The influence of beta-blockade on the hemodynamic effects of levosimendan in elderly (>or= 70 years) patients with acutely decompensated systolic heart failure.

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the influence of chronic beta-blockade on the hemodynamic parameters in elderly (>or= 70 years) patients with acutely decompensated systolic heart failure treated with levosimendan. Eighteen patients with acutely decompensated systolic heart failure (8 on chronic beta-blockade) were included in this study. Inclusion criteria were symptoms and signs of acute heart failure in the presence of: a) left ventricular ejection fraction < 0.35; b) cardiac index < 2.5 l/min/m2, c) pulmonary capillary wedge pressure > 15 mmHg; and d) systolic blood pressure between 90 and 110 mmHg. After completion of baseline hemodynamic measurements, a levosimendan intravenous infusion was started (initial loading dose given as an infusion of 24 microg/kg over 10 minutes, followed by a continuous infusion of 0.1 microg/kg/min for 24 hours). At the end of levosimendan infusion hemodynamic measurements were repeated. Demographic characteristics as well as baseline systolic and diastolic blood pressure were not significantly different between patients not receiving beta-blockers (Group A) and those under beta-blockade (Group B), whereas heart rate was significantly lower in the latter. Treatment with levosimendan was associated with an increase in the cardiac index and a decrease in wedge pressure in both groups (Group A: 43.8% and 33%; p < 0.001 vs. baseline; Group B: 17.72% and 17.5%, p < 0.001 vs. baseline, respectively). Peripheral and pulmonary resistance significantly decreased in both groups (31% vs. 15%, p < 0.001 and 44.5% vs. 25%, p < 0.001, respectively). Thus, the beneficial hemodynamic effects of levosimendan are maintained in elderly patients with acute decompensated systolic heart failure treated with beta-blockers.

Challenges in mental health nursing: working in institutional or community settings?

Professional environments likely affect patient safety, quality of care provided, and nurses' satisfaction and retention. The aim of this study was to explore mental health nurses' perceptions of their professional practice environment and examine differences in perceptions between nurses working at institutions and those practising in community care. The methodology used was descriptive and comparative. The sample consisted of 248 mental health nurses working within the public sector (76% response rate) drawn from a psychiatric hospital (n = 163) and community settings (n = 85). We administered the Revised Professional Practice Environment (RPPE) questionnaire. Comparisons of the two groups were made using eight subscales of the RPPE. The results indicated that mental health nurses' ratings of their practice environment were slightly positive (M = 2.69; range = 1-4). Nurses working in a psychiatric hospital perceived the professional practice environment more negatively (M = 2.66) than their colleagues in community care (M = 2.73). A t-test comparison revealed statistically significant differences between the two groups within subcategories of work motivation (P = 0.04) and leadership and autonomy (P = 0.03). Nurses working in the community gave higher ratings in comparison with their colleagues working in institutional settings. In conclusions, an in-depth analysis of differences in practice environments is required to define causes of these differences and how they might influence nurses' abilities to provide quality care.