Effect of Race and Ethnicity on Pulmonary Function Testing Interpretation: An American College of Chest Physicians (CHEST), American Association for Respiratory Care (AARC), American Thoracic Society (ATS), and Canadian Thoracic Society (CTS) Evidence Review and Research Statement.

BACKGROUND: Calls have been made to discontinue the routine use of race and ethnicity in medicine. Specific to respiratory medicine, the use of race- and ethnicity-specific reference equations for the interpretation of pulmonary function test (PFT) results has been questioned. RESEARCH QUESTIONS: Three key questions were addressed: (1) What is the current evidence supporting the use of race- and ethnicity-specific reference equations for the interpretation of PFTs? (2) What are the potential clinical implications of the use or nonuse of race and ethnicity in interpreting PFT results? and (3) What research gaps and questions must be addressed and answered to understand better the effect of race and ethnicity on PFT results interpretation and potential clinical and occupational health implications? STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: A joint multisociety (American College of Chest Physicians, American Association for Respiratory Care, American Thoracic Society, and Canadian Thoracic Society) expert panel was formed to undertake a comprehensive evidence review and to develop a statement with recommendations to address the research questions. RESULTS: Several assumptions and gaps, both in the published literature and in our evolving understanding of lung health, were identified. It seems that many past perceptions and practices regarding the effect of race and ethnicity on PFT results interpretation are based on limited scientific evidence and measures that lack reliability. INTERPRETATION: A need exists for more and better research that will inform our field about these many uncertainties and will serve as a foundation for future recommendations in this area. The identified shortcomings should not be discounted or dismissed because they may enable flawed conclusions, unintended consequences, or both. Addressing the identified research gaps and needs would allow a better-a more informed-understanding of the effects of race and ethnicity on PFT results interpretation.

Mechanisms of sleep-disordered breathing: causes and consequences.

Obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) is very common in the general population and is characterized by ineffective inspiratory efforts against a collapsed upper airway during sleep. Collapse occurs mainly at the level of the velopharynx and oropharynx due to a combination of predisposing anatomy and the withdrawal of pharyngeal dilator activity during sleep. Central sleep apnea (CSA) is a manifestation of chemoreflex control instability, leading to periods of inadequate respiratory drive sufficient to trigger breathing, usually alternating with periods of hyperventilation. While both forms of apnea are the result of differing pathophysiology, it has become increasingly clear that OSA and CSA often coexist in the same patient, the existence of one can predispose to the other, and that the two are not as distinct as previously thought. Both OSA and CSA exert a number of acute deleterious effects including intermittent hypoxia, arousals from sleep, and swings in negative intrathoracic pressure, which in turn lead to chronic physiologic consequences such as autonomic dysregulation, endothelial dysfunction, and cardiac remodeling. These underlying pathophysiological mechanisms provide a framework for understanding why OSA and CSA may predispose to cardiovascular diseases like ischemic heart disease and stroke.

A cost-analysis comparison of laparoscopic radical prostatectomy versus open radical prostatectomy: the McMaster Institute of Urology experience.

INTRODUCTION: The objective of this study was to identify and compare the costs of laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (LRP) and radical retropubic prostatectomy (RRP) at our centre. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective chart review of our first 70 consecutive LRP cases and 70 consecutive RRP cases at St. Joseph's Healthcare in Hamilton, Ontario, Canada. We performed cost analysis, including operating room costs, disposable instruments, blood transfusions, analgesic requirements and length of hospital stay. Overall expenses were then analyzed and compared. RESULTS: Preoperative patient demographics and disease stages were comparable between the LRP and RRP groups. On a per procedure basis, large discrepancies were found in mean disposable instrument costs (LRP = $659.18 vs. RRP = $236.59), operating room costs (LRP = $4278.00 vs. RRP = $3139.00), mean cost of blood transfusions (LRP = $21.00 vs. RRP = $394.34), mean analgesia requirements (LRP = $12.94 vs. RRP = $41.06) and mean hospital stay bed costs (LRP = $3690.00 vs. RRP = $5027.14). Overall, costs for all patients in the LRP and RRP groups, respectively, were $606 307.29 and $618 721.57 with a cost saving of $12 414.28 in favour of the LRP arm. CONCLUSION: At our institution, we found that LRP costs are slightly less than those for RRP. Higher operative time and disposable instrument expenses are offset by the shorter hospital stays, fewer blood transfusions and less analgesic requirements for the LRP group. Further financial advantages for LRP will likely be achieved with additional reduction of operating room time and by minimizing disposables.

