups 1-3. In conclusion, our data reveal clear genotype-phenotype correlations between age at seizure onset, type of epilepsy and gain- or loss-of-function effects of SCN8A variants. Generalized epilepsy with absence seizures is the main epilepsy phenotype of LOF variant carriers and the extent of the electrophysiological dysfunction of the GOF variants is a main determinant of the severity of the clinical phenotype in focal epilepsies. Our pharmacological data indicate that SCBs present a treatment option in SCN8A-related focal epilepsy with onset in the first year of life.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/brain/awab321DOI Listing
August 2021

A patient decision aid for mild asthma: Navigating a new asthma treatment paradigm.

Respir Med 2021 Aug 10:106568. Epub 2021 Aug 10.

Division of Respirology, St. Michael's Hospital, Unity Health Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada; Department of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada; Keenan Research Centre for Biomedical Science, St. Michael's Hospital, Unity Health Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada. Electronic address:

Introduction: In mild asthma, as-needed budesonide-formoterol offers similar protection from severe exacerbations as daily inhaled corticosteroids (ICS), with lower ICS exposure but slightly increased symptoms. We sought to develop an electronic decision aid to guide discussions about the pros and cons of these first-line options, while identifying and integrating user preferences.

Methods: Following International Patient Decision Aid Standards, we created a mild asthma decision aid prototype comparing convenience, clinical outcomes, cumulative ICS dose exposure, costs, and side-effects of each option. After face validation, the prototype was iteratively adapted through rapid-cycle development. Each cycle consisted of a patient focus group and a primary care physician interview. We made user preference-based improvements after each round, until reaching a pre-set stopping criterion (no new critical issues identified). We then performed a summative qualitative content analysis.

Results: Over 5 cycles, we recruited 21 asthma patients (12/21 women, 10/21 ≥ 60 years old) and 5 physicians. Serial changes included simplification and reduction of text and reading level, inclusion of an ICS "myths" section and elaboration of patient-friendly infographics for numerical comparisons. User preferences fell within Content, Format, and tool use Process themes. In response to decision-making preferences, we created a complementary one-page conversation aid for patient-provider use at the point-of-care.

Conclusions: We present preference-based electronic patient decision and conversation aids for treatment of mild asthma. Our user preference analyses offer useful insights for development of such tools in other chronic diseases. These tools now require integration into point-of-care workflows for measurement of real-world uptake and impact.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.rmed.2021.106568DOI Listing
August 2021

Inhaled budesonide for COVID-19 in people at high risk of complications in the community in the UK (PRINCIPLE): a randomised, controlled, open-label, adaptive platform trial.

Lancet 2021 09 10;398(10303):843-855. Epub 2021 Aug 10.

Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK. Electronic address:

Background: A previous efficacy trial found benefit from inhaled budesonide for COVID-19 in patients not admitted to hospital, but effectiveness in high-risk individuals is unknown. We aimed to establish whether inhaled budesonide reduces time to recovery and COVID-19-related hospital admissions or deaths among people at high risk of complications in the community.

Methods: PRINCIPLE is a multicentre, open-label, multi-arm, randomised, controlled, adaptive platform trial done remotely from a central trial site and at primary care centres in the UK. Eligible participants were aged 65 years or older or 50 years or older with comorbidities, and unwell for up to 14 days with suspected COVID-19 but not admitted to hospital. Participants were randomly assigned to usual care, usual care plus inhaled budesonide (800 μg twice daily for 14 days), or usual care plus other interventions, and followed up for 28 days. Participants were aware of group assignment. The coprimary endpoints are time to first self-reported recovery and hospital admission or death related to COVID-19, within 28 days, analysed using Bayesian models. The primary analysis population included all eligible SARS-CoV-2-positive participants randomly assigned to budesonide, usual care, and other interventions, from the start of the platform trial until the budesonide group was closed. This trial is registered at the ISRCTN registry (ISRCTN86534580) and is ongoing.

Findings: The trial began enrolment on April 2, 2020, with randomisation to budesonide from Nov 27, 2020, until March 31, 2021, when the prespecified time to recovery superiority criterion was met. 4700 participants were randomly assigned to budesonide (n=1073), usual care alone (n=1988), or other treatments (n=1639). The primary analysis model includes 2530 SARS-CoV-2-positive participants, with 787 in the budesonide group, 1069 in the usual care group, and 974 receiving other treatments. There was a benefit in time to first self-reported recovery of an estimated 2·94 days (95% Bayesian credible interval [BCI] 1·19 to 5·12) in the budesonide group versus the usual care group (11·8 days [95% BCI 10·0 to 14·1] vs 14·7 days [12·3 to 18·0]; hazard ratio 1·21 [95% BCI 1·08 to 1·36]), with a probability of superiority greater than 0·999, meeting the prespecified superiority threshold of 0·99. For the hospital admission or death outcome, the estimated rate was 6·8% (95% BCI 4·1 to 10·2) in the budesonide group versus 8·8% (5·5 to 12·7) in the usual care group (estimated absolute difference 2·0% [95% BCI -0·2 to 4·5]; odds ratio 0·75 [95% BCI 0·55 to 1·03]), with a probability of superiority 0·963, below the prespecified superiority threshold of 0·975. Two participants in the budesonide group and four in the usual care group had serious adverse events (hospital admissions unrelated to COVID-19).

Interpretation: Inhaled budesonide improves time to recovery, with a chance of also reducing hospital admissions or deaths (although our results did not meet the superiority threshold), in people with COVID-19 in the community who are at higher risk of complications.

