RESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: We aim to analyze the efficacy and safety of TMS on cognition in mild cognitive impairment (MCI), Alzheimer's disease (AD), AD-related dementias, and nondementia conditions with comorbid cognitive impairment. DESIGN: Systematic review, Meta-Analysis. SETTING: We searched MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane database, APA PsycINFO, Web of Science, and Scopus from January 1, 2000, to February 9, 2023. PARTICIPANTS AND INTERVENTIONS: RCTs, open-label, and case series studies reporting cognitive outcomes following TMS intervention were included. MEASUREMENT: Cognitive and safety outcomes were measured. Cochrane Risk of Bias for RCTs and MINORS (Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies) criteria were used to evaluate study quality. This study was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42022326423). RESULTS: The systematic review included 143 studies (n = 5,800 participants) worldwide, encompassing 94 RCTs, 43 open-label prospective, 3 open-label retrospective, and 3 case series. The meta-analysis included 25 RCTs in MCI and AD. Collectively, these studies provide evidence of improved global and specific cognitive measures with TMS across diagnostic groups. Only 2 studies (among 143) reported 4 adverse events of seizures: 3 were deemed TMS unrelated and another resolved with coil repositioning. Meta-analysis showed large effect sizes on global cognition (Mini-Mental State Examination (SMD = 0.80 [0.26, 1.33], p = 0.003), Montreal Cognitive Assessment (SMD = 0.85 [0.26, 1.44], p = 0.005), Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale-Cognitive Subscale (SMD = -0.96 [-1.32, -0.60], p < 0.001)) in MCI and AD, although with significant heterogeneity. CONCLUSION: The reviewed studies provide favorable evidence of improved cognition with TMS across all groups with cognitive impairment. TMS was safe and well tolerated with infrequent serious adverse events.
RESUMEN
PURPOSE: To investigate the association of patient race and ethnicity with postanesthesia care unit (PACU) outcomes in common, noncardiac surgeries requiring general anesthesia. DESIGN: Single tertiary care academic medical center retrospective matched cohort. METHODS: We matched 1:1 1836 adult patients by race and/or ethnicity undergoing common surgeries. We compared racial and ethnic minority populations (62 American Indian, 250 Asian, 315 Black or African American, 281 Hispanic, and 10 Pacific Islander patients) to 918 non-Hispanic White patients. The primary outcomes were: the use of an appropriate number of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) prophylactics; the incidence of PONV; and the use of a propofol infusion as part of the anesthetic (PROP). Secondary outcomes were: the use of opioid-sparing multimodal analgesia, including the use of regional anesthesia for postoperative pain control; the use of any local anesthetic, including the use of liposomal bupivacaine; the duration until readiness for discharge from the PACU; the time between arrival to PACU and first pain score; and the time between the first PACU pain score of ≥4 and administration of an analgesic. Logistic and linear regression were used for relevant outcomes of interest. FINDINGS: Overall, there were no differences in the appropriate number of PONV prophylactics, nor the incidence of PONV between the two groups. There was, however, a decreased use of PROP (OR = 0.80; 95% CI: 0.69, 0.94; P = .005), PACU length of stay was 9.56 minutes longer (95% CI: 2.62, 16.49; P = .007), and time between arrival to PACU and first pain score was 2.30 minutes longer in patients from racial and ethnic minority populations (95% CI: 0.99, 3.61; P = .001). There were no statistically significant differences in the other secondary outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: The rate of appropriate number of PONV prophylactic medications as well as the incidence of PONV were similar in patients from racial and ethnic minority populations compared to non-Hispanic White patients. However, there was a lower use of PROP in racial and ethnic minority patients. It is important to have a health equity lens to identify differences in management that may contribute to disparities within each phase of perioperative care.
