Does age worsen EEG slowing and attention deficits in obstructive sleep apnea syndrome?

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to determine whether EEG slowing is more pronounced in older than younger OSAS patients and to verify whether this cortical slowing is correlated to daytime performance, respiratory perturbation and sleep fragmentation. METHODS: Twelve young OSAS patients (mean age 38.2+/-2.0 y) and 13 older OSAS patients (mean age 62.2+/-1.9 y) along with 13 young controls (mean age 35.8+/-2.0 y) and 14 older controls (mean age 60.2+/-2.0 y) underwent a polysomnographic evaluation followed by a waking EEG recording. As a global index of cortical slowing, a ratio of slow-to-fast frequencies was calculated in all cortical regions. Daytime performance was assessed using the four choice reaction time test. RESULTS: Differences in waking EEG and in daytime performance were analyzed by ANOVAs with Group and Age as factors. Waking EEG did not yield a Group by Age interaction. OSAS patients had higher ratios across all regions than controls. Similarly, daytime performance revealed no Group by Age interaction. However, OSAS patients showed more lapses than controls and older subjects were slower than younger subjects. CONCLUSIONS: Our results indicate that age does not interact with OSAS to worsen the severity of cortical slowing, but age can add to the OSAS effect to worsen daytime performance deficits in OSAS patients. SIGNIFICANCE: The daytime performance deficits observed particularly in elderly OSAS patients warrant a careful clinical assessment of these patients to prevent accidents and injuries.     

Review of determinants of patients' preferences for adjuvant therapy in cancer.

PURPOSE: Many studies have determined cancer patients' preferences for adjuvant therapy, for example, by asking patients the extent of benefit they would need in order to accept the therapy. However, little is known about the determinants that influence these preferences. Our research goal was to explore which determinants underlie patients' preferences by means of a literature review. METHODS: PubMed searches were conducted to identify studies in which cancer patients' preferences for adjuvant therapy had been elicited by means of a treatment preference instrument. Twenty-three papers were evaluated with regard to reported relationships between preferences and potential determinants. A total of 40 determinants were recorded and classified into one of seven categories: (1) treatment-related determinants, (2) sociodemographic characteristics and current quality of life, (3) clinical characteristics, (4) measurement instrument-related determinants, (5) time-related determinants, (6) cognitive/affective determinants, and (7) specialist-related determinants. Results: The benefit and toxicity of treatment, experience of the treatment, and having dependents (eg, children) living at home were important determinants of patients' preferences. Furthermore, qualitative data suggested that cognitive/affective and specialist-related determinants might have a large impact on patients' treatment preferences. CONCLUSION: Our results show that patients' preferences cannot fully be explained on the basis of treatment-related determinants and patient and clinical characteristics. More research is needed in the area of cognitive/affective and specialist-related determinants because of the lack of quantitative results. Furthermore, we recommend carrying out larger studies in which the (internal) relationships between determinants and preferences are assessed in the context of a cognitive cost-benefit model.     

Sleep length and quality,sleepiness and urinary melatonin among healthy Danish nurses with shift work during work and leisure time

Background  

Sleep problems are common effects of shift work. The aim of the present study was to evaluate how different types of shift affect sleep and sleepiness, and to relate sleepiness to urinary 6-sulfatoxymelatonin.     

Once-daily gentamicin dosing for the preterm and term newborn: proposal for a simple regimen that achieves target levels.