Funding: National Institute of Health Research and United Kingdom Research Innovation.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(21)01744-XDOI Listing
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8354567PMC
September 2021

Making trauma registries more useful for improving patient care: A survey of trauma care and trauma registry stakeholders across Australia and New Zealand.

Injury 2021 Oct 19;52(10):2848-2854. Epub 2021 Jul 19.

National Trauma Research Institute, The Alfred, Melbourne, Australia; Emergency and Trauma Centre, The Alfred, Melbourne, Australia; Trauma Service, The Alfred, Melbourne, Australia; Software and Innovation Lab, Deakin University, Melbourne, Australia. Electronic address:

Introduction: Injury is a major global health burden. Trauma registries have been used for decades to monitor the burden of injury and inform trauma care. However, the extent to which trauma registries have fulfilled their potential remains uncertain. The aims of this study were to determine the current and priority uses of trauma registries across Australia and New Zealand and to establish the priority clinical outcomes, the probability for which, if known for an individual trauma patient, would better inform that same patient's care, during hospital admission.

Methods: A prospective observational study using survey methodology was conducted. Participants were sourced from the Australia New Zealand Trauma Registry (ATR) participating hospitals. The survey questions included: the current uses and priorities for both single-site trauma registries and the binational trauma registry; the five top-ranked priority outcomes for which knowing the probability, for an individual patient, would inform care; and the priority timepoints for applying patient-level outcome prediction models.

Results: Of the 26 ATR-participating hospitals, 25 were represented by a total of 54 participants in the survey, including trauma service directors and trauma nurse coordinators. The main trauma registry use and priority for the single site registries was to inform the quality improvement program; for the ATR, the main use was periodic reporting and the main priority was benchmarking. For each potential purpose of the registry, the future priority level was ranked more highly than the current level of utilisation. The most highly ranked priority patient-level outcomes requiring prediction were: preventable death, missed injury, quality of life, admission costs, pulmonary embolism, post-traumatic stress disorder, length of hospital stay, errors in decision-making and deep venous thrombosis. The time period between leaving the emergency department and the 24 h mark following presentation was considered the preferred time for patient-level priority outcome prediction.

Conclusion: There is a mismatch between current trauma registry uses and future priorities. The priority outcomes demanding prediction in the first 24 h of a trauma patient's stay are preventable death, missed injury, quality of life, hospital costs, thromboembolism, post-traumatic stress disorder, length of hospital stay and errors in clinical decision-making.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.injury.2021.07.024DOI Listing
October 2021

Therapeutic Anticoagulation with Heparin in Critically Ill Patients with Covid-19.

N Engl J Med 2021 Aug 4;385(9):777-789. Epub 2021 Aug 4.

