Search

Introduction: Evidence‐based guidelines suggest a conservative, nonsurgical approach as first‐line treatment for knee osteoarthritis. However, previous literature has documented underutilization of the fundamental components of condition management emphasized in the guidelines. The intervention aim is to apply organized conservative components of care for knee osteoarthritis in an evidence‐based management program through the translation of research into practice with a target to observe meaningful functional improvement in a distinct population. Methods: The program, modeled after the nonsurgical arm of a randomized, controlled trial, was designed as a single‐arm observational cohort study with a pre‐ and post‐program comparison for participants reporting presence of knee osteoarthritis who were attributed to a specific employer's health plan in the United States. The 12‐week intervention consisted of condition education, group exercise, and a dietary intervention. Results: Ninety‐six participants enrolled in the program, of which 72% completed the protocol. The median change in pre‐ to post‐program Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score values was 10.4 ± 0.8 (Z = 210.5, p < 0.001)—a clinically important change. Secondary outcomes were complementary to the primary outcome. Conclusions: Results of the program indicate that the clinically significant 3‐month findings in the report by Skou et al. (2015) regarding functional improvement can be replicated in an alternate setting. Organizing and offering fundamental components of condition management in a group format with provider oversight could be a feasible and logical component in the continuum of care for knee osteoarthritis, while complementing other secondary management strategies following diagnosis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Shift work is associated with insufficient sleep, which can compromise worker alertness with ultimate effects on occupational health and safety. Adapting shift work schedules may reduce adverse occupational outcomes., Objectives: To assess the effects of shift schedule adaptation on sleep quality, sleep duration, and sleepiness among shift workers., Search Methods: We searched CENTRAL, PubMed, Embase, and eight other databases on 13 December 2020, and again on 20 April 2022, applying no language restrictions., Selection Criteria: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and non-RCTs, including controlled before-after (CBA) trials, interrupted time series, and cross-over trials. Eligible trials evaluated any of the following shift schedule components. • Permanency of shifts • Regularity of shift changes • Direction of shift rotation • Speed of rotation • Shift duration • Timing of start of shifts • Distribution of shift schedule • Time off between shifts • Split shifts • Protected sleep • Worker participation We included studies that assessed sleep quality off-shift, sleep duration off-shift, or sleepiness during shifts., Data Collection and Analysis: Two review authors independently screened the titles and abstracts of the records recovered by the search, read through the full-text articles of potentially eligible studies, and extracted data. We assessed the risk of bias of included studies using the Cochrane risk of bias tool, with specific additional domains for non-randomised and cluster-randomised studies. For all stages, we resolved any disagreements by consulting a third review author. We presented the results by study design and combined clinically homogeneous studies in meta-analyses using random-effects models. We assessed the certainty of the evidence with GRADE., Main Results: We included 11 studies with a total of 2125 participants. One study was conducted in a laboratory setting and was not considered for drawing conclusions on intervention effects. The included studies investigated different and often multiple changes to shift schedule, and were heterogeneous with respect to outcome measurement. Forward versus backward rotation Three CBA trials (561 participants) investigated the effects of forward rotation versus backward rotation. Only one CBA trial provided sufficient data for the quantitative analysis; it provided very low-certainty evidence that forward rotation compared with backward rotation did not affect sleep quality measured with the Basic Nordic Sleep Questionnaire (BNSQ; mean difference (MD) -0.20 points, 95% confidence interval (CI) -2.28 to 1.89; 62 participants) or sleep duration off-shift (MD -0.21 hours, 95% CI -3.29 to 2.88; 62 participants). However, there was also very low-certainty evidence that forward rotation reduced sleepiness during shifts measured with the BNSQ (MD -1.24 points, 95% CI -2.24 to -0.24; 62 participants). Faster versus slower rotation Two CBA trials and one non-randomised cross-over trial (341 participants) evaluated faster versus slower shift rotation. We were able to meta-analyse data from two studies. There was low-certainty evidence of no difference in sleep quality off-shift (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.01, 95% CI -0.26 to 0.23) and very low-certainty evidence that faster shift rotation reduced sleep duration off-shift (SMD -0.26, 95% CI -0.51 to -0.01; 2 studies, 282 participants). The SMD for sleep duration translated to an MD of 0.38 hours' less sleep per day (95% CI -0.74 to -0.01). One study provided very low-certainty evidence that faster rotations decreased sleepiness during shifts measured with the BNSQ (MD -1.24 points, 95% CI -2.24 to -0.24; 62 participants). Limited shift duration (16 hours) versus unlimited shift duration Two RCTs (760 participants) evaluated 80-hour workweeks with maximum daily shift duration of 16 hours versus workweeks without any daily shift duration limits. There was low-certainty evidence that the 16-hour limit increased sleep duration off-shift (SMD 0.50, 95% CI 0.21 to 0.78; which translated to an MD of 0.73 hours' more sleep per day, 95% CI 0.30 to 1.13; 2 RCTs, 760 participants) and moderate-certainty evidence that the 16-hour limit reduced sleepiness during shifts, measured with the Karolinska Sleepiness Scale (SMD -0.29, 95% CI -0.44 to -0.14; which translated to an MD of 0.37 fewer points, 95% CI -0.55 to -0.17; 2 RCTs, 716 participants). Shorter versus longer shifts One RCT, one CBA trial, and one non-randomised cross-over trial (692 participants) evaluated shorter shift duration (eight to 10 hours) versus longer shift duration (two to three hours longer). There was very low-certainty evidence of no difference in sleep quality (SMD -0.23, 95% CI -0.61 to 0.15; which translated to an MD of 0.13 points lower on a scale of 1 to 5; 2 studies, 111 participants) or sleep duration off-shift (SMD 0.18, 95% CI -0.17 to 0.54; which translated to an MD of 0.26 hours' less sleep per day; 2 studies, 121 participants). The RCT and the non-randomised cross-over study found that shorter shifts reduced sleepiness during shifts, while the CBA study found no effect on sleepiness. More compressed versus more spread out shift schedules One RCT and one CBA trial (346 participants) evaluated more compressed versus more spread out shift schedules. The CBA trial provided very low-certainty evidence of no difference between the groups in sleep quality off-shift (MD 0.31 points, 95% CI -0.53 to 1.15) and sleep duration off-shift (MD 0.52 hours, 95% CI -0.52 to 1.56)., Authors' Conclusions: Forward and faster rotation may reduce sleepiness during shifts, and may make no difference to sleep quality, but the evidence is very uncertain. Very low-certainty evidence indicated that sleep duration off-shift decreases with faster rotation. Low-certainty evidence indicated that on-duty workweeks with shift duration limited to 16 hours increases sleep duration, with moderate-certainty evidence for minimal reductions in sleepiness. Changes in shift duration and compression of workweeks had no effect on sleep or sleepiness, but the evidence was of very low-certainty. No evidence is available for other shift schedule changes. There is a need for more high-quality studies (preferably RCTs) for all shift schedule interventions to draw conclusions on the effects of shift schedule adaptations on sleep and sleepiness in shift workers., (Copyright © 2023 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.)

