Fentanyl-Induced Rigid Chest Syndrome in Critically Ill Patients.

BACKGROUND: Opioid induced chest wall rigidity was first described in the early 1950s during surgical anesthesia and has often been referred to as fentanyl induced rigid chest syndrome (FIRCS). It has most commonly been described in the setting of procedural sedation and bronchoscopy, characterized by pronounced abdominal and thoracic rigidity, asynchronous ventilation, and respiratory failure. FIRCS has been infrequently described in the setting of continuous analgesia in critically ill adult patients. We postulate that FIRCS can occur in this setting and is likely under recognized, leading to increased morbidity and mortality. METHODS: Patients admitted to the intensive care unit with suspected FIRCS were included in this retrospective analysis. The objective of this analysis is to describe the clinical presentation and treatment strategies for FIRCS. RESULTS: Forty-two patients exhibiting symptoms of FIRCS were included in this analysis. Twenty-two of the forty-two patients with descriptive documentation had evidence of thoracic or abdominal rigidity on examination (52.4%). Twelve of sixteen (75%) patients treated solely with naloxone had documented ventilator compliance following intervention, compared to six of eleven (55%) managed with cisatracurium alone. Nine of twelve patients who ultimately received naloxone after initial treatment with cisatracurium had documented ventilator compliance following naloxone administration (75%). Standard interventions, including sedation optimization and ventilator adjustments were attempted to rule out and treat other potential causes of dyssynchrony. In most cases, the administration of naloxone resulted in appropriate compliance with both ventilator and patient-initiated breaths, suggesting the ventilator dyssynchrony was due to fentanyl. CONCLUSIONS: This is the largest case series to date describing FIRCS in the intensive care setting. Recognition and prompt management is necessary for improved patient outcomes. Research is needed to increase awareness and recognition, identify patient risk factors, and analyze the efficacy and safety of interventions.

HIV interventions to reduce HIV/AIDS stigma: a systematic review.

We reviewed the literature to determine the effectiveness of HIV-related interventions in reducing HIV/AIDS stigma. Studies selected had randomized controlled trial (RCT), pretest-posttest with a non-randomized control group, or pretest-posttest one group study designs in which HIV-related interventions were being evaluated, and in which HIV/AIDS stigma was one of the outcomes being measured. A checklist was used to extract data from accepted studies, assess their internal validity, and overall quality. Data were extracted from 19 studies, and 14 of these studies demonstrated effectiveness in reducing HIV/AIDS stigma. Only 2 of these 14 effective studies were considered good studies, based on quality, the extent to which the intervention focused on reducing HIV/AIDS stigma, and the statistics reported to demonstrate effectiveness. Future studies to reduce HIV/AIDS stigma could improve by designing interventions that pay greater attention to internal validity, use validated HIV/AIDS stigma instruments, and achieve both statistical and public health significance.

Systematic review: Effective characteristics of nursing homes and other residential long-term care settings for people with dementia.

OBJECTIVES: In response to the need for an evidence-based review of factors within long-term care settings that affect the quality of care, this review compared characteristics of nursing homes and other residential long-term care settings for people with dementia and their informal family caregivers with respect to health and psychosocial outcomes. DESIGN: Databases were searched for literature published between 1990 and March 2012 that met review criteria, including that at least 80% of the subject population had dementia. RESULTS: Fourteen articles meeting review criteria that were of at least fair quality were found: four prospective cohort studies, nine randomized controlled trials (RCTs), and one nonrandomized controlled trial. Overall, low or insufficient strength of evidence was found regarding the effect of most organizational characteristics, structures, and processes of care on health and psychosocial outcomes for people with dementia and no evidence for informal caregivers. Findings of moderate strength of evidence indicate that pleasant sensory stimulation reduces agitation for people with dementia. Also, although the strength of evidence is low, protocols for individualized care and to improve function result in better outcomes for these individuals. Finally, outcomes do not differ between nursing homes and residential care or assisted living settings for people with dementia except when medical care is indicated. CONCLUSION: Given the paucity of high-quality studies in this area, additional research is needed to develop a sufficient evidence base to support consumer selection, practice, and policy regarding the best settings and characteristics of settings for residential long-term care of people with dementia.

Outcomes of community health worker interventions.

OBJECTIVES: To conduct a systematic review of the evidence on characteristics of community health workers (CHWs) and CHW interventions, outcomes of such interventions, costs and cost-effectiveness of CHW interventions, and characteristics of CHW training. DATA SOURCES: We searched MEDLINE, Cochrane Collaboration resources, and the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature for studies published in English from 1980 through November 2008. REVIEW METHODS: We used standard Evidence-based Practice Center methods of dual review of abstracts, full-text articles, abstractions, quality ratings, and strength of evidence grades. We resolved disagreements by consensus. RESULTS: We included 53 studies on characteristics and outcomes of CHW interventions, 6 on cost-effectiveness, and 9 on training. CHWs interacted with participants in a broad array of locations, using a spectrum of materials at varying levels of intensity. We classified 8 studies as low intensity, 18 as moderate intensity, and 27 as high intensity, based on the type and duration of interaction. Regarding outcomes, limited evidence (five studies) suggests that CHW interventions can improve participant knowledge when compared with alternative approaches such as no intervention, media, mail, or usual care plus pamphlets. We found mixed evidence for CHW effectiveness on participant behavior change (22 studies) and health outcomes (27 studies): some studies suggested that CHW interventions can result in greater improvements in participant behavior and health outcomes when compared with various alternatives, but other studies suggested that CHW interventions provide no statistically different benefits than alternatives. Low or moderate strength of evidence suggests that CHWs can increase appropriate health care utilization for some interventions (30 studies). The literature showed mixed results of effectiveness when analyzed by clinical context: CHW interventions had the greatest effectiveness relative to alternatives for some disease prevention, asthma management, cervical cancer screening, and mammography screening outcomes. CHW interventions were not significantly different from alternatives for clinical breast examination, breast self-examination, colorectal cancer screening, chronic disease management, or most maternal and child health interventions. Six studies with economic and cost information yielded insufficient data to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of CHW interventions relative to other community health interventions. Limited evidence described characteristics of CHW training; no studies examined the impact of CHW training on health outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: CHWs can serve as a means of improving outcomes for underserved populations for some health conditions. The effectiveness of CHWs in numerous areas requires further research that addresses the methodological limitations of prior studies and that contributes to translating research into practice.