From the University of Toronto (E.C.G., P.R.L., L.C.G., M.E.F., V.D., R.A.F., J.P.G., M.H., A.S.S.), University Health Network (E.C.G., M.H.), Peter Munk Cardiac Centre at University Health Network (P.R.L., L.C.G., M.E.F., V.D.), Ozmosis Research (L.B., V.W.), Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre (J.P.G.), Toronto, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute (M. Carrier, L.A.C., D.A.F., G.L.G., D.M.S.), Institut du Savoir Montfort (M. Carrier, G.L.G.), and the University of Ottawa (L.A.C., D.A.F., D.M.S.), Ottawa, the University of Manitoba (A. Kumar, B.L.H., R.Z., S.A.L., D.S., G.V.-G.) and CancerCare Manitoba (B.L.H., R.Z.), Winnipeg, Université Laval and Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Québec-Université Laval Research Center, Quebec, QC (A.F.T.), McGill University, Montreal (S.R.K., E.G.M.), St. Michael's Hospital Unity Health, Toronto (J.C.M., Z.B., M.S., A.S.S.), McMaster University and the Thrombosis and Atherosclerosis Research Institute, Hamilton, ON (P.L.G.) Université de Sherbrooke, Sherbrooke, QC (F.L.), St. Boniface Hospital, Winnipeg, MB (N.M.), the University of British Columbia, Vancouver (S. Murthy), and the University of Alberta, Edmonton (S.D.) - all in Canada; University of Bristol and University Hospitals Bristol and Weston NHS Foundation Trust, Bristol (C.A.B.), the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine (B.-A.K.), Imperial College London (A.C.G., F.A.-B., M.A.L.), Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, St. Mary's Hospital (A.C.G.), University College London Hospital (R.H.), Kings Healthcare Partners (B.J.H.), and Intensive Care National Audit and Research Centre (ICNARC) (P.R.M., K.R.), London, Queen's University Belfast and Royal Victoria Hospital, Belfast (D.F.M.), and Oxford University (A. Beane, L.J.E., S.J.S.) and NHS Blood and Transplant (L.J.E., S. Mavromichalis, S.J.S.), Oxford - all in the United Kingdom; the University of Pittsburgh (B.J.M., D.C.A., M.M.B., M.D.N., H.F.E., J.D.F., Z.F., D.T.H., A.J.K., C.M.L., K.L., M.M., S.K.M., C.W.S., Y.Z.), University of Pittsburgh Medical Center (B.J.M., D.C.A., M.D.N., K.L.), the Clinical Research, Investigation, and Systems Modeling of Acute Illness (CRISMA) Center, University of Pittsburgh (T.D.G.), and University of Pittsburgh Medical Center Children's Hospital of Pittsburgh (C.M. Horvat) - all in Pittsburgh; New York University (NYU) Grossman School of Medicine (J.S.B., H.R.R., J.S.H., T.C., A.C., N.M.K., S. Mavromichalis, S.P.), NYU Langone Health, NYU Langone Hospital (T.A., T.C., A.C., J.M.H., E.Y.), and Bellevue Hospital (N.M.K.), Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai (R.S.R.), and Mount Sinai Heart (R.S.R.), New York, Montefiore Medical Center (M.N.G., H.H.B., S.C., J.-T.C., A.A. Hope, R.N.) and Albert Einstein College of Medicine (M.N.G., H.H.B., B.T.G., A.A. Hope), Bronx, and NYU Langone Long Island, Mineola (A.A. Hindenburg) - all in New York; Zuckerberg San Francisco General Hospital-University of California, San Francisco (L.Z.K., C.M. Hendrickson, M.M.K., A.E.K., B.N.-G., J.J.P.), Harbor-UCLA Medical Center, Torrance (R.J.L.), Global Coalition for Adaptive Research (M. Buxton) and the University of California, Los Angeles (G.L.), Los Angeles, the University of California San Diego School of Medicine, San Diego (T.W.C.), and Stanford University School of Medicine, Palo Alto (J.G.W.) - all in California; the University of Illinois (K.S.K., J.R.J., J.G.Q.), the University of Chicago (J.D.P.), and the Chartis Group (J.S.) - all in Chicago; University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University (L.P.G.D., M. Bonten, R.E.G.S., W.B.-P.), and Utrecht University (R.E.G.S.), Utrecht, and Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen (S. Middeldorp, F.L.V.) - all in the Netherlands; Larner College of Medicine at the University of Vermont, Burlington (M. Cushman); Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, University of Bern, Bern (T.T.), and SOCAR Research, Nyon (B.-A.K., S. Brouwer) - both in Switzerland; Instituto do Coracao, Hospital das Clinicas, Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade de Sao Paulo (L.C.G., F.G.L., J.C.N.), Avanti Pesquisa Clínica (A.S.M.), and Hospital 9 de Julho (F.O.S.), Sao Paulo, Hospital do Coração de Mato Grosso do Sul (M.P.), the Federal University of Mato Grosso do Sul (M.P.), Hospital Universitário Maria Aparecida Pedrossia (D.G.S.), and Hospital Unimed Campo Grande (D.G.S.), Campo Grande, and Instituto Goiano de Oncologia e Hematologia, Clinical Research Center, Goiânia (M.O.S.) - all in Brazil; the Australian and New Zealand Intensive Care Research Centre, Monash University (Z.M., C.J.M., S.A.W., A. Buzgau, C.G., A.M.H., S.P.M., A.D.N., J.C.P.), Monash University (A.C.C.), and Alfred Health (A.C.C., A.D.N.), Melbourne, VIC, St. John of God Subiaco Hospital, Subiaco, WA (S.A.W., E. Litton), Flinders University, Bedford Park, SA (S. Bihari), and Fiona Stanley Hospital, Perth, WA (E. Litton) - all in Australia; Berry Consultants, Austin (R.J.L., L.R.B., E. Lorenzi, S.M.B., M.A.D., M.F., A.M., C.T.S.), and Baylor Scott and White Health, Temple (R.J.W.) - both in Texas; Auckland City Hospital (C.J.M., S.P.M., R.L.P.) and the University of Auckland (R.L.P.), Auckland, and the Medical Research Institute of New Zealand, Wellington (C.J.M., A.M.T.) - all in New Zealand; Fédération Hospitalo-Universitaire Saclay and Paris Seine Nord Endeavour to Personalize Interventions for Sepsis (FHU-SEPSIS), Raymond Poincaré Hospital, Université de Versailles Saint-Quentin-en-Yvelines, Garches (D. Annane), and Aix-Marseille University, Marseille (B.C.) - both in France; King Saud bin Abdulaziz University for Health Sciences and King Abdullah International Medical Research Center, Riyadh, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (Y.M.A.); Nepal Mediciti Hospital, Lalitpur (D. Aryal), and the Nepal Intensive Care Research Foundation, Kathmandu (D. Aryal); Versiti Blood Research Institute, Milwaukee (L.B.K.); National Intensive Care Surveillance (NICS)-Mahidol Oxford Tropical Medicine Research Unit (MORU), Colombo, Sri Lanka (A. Beane); Jena University Hospital, Jena, Germany (F.B.); Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland (A.D.), and the University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati (K.H.) - both in Ohio; Ochsner Medical Center, University of Queensland-Ochsner Clinical School, New Orleans (M.B.E.); Instituto Mexicano del Seguro Social, Mexico City (J.E., E.M.G.); Brigham and Women's Hospital (B.M.E., Y.K., S.M.H.), Massachusetts General Hospital (N.S.R., A.B.S.), and Harvard Medical School (B.M.E., Y.K., N.S.R., A.B.S.) - all in Boston; University of Alabama, Birmingham (S.G.); TriStar Centennial Medical Center, Nashville (A.L.G.); University of Antwerp, Wilrijk, Belgium (H.G.); Rutgers New Jersey Medical School, Newark, New Jersey (Y.Y.G.); University of Oxford, Bangkok, Thailand (R.H.); the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor (R.C.H., P.K.P.), Beaumont Health, Royal Oak (G.B.N.), and Oakland University William Beaumont School of Medicine, Auburn Hills (G.B.N.) - all in Michigan; Apollo Speciality Hospital OMR, Chennai, India (D.J.); Oregon Health and Science University, Portland (A. Khan); National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD (A. Kindzelski, E.S.L.); University of Mississippi Medical Center, Jackson (M.E.K.); IdiPaz Research Institute, Universidad Autonoma, Madrid (J.L.-S.); University College Dublin, Dublin (A.D.N.); the University of Kansas School of Medicine, Kansas City (L.S.); and Duke University Hospital, Durham, North Carolina (L.W.).

