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.     

Nipple leiomyoma: A rare neoplasm with a broad spectrum of histologic appearances

Cutaneous leiomyomas are rare benign smooth‐muscle tumors. These lesions are distinguished based on their cell of origin and are subclassified as pilar leiomyoma, angioleiomyoma, and genital‐type leiomyoma. Nipple leiomyoma is the least common genital‐type leiomyoma, arising from the dartoic muscle cell of the nipple. Histologic examination of the lesion is necessary for definitive diagnosis, and these uncommon tumors can pose a diagnostic challenge. We describe herein a series of six nipple leiomyomas with a spectrum of histologic appearances.     

Pharmacokinetic study of the oral fluorouracil antitumor agent S‐1 in patients with impaired renal function

Although dose reduction of S‐1 is recommended for patients with impaired renal function, dose modification for such patients has not been prospectively evaluated. The aim of the present study was to investigate the pharmacokinetic parameters of 5‐fluorouracil, 5‐chloro‐2,4 dihydroxypyridine and oteracil potassium, and to review the recommended dose modification of S‐1 in patients with renal impairment. We classified patients receiving S‐1 into 4 groups according to their renal function, as measured using the Japanese estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) equation. The daily S‐1 dose was adjusted based on the patient's eGFR and body surface area. Blood samples were collected for pharmacokinetic analysis. A total of 33 patients were enrolled and classified into 4 groups as follows: 10 patients in cohort 1 (eGFR ≥ 80 mL/min/1.73 m²), 10 patients in cohort 2 (eGFR = 50‐79 mL/min/1.73 m²), 10 patients in cohort 3 (eGFR = 30‐49 mL/min/1.73 m²), and 3 patients in cohort 4 (eGFR < 30 mL/min/1.73 m²). Those in cohorts 3 and 4 treated with an adjusted dose of S‐1 showed a similar area under the curve for 5‐fluorouracil (941.9 ± 275.6 and 1043.5 ± 224.8 ng/mL, respectively) compared with cohort 2 (1034.9 ± 414.3 ng/mL). Notably, while there was a statistically significant difference between cohort 1 (689.6 ± 208.8 ng/mL) and 2 (P = 0.0474) treated with an equal dose of S‐1, there was no significant difference observed in the toxicity profiles of the cohorts. In conclusion, dose adjustment of S‐1 in patients with impaired renal function using eGFR is appropriate and safe.