A Short-Time Real-World Study of Two Perfluoropropane Tamponade Methods in Pars Plana Vitrectomy for Retinal Detachment.

INTRODUCTION: This real-world study evaluated the efficacy, safety, and operative parameters of two perfluoropropane (C3F8) tamponade methods combined with pars plana vitrectomy (PPV) for retinal detachment (RD). METHODS: A retrospective study of 132 patients (132 eyes) with RD (pure C3F8 in 38 eyes, mixed C3F8 in 94 eyes). All eyes underwent PPV with C3F8 tamponade and were followed up for at least 3 months. Retinal reattachment rate, time of gas configuration and injection, C3F8 dosage, intraocular pressure (IOP), best corrected visual acuity, postoperative ocular inflammation, and patients' complaints were evaluated. RESULTS: The single-surgery retinal reattachment rates of the pure C3F8 group and mixed C3F8 group were 97.4% and 96.8%, respectively, with no significant difference (p = 1.00). The final retinal reattachment rates of the two groups were 100% and 97.2%, respectively, with no significant difference (p = 1.00). The gas configuration time, gas injection time, and C3F8 dosage were significantly less in the pure C3F8 group (all p < 0.001). Time, but not group, was the influencing factor of postoperative IOP changes in the two groups (p < 0.001, p = 0.547, respectively). Compared with the baseline, the IOP estimates of the pure C3F8 group showed a significant increase immediately after surgery (p < 0.001), and the mixed C3F8 group showed a significant increase immediately and 1-2 days after surgery (all p < 0.05). There was no statistical difference in ocular inflammation (p = 0.339) and patients' complaints of discomfort (p = 0.175) between the two groups. CONCLUSION: Both the two methods of C3F8 tamponade combined with PPV in RD patients showed good efficacy and safety, but the clinical operation of pure C3F8 tamponade was more convenient and eco-friendly.

Early mobilisation following fragility hip fracture surgery: current trends and association with discharge outcomes in a local tertiary hospital.

Introduction: Postoperative day 1 (POD 1) mobilisation is a key clinical indicator for the fragility hip fracture surgery population. This study aimed to evaluate the current trends of POD 1 mobilisation at our institution and to review the relationships between early mobilisation and outcomes of early functional recovery, length of stay (LOS) and discharge destination. Methods: In this preliminary observational study, data pertaining to demographics, premorbid function, health status, injury and surgical factors, POD 1 mobilisation status and clinical outcomes of interest were retrieved from eligible patients. Patients who attained POD 1 ambulation formed the early ambulation (EA) group, while the remaining patients formed the delayed ambulation (DA) group. Data were analysed for any significant difference between the groups. Results: One hundred and fifteen patients were included in the analysis. The rate of patients achieving at least sitting out of bed on POD 1 was 80.0% (n=92), which was comparable to the data available from international hip fracture audit databases. There were 55 (47.8%) patients in the EA group and 60 (52.5%) patients in the DA group. The EA group was approximately nine times more likely to achieve independence in ambulation at discharge compared to the DA group (adjusted odds ratio 9.20, 95% confidence interval 1.50-56.45; P = 0.016). There were observed trends of shorter LOS and more proportion of home discharge in the EA group compared to the DA group (P > 0.05). Conclusion: This is the first local study to offer benchmark of the POD 1 mobilisation status for this population. Patients who attained POD 1 ambulation had better early functional recovery.

Web-Based Health Information Following the Renewal of the Cervical Screening Program in Australia: Evaluation of Readability, Understandability, and Credibility.