Background: Thrombosis and inflammation may contribute to morbidity and mortality among patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19). We hypothesized that therapeutic-dose anticoagulation would improve outcomes in critically ill patients with Covid-19.

Methods: In an open-label, adaptive, multiplatform, randomized clinical trial, critically ill patients with severe Covid-19 were randomly assigned to a pragmatically defined regimen of either therapeutic-dose anticoagulation with heparin or pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis in accordance with local usual care. The primary outcome was organ support-free days, evaluated on an ordinal scale that combined in-hospital death (assigned a value of -1) and the number of days free of cardiovascular or respiratory organ support up to day 21 among patients who survived to hospital discharge.

Results: The trial was stopped when the prespecified criterion for futility was met for therapeutic-dose anticoagulation. Data on the primary outcome were available for 1098 patients (534 assigned to therapeutic-dose anticoagulation and 564 assigned to usual-care thromboprophylaxis). The median value for organ support-free days was 1 (interquartile range, -1 to 16) among the patients assigned to therapeutic-dose anticoagulation and was 4 (interquartile range, -1 to 16) among the patients assigned to usual-care thromboprophylaxis (adjusted proportional odds ratio, 0.83; 95% credible interval, 0.67 to 1.03; posterior probability of futility [defined as an odds ratio <1.2], 99.9%). The percentage of patients who survived to hospital discharge was similar in the two groups (62.7% and 64.5%, respectively; adjusted odds ratio, 0.84; 95% credible interval, 0.64 to 1.11). Major bleeding occurred in 3.8% of the patients assigned to therapeutic-dose anticoagulation and in 2.3% of those assigned to usual-care pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis.

Conclusions: In critically ill patients with Covid-19, an initial strategy of therapeutic-dose anticoagulation with heparin did not result in a greater probability of survival to hospital discharge or a greater number of days free of cardiovascular or respiratory organ support than did usual-care pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis. (REMAP-CAP, ACTIV-4a, and ATTACC ClinicalTrials.gov numbers, NCT02735707, NCT04505774, NCT04359277, and NCT04372589.).
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa2103417DOI Listing
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8362592PMC
August 2021

Therapeutic Anticoagulation with Heparin in Noncritically Ill Patients with Covid-19.

N Engl J Med 2021 Aug 4;385(9):790-802. Epub 2021 Aug 4.

