RESUMEN
Preterm infants are more likely to demonstrate developmental delays than fullterm infants. Postural measurement tools may be effective in measuring the center of pressure (COP) and asymmetry, as well as predicting future motor impairment. The objective of this systematic review was to evaluate existing evidence regarding use of pressure mats or force plates for measuring COP and asymmetry in preterm infants, to determine how measures differ between preterm and fullterm infants and if these tools appropriately predict future motor impairment. The consulted databases included PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and CINAHL. The quality of the literature and the risk of bias were assessed utilizing the ROB2: revised Cochrane risk-of bias tool. Nine manuscripts met the criteria for review. The postural control tools included were FSA UltraThin seat mat, Conformat Pressure-Sensitive mat, Play and Neuro-Developmental Assessment, and standard force plates. Studies demonstrated that all tools were capable of COP assessment in preterm infants and support the association between the observation of reduced postural complexity prior to the observation of midline head control as an indicator of future motor delay. Postural measurement tools provide quick and objective measures of postural control and asymmetry. Based on the degree of impairment, these tools may provide an alternative to standardized assessments that may be taxing to the preterm infant, inaccessible to therapists, or not sensitive enough to capture motor delays.
RESUMEN
Background: The link between diabetes and prostate cancer progression is poorly understood and complicated by obesity. We investigated associations between diabetes and prostate cancer-specific mortality (PCSM), castrate-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC), and metastases in obese and nonobese men undergoing radical prostatectomy (RP). Methods: We included 4688 men from the Shared Equal Access Regional Cancer Hospital cohort of men undergoing RP from 1988 to 2017. Diabetes prior to RP, anthropometric, and clinical data were abstracted from 6 Veterans Affairs Medical Centers electronic medical records. Primary and secondary outcomes were PCSM and metastases and CRPC, respectively. Multivariable-adjusted hazard ratios (adj-HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated for diabetes and PCSM, CRPC, and metastases. Adjusted hazard ratios were also estimated in analyses stratified by obesity (body mass index: nonobese <30 kg/m2; obese ≥30 kg/m2). All statistical tests were 2-sided. Results: Diabetes was not associated with PCSM (adj-HR = 1.38, 95% CI = 0.86 to 2.24), CRPC (adj-HR = 1.05, 95% CI = 0.67 to 1.64), or metastases (adj-HR = 1.01, 95% CI = 0.70 to 1.46), among all men. Interaction terms for diabetes and obesity were statistically significant in multivariable models for PCSM, CRPC, and metastases (P ≤ .04). In stratified analyses, in obese men, diabetes was associated with PCSM (adj-HR = 3.06, 95% CI = 1.40 to 6.69), CRPC (adj-HR = 2.14, 95% CI = 1.11 to 4.15), and metastases (adj-HR = 1.57, 95% CI = 0.88 to 2.78), though not statistically significant for metastases. In nonobese men, inverse associations were suggested for diabetes and prostate cancer outcomes without reaching statistical significance. Conclusions: Diabetes was associated with increased risks of prostate cancer progression and mortality among obese men but not among nonobese men, highlighting the importance of aggressively curtailing the increasing prevalence of obesity in prostate cancer survivors.