Search

Byline: Norma G. Cuellar, DSN, RN (School of Nursing at the University of Pennsylvania, ncuellar@nursing.upenn.edu); Sarah J. Ratcliffe, PhD (Center for Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics School of Medicine at the [...]

Background: Infants with congenital diaphragmatic hernia (CDH) often experience hypoxaemia with acidosis immediately after birth. The traditional approach in the delivery room is immediate cord clamping followed by intubation. Initiating resuscitation prior to umbilical cord clamping (UCC) may support this transition.Objectives: To establish the safety and feasibility of intubation and ventilation prior to UCC for infants with CDH. To compare short-term outcomes between trial participants and matched controls treated with immediate cord clamping before intubation and ventilation.Design: Single-arm, single-site trial of infants with CDH and gestational age ≥36 weeks. Infants were placed on a trolley immediately after birth and underwent intubation and ventilation, with UCC performed after qualitative CO2 detection. The primary feasibility endpoint was successful intubation prior to UCC. Prespecified safety and physiological outcomes were compared with historical controls matched for prognostic variables using standard bivariate tests.Results: Of 20 enrolled infants, all were placed on the trolley, and 17 (85%) infants were intubated before UCC. The first haemoglobin and mean blood pressure at 1 hour of life were significantly higher in trial participants than controls. There were no significant differences between groups for subsequent blood pressure values, vasoactive medications, inhaled nitric oxide or extracorporeal membrane oxygenation. Blood gas and oxygenation index values did not differ between groups at any point.Conclusions: Intubation and ventilation prior to UCC is safe and feasible among infants with CDH. The impact of this approach on clinically relevant outcomes deserves investigation in a randomised trial. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Rationale: Understanding long-term outcomes of critically ill patients may inform shared decision-making in the intensive care unit (ICU).Objectives: To quantify 6-month functional outcomes of general ICU patients, and develop a multivariable model comprising factors present during the first ICU day to predict which patients will return to their baseline function 6 months later.Methods: We conducted a prospective cohort study in three medical ICUs and two surgical ICUs in three hospitals. We enrolled patients who spent at least 3 days in the ICU and received mechanical ventilation for more than 48 hours and/or vasoactive infusions for more than 24 hours.Results: We measured 6-month outcomes including survival, return to original place of residence, and physical and cognitive function. Of 303 enrolled patients, 299 (98.7%) had complete follow-up at 6 months. Among the 169 patients (56.5%) who survived to 6 months, 82.8% returned home, 81.9% were able to toilet, 71.3% were able to ambulate 10 stairs, and 62.4% reported normal cognition. Overall, 31.1% of patients returned to their baseline status on these measures. Factors associated with not returning to baseline included higher APACHE III score, being a medical patient, older age, nonwhite race, recent hospitalization, prior transplantation, and a history of cancer or of neurologic or liver disease. A model including only these Day 1 factors had good discrimination (area under receiver operating characteristic curve, 0.778; 95% confidence interval, 0.724-0.832) and calibration (difference between observed and expected P value, 0.36).Conclusions: Among patients spending at least 3 days in an ICU and requiring even brief periods of life-sustaining therapy, nearly one-half will be dead and less than one-third will have returned to their baseline status at 6 months. Of those who survive, the majority of patients will be back at home at 6 months. Future research is needed to validate this multivariable model, including readily available patient characteristics available on the first ICU day, that seems to identify patients who will return to baseline at 6 months. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Symptom clusters have not previously been explored among individuals with atrial fibrillation of any type. Objective: The purpose of this study is to determine the number of symptom clusters present among adults with chronic atrial fibrillation and to explore sociodemographic and clinical factors potentially associated with cluster membership. Methods: This was a cross-sectional secondary data analysis of 335 Australian community-dwelling adults with chronic (recurrent paroxysmal, persistent, or permanent) atrial fibrillation. We used self-reported symptoms and agglomerative hierarchical cluster analysis to determine the number and content of symptom clusters present. Results: There were slightly more male (52%) than female participants, with a mean (SD) age of 72 (11.25) years. Three symptom clusters were evident, including a vagal cluster (nausea and diaphoresis), a tired cluster (fatigue/lethargy, weakness, syncope/dizziness, and dyspnea/breathlessness), and a heart cluster (chest pain/discomfort and palpitations/fluttering). We compared patient characteristics among those with all the symptoms in the cluster, those with some of the symptoms in the cluster, and those with none of the symptoms in the cluster. The only statistically significant differences were in age, gender, and the use of antiarrhythmic medications for the heart cluster. Women were more likely to have the heart symptom cluster than men were. Individuals with all of the symptoms in the heart cluster were younger (69.6 vs 73.7 years; P = .029) than those with none of the symptoms in the heart cluster and were more likely to be on antiarrhythmic medications. Conclusion: Three unique atrial fibrillation symptom clusters were identified in this study population. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article focuses on the issue of hospital readmission risk, intensive care unit (ICU) capacity strain, and pressure on staff and resources in the U.S. Topics discussed include collection of data from electronic health records, logistic regression of patient records, and chi-squared tests; relation between ward capacity strain and patient level variables; and prediction of readmissions.