From the Peter Munk Cardiac Centre at University Health Network (P.R.L., M.E.F., V.D., J.P.G., L.C.G., G.H.), the University of Toronto (P.R.L., E.C.G., A.S.S., M.E.F., V.D., R.A.F., L.C.G., G.H., M.H.), University Health Network (E.C.G., M.H.), St. Michael's Hospital Unity Health (A.S.S., Z.B., J.C.M., M.S.), Ozmosis Research (L.B., L.P.G.D., V.W.), and Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre (J.P.G.), Toronto, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute (M. Carrier, L.A.C., D.A.F., G.L.G., D.M.S.), Institut du Savoir Montfort (Marc Carrier, G.L.G.), and the University of Ottawa (L.A.C., D.A.F., D.M.S.), Ottawa, Université Laval (A.F.T.) and CHU de Québec-Université Laval Research Center (A.F.T.), Quebec, QC, the University of Manitoba (B.L.H., A. Kumar, R.Z., S.A.L., D.S., G.V.-G.), CancerCare Manitoba (B.L.H., R.Z.), and St. Boniface Hospital (N.M.), Winnipeg, MB, McGill University, Montreal (S.R.K., E.G.M.), McMaster University (P.L.G.) and the Thrombosis and Atherosclerosis Research Institute (P.L.G.), Hamilton, ON, Université de Sherbrooke, Sherbrooke, QC (F.L.), the University of British Columbia, Vancouver (S. Murthy, K.R.), and the University of Alberta, Edmonton (S.D.) - all in Canada; NYU Grossman School of Medicine (J.S.B., H.R.R., J.S.H., T.C., N.M.K., S.P.), the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai and Mount Sinai Heart (R.S.R.), NYU Langone Health, NYU Langone Hospital (T.C., J.M.H., E.Y.), and Bellevue Hospital (N.M.K.), New York, Montefiore Medical Center (M.N.G., H.H.B., S.C., J.T.C., R.N.) and Albert Einstein College of Medicine (M.N.G., H.H.B., B.T.G., A. Hope), Bronx, and NYU Langone Long Island, Mineola (R.D.H., A. Hindenburg) - all in New York; the University of Pittsburgh (M.D.N., B.J.M., D.T.H., M.M.B., D.C.A., A.J.K., C.M.L., K.L., S.K.M., C.W.S.), UPMC (M.D.N., B.J.M., D.C.A., K.L., S.K.M.), the Clinical Research, Investigation, and Systems Modeling of Acute Illness (CRISMA) Center, University of Pittsburgh (T.D.G.), and UPMC Children's Hospital of Pittsburgh (C. Horvat), Pittsburgh, and Emergency Medicine, Penn State Hershey Medical Center, Hershey (S.C.M.) - all in Pennsylvania; Instituto do Coracao, Hospital das Clinicas, Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade de Sao Paulo (J.C.N., L.C.G., F.G.L.), Avanti Pesquisa Clínica (A.S.M.), Hospital de Julho (F.O.S.), and Hospital do Coracao (F.G.Z.), Sao Paulo, Hospital do Coração de Mato Grosso do Sul and the Federal University of Mato Grosso do Sul (M.P.), Hospital Universitário Maria Aparecida Pedrossia (D.G.S.J.), and Hospital Unimed Campo Grande (D.G.S.J.), Campo Grande, and INGOH, Clinical Research Center, Goiânia (M.O.S.) - all in Brazil; Instituto Mexicano del Seguro Social, Mexico City (J.E., Y.S.P.G.); the University of Bristol and University Hospitals Bristol and Weston NHS Foundation Trust (C.A.B.), Bristol, Imperial College London (A.C.G., F.A.-B., M.A.L.), Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, St. Mary's Hospital (A.C.G.), the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine (B.-A.K.), University College London Hospital (R.H.), Kings Healthcare Partners (B.J.H.), the Intensive Care National Audit and Research Centre (P.R.M.), Guy's and St. Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust (M.S.-H.), and King's College London (M.S.-H.), London, Oxford University (A. Beane, S.J.S.) and NHS Blood and Transplant (L.J.E., S.J.S.), Oxford, and Queen's University Belfast and Royal Victoria Hospital, Belfast (D.F.M.) - all in the United Kingdom; Zuckerberg San Francisco General Hospital, University of California, San Francisco (L.Z.K., C. Hendrickson, M.M.K., A.E.K., M.A.M., B.N.-G.), Harbor-UCLA Medical Center, Torrance (R.J.L., S. Brouwer), Global Coalition for Adaptive Research (M. Buxton) and the University of California Los Angeles (G.L.), Los Angeles, the University of California San Diego School of Medicine, San Diego (T.W.C.), and Stanford University School of Medicine, Palo Alto (J.G.W.) - all in California; Larner College of Medicine at the University of Vermont, Burlington (M. Cushman); Australian and New Zealand Intensive Care Research Centre, Monash University (Z.M., A.M.H., C.J.M., S.A.W., A. Buzgau, C.G., S.P.M., A.D.N., J.C.P., A.C.C.), and Alfred Health (A.C.C., A.D.N.), Melbourne, VIC, St. John of God Subiaco Hospital (S.A.W., E. Litton) and Fiona Stanley Hospital (E. Litton), Perth, WA, and Flinders University, Bedford Park, SA (S. Bihari) - all in Australia; the University of Illinois (K.S.K., J.R.J., J.G.Q.), Cook County Health and Rush Medical College (S. Malhotra), and the University of Chicago (J.D.P.) - all in Chicago; SOCAR Research SA, Nyon (B.-A.K.), and Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, University of Bern (T.T.), Bern - all in Switzerland; Berry Consultants, Austin (R.J.L., E. Lorenzi, S.M.B., L.R.B., M.A.D., M.F., A.M., C.T.S.), University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas (A.P.), and Baylor Scott and White Health, Temple (R.J.W.) - all in Texas; Auckland City Hospital (C.J.M., S.P.M., R.L.P.) and the University of Auckland (R.L.P.), Auckland, and the Medical Research Institute of New Zealand, Wellington (C.J.M., A.M.T.) - all in New Zealand; Vanderbilt University Medical Center (A.W.A.) and TriStar Centennial Medical Center (A.L.G.) - both in Nashville; Fédération Hospitalo Universitaire, Raymond Poincaré Hospital, Université de Versailles Saint-Quentin-en-Yvelines, Garches (D. Annane), and Aix-Marseille University, Marseille (B.C.) - both in France; King Saud bin Abdulaziz University for Health Sciences and King Abdullah International Medical Research Center, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia (Y.M.A.); Nepal Mediciti Hospital, Lalitpur, and Nepal Intensive Care Research Foundation, Kathmandu (D. Aryal) - both in Nepal; Versiti Blood Research Institute, Milwaukee (L.B.K., L.J.E.), and the University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison (J.P.S.); National Intensive Care Surveillance-Mahidol Oxford Tropical Medicine Research Unit, Colombo, Sri Lanka (A. Beane); the University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht (M. Bonten, R.E.G.S., W.B.-P.), and Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen (S. Middeldorp, F.L.V.) - both in the Netherlands; Jena University Hospital, Jena, Germany (F.B.); Cleveland Clinic (A.D.) and Case Western Reserve University, the Metro Health Medical Centre (V.K.) - both in Cleveland; Ochsner Medical Center, University of Queensland-Ochsner Clinical School, New Orleans (M.B.E.); Harvard Medical School (B.M.E., Y.K., N.S.R., A.B.S), Brigham and Women's Hospital (B.M.E., Y.K., S.M.H.), Boston University School of Medicine and Boston Medical Center (N.M.H.), and Massachusetts General Hospital (A.B.S., N.S.R.) - all in Boston; University of Alabama, Birmingham (S.G.); Hospital Ramón y Cajal (S.G.-M., J.L.L.-S.M., R.M.G.) and IdiPaz Research Institute, Universidad Autonoma (J.L.-S.), Madrid, and University Hospital of Salamanca-University of Salamanca-IBSAL, Salamanca (M.M.) - all in Spain; University of Antwerp, Wilrijk, Belgium (H.G.); Rutgers New Jersey Medical School, Newark (Y.Y.G.); University of Oxford, Bangkok, Thailand (R.H.); Ascension St. John Heart and Vascular Center, Tulsa (N.H.), and the University of Oklahoma College of Medicine, Oklahoma City (N.H.); the University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati (K.H.); University of Michigan, Ann Arbor (R.C.H., P.K.P.), Beaumont Health, Royal Oak, and the OUWB School of Medicine, Auburn Hills (G.B.N.) - all in Michigan; Mayo Clinic, Rochester (V.N.I.), and the Hennepin County Medical Center, Minneapolis (M.E.P.) - both in Minnesota; Apollo Speciality Hospital-OMR, Chennai, India (D.J.); Oregon Health and Science University, Portland (A. Khan, E.S.L.); the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, Bethesda, MD (A.L.K.); University of Mississippi Medical Center, Jackson (M.E.K.); University College Dublin, Dublin (A.D.N.); University of Kansas School of Medicine, Kansas City (L.S.); Duke University Hospital, Durham, NC (L.W.); and Emory University, Atlanta (B.J.W.).