BACKGROUND: Three main changes were implemented in the Australian National Cervical Screening Program (NCSP) in December 2017: an increase in the recommended age to start screening, extended screening intervals, and change from the Papanicolaou (Pap) test to primary human papillomavirus screening (cervical screening test). The internet is a readily accessible source of information to explain the reasons for these changes to the public. It is important that web-based health information about changes to national screening programs is accessible and understandable for the general population. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate Australian web-based resources that provide information about the changes to the cervical screening program. METHODS: The term cervical screening was searched in 3 search engines. The first 10 relevant results across the first 3 pages of each search engine were selected. Overall, 2 authors independently evaluated each website for readability (Flesch Reading Ease [FRE], Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level, and Simple Measure of Gobbledygook [SMOG] index), quality of information (Patient Education Materials Assessment Tool [PEMAT] for printable materials), credibility (Journal of the American Medical Association [JAMA] benchmark criteria and presence of Health on the Net Foundation code of conduct [HONcode] certification), website design, and usability with 5 simulation questions to assess the relevance of information. A descriptive analysis was conducted for the readability measures, PEMAT, and the JAMA benchmark criteria. RESULTS: Of the 49 websites identified in the search, 15 were eligible for inclusion. The consumer-focused websites were classed as fairly difficult to read (mean FRE score 51.8, SD 13.3). The highest FRE score (easiest to read) was 70.4 (Cancer Council Australia Cervical Screening Consumer Site), and the lowest FRE score (most difficult to read) was 33.0 (NCSP Clinical Guidelines). A total of 9 consumer-focused websites and 4 health care provider-focused websites met the recommended threshold (sixth to eighth grade; SMOG index) for readability. The mean PEMAT understandability scores were 87.7% (SD 6.0%) for consumer-focused websites and 64.9% (SD 13.8%) for health care provider-focused websites. The mean actionability scores were 58.1% (SD 19.1%) for consumer-focused websites and 36.7% (SD 11.0%) for health care provider-focused websites. Moreover, 9 consumer-focused and 3 health care provider-focused websites scored above 70% for understandability, and 2 consumer-focused websites had an actionability score above 70%. A total of 3 websites met all 4 of the JAMA benchmark criteria, and 2 websites displayed the HONcode. CONCLUSIONS: It is important for women to have access to information that is at an appropriate reading level to better understand the implications of the changes to the cervical screening program. These findings can help health care providers direct their patients toward websites that provide information on cervical screening that is written at accessible reading levels and has high understandability.

A randomised controlled trial comparing adductor canal block and femoral nerve block for knee arthroplasty.

INTRODUCTION: Adductor canal block (ACB) is hypothesised to provide superior analgesia to femoral nerve block (FNB) for total knee arthroplasty (TKA) while preserving quadriceps strength. METHODS: 30 patients undergoing TKA were randomised to receive either ACB or FNB. Baseline tests of quadriceps strength were performed. Ultrasound-guided blocks with 30 mL of 0.5% ropivacaine were administered before induction of general anaesthesia. Patient-controlled analgesia (morphine) was prescribed for postoperative analgesia. The primary outcome of this prospective, double-blinded, randomised controlled trial was morphine consumption (mean ± standard deviation) in the first 24 hours. Secondary outcomes were pain scores using a numeric rating scale (median and interquartile range [IQR]), quadriceps strength (% of baseline) and functional outcomes at 24 hours and 48 hours postoperatively. RESULTS: There was no statistically significant difference in morphine consumption at 24 hours between the ACB and FNB groups (21 ± 11 mg vs. 20 ± 12 mg; p = 0.85). No statistically significant differences were observed between the ACB and FNB groups in pain scores at 24 hours (at rest: 0 [IQR 0-2] vs. 0 [IQR 0-2]; on movement: 5 [IQR 4-8] vs. 5 [IQR 3-8]) and quadriceps strength (24 hours: 28.8% ± 26.1% vs. 26.8% ± 19.6% of baseline; 48 hours: 31.5 ± 23.1% vs. 33.7% ± 20.1% of baseline). There were also no statistically significant differences in functional outcomes and length of stay. CONCLUSION: We found no statistically significant differences in analgesic effects, quadriceps strength or functional recovery postoperatively between ACB and FNB.