Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management最新文献

Objective: Modifying the PIVC tip to direct infusates toward areas of highest hemodilution may reduce vein wall damage. This study compared flow patterns between a traditional PIVC with a central opening and one with an off-axis aperture.

Methods: This was an exploratory observational analysis conducted at a tertiary care emergency department (ED) comparing flow patterns of two intravenous catheters: PIVC 1 (2.95 cm 20 gauge [Autoguard, Becton Dickinson]) and PIVC 2 (3.68 cm 20 gauge [Osprey, SkyDance Vascular]). Adult ED patients with PIVCs placed via traditional palpation/visualization method and with ultrasound capturing the flushing were eligible participants. Ultrasounds were reviewed to determine vein, catheter, and flow characteristics. The primary outcome was angle of the infusate leaving the catheter. Secondary outcomes included direction of catheter tip against vein wall, distance away from vein wall, vasospasm, and laminar/turbulent flow.

Results: Data from December 2023 included 28 catheters (10 PIVC 1, 18 PIVC 2). The average patient age was 53.7 years; 53.6% were female. Vein diameter/depth were similar: 0.35 cm/0.41 cm for PIVC 1 and 0.37 cm/0.47 cm for PIVC 2. The catheter tip pointed posteriorly towards the vein wall in 60% of PIVC 1 vs 11.1% in PIVC 2 (P=0.018). The angle of infusate flow away from the vein wall was 0.20° (SD 0.63) for PIVC 1 and 7.61° (SD 5.71) for PIVC 2 (P<0.001). Flow at 0° occurred in 90% of PIVC 1 vs 16.7% in PIVC 2 (P<0.001).

Conclusion: In this exploratory investigation, a peripheral vascular access device with an off-axis tip aperture of demonstrated a sharper infusate flow angle away from the vein wall compared to a traditional central opening device. This redirection may reduce vein wall trauma and complications, though further research is needed to pair clinical outcomes with this technology.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.2147/TCRM.S455379.].

Background and aim: The Global Leadership Initiative on Malnutrition (GLIM) has proposed criteria for the diagnosis of malnutrition. No studies validated the GLIM criteria in acute pancreatitis (AP). The present study aimed to validate the predictive capacity of GLIM criteria for adverse outcomes in AP patients.

Patients and methods: Clinical data of 269 patients with AP were analyzed retrospectively. The Nutritional Risk Screening 2002 (NRS2002) was chosen as the screening tool. Multivariate logistic regression analyses evaluated the adverse clinical outcomes in malnourished patients.

Results: Overall, 160 patients (59.5%) were at nutritional risk and 38 (14.1%) were malnourished. Reduced muscle mass/ low body mass index + inflammation combinations contributed most to malnutrition overall and in each subgroup. The malnourished group had lower hemoglobin, neutrophils, albumin, total cholesterol, and triglycerides than the well-nourished group. The malnourished group had higher hospitalization costs (CNY, 11319.34 vs 9258.22, p <0.001) and more local complications (34.2% vs 14.7%, p =0.009) than the well-nourished group. There was an interaction between malnutrition and overweight/obesity on local complications (p for interaction = 0.023). Multivariate logistic regression showed malnutrition was significantly associated with local complications (OR 12.2, 95% CI: 2.51-59.37), infectious complications (OR 9.95, 95% CI: 1.25-79.44) and composite adverse outcome (OR 4.78, 95% CI: 1.05-21.73) in the overweight/obesity subgroup. There was no association between malnutrition and the rate of various adverse outcomes in the non-overweight/obesity subgroup. Additionally, we observed an association between malnutrition and composite adverse outcome (OR 6.75, 95% CI: 1.49-30.68) in patients <70 years only in females.

Conclusion: Malnourished AP patients were more likely to have adverse outcomes than well-nourished patients. Malnutrition was associated with various adverse outcomes only in the overweight/obesity subgroups.

Aim: Identifying a patient's risk for poor outcomes after starting antiseizure medication (ASM) therapy is crucial in managing epilepsy pharmacologically. To date, there is a lack of designated tools to assess such risks.

Purpose: To develop and validate a risk assessment tool for the therapeutic outcomes of ASM therapy.

Patients and methods: A cross-sectional study was carried out in a hospital-based specialist clinic from September 2022 to August 2023. Data was analyzed from patients' medical records and face-to-face assessments. The seizure control domain was determined from the patients' medical records while seizure severity (SS) and adverse effects (AE) of ASM were assessed using the Seizure Severity Questionnaire and the Liverpool Adverse Event Profile respectively. The developed tool was devised from prediction models using logistic and linear regressions. Concurrent validity and interrater reliability methods were employed for validity assessments.

