老年人生命晚期获知疾病信息意向及影响因素CSCD

目的了解老年人生命晚期获知疾病相关信息意向及影响因素。方法2016年10月至2017年6月,采用生命晚期疾病信息意向问卷,利用方便抽样法对福州市中心城区7所养老机构及15个社区的414例年龄≥60岁的老年人进行横断面调查,采用单因素分析、多元线性回归与有序多分类logistic回归分析老年人对疾病相关信息的需求水平、获知程度意向及其影响因素。结果414例老年人疾病相关信息需求得分为(17.1±4.9)分;48.8%(202/414)希望详尽知晓,30.7%(127/414)希望选择性了解,20.5%(85/414)不想知道任何信息;多元线性回归分析显示,年龄、文化程度、是否接受/见过其他生命维持治疗(LSTs)是影响老年人疾病相关信息需求水平的主要因素(标准化回归系数分别为-0.141、0.116、0.115,均P<0.05);有序多分类logistic分析显示,年龄(以60~69岁为参照,70~79岁:OR=0.544,95%CI:0.310~0.957;80~89岁:OR=0.526,95%CI:0.289~0.956)、文化程度(以小学及以下为参照,大专及以上:OR=2.166,95%CI:1.093~4.290)、主要生活费来源(以其他补贴为参照,家人支持:OR=7.303,95%CI:1.157~46.108;退休金:OR=9.288,95%CI:1.502~57.415;公积金/储蓄:OR=15.676,95%CI:2.122~115.793)、是否接受/见过其他LSTs(以是为参照,OR=1.985,95%CI:1.150~3.425)是影响老年人疾病相关信息获知程度意向的主要因素。结论老年人生命晚期获知疾病相关信息的意向程度较高,年龄、文化程度、主要生活费来源、是否接受/见过其他生命维持治疗等是其主要影响因素。     

Inferior Vena Cava Filters: Aligning Practice With Evidence to Improve Patient Outcomes

BackgroundDespite indications for the removal of temporary inferior vena cava (IVC) filters, many filters are unintentionally left in place, predisposing patients to adverse outcomes.ObjectiveThis quality improvement study set out to determine the impact of an IVC filter retrieval protocol on filter retrieval rates and patients lost to follow-up for patients who had undergone placement of a temporary IVC filter.MethodsFollowing a quasi-experimental design, data of all consecutive patients who underwent insertion of a temporary IVC filter for a period of 24-month preprotocol and 12-month postprotocol were compared.ResultsFilter retrieval rates of eligible filters increased from 64.2% to 100%; patients lost to follow-up decreased from 35.9% to 0% (p < .01, both outcomes).ConclusionAdoption of a comprehensive IVC filter protocol by the service that implants these devices can improve filter retrieval rates and decrease patients being lost to follow-up.     

李延应用泽泻汤合温胆汤治疗舒张压高的临床经验

随着社会的发展,人类生活方式的改变,高血压病越来越高发,具有低龄化趋势,代谢综合征常伴随发生,此种情况下的高血压往往是以舒张压升高为主,临床表现常与“亚健康”状态混淆,未能引起患者甚至部分医生的重视,然而事实上越来越多的科学研究证实舒张压高之危害十分明显,不容忽视。尽管现代医学对舒张压高的病因及病理机制有明确的阐述,但是暂时没有特效的药物。李延教授在治疗高血压病方面有着丰富的临床经验,临床中运用泽泻汤合温胆汤加减治疗舒张压高之眩晕,切中病机,加减灵活,屡有良效。文中从中医角度阐述舒张压高的病因病机,介绍李师辨病辨证思路,组方用药特点,附三则典型验案,另加个人心得体会,以期为舒张压高的有效治疗提供思路。     

Methodological Quality Assessment of Meta-analyses and Systematic Reviews of the Relationship Between Periodontal and Systemic Diseases

ObjectivesThe aims of this article are to identify all the published systematic reviews (SRs) and meta-analyses (MAs) that studied the relationship between periodontal and systemic diseases and to assess their quality using 2 scales (the Overview Quality Assessment Questionnaire [OQAQ] and A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews [AMSTAR] checklist).MethodsFor SRs and MAs to be included, they should have investigated one of the following systemic diseases: pulmonary conditions, cardiac conditions, endocrine conditions, cancer, blood disorders, psychological conditions, anxiety, depression, mood disorders, and several other diseases. Two investigators screened MEDLINE via PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. The tools used to evaluate quality were the AMSTAR scale and OQAQ. The protocol was prospectively registered in PROSPERO (CRD42018102208).ResultsThe search strategy found 691 unique articles, 42 of which met the eligibility criteria and were included in this review. Diabetes mellitus was the most investigated disease (14 out of 42 studies), followed by obesity (11 studies) and cardiovascular diseases (5 studies). A total of 40 reviews reported on the characteristics of included studies, and, as per the AMSTAR scale, 39 reviews had an a priori design. The number of reviews that fulfilled the status of publication criterion was the lowest (7 reviews only), followed by the number used in the assessment of publication bias (11 reviews). The number of high-quality reviews was higher with the OQAQ than with the AMSTAR checklist (33 vs 25 studies), but the AMSTAR showed a higher number of medium-quality reviews than the OQAQ (14 vs 6 studies). Both showed the same number of low-quality reviews.ConclusionsHigh-quality SRs and MAs are crucial to understanding the relationship between systemic and periodontal diseases. Medical practitioners must be able to inform patients about oral health and specific periodontal health concerns.     

Repeat resection in recurrent glioblastoma (3rGBM) Trial: A randomized care trial

BackgroundThe prognosis for patients with recurrent glioblastoma (GBM) is dismal, and the question of repeat surgery at time of recurrence is common. Re-operation in the management of these patients remains controversial, as there is no randomized evidence of benefit. An all-inclusive pragmatic care trial is needed to evaluate the role of repeat resection.Methods3rGBM is a multicenter, pragmatic, prospective, parallel-group randomized care trial, with 1:1 allocation to repeat resection or standard care with no repeat resection. To test the hypothesis that repeat resection can improve overall survival by at least 3 months (from 6 to 9 months), 250 adult patients with prior resection of pathology-proven glioblastoma for whom the attending surgeon believes repeat resection may improve quality survival will be enrolled. A surrogate measure of quality of life, the number of days outside of hospital/nursing/palliative care facility, will also be compared. Centers are invited to participate without financial compensation and without contracts. Clinicians may apply to local authorities to approve an investigator-led in-house trial, using a common protocol, web-based randomization platform, and simple standardized case report forms.DiscussionThe 3rGBM trial is a modern transparent care research framework with no additional risks, tests, or visits other than what patients would encounter in normal care. The burden of proof remains on repeat surgical management of recurrent GBM, because this management has yet to be shown beneficial. The trial is designed to help patients and surgeons manage the uncertainty regarding optimal care.Clinical Trial Registrationhttp://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT04838782.