Quality of care in for-profit and not-for-profit nursing homes: systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To compare quality of care in for-profit and not-for-profit nursing homes. DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies and randomised controlled trials investigating quality of care in for-profit versus not-for-profit nursing homes. RESULTS: A comprehensive search yielded 8827 citations, of which 956 were judged appropriate for full text review. Study characteristics and results of 82 articles that met inclusion criteria were summarised, and results for the four most frequently reported quality measures were pooled. Included studies reported results dating from 1965 to 2003. In 40 studies, all statistically significant comparisons (P<0.05) favoured not-for-profit facilities; in three studies, all statistically significant comparisons favoured for-profit facilities, and the remaining studies had less consistent findings. Meta-analyses suggested that not-for-profit facilities delivered higher quality care than did for-profit facilities for two of the four most frequently reported quality measures: more or higher quality staffing (ratio of effect 1.11, 95% confidence interval 1.07 to 1.14, P<0.001) and lower pressure ulcer prevalence (odds ratio 0.91, 95% confidence interval 0.83 to 0.98, P=0.02). Non-significant results favouring not-for-profit homes were found for the two other most frequently used measures: physical restraint use (odds ratio 0.93, 0.82 to 1.05, P=0.25) and fewer deficiencies in governmental regulatory assessments (ratio of effect 0.90, 0.78 to 1.04, P=0.17). CONCLUSIONS: This systematic review and meta-analysis of the evidence suggests that, on average, not-for-profit nursing homes deliver higher quality care than do for-profit nursing homes. Many factors may, however, influence this relation in the case of individual institutions.

The impact of CPAP on cardiovascular biomarkers in minimally symptomatic patients with obstructive sleep apnea: a pilot feasibility randomized crossover trial.

BACKGROUND: Previous, largely uncontrolled studies demonstrated the substantial effects of continuous positive airway pressure ventilation (CPAP) on a variety of physiologic and biochemical markers known to be risk factors for cardiovascular disease in patients with obstructive sleep apnea (OSA). In this pilot crossover study, we assessed (1) the feasibility of using CPAP in a group of minimally symptomatic patients with OSA, assessed through patient compliance and (2) CPAP therapy's effect on biomarkers in these patients. METHODS: We studied patients with minimal daytime sleepiness who were referred to the University of British Columbia's Hospital Sleep Clinic with suspected OSA and an apnea-hypopnea index (AHI) > 15 events/h. Patients were randomized to either CPAP or no therapy for 4 weeks followed by a washout of 4 weeks, and then a crossover to the other intervention. Fasting morning blood and urine, 24-h blood pressure (BP) measurements, and endothelial function (peak flow-mediated dilation to nitroglycerin-mediated dilation ratio) were assessed before and after each study intervention. RESULTS: Nine adult male and four female patients were studied. Mean (SD) age was 55 (7) years, mean AHI = 27.9/h, mean Epworth Sleepiness Score = 6.8 (11/13 had a score < 10), and mean BMI = 31.1 kg/m(2). Mean compliance with CPAP therapy was 5.53 h/night. Compared to no therapy, potential improvements were observed with CPAP for urinary microalbumin, norepinephrine, and epinephrine to creatinine ratios (decreased by 3.51 mg/mmol, 1.70 nmol/mmol, and 0.95 nmol/mmol, respectively); 24-h BP (systolic decreased by 3.60 mmHg, diastolic by 0.70 mmHg); homeostasis model for insulin resistance score (decreased by 1.11); and endothelial function (increased by 7.4%). However, none of the above differences was significant (p > 0.10). CONCLUSION: In this pilot study there were potential improvements in a variety of cardiovascular biomarkers with CPAP. CPAP compliance was reasonably good even though patients were not particularly sleepy. Accordingly, larger randomized controlled trials in this area appear feasible and warranted.

The economic impact of obstructive sleep apnea.

Untreated obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) increases healthcare utilization and is associated with reduced work performance and occupational injuries. The economic burden related to untreated OSA is substantial, accounting for billions of dollars per year. Furthermore, therapy of OSA is an extremely cost-efficient use of healthcare resources, comparing highly favorably with other commonly funded medical therapies. Governments, transportation agencies, industry, and insurance companies need to be better informed concerning the economic impact of untreated OSA and the benefits of therapy.