Background: Thrombosis and inflammation may contribute to the risk of death and complications among patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19). We hypothesized that therapeutic-dose anticoagulation may improve outcomes in noncritically ill patients who are hospitalized with Covid-19.

Methods: In this open-label, adaptive, multiplatform, controlled trial, we randomly assigned patients who were hospitalized with Covid-19 and who were not critically ill (which was defined as an absence of critical care-level organ support at enrollment) to receive pragmatically defined regimens of either therapeutic-dose anticoagulation with heparin or usual-care pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis. The primary outcome was organ support-free days, evaluated on an ordinal scale that combined in-hospital death (assigned a value of -1) and the number of days free of cardiovascular or respiratory organ support up to day 21 among patients who survived to hospital discharge. This outcome was evaluated with the use of a Bayesian statistical model for all patients and according to the baseline d-dimer level.

Results: The trial was stopped when prespecified criteria for the superiority of therapeutic-dose anticoagulation were met. Among 2219 patients in the final analysis, the probability that therapeutic-dose anticoagulation increased organ support-free days as compared with usual-care thromboprophylaxis was 98.6% (adjusted odds ratio, 1.27; 95% credible interval, 1.03 to 1.58). The adjusted absolute between-group difference in survival until hospital discharge without organ support favoring therapeutic-dose anticoagulation was 4.0 percentage points (95% credible interval, 0.5 to 7.2). The final probability of the superiority of therapeutic-dose anticoagulation over usual-care thromboprophylaxis was 97.3% in the high d-dimer cohort, 92.9% in the low d-dimer cohort, and 97.3% in the unknown d-dimer cohort. Major bleeding occurred in 1.9% of the patients receiving therapeutic-dose anticoagulation and in 0.9% of those receiving thromboprophylaxis.

Conclusions: In noncritically ill patients with Covid-19, an initial strategy of therapeutic-dose anticoagulation with heparin increased the probability of survival to hospital discharge with reduced use of cardiovascular or respiratory organ support as compared with usual-care thromboprophylaxis. (ATTACC, ACTIV-4a, and REMAP-CAP ClinicalTrials.gov numbers, NCT04372589, NCT04505774, NCT04359277, and NCT02735707.).
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa2105911DOI Listing
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8362594PMC
August 2021

Doxycycline for community treatment of suspected COVID-19 in people at high risk of adverse outcomes in the UK (PRINCIPLE): a randomised, controlled, open-label, adaptive platform trial.

Lancet Respir Med 2021 09 27;9(9):1010-1020. Epub 2021 Jul 27.

Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.

Background: Doxycycline is often used for treating COVID-19 respiratory symptoms in the community despite an absence of evidence from clinical trials to support its use. We aimed to assess the efficacy of doxycycline to treat suspected COVID-19 in the community among people at high risk of adverse outcomes.

Methods: We did a national, open-label, multi-arm, adaptive platform randomised trial of interventions against COVID-19 in older people (PRINCIPLE) across primary care centres in the UK. We included people aged 65 years or older, or 50 years or older with comorbidities (weakened immune system, heart disease, hypertension, asthma or lung disease, diabetes, mild hepatic impairment, stroke or neurological problem, and self-reported obesity or body-mass index of 35 kg/m or greater), who had been unwell (for ≤14 days) with suspected COVID-19 or a positive PCR test for SARS-CoV-2 infection in the community. Participants were randomly assigned using response adaptive randomisation to usual care only, usual care plus oral doxycycline (200 mg on day 1, then 100 mg once daily for the following 6 days), or usual care plus other interventions. The interventions reported in this manuscript are usual care plus doxycycline and usual care only; evaluations of other interventions in this platform trial are ongoing. The coprimary endpoints were time to first self-reported recovery, and hospitalisation or death related to COVID-19, both measured over 28 days from randomisation and analysed by intention to treat. This trial is ongoing and is registered with ISRCTN, 86534580.

Findings: The trial opened on April 2, 2020. Randomisation to doxycycline began on July 24, 2020, and was stopped on Dec 14, 2020, because the prespecified futility criterion was met; 2689 participants were enrolled and randomised between these dates. Of these, 2508 (93·3%) participants contributed follow-up data and were included in the primary analysis: 780 (31·1%) in the usual care plus doxycycline group, 948 in the usual care only group (37·8%), and 780 (31·1%) in the usual care plus other interventions group. Among the 1792 participants randomly assigned to the usual care plus doxycycline and usual care only groups, the mean age was 61·1 years (SD 7·9); 999 (55·7%) participants were female and 790 (44·1%) were male. In the primary analysis model, there was little evidence of difference in median time to first self-reported recovery between the usual care plus doxycycline group and the usual care only group (9·6 [95% Bayesian Credible Interval [BCI] 8·3 to 11·0] days vs 10·1 [8·7 to 11·7] days, hazard ratio 1·04 [95% BCI 0·93 to 1·17]). The estimated benefit in median time to first self-reported recovery was 0·5 days [95% BCI -0·99 to 2·04] and the probability of a clinically meaningful benefit (defined as ≥1·5 days) was 0·10. Hospitalisation or death related to COVID-19 occurred in 41 (crude percentage 5·3%) participants in the usual care plus doxycycline group and 43 (4·5%) in the usual care only group (estimated absolute percentage difference -0·5% [95% BCI -2·6 to 1·4]); there were five deaths (0·6%) in the usual care plus doxycycline group and two (0·2%) in the usual care only group.