Asunto(s)
Etnicidad , Humanos , Femenino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Masculino , Estudios Retrospectivos , Adulto , Etnicidad/estadística & datos numéricos , Náusea y Vómito Posoperatorios/epidemiología , Náusea y Vómito Posoperatorios/prevención & control , Anciano , Grupos Raciales/estadística & datos numéricos , Anestesia General/métodos , Anestesia General/estadística & datos numéricos , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Operativos/métodos , Dolor Postoperatorio/tratamiento farmacológico , Estudios de CohortesRESUMEN
Introduction: The absence of a standardized postoperative antibiotic treatment approach for patients with surgically treated septic bursitis results in disparate practices. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed charts of adult patients with surgically treated septic olecranon bursitis at Mayo Clinic sites between 1 January 2000 and 20 August 2022, focusing on their clinical presentation, diagnostics, management, postoperative antibiotic use, and outcomes. Results: A total of 91 surgically treated patients were identified during the study period. Staphylococcus aureus was the most common pathogen (64â¯%). Following surgery, 92â¯% (84 of 91 patients) received systemic antibiotics. Excluding initial presentations of bacteremia or osteomyelitis (n=5), the median duration of postoperative antibiotics was 21â¯d (interquartile range, IQR: 14-29). Postoperative complications were observed in 23â¯% (21 of 91) of patients, while cure was achieved in 87â¯% (79 of 91). Active smokers had 4.53 times greater odds of clinical failure compared with nonsmokers (95â¯% confidence interval, 95â¯% CI: 1.04-20.50; p=0.026). The highest odds of clinical failure were noted in cases without postoperative antibiotic administration (odds ratio, OR: 7.4). Conversely, each additional day of antibiotic treatment, up to 21â¯d, was associated with a progressive decrease in the odds of clinical failure (OR: 1 at 21â¯d). Conclusion: The optimal duration of antibiotics postoperatively in this study was 21â¯d, which was associated with a 7.4-fold reduction in the odds clinical failure compared with cases without postoperative antibiotics. Further validation through a randomized controlled trial is needed.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Despite effective vaccines against influenza, pneumococcus, and COVID-19, uptake has been suboptimal. RESEARCH QUESTION: Although disparities in vaccination by race and ethnicity have been observed, what is the role of other sociodemographic factors in US vaccine uptake? STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: We conducted a population-based study using the Rochester Epidemiology Project (REP), a comprehensive medical records linkage system, to assess effects of sociodemographic factors including race, ethnicity, individual-level socioeconomic status (SES) via the housing-based socioeconomic status index, education, population density (urban or nonurban), and marital status with uptake of influenza, pneumococcal, and COVID-19 vaccination in high-risk adults. Adults at high risk of invasive pneumococcal disease residing in four counties in southeastern Minnesota who were aged 19 to 64 years were identified. Vaccination data were obtained from the Minnesota Immunization Information Connection and REP from January 1, 2010, through December 31, 2021. RESULTS: We identified 45,755 residents. Most were White (82%), non-Hispanic (94%), married (56%), and living in an urban setting (81%), with three-quarters obtaining at least some college education (74%). Although 45.1% were up to date on pneumococcal vaccines, 60.1% had completed the primary COVID-19 series. For influenza and COVID-19, higher SES, living in an urban setting, older age, and higher education positively correlated with vaccination. Magnitude of differences in race, education, and SES widened with booster vaccines. INTERPRETATION: This high-risk population is undervaccinated against preventable respiratory diseases, especially influenza and pneumococcus. Although national data reported improvement of disparities in COVID-19 vaccination uptake observed early in the pandemic, our data demonstrated gaps related to race, education level, SES, and age that widened with booster vaccines. Communities with high social vulnerabilities often show increased risk of severe disease outcomes, yet demonstrate lower uptake of preventive services. This highlights the need to understand better vaccine compliance and access in rural, lower SES, less-educated, Black, Hispanic, and younger populations, each of which were associated independently with decreased vaccination.
Asunto(s)
Vacunas contra la COVID-19 , COVID-19 , Vacunas contra la Influenza , Gripe Humana , Infecciones Neumocócicas , Vacunas Neumococicas , Cobertura de Vacunación , Humanos , Adulto , Persona de Mediana Edad , Minnesota/epidemiología , Masculino , Femenino , COVID-19/prevención & control , COVID-19/epidemiología , Vacunas Neumococicas/administración & dosificación , Cobertura de Vacunación/estadística & datos numéricos , Adulto Joven , Gripe Humana/prevención & control , Gripe Humana/epidemiología , Infecciones Neumocócicas/prevención & control , Infecciones Neumocócicas/epidemiología , SARS-CoV-2 , Disparidades en Atención de Salud/estadística & datos numéricos , Disparidades en Atención de Salud/etnologíaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: While criteria for the diagnosis of nosocomial pneumonias exist, objective definitions are a challenge and there is no gold standard for diagnosis. We analyzed the impact of the implementation of a logical, consensus-based diagnostic and treatment protocol for managing nosocomial pneumonias in the cardiovascular surgery intensive care unit (CVS-ICU). METHODS: We conducted a quasi-experimental, interrupted time series analysis to evaluate the impact of a diagnostic and treatment protocol for nosocomial pneumonias in the CVS-ICU. Impacts were measured relative to patient outcomes, diagnostic processes, and antimicrobial stewardship improvement. Descriptive statistics were used to analyze results. RESULTS: Overall, 35 pre-protocol and 39 post-protocol patients were included. Primary clinical variables suggesting pneumonia in pre- and post-protocol patients were new lung consolidation (50% vs. 71%), new leukocytosis (59% vs. 64%), and positive culture (32% vs. 55%). Appropriate diagnostic testing improved (23% vs. 54%, p = 0.008) after protocol implementation. The proportion of patients meeting the criteria for nosocomial pneumonia (77% vs. 87%) was not statistically significant, though more patients in the post-protocol group met probable diagnostic criteria (51% vs. 77%). Duration of therapy was not significantly different (6 days [IQR = 5.0, 10.0] vs. 7 days [IQR = 6.0, 9.0]). CONCLUSIONS: The implementation of a diagnostic and treatment protocol for management of nosocomial pneumonias in the CVS-ICU resulted in improved diagnostic accuracy, advanced antimicrobial and diagnostic stewardship efforts, and laboratory cost savings without an adverse impact on patient-centered outcomes.