The outbreak of coronavirus disease (COVID-19) caused by the 2019 novel coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) in 2019-2020 had a substantial impact on the healthcare resources of the world community. An organized regional response was essential to saving lives, preserving and distributing health care resources, and coordinating health care efforts. This brief report describes how a long-established regional trauma organization (RTO) provided that coordination in Central, Southeast, and Southeast Central Ohio during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Introduction: Children with neuromuscular disabilities (NMD) receive care in a wide variety of clinical settings. Residents lack training to develop physical examination skills for evaluating patients with NMD. We devised a curriculum to teach residents how to examine patients with NMD using a systematic and simplified approach., Methods: Creation of this resource was a response to a survey of final-year residents that revealed the need for education focused on developing physical examination skills. The curriculum has four components-multimedia PowerPoint with embedded video, knowledge assessment, clinical exam (CEX) assessment, and module feedback-and was completed by 37 residents over an 8-month period from January to September 2016. We utilized knowledge assessment, direct clinical skills observation using the CEX, and module-feedback responses as part of the evaluation., Results: All 37 residents completed the curriculum, with an overall knowledge score of greater than 80%. Residents demonstrated most of the desired patient care behaviors on the CEX assessment and provided positive feedback on the quality, usefulness, and applicability of the module, in addition to requesting more curricula to develop their physical examination skills., Discussion: The CEX assessment provided a unique opportunity for faculty feedback on residents' physical exam performance. After completing the module, residents achieved high scores in most areas of the standardized CEX and were able to conduct the NMD physical exam in a sensitive manner. The assessment highlighted the need to improve residents' skills of detecting abnormal clinical findings and communicating with the patient during the physical exam., Competing Interests: None to report.

Liver cancer, the fifth most common cancer and second leading cause of cancer-related death among men worldwide, is plagued by not only lack of clinical research, but informatics tools for early detection. Consequently, it presents a major health and cost burden. Among the different types of liver cancer, hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the most common and deadly form, arising from underlying liver disease. Current models for predicting risk of HCC and liver disease are limited to clinical data. A domain analysis of existing research related to screening for HCC and liver disease suggests that metabolic syndrome (MetS) may present oppportunites to detect early signs of liver disease. The purpose of this paper is to (i) provide a domain analysis of the relationship between HCC, liver disease, and metabolic syndrome, (ii) a review of the current disparate sources of data available for MetS diagnosis, and (iii) recommend informatics solutions for the diagnosis of MetS from available administrative (Biometrics, PHA, claims) and laboratory data, towards early prediction of liver disease. Our domain analysis and recommendations incorporate best practices to make meaningful use of available data with the goal of reducing cost associated with liver disease.