Comparison of two approaches to measuring clean faces as part of the facial cleanliness component of the SAFE trachoma elimination strategy.

BACKGROUND: The Alliance for the Global Elimination of Trachoma (GET) endorses the full SAFE strategy to eliminate trachoma; Surgery (for trichiasis), Antibiotics (to reduce the community pool of infection, Facial cleanliness, and Environmental improvement (to decrease transmission). There is no accepted measure of facial cleanliness. This study compared two possible metrics for facial cleanliness. METHOD/FINDINGS: Metric one: Clean face was defined as observed absence of ocular and nasal discharge on the face. Metric two: observing a grade of dirtiness (scale 10 = lightest to 0 = darkest) on a standard facial wipe. The reliability of grading a child's face or grading a facial wipe was determined in children in Kongwa Tanzania. We also observed both measurements in a cohort of 202 children ages 1 to <7years prior to face cleaning, immediately afterwards, and 4 hours afterwards. Fifty of the children did not have face cleaning and were controls. Intra-and interobserver reliability was similar for both measures, the latter = 0.53 for observing a clean face and 0.52 for grading a facial wipe. There was no correlation between the two. Both measures detected facial cleaning, compared to control children who were not cleaned, immediately after cleaning; control children with 53% clean faces and wipe score of 6.7 compared to cleaned children with 88% clean faces and wipe score of 8 (p = .0001, p = < .0001, respectively). Both measures also detected face washing 4 hours previously compared to controls. CONCLUSIONS: The two metrics were equally reliable, and both measured the behavior of face washing. They measure different aspects of a clean face; one measures the amount of dirt on wiped area and the other measures ocular and nasal discharge. Both measurements appear to capture the behavior of facial cleaning, and the choice of metric would appear to rest on the measurement that captures the stated objective of the behavior, consideration of costs, training, logistics, and implementation.

Is tube feeding futile in advanced dementia?

It is controversial whether tube feeding in people with dementia improves nutritional status or prolongs survival. Guidelines published by several professional societies cite observational studies that have shown no benefit and conclude that tube feeding in patients with advanced dementia should be avoided. However, all studies on tube feeding in dementia have major methodological flaws that invalidate their findings. The present evidence is not sufficient to justify general guidelines. Patients with advanced dementia represent a very heterogeneous group, and evidence demonstrates that some patients with dementia benefit from tube feeding. However, presently available guidelines make a single recommendation against tube feeding for all patients. Clinicians, patients, and surrogates should be aware that the guidelines and prior commentary on this topic tend both to overestimate the strength of evidence for futility and to exaggerate the burdens of tube feeding. Shared decision making requires accurate information tailored to the individual patient's particular situation, not blanket guidelines based on flawed data. Lay Summary: Many doctors believe that tube feeding does not help people with advanced dementia. Scientific studies suggest that people with dementia who have feeding tubes do not live longer or gain weight compared with those who are carefully hand fed. However, these studies are not very helpful because of flaws in design, which are discussed in this article. Guidelines from professional societies make a blanket recommendation against feeding tubes for anyone with dementia, but an individual approach that takes each person's situation into account seems more appropriate. Patients and surrogates should be aware that the guidelines on this topic tend both to underestimate the benefit and exaggerate the burdens of tube feeding.

A primer on electrophysiologic studies in myopathy.

Electromyography and nerve conduction studies are the primary electrodiagnostic studies employed in the evaluation of patients with weakness and suspected myopathy. This article discusses the physiologic principles that serve as a framework for understanding the purpose, limitations, and interpretation of these tests. In the process the authors also review the differential diagnosis of myopathy.