The Integration of Studio Cycling into a Worksite Stress Management Programme

High stress is a prevalent problem in the worksite. To reduce stress, improve productivity, reduce absenteeism, and lower healthcare costs, many companies offer exercise classes or stress management programmes. Although physical activity is an important component of stress management, few worksites have integrated physical activity into their comprehensive stress reduction programmes. The purpose of this single‐arm pilot project was to examine the potential effectiveness of an integrated exercise (studio cycling) and cognitive–behavioural stress management programme. Eighty‐four adults, 75% female, mostly aged 40+ years, participated in an integrated 12‐week cycling studio and cognitive–behavioural stress management programme. Participants experienced a significant and clinically meaningful reduction on the Perceived Stress Scale (p < 0.01), rating of current stress level and confidence to manage stress at the programme's end and at a 1‐month follow‐up. Participants also reported having significantly improved overall health, improved nutritional habits, higher physical activity level, greater confidence in their ability to follow a healthy diet, higher spiritual well‐being, improved sleep, receiving more support for maintaining healthy living and improved quality of life at the completion of the 12‐week programme and 1‐month follow‐up. These findings provide further support for an integrated exercise and stress management programme. Copyright © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Topical 5‐azacytidine accelerates skin wound healing in rats

The development of new methods to improve skin wound healing may affect the outcomes of a number of medical conditions. Here, we evaluate the molecular and clinical effects of topical 5‐azacytidine on wound healing in rats. 5‐Azacytidine decreases the expression of follistatin‐1, which negatively regulates activins. Activins, in turn, promote cell growth in different tissues, including the skin. Eight‐week‐old male Wistar rats were submitted to 8.0‐mm punch‐wounding in the dorsal region. After 3 days, rats were randomly assigned to receive either a control treatment or the topical application of a solution containing 5‐azacytidine (10 mM) once per day. Photo documentation and sample collection were performed on days 5, 9, and 15. Overall, 5‐azacytidine promoted a significant acceleration of complete wound healing (99.7% ± 0.7.0 vs. 71.2% ± 2.8 on day 15; n = 10; p < 0.01), accompanied by up to threefold reduction in follistatin expression. Histological examination of the skin revealed efficient reepithelization and cell proliferation, as evaluated by the BrdU incorporation method. 5‐Azacytidine treatment also resulted in increased gene expression of transforming growth factor‐beta and the keratinocyte markers involucrin and cytokeratin, as well as decreased expression of cytokines such as tumor necrosis factor‐alpha and interleukin‐10. Lastly, when recombinant follistatin was applied to the skin in parallel with topical 5‐azacytidine, most of the beneficial effects of the drug were lost. Thus, 5‐azacytidine acts, at least in part through the follistatin/activin pathway, to improve skin wound healing in rodents.     

Efficacy of intralesional recombinant human epidermal growth factor in diabetic foot ulcers in Mexican patients: A randomized double‐blinded controlled trial

The healing process in diabetic foot ulcer (DFU) is hindered by factors such as chronic inflammation, defects in fibroblast function, poor angiogenesis, and lack of cell migration. Recombinant human epidermal growth factor (rhEGF) has been shown to enhance extracellular matrix formation, cellular proliferation, and angiogenesis. Therefore, intralesional application of rhEGF in DFU could accelerate wound healing. Our objective was to determine the efficacy and safety of rhEGF in patients with DFU. A randomized, double‐blinded, placebo‐controlled study was conducted comparing a thrice‐per‐week intralesional application of rhEGF (75 μg) or placebo in patients with DFU for 8 weeks. The number of completely healed ulcers, size, and wound bed characteristics were evaluated to determine the efficacy of rhEGF. Adverse events were recorded and analyzed to establish its safety. A total of 34 patients were recruited for the study. After three dropouts, we were able to follow and analyze 16 patients in the placebo group and 15 patients in the rhEGF study to the end of the trial. Baseline testing showed that both groups were similar. Compared to the placebo group, more ulcers achieved complete healing in the rhEGF group (rhEGF, n = 4; placebo, n = 0; p = 0.033); ulcers in the rhEGF group decreased in area size (12.5 cm2 [rhEGF] vs. 5.2 cm2 [placebo]; p = 0.049); and more epithelial islands in the wound bed were present (28% vs. 3%; p = 0.025). Mild transitory dizziness was the only side effect that was more frequently noted in the rhEGF group. Our results showed that in patients with DFU who received standard care, intralesional rhEGF application resulted in complete healing in more patients, promoted the epithelialization of the wound bed, and significantly reduced the area of the DFU treated. Therefore, rhEGF resulted in better outcomes for patients suffering from DFU.     

Clinical application of growth factors and cytokines in wound healing

Wound healing is a complex and dynamic biological process that involves the coordinated efforts of multiple cell types and is executed and regulated by numerous growth factors and cytokines. There has been a drive in the past two decades to study the therapeutic effects of various growth factors in the clinical management of nonhealing wounds (e.g., pressure ulcers, chronic venous ulcers, diabetic foot ulcers). For this review, we conducted an online search of Medline/PubMed and critically analyzed the literature regarding the role of growth factors and cytokines in the management of these wounds. We focused on currently approved therapies, emerging therapies, and future research possibilities. In this review, we discuss four growth factors and cytokines currently being used on and off label for the healing of wounds. These include granulocyte‐macrophage colony‐stimulating factor, platelet‐derived growth factor, vascular endothelial growth factor, and basic fibroblast growth factor. While the clinical results of using growth factors and cytokines are encouraging, many studies involved a small sample size and are disparate in measured endpoints. Therefore, further research is required to provide definitive evidence of efficacy.     

Adverse effects of perioperative paracetamol,NSAIDs, glucocorticoids,gabapentinoids and their combinations: a topical review

Post‐operative pain affects millions of patients worldwide and the post‐operative period has high rates of morbidity and mortality. Some of this morbidity may be related to analgesics. The aim of this review was to provide an update of current knowledge of adverse events (AE) associated with the most common perioperative non‐opioid analgesics: paracetamol, non‐steroidal anti‐inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), glucocorticoids (GCCs), gabapentinoids and their combinations. The review is based on data from systematic reviews with meta‐analyses of analgesic efficacy and/or adverse effects of perioperative non‐opioid analgesics, and randomised trials and cohort/retrospective studies. Generally, data on AE are sparse and related to the immediate post‐operative period. For paracetamol, the incidence of AEs appears trivial. Data are inconclusive regarding an association of NSAIDs with mortality, cardiovascular events, surgical bleeding and renal impairment. Anastomotic leakage may be associated with NSAID usage. No firm evidence exists for an association of NSAIDs with impaired bone healing. Single‐dose GCCs were not significantly related to increased infection rates or delayed wound healing. Gabapentinoid treatment was associated with increased sedation, dizziness and visual disturbances, but the clinical relevance needs clarification. Importantly, data on AEs of combinations of the above analgesics are sparse and inconclusive. Despite the potential adverse events associated with the most commonly applied non‐opioid analgesics, including their combinations, reporting of such events is sparse and confined to the immediate perioperative period. Knowledge of benefit and harm related to multimodal pain treatment is deficient and needs clarification in large trials with prolonged observation.