Copyright of European Journal of Contraception & Reproductive Health Care is the property of Taylor & Francis Ltd and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Reducing falls in nursing homes requires a knowledgeable nursing workforce. To test knowledge, 8 validated vignettes representing multifactorial fall causes were administered to 47 nurses from 3 nursing homes. Although licensed practical nurses scored higher than registered nurses in individual categories of falls, when we computed the average score of all 8 categories between groups of registered nurses and licensed practical nurses, registered nurses scored higher (F = 4.106; P < .05) in identifying 8 causal reasons for older adults to fall. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses a study that determined the implications of varying decisions in forgoing therapies for sustaining life among intensive care unit (ICU) patients in the U.S. Reviewed were data of patients in 153 ICUs and the decisions to forgo life-sustaining therapy (DFLSTs) from 2001-2009. Results showed that factors affecting higher chances for DFLSTs among ICU patients in the U.S. include female sex, advanced age, white race and poor functional status.

Background: Medical management of early pregnancy loss is an alternative to uterine aspiration, but standard medical treatment with misoprostol commonly results in treatment failure. We compared the efficacy and safety of pretreatment with mifepristone followed by treatment with misoprostol with the efficacy and safety of misoprostol use alone for the management of early pregnancy loss.Methods: We randomly assigned 300 women who had an anembryonic gestation or in whom embryonic or fetal death was confirmed to receive pretreatment with 200 mg of mifepristone, administered orally, followed by 800 μg of misoprostol, administered vaginally (mifepristone-pretreatment group), or 800 μg of misoprostol alone, administered vaginally (misoprostol-alone group). Participants returned 1 to 4 days after misoprostol use for evaluation, including ultrasound examination, by an investigator who was unaware of the treatment-group assignments. Women in whom the gestational sac was not expelled were offered expectant management, a second dose of misoprostol, or uterine aspiration. We followed all participants for 30 days after randomization. Our primary outcome was gestational sac expulsion with one dose of misoprostol by the first follow-up visit and no additional intervention within 30 days after treatment.Results: Complete expulsion after one dose of misoprostol occurred in 124 of 148 women (83.8%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 76.8 to 89.3) in the mifepristone-pretreatment group and in 100 of 149 women (67.1%; 95% CI, 59.0 to 74.6) in the misoprostol-alone group (relative risk, 1.25; 95% CI, 1.09 to 1.43). Uterine aspiration was performed less frequently in the mifepristone-pretreatment group than in the misoprostol-alone group (8.8% vs. 23.5%; relative risk, 0.37; 95% CI, 0.21 to 0.68). Bleeding that resulted in blood transfusion occurred in 2.0% of the women in the mifepristone-pretreatment group and in 0.7% of the women in the misoprostol-alone group (P=0.31); pelvic infection was diagnosed in 1.3% of the women in each group.Conclusions: Pretreatment with mifepristone followed by treatment with misoprostol resulted in a higher likelihood of successful management of first-trimester pregnancy loss than treatment with misoprostol alone. (Funded by the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development; PreFaiR ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02012491 .). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]