Results: A total of 397 patients were included in the analysis. For seizure control, the identified predictors include ≥10 years' epilepsy duration (OR:1.87,95% CI:1.10-3.17), generalized onset (OR:7.42,95% CI:2.95-18.66), focal onset seizure (OR:8.24,95% CI:2.98-22.77), non-adherence (OR:3.55,95% CI:1.52-8.27) and having ≥3 ASM (OR:3.29,95% CI:1.32-8.24). Younger age at epilepsy onset (≤40) (OR:3.29,95% CI:1.32-8.24) and neurological deficit (OR:3.55,95% CI:1.52-8.27) were significant predictors for SS. For AE, the positive predictors were age >35 (OR:0.12,95% CI:0.03-0.20), <13 years epilepsy duration (OR:2.89,95% CI:0.50-5.29) and changes in ASM regimen (OR:2.93,95% CI: 0.24-5.62). The seizure control domain showed a good discriminatory ability with a c-index of 0.711. From the Bonferroni (ANOVA) analysis, only SS predicted scores generated a linear plot against the mean of the actual scores. The AE domain was omitted from the final tool because it did not meet the requirements for validity assessment.

Conclusion: This newly developed tool (RAS-TO) is a promising tool that could help healthcare providers in determining optimal treatment strategies for adults with epilepsy.

Aim: The study aimed to compare the diagnostic performance of AI-SONICTM Thyroid System (AI-SONICTM) with six thyroid nodule ultrasound risk stratification systems, as well as the interobserver agreement among different-year ultrasound examiners using the same diagnostic approach.

Methods: This retrospective study included patients who underwent thyroid ultrasound examination and surgery between 2010 and 2022. Three ultrasound examiners with 2, 5, and 10 years of experience, respectively, used AI-SONICTM and six guidelines to risk-stratify the nodules. The diagnostic performance and interobserver agreement were assessed.

Results: A total of 370 thyroid nodules were included, including 195 papillary thyroid carcinomas (PTC) and 175 benign nodules. For physicians of varying seniority from low to high, AI-SONICTM had a moderate sensitivities of 82.56%, 83.08%, 84.62%, respectively, while AACE/ACE/AME had the highest diagnostic sensitivities (96.41%, 95.38%, 96.41%, respectively); And relatively higher specificities were 85.14%, 85.71%, 85.71% for KSThR, while moderate specificities with values of 84.0%, 85.14%, and 85.71%, respectively were found for AI-SONICTM; The accuracy was highest for ATA (excluding non-classifiable nodules), with values of 87.26%, 87.93%, and 88.82%, respectively, while the accuracy for AI-SONICTM were 83.24%, 84.05%, and 85.14%, respectively. The Kendall's tau coefficient indicated strong or moderate interobserver agreement among all examiners using different diagnostic methods (Kendall's tau coefficient >0.6, P<0.001). AI-SONICTM showed the highest interobserver agreement (Kendall's tau coefficient=0.995, P<0.001). A binary probit regression analysis showed that nodules with cystic components had a significantly higher regression coefficient value of 0.983 (P=0.002), indicating that AI-SONICTM may have higher accuracy for nodules with cystic components.

Conclusion: AI-SONICTM and the six thyroid nodule ultrasound risk stratification systems showed high diagnostic performance for papillary thyroid carcinoma. All examiners showed strong or moderate interobserver agreement when using different diagnostic methods. AI-SONICTM may have higher accuracy for nodules with cystic components.

Background: Implementing allergy testing among children with a reported history of penicillin allergy could be challenging, particularly in developing countries with limited resources. This study screened and risk-stratified the likelihood of true penicillin allergy among children labeled with penicillin allergy in Jordan.

Methods: A web-based survey, completed by parents, assessed history, type, and severity of penicillin allergic reactions, including age at diagnosis, symptoms, time to the reaction, reaction's course and resolution, and received medical evaluation/testing. Low-risk allergic symptoms were defined as vomiting, diarrhea, headache, dizziness, itching, rash, cough, or runny nose without evidence of anaphylaxis or severe cutaneous reactions.

Results: A total of 530 parents of "penicillin allergy"-labeled children completed the survey. Of these, 86.4% reported allergic reactions to penicillin and 13.6% reported avoidance of penicillin due to family history. Among the former, 52.2% were male, 67.3% were three years old or younger when the reported reaction was established, and 68.3% experienced exclusively low-risk symptoms. Overall, skin rash was the most reported symptom (86.0%). High-risk symptoms were reported in 31.5% of children. About two-thirds (64.0%) of children were reported to have experienced symptoms after the first exposure to penicillin. The most common indication for antibiotic use was a throat infection (63.8%). Asthma comorbidity was significantly higher among high-risk (24.8%) compared low-risk group (11.5%).

Conclusion: In Jordan, many parent-reported penicillin allergic reactions seem to be clinically insignificant and unlikely to be verifiable, which can adversely affect patients' care and antimicrobial stewardship. An appropriate clinical history/evaluation is a key step in identifying true immunoglobulin E-mediated allergic reactions and risk stratifying patients for either de-labeling those with obviously non-immune-mediated reactions or identifying candidates for direct oral challenge test.