Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 4 de 4
Filtrar
Más filtros










Base de datos
Intervalo de año de publicación
1.
BMJ Open ; 12(7): e057753, 2022 07 15.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35840308

RESUMEN

INTRODUCTION: Fractures of the odontoid process frequently result from low impact falls in frail or older adults. These are increasing in incidence and importance as the population ages. In the UK, odontoid fractures in older adults are usually managed in hard collars to immobilise the fracture and promote bony healing. However, bony healing does not always occur in older adults, and bony healing is not associated with quality of life, functional, or pain outcomes. Further, hard collars can cause complications such as skin pressure ulcers, swallowing difficulties and difficulties with personal care. We hypothesise that management with no immobilisation may be superior to management in a hard collar for older or frail adults with odontoid fractures. METHODS AND ANALYSES: This is the protocol for the Duration of External Neck Stabilisation (DENS) trial-a non-blinded randomised controlled trial comparing management in a hard collar with management without a collar for older (≥65 years) or frail (Rockwood Clinical Frailty Scale ≥5) adults with a new odontoid fracture. 887 neurologically intact participants with any odontoid process fracture type will be randomised to continuing with a hard collar (standard care) or removal of the collar (intervention). The primary outcome is quality of life measured using the EQ-5D-5L at 12 weeks. Secondary outcomes include pain scores, neck disability index, health and social care use and costs, and mortality. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Informed consent for participation will be sought from those able to provide it. We will also include those who lack capacity to ensure representativeness of frail and acutely unwell older adults. Results will be disseminated via scientific publication, lay summary, and visual abstract. The DENS trial received a favourable ethical opinion from the Scotland A Research Ethics Committee (21/SS/0036) and the Leeds West Research Ethics Committee (21/YH/0141). TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04895644.


Asunto(s)
Fracturas Óseas , Apófisis Odontoides , Fracturas de la Columna Vertebral , Anciano , Anciano Frágil , Humanos , Apófisis Odontoides/lesiones , Dolor , Calidad de Vida , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como Asunto , Fracturas de la Columna Vertebral/terapia
2.
BMC Med ; 17(1): 138, 2019 07 24.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31337404

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Delirium affects > 15% of hospitalised patients but is grossly underdetected, contributing to poor care. The 4 'A's Test (4AT, www.the4AT.com ) is a short delirium assessment tool designed for routine use without special training. The primary objective was to assess the accuracy of the 4AT for delirium detection. The secondary objective was to compare the 4AT with another commonly used delirium assessment tool, the Confusion Assessment Method (CAM). METHODS: This was a prospective diagnostic test accuracy study set in emergency departments or acute medical wards involving acute medical patients aged ≥ 70. All those without acutely life-threatening illness or coma were eligible. Patients underwent (1) reference standard delirium assessment based on DSM-IV criteria and (2) were randomised to either the index test (4AT, scores 0-12; prespecified score of > 3 considered positive) or the comparator (CAM; scored positive or negative), in a random order, using computer-generated pseudo-random numbers, stratified by study site, with block allocation. Reference standard and 4AT or CAM assessments were performed by pairs of independent raters blinded to the results of the other assessment. RESULTS: Eight hundred forty-three individuals were randomised: 21 withdrew, 3 lost contact, 32 indeterminate diagnosis, 2 missing outcome, and 785 were included in the analysis. Mean age was 81.4 (SD 6.4) years. 12.1% (95/785) had delirium by reference standard assessment, 14.3% (56/392) by 4AT, and 4.7% (18/384) by CAM. The 4AT had an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.90 (95% CI 0.84-0.96). The 4AT had a sensitivity of 76% (95% CI 61-87%) and a specificity of 94% (95% CI 92-97%). The CAM had a sensitivity of 40% (95% CI 26-57%) and a specificity of 100% (95% CI 98-100%). CONCLUSIONS: The 4AT is a short, pragmatic tool which can help improving detection rates of delirium in routine clinical care. TRIAL REGISTRATION: International standard randomised controlled trial number (ISRCTN) 53388093 . Date applied 30/05/2014; date assigned 02/06/2014.