Interpretation: In patients with suspected COVID-19 in the community in the UK, who were at high risk of adverse outcomes, treatment with doxycycline was not associated with clinically meaningful reductions in time to recovery or hospital admissions or deaths related to COVID-19, and should not be used as a routine treatment for COVID-19.

Funding: UK Research and Innovation, Department of Health and Social Care, National Institute for Health Research.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S2213-2600(21)00310-6DOI Listing
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8315758PMC
September 2021

Reliability, Validity, Clinical Utility, and Responsiveness of Measures for Assessing Mobility and Physical Function in Patients With Traumatic Injury in the Acute Care Hospital Setting: A Prospective Study.

Phys Ther 2021 Nov;101(11)

Department of Physiotherapy, The Alfred Hospital, Prahran, Melbourne, VIC 3181, Australia.

Objective: The longer-term impact of injury is increasingly recognized, but the early phases of recovery are less well understood. The best tools to measure early recovery of mobility and physical function following traumatic injury are unclear. The purpose of this study was to assess the clinical utility, validity, reliability, and responsiveness of 4 mobility and physical function measures in patients following traumatic injury.

Methods: In this cohort, measurement-focused study (n = 100), the modified Iowa Level of Assistance Score, Acute Care Index of Function, Activity Measure for Post-Acute Care "6 Clicks" short forms, and Functional Independence Measure were completed during first and last physical therapy sessions. Clinical utility and floor and ceiling effects were documented. Known-groups validity (early vs late in admission and by discharge destination), predictive validity (using 6-month postinjury outcomes data), and responsiveness were established. Interrater reliability was assessed in 30 patients with stable mobility and function.

Results: Participants had a median age of 52 years (interquartile range = 33-68 years), and 68% were male. The modified Iowa Level of Assistance Score, Acute Care Index of Function, and "6 Clicks" short forms were quick to administer (an extra median time of 30 seconds-1 minute), but the Functional Independence Measure took much longer (extra median time of 5 minutes). At the last physical therapy session, ceiling effects were present for all measures except the Functional Independence Measure (18%-33% of participants). All had strong known-groups validity (early vs late in admission and by discharge destination). All were responsive (effect sizes >1.0) and had excellent interrater reliability (intraclass correlation coefficients = 0.79-0.94).

Conclusion: All 4 measures were reliable, valid, and responsive; however, their clinical utility varied, and ceiling effects were common at physical therapy discharge.

Impact: This study is an important step toward evidence-based measurement in acute trauma physical therapy care. It provides critical information to guide assessment of mobility and physical function in acute trauma physical therapy, which may facilitate benchmarking across different hospitals and trauma centers and further progress the science and practice of physical therapy following traumatic injury.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ptj/pzab183DOI Listing
November 2021

Comparing methods to secure a tracheal tube placed via a surgical cricothyroidotomy: a randomised controlled study in cadavers.

Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med 2021 Jul 28;29(1):104. Epub 2021 Jul 28.

National Trauma Research Institute, Melbourne, Australia.

Objective: In the 'can't intubate can't oxygenate' scenario, techniques to achieve front of neck access to the airway have been described in the literature but there is a lack of guidance on the optimal method for securing the tracheal tube (TT) placed during this procedure. The aim of this study was to compare three different methods of securing a TT to prevent extubation following a surgical cricothyroidotomy.

Methods: A randomised controlled trial was undertaken. The population studied were emergency physicians (EPs) attending a cadaveric airway course. The intervention was securing a TT placed via a surgical cricothyroidotomy by suture. The comparison was securing the TT using fabric tape with two different tying techniques. The primary outcome was the force required to extubate the trachea. The trial was registered with ANZCTR.org.au (ACTRN12621000320853).

Results: 17 emergency physicians completed intubations using all three of the securing methods on 12 cadavers for a total of 51 experiments. The mean extubation force was 6.54 KG (95 % CI 5.54-7.55) in the suture group compared with 2.28 KG (95 % CI 1.91-2.64) in the 'Wilko tie' group and 2.12 KG (95 % CI 1.63-2.60) in the 'Lark's foot tie' group; The mean difference between the suture and fabric tie techniques was significant (p < 0.001).

Conclusions: Following a surgical cricothyroidotomy in cadavers, EPs were able to effectively secure a TT using a suture technique, and this method was superior to tying the TT using fabric tape.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13049-021-00925-yDOI Listing
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8317275PMC
July 2021

Rate and Predictors of Failure in the Conservative Management of Stable Thoracolumbar Burst Fractures: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Global Spine J 2021 Jul 19:21925682211031207. Epub 2021 Jul 19.

Department of Neurosurgery, The Alfred Hospital, Melbourne, Australia.

Study Design: Systematic review.

Objectives: Management of stable traumatic thoracolumbar burst fractures in neurologically-intact patients remains controversial. Conservative management fails in a subset of patients who require subsequent surgical fixation. The aim of this review is to (1) determine the rate of conservative management failure, and (2) analyze predictive factors at admission influencing conservative management failure.

