Glycaemic control for patients with severe acute brain injury: Protocol for a systematic review

Background

Hyperglycaemia is common in patients with acute brain injury admitted to an intensive care unit (ICU). Many studies have found associations between development of hyperglycaemia and increased mortality in hospitalised patients. However, the optimal target for blood glucose control is unknown. We want to conduct a systematic review with meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis to explore the beneficial and harmful effects of restrictive versus liberal glucose control on patient outcomes in adults with severe acute brain injury.

Methods

We will systematically search medical databases including CENTRAL, Embase, MEDLINE and trial registries. We will search the following websites for ongoing or unpublished trials: http://www.controlled-trials.com/ , http://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ , www.eudraCT.com , http://centerwatch.com/ , The Cochrane Library's CENTRAL, PubMed, EMBASE, Science Citation Index Expanded and CINAHL. Two authors will independently review and select trials and extract data. We will include randomised trials comparing levels of glucose control in our analyses and observational studies will be included to address potential harms. The primary outcomes are defined as all-cause mortality, functional outcome and health-related quality of life. Secondary outcomes include serious adverse events including hypoglycaemia, length of ICU stay and duration of mechanical ventilation, and explorative outcomes including intracranial pressure and infection. Trial Sequential Analysis will be used to investigate the risk of type I error due to repetitive testing and to further explore imprecision. Quality of trials will be evaluated using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool, and quality of evidence will be assessed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) approach.

Discussion

The results of the systematic review will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publication. With the review, we hope to inform future randomised clinical trials and improve clinical practice.     

整合素α5β1在苯妥英钠促进大鼠PDLSCs和BMMSCs黏附于牙骨质中的作用

目的 探讨在苯妥英钠(Phenytoin,PHT)促进大鼠牙周膜干细胞(Rat periodontal ligament stem cells,rPDLSCs)、大鼠骨髓间充质干细胞(Rat Bone Marrow Mesenchymal Stem Cells,rBMMSCs)黏附于牙骨质过程中,整合素α5β1(Integrin α5β1)起到的作用。方法 提取大鼠BMMSCs和PDLSCs,培养并纯化。通过细胞鉴定后,将获得的两种细胞各分为4组:40 mg/L PHT处理组、40 mg/L PHT+整合素α5抗体处理组、40 mg/L PHT+整合素β1抗体处理组、PBS处理组,每组细胞放入置有牙骨质片的96孔板处理4 h后,检测黏附于牙骨质片上的细胞量并做以比较。最后,利用qRT-PCR和Western blot检测40 mg/L PHT组与对照组细胞的整合素α5、β1亚基的mRNA与蛋白表达量。结果 40 mg/L PHT可促进rBMMSCs及rPDLSCs黏附于牙骨质片,加入整合素α5、β1抗体后,均明显抑制了40 mg/L PHT对rBMMSCs、rPDLSCs黏附于牙骨质的促进作用(P＜0.01)。qRT-PCR、Western-blot结果显示PHT处理组的整合素α5、β1亚基表达量高于空白对照组(P＜0.05)。结论 40 mg/L PHT能促进rBMMSCs、rPDLSCs黏附于牙骨质,该作用与整合素α5β1的表达上调密切相关。     

Sex Disparities in Risk of Mortality Among Children With ESRD

1. Download high-res image (377KB)
2. Download full-size image

     

Linguistic Validation of the US Spanish Work Productivity and Activity Impairment Questionnaire, General Health Version

INTRODUCTION: There are no measures of health-related absenteeism and presenteeism validated for use in the large and increasing US Spanish-speaking population. Before using a Spanish translation of an available English-language questionnaire, the linguistic validity of the Spanish version must be established to ensure its conceptual equivalence to the original and its cultural appropriateness. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to evaluate the linguistic validity of the US Spanish version of the Work Productivity and Activity Impairment questionnaire, General Health Version (WPAI:GH). METHODS: A US Spanish translation of the US English WPAI:GH was created through a reiterative process of creating harmonized forward and back translations by independent translators. Spanish-speaking and English-speaking subjects residing in the US self-administered the WPAI:GH in their primary language and were subsequently debriefed by a bilingual (Spanish-English) interviewer. RESULTS: US Spanish subjects (N = 31) and English subjects (N = 35), stratified equally by educational level, with and without a high school degree participated in the study. The WPAI-GH item comprehension rate was 98.6% for Spanish and 99.6% for English. Response revision rates during debriefing were 1.6% for Spanish and 0.5% for English. Responses to hypothetical scenarios indicated that both language versions adequately differentiate sick time taken for health and non-health reasons and between absenteeism and presenteeism. CONCLUSION: Linguistic validity of the US Spanish translation of the WPAI:GH was established among a diverse US Spanish-speaking population, including those with minimal education.