OBJECTIVE: Based on recent safety and efficacy data, combined with the known pharmacokinetic parameters of aminoglycosides in the newborn, once-daily gentamicin should be preferable to the many other dosing regimens currently in use. Although there are growing data to support its use in term newborns, experience with preterm infants is more limited. In our Neonatal Intensive Care Unit, we experienced difficulties regarding complicated dosing regimens, actual dosing errors, and the tendency to check trough and peak levels around the third dose for infants receiving only a 48 hour course. Therefore, we conducted a quality improvement initiative in which we developed and tested a clinical practice guideline for the use of once-daily gentamicin for preterm and term infants that we hoped would yield trough and peak levels in our target range. METHODS: We combined a review of the published English language literature with pharmacokinetic analysis of our own data prior to initiation of this new regimen to design the following dosing regimen: <35 weeks gestation: 3 mg/kg q 24 hours, > or =35 weeks gestation: 4 mg/kg q 24 hours. Our goal serum levels were a trough < or =2 microg/ml and a peak between 6 and 12 microg/ml. We collected and analyzed trough and peak levels from all infants receiving this dosing regimen in the first week of life for at least 72 hours between 3/1/99 and 12/31/00. RESULTS: In total, 214 babies met our inclusion criteria, 75 of whom were <35 weeks gestation. 100% of babies of all gestational ages had a nontoxic trough level. For infants <35 weeks gestation, 79% had a therapeutic peak level, with a mean value of 6.8 microg/ml. For infants of at least 35 weeks gestation, 93% had a therapeutic peak level, with a mean value of 8.4 microg/ml. 92% of nontherapeutic peaks were too low. CONCLUSION: This study of once-daily gentamicin represents the largest sample size of pre-term infants published to date. The proposed regimen is simple and yields a high proportion of desirable levels. We recommend it for use in preterm and term newborns.     

What is the value of minimizing access trauma for patients?]

Minimizing the access trauma of surgical interventions is becoming an essential task in modern surgery in order to make the treatment more comfortable for the patient. Minimally invasive surgery has had a major impact on the improvement of surgical results over the last decade. This is why such surgery is often named as the third patient friendly revolution in surgery after the introduction of asepsis and anesthesia. Operations that caused a huge strain on the patients in the past and led to immense costs for society because of the patient's lost working time and extensive rehabilitation, have lost their fear thanks to this technique. The physical strain is lower, the cosmetic effect is considerable and the costs for society might be reduced due to the significantly shorter duration of convalescence.Despite its known advantages, which have been reported in numerous studies, minimally invasive surgery has recently gained increased interest because of the installation of new accounting systems as well as strict budgeting and restricted resources.Realistic cost-benefit analysis and objectified quality controls are needed in order to guarantee innovative and patient friendly basic approaches in medicine in the future.     

Head-to-head comparison of retropubic, perineal and laparoscopic radical prostatectomy

OBJECTIVE: As more patients are diagnosed with prostate cancer at an early stage, it is becoming increasingly important to refine the technique of surgical excision. For this purpose we have generated objective data comparing three different surgical approaches used by three experienced surgeons. METHODS: We prospectively compared three contemporary personal series of 50 consecutive radical prostatectomy (RP) patients. The health-related quality of life was evaluated preoperatively and in months 1, 3, 6, 12 and 24. RESULTS: Considering in turn the patients undergoing retropubic, perineal and laparoscopic RP, the median procedure time was 2 h and 27 min, 1 h and 50 min and 4 h, with a transfusion rate of 2, 0 and 8%, respectively. In the perineal group there were more wound infections. Median catheter drainage was 7, 10 and 7 days and zero, 13 and one patients needed reinsertion of a catheter. Early continence varied considerably, with 57.4, 11.4 and 6.3% of patients pad-free after 1 month, but there were no differences in social continence (zero or one pad) with 97.8, 97.8 and 91.9% after 2 years. The Litwin score for incontinence (preoperative minus postoperative) was -24, -41 and -63% after 1 month and -13, +3 and -29% after 2 years. Twenty-nine, five and 15 patients had a preoperative five-item version of International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF-5) score of > or = 17 points and a nerve-sparing procedure. After 2 years, 48.1, 0 and 0% had an IIEF-5 score of > or = 17 points without the use of phosphodiesterase type 5 (PDE-5) inhibitors, but when including patients using inhibitors there were no significant differences. CONCLUSIONS: A comparison of morbidity, short-term convalescence and long-term side-effects of different surgical techniques is strongly biased by both the preoperative status of patients and the skill of the surgeons. Overall, we found some differences in the short-term results (e.g. early continence) and comparable long-term results.