Methods: A systematic review adhering to PRISMA guidelines was performed. Studies with data pertaining to traumatic thoracolumbar burst fractures without posterior osteoligamentous injury (e.g. AO Type A3/A4) and/or the rate and predictive factors of conservative management failure were included. Risk of bias appraisal was performed. Pooled analysis of rates of failure was performed with qualitative analysis of predictors of conservative management failure.

Results: 16 articles were included in this review (11 pertaining to rate of conservative management failure, 5 pertaining to predictive risk factors). Rate of failure of conservative management from a pooled analysis of 601 patients is 9.2% (95% CI: 4.5%-13.9%). Admission factors predictive of conservative management failure include age, greater initial kyphotic angle, greater initial interpedicular distance, smaller initial residual canal size, greater Load Sharing Classification (LSC) score and greater admission Visual Analog Scale (VAS) pain scores.

Conclusion: A proportion (9.2%) of conservatively managed, neurologically-intact thoracolumbar burst fractures fail conservative management. Among other factors, age, kyphotic angle, residual canal area and interpedicular distance should be investigated in prospective studies to identify the subset of patients prone to failure of conservative management. Surgical management should be carefully considered in patients with the above risk factors.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/21925682211031207DOI Listing
July 2021

Factors Affecting Health Literacy as Related to Asthma and COPD Management: Learning from Patient and Health Care Professional Viewpoints.

Health Lit Res Pract 2021 Jul 15;5(3):e179-e193. Epub 2021 Jul 15.

Background: Studies have identified health literacy (HL) as an important determinant of asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) management. There are, however, limited data on patients' and health care professionals (HCPs') insights about the link between HL and management of asthma and COPD.

Objective: The aim of this study was to elicit patients' and HCPs' perspectives with respect to factors affecting HL in the context of asthma and COPD management.

Methods: A total of 16 semi-structured focus groups (10 in English and 6 in French) with patients with asthma or COPD (n = 93) and 45 interviews with HCPs, researchers, and policymakers were conducted between June 2015 and April 2017. Participants were asked to share their perspectives with respect to five predefined HL domains-accessing, understanding, evaluating, communicating, and using health-related information-in relation to disease self-management practices. Data were analyzed qualitatively, using a content analysis approach.

Key Results: Most patients and HCPs reflected on factors hampering HL in relation to asthma and COPD management. Thoughts such as "not having enough time during medical consultations," "not receiving consistent messages from different health care professionals," and "language or cultural differences" were frequently mentioned by both patients and HCPs.

Conclusions: We identified multiple factors affecting communication between patients and HCPs as it relates to the self-management of their disease. These included inconsistent messages from different providers, limited consultation time, use of technical language, failure to account for cultural differences, and reduced health literacy, especially as it related to written communication. Future interventions that aim to enhance HL skills in the context of asthma and COPD self-management should consider these issues. Plain Language Summary: The current study advances the health literacy (HL) knowledge base by adding patients' and health care professionals' valuable insights on factors that hamper or facilitate HL in relation to asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) management. An important insight from this study is that receiving conflicting information from different health care professional's hampers HL in patients with asthma and/or COPD.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.3928/24748307-20210526-01DOI Listing
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8279022PMC
July 2021

Lopinavir-ritonavir and hydroxychloroquine for critically ill patients with COVID-19: REMAP-CAP randomized controlled trial.

Intensive Care Med 2021 Aug 12;47(8):867-886. Epub 2021 Jul 12.

Medical Research Institute of New Zealand, Wellington, New Zealand.

Purpose: To study the efficacy of lopinavir-ritonavir and hydroxychloroquine in critically ill patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19).

Methods: Critically ill adults with COVID-19 were randomized to receive lopinavir-ritonavir, hydroxychloroquine, combination therapy of lopinavir-ritonavir and hydroxychloroquine or no antiviral therapy (control). The primary endpoint was an ordinal scale of organ support-free days. Analyses used a Bayesian cumulative logistic model and expressed treatment effects as an adjusted odds ratio (OR) where an OR > 1 is favorable.

Results: We randomized 694 patients to receive lopinavir-ritonavir (n = 255), hydroxychloroquine (n = 50), combination therapy (n = 27) or control (n = 362). The median organ support-free days among patients in lopinavir-ritonavir, hydroxychloroquine, and combination therapy groups was 4 (- 1 to 15), 0 (- 1 to 9) and-1 (- 1 to 7), respectively, compared to 6 (- 1 to 16) in the control group with in-hospital mortality of 88/249 (35%), 17/49 (35%), 13/26 (50%), respectively, compared to 106/353 (30%) in the control group. The three interventions decreased organ support-free days compared to control (OR [95% credible interval]: 0.73 [0.55, 0.99], 0.57 [0.35, 0.83] 0.41 [0.24, 0.72]), yielding posterior probabilities that reached the threshold futility (≥ 99.0%), and high probabilities of harm (98.0%, 99.9% and > 99.9%, respectively). The three interventions reduced hospital survival compared with control (OR [95% CrI]: 0.65 [0.45, 0.95], 0.56 [0.30, 0.89], and 0.36 [0.17, 0.73]), yielding high probabilities of harm (98.5% and 99.4% and 99.8%, respectively).

Conclusion: Among critically ill patients with COVID-19, lopinavir-ritonavir, hydroxychloroquine, or combination therapy worsened outcomes compared to no antiviral therapy.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00134-021-06448-5DOI Listing
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8274471PMC
August 2021
-->