Asunto(s)
Confusión/diagnóstico , Delirio/diagnóstico , Pruebas Diagnósticas de Rutina , Pruebas Neuropsicológicas , Enfermedad Aguda , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Algoritmos , Lista de Verificación/métodos , Lista de Verificación/normas , Pruebas Diagnósticas de Rutina/métodos , Pruebas Diagnósticas de Rutina/normas , Manual Diagnóstico y Estadístico de los Trastornos Mentales , Servicio de Urgencia en Hospital , Femenino , Evaluación Geriátrica/métodos , Humanos , Pacientes Internos , Masculino , Pruebas Neuropsicológicas/normas , Valor Predictivo de las Pruebas , Reproducibilidad de los Resultados , Sensibilidad y Especificidad
3.
BMJ Open ; 8(2): e015572, 2018 02 10.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29440152

RESUMEN

INTRODUCTION: Delirium is a severe neuropsychiatric syndrome of rapid onset, commonly precipitated by acute illness. It is common in older people in the emergency department (ED) and acute hospital, but greatly under-recognised in these and other settings. Delirium and other forms of cognitive impairment, particularly dementia, commonly coexist. There is a need for a rapid delirium screening tool that can be administered by a range of professional-level healthcare staff to patients with sensory or functional impairments in a busy clinical environment, which also incorporates general cognitive assessment. We developed the 4 'A's Test (4AT) for this purpose. This study's primary objective is to validate the 4AT against a reference standard. Secondary objectives include (1) comparing the 4AT with another widely used test (the Confusion Assessment Method (CAM)); (2) determining if the 4AT is sensitive to general cognitive impairment; (3) assessing if 4AT scores predict outcomes, including (4) a health economic analysis. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: 900 patients aged 70 or over in EDs or acute general medical wards will be recruited in three sites (Edinburgh, Bradford and Sheffield) over 18 months. Each patient will undergo a reference standard delirium assessment and will be randomised to assessment with either the 4AT or the CAM. At 12 weeks, outcomes (length of stay, institutionalisation and mortality) and resource utilisation will be collected by a questionnaire and via the electronic patient record. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval was granted in Scotland and England. The study involves administering tests commonly used in clinical practice. The main ethical issues are the essential recruitment of people without capacity. Dissemination is planned via publication in high impact journals, presentation at conferences, social media and the website www.the4AT.com. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN53388093; Pre-results.


Asunto(s)
Delirio/diagnóstico , Pruebas Diagnósticas de Rutina/normas , Evaluación Geriátrica/métodos , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Servicio de Urgencia en Hospital , Femenino , Humanos , Modelos Logísticos , Masculino , Habitaciones de Pacientes , Estudios Prospectivos , Proyectos de Investigación , Índice de Severidad de la Enfermedad , Encuestas y Cuestionarios , Reino Unido
4.
Diagn Progn Res ; 2: 18, 2018.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31093566

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: In recent years, there has been increasing focus on the earlier detection of deterioration in the clinical condition of hospital patients with the aim of instigating earlier treatment to reverse this deterioration and prevent adverse outcomes. This is especially important in the ED, a dynamic environment with large volumes of undifferentiated patients, which carries inherent patient risk. SNAP40 is an innovative medical-grade device that can be worn on the upper arm that continuously monitors patients' vital signs including relative changes in systolic blood pressure, respiratory rate, heart rate, movement, blood oxygen saturation and temperature. It uses automated risk analysis to potentially allow clinical staff to easily and quickly identify high-risk patients. The aim of this study is to investigate whether the SNAP40 device is able to identify deterioration in the vital sign physiology of an ED patient earlier than current standard monitoring and observation charting techniques. METHODS/DESIGN: Single centre, teaching hospital ED open label, prospective, observational cohort study recruiting 250 high acuity participants aged 16 years or over presenting to the ED. Participants will be approached and enrolled in the ED and after consent will have the SNAP40 wearable monitoring device attached which will be used alongside standard care monitoring. Participants will be observed throughout their time in the ED. Any SNAP40 device alarm, standard monitoring alarms or standard practice vital sign observations indicating a deterioration in a patient's vital sign physiology (defined as an increase in NEWS score) will be recorded. Primary outcome is time to detection of deterioration. Secondary outcomes include staff time spent performing observations and responding to standard monitoring alarms, clinical escalation of care when deterioration is detected and participants and staff rating of experience of both SNAP40 and current monitoring. DISCUSSION: The SNAP40-ED study aims to recruit 250 patients. It will be the first study to compare the ability of a novel ambulatory monitoring device to detect deterioration compared to standard care in the ED. It may allow the earlier detection of deterioration in the clinical condition of ED patients and therefore earlier treatment to reverse this deterioration and prevent adverse outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT03179267 ClinicalTrials.gov. Registered on June 17, 2017.

SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA
...