The Brain Health Assessment for Detecting and Diagnosing Neurocognitive Disorders.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: Brief cognitive screens lack the sensitivity to detect mild cognitive impairment (MCI) or support differential diagnoses. The objective of this study was to validate the 10-minute, tablet-based University of California, San Francisco (UCSF) Brain Health Assessment (BHA) to overcome these limitations. DESIGN: Cross-sectional. SETTING: UCSF Memory and Aging Center. PARTICIPANTS: Older adults (N = 347) (neurologically healthy controls (n = 185), and individuals diagnosed with MCI (n = 99), dementia (n = 42), and as normal with concerns (n = 21)). MEASUREMENTS: The BHA includes subtests of memory, executive function and speed, visuospatial skills, and language and an optional informant survey. Participants completed the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) and criterion-standard neuropsychological tests. Standardized structural 3T brain magnetic resonance imaging was performed in 145 participants. RESULTS: At a fixed 85% specificity rate, the BHA had 100% sensitivity to dementia and 84% to MCI; the MoCA had 75% sensitivity to dementia and 25% to MCI. The BHA had 83% sensitivity to MCI likely due to AD and 88% to MCI unlikely due to AD, and the MoCA had 58% sensitivity to MCI likely AD and 24% to MCI unlikely AD. The BHA subtests demonstrated moderate to high correlations with the criterion-standard tests from their respective cognitive domains. Memory test performance correlated with medial temporal lobe volumes; executive and speed with frontal, parietal, and basal ganglia volumes; and visuospatial with right parietal volumes. CONCLUSION: The BHA had excellent combined sensitivity and specificity to detect dementia and MCI, including MCI due to diverse etiologies. The subtests provide efficient, valid measures of neurocognition that are critical in making a differential diagnosis.

A Comparison of the Haider Tube-Guard® Endotracheal Tube Holder Versus Adhesive Tape to Determine if This Novel Device Can Reduce Endotracheal Tube Movement and Prevent Unplanned Extubation.

BACKGROUND: Endotracheal tube security is a critical safety issue. We compared the mobility of an in situ endotracheal tube secured with adhesive tape to the one secured with a new commercially available purpose-designed endotracheal tube-holder device (Haider Tube-Guard). We also observed for the incidence of oropharyngeal or facial trauma associated with the 2 tube fixation methods. METHODS: Thirty adult patients undergoing general anesthesia with neuromuscular blockade were prospectively enrolled. Immediately after intubation, a single study author positioned the endotracheal tube tip in the distal trachea using a bronchoscope. Anesthesiologists caring for patients secured the tube in their normal fashion (always with adhesive tape). A force transducer was used to apply linear force, increasing to 15 N or until the principal investigator deemed that the force be aborted for safety reasons. The displacement of the endotracheal tube was measured with the bronchoscope. Any tape was then removed and the endotracheal tube secured with the Haider Tube-Guard device. The linear force was reapplied and the displacement of the endotracheal tube measured. The Haider Tube-Guard device was left in place for the duration of the case. The patient's face and oropharynx were examined for any evidence of trauma during surgery and in the recovery room. On discharge from the postanesthesia care unit, the patient answered a brief survey assessing for any subjective evidence of minor facial or oropharyngeal trauma. RESULTS: Under standardized tension, the endotracheal tube withdrew a mean distance of 3.4 cm when secured with adhesive tape versus 0.3 cm when secured with the Haider Tube-Guard (P <0.001). Ninety-seven percent of patients (29/30) experienced clinically significant endotracheal tube movement (>1 cm) when adhesive tape was used to secure the tube versus 3% (1/30) when the Haider Tube-Guard was used (P <0.001). Thirty percent of patients (9/30) were potentially deemed a high extubation risk (endotracheal tube movement >4 cm) when the endotracheal tube was secured with tape versus 0% (0/30) when secured with the Haider Tube-Guard (P = 0.004). Six patients with taped endotracheal tubes required the traction to be aborted before 15 N of force was achieved to prevent potential extubation as the tape either separated from the face or stretched to allow excessive endotracheal tube movement. None of the patients appeared to sustain any injury from the Haider Tube-Guard device. CONCLUSIONS: The Haider Tube-Guard significantly reduced the mobility of the endotracheal tube when compared with adhesive tape and was well tolerated in our observations.