Comparison of routes for achieving parenteral access with a focus on the management of patients with Ebola virus disease.

Dehydration is an important cause of death in patients with Ebola virus disease (EVD). Parenteral fluids are often required in patients with fluid requirements in excess of their oral intake. The peripheral intravenous route is the most commonly used method of parenteral access, but inserting and maintaining an intravenous line can be challenging in the context of EVD. Therefore it is important to consider the advantages and disadvantages of different routes for achieving parenteral access (e.g. intravenous, intraosseous, subcutaneous and intraperitoneal). To compare the reliability, ease of use and speed of insertion of different parenteral access methods. We ran the search on 17 November 2014. We searched the Cochrane Injuries Group's Specialised Register, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, The Cochrane Library), Ovid MEDLINE(R) In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations, Ovid MEDLINE(R) Daily, Ovid MEDLINE(R) and Ovid OLDMEDLINE(R), Embase Classic + Embase (OvidSP), CINAHL (EBSCOhost), clinicaltrials.gov and screened reference lists. Randomised controlled trials comparing different parenteral routes for the infusion of fluids or medication. Two review authors examined the titles and abstracts of records obtained by searching the electronic databases to determine eligibility. Two review authors extracted data from the included trials and assessed the risk of bias. Outcome measures of interest were success of insertion; time required for insertion; number of insertion attempts; number of dislodgements; time period with functional access; local site reactions; clinicians' perception of ease of administration; needlestick injury to healthcare workers; patients' discomfort; and mortality. For trials involving the administration of fluids we also collected data on the volume of fluid infused, changes in serum electrolytes and markers of renal function. We rated the quality of the evidence as 'high', 'moderate', 'low' or 'very low' according to the GRADE approach for the following outcomes: success of insertion, time required for insertion, number of dislodgements, volume of fluid infused and needlestick injuries. We included 17 trials involving 885 participants. Parenteral access was used to infuse fluids in 11 trials and medications in six trials. None of the trials involved patients with EVD. Intravenous and intraosseous access was compared in four trials; intravenous and subcutaneous access in 11; peripheral intravenous and intraperitoneal access in one; saphenous vein cutdown and intraosseous access in one; and intraperitoneal with subcutaneous access in one. All of the trials assessing the intravenous method involved peripheral intravenous access.We judged few trials to be at low risk of bias for any of the assessed domains.Compared to the intraosseous group, patients in the intravenous group were more likely to experience an insertion failure (risk ratio (RR) 3.89, 95% confidence interval (CI) 2.39 to 6.33; n = 242; GRADE rating: low). We did not pool data for time to insertion but estimates from the trials suggest that inserting intravenous access takes longer (GRADE rating: moderate). Clinicians judged the intravenous route to be easier to insert (RR 0.15, 95% CI 0.04 to 0.61; n = 182). A larger volume of fluids was infused via the intravenous route (GRADE rating: moderate). There was no evidence of a difference between the two routes for any other outcomes, including adverse events.Compared to the subcutaneous group, patients in the intravenous group were more likely to experience an insertion failure (RR 14.79, 95% CI 2.87 to 76.08; n = 238; GRADE rating: moderate) and dislodgement of the device (RR 3.78, 95% CI 1.16 to 12.34; n = 67; GRADE rating: low). Clinicians also judged the intravenous route as being more difficult to insert and patients were more likely to be agitated in the intravenous group. Patients in the intravenous group were more likely to develop a local infection and phlebitis, but were less likely to develop erythema, oedema or swelling than those in the subcutaneous group. A larger volume of fluids was infused into patients via the intravenous route. There was no evidence of a difference between the two routes for any other outcome.There were insufficient data to reliably determine if the risk of insertion failure differed between the saphenous vein cutdown (SVC) and intraosseous method (RR 4.00, 95% CI 0.51 to 31.13; GRADE rating: low). Insertion using SVC took longer than the intraosseous method (MD 219.60 seconds, 95% CI 135.44 to 303.76; GRADE rating: moderate). There were no data and therefore there was no evidence of a difference between the two routes for any other outcome.There were insufficient data to reliably determine the relative effects of intraperitoneal or central intravenous access relative to any other parenteral access method. There are several different ways of achieving parenteral access in patients who are unable meet their fluid requirements with oral intake alone. The quality of the evidence, as assessed using the GRADE criteria, is somewhat limited because of the lack of adequately powered trials at low risk of bias. However, we believe that there is sufficient evidence to draw the following conclusions: if peripheral intravenous access can be achieved easily, this allows infusion of larger volumes of fluid than other routes; but if this is not possible, the intraosseous and subcutaneous routes are viable alternatives. The subcutaneous route may be suitable for patients who are not severely dehydrated but in whom ongoing fluid losses cannot be met by oral intake.A film to accompany this review can be viewed here (http://youtu.be/ArVPzkf93ng)

The effectiveness and safety of antifibrinolytics in patients with acute intracranial haemorrhage: statistical analysis plan for an individual patient data meta-analysis

Introduction: The Antifibrinolytic Trialists Collaboration aims to increase knowledge about the effectiveness and safety of antifibrinolytic treatment by conducting individual patient data (IPD) meta-analyses of randomised trials. This article presents the statistical analysis plan for an IPD meta-analysis of the effects of antifibrinolytics for acute intracranial haemorrhage. Methods: The protocol for the IPD meta-analysis has been registered with PROSPERO (CRD42016052155). We will conduct an individual patient data meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials with 1000 patients or more assessing the effects of antifibrinolytics in acute intracranial haemorrhage. We will assess the effect on two co-primary outcomes: 1) death in hospital at end of trial follow-up, and 2) death in hospital or dependency at end of trial follow-up. The co-primary outcomes will be limited to patients treated within three hours of injury or stroke onset. We will report treatment effects using odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals. We use logistic regression models to examine how the effect of antifibrinolytics vary by time to treatment, severity of intracranial bleeding, and age. We will also examine the effect of antifibrinolytics on secondary outcomes including death, dependency, vascular occlusive events, seizures, and neurological outcomes. Secondary outcomes will be assessed in all patients irrespective of time of treatment. All analyses will be conducted on an intention-to-treat basis. Conclusions: This IPD meta-analysis will examine important clinical questions about the effects of antifibrinolytic treatment in patients with intracranial haemorrhage that cannot be answered using aggregate data. With IPD we can examine how effects vary by time to treatment, bleeding severity, and age, to gain better understanding of the balance of benefit and harms on which to base recommendations for practice

Food insecurity in adults with severe mental illness living in Northern England: A co-produced cross-sectional study

\ua9 2024 The Authors. Nutrition & Dietetics published by John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd on behalf of Dietitians Australia.Aim: This study aimed to explore food insecurity prevalence and experiences of adults with severe mental illness living in Northern England. Methods: This mixed-methods cross-sectional study took place between March and October 2022. Participants were adults with self-reported severe mental illness living in Northern England. The survey included demographic, health, and financial questions. Food insecurity was measured using the US Department of Agriculture Adult Food Security measure. Quantitative data were analysed using descriptive statistics and binary logistic regression; and qualitative data using content analysis. Results: In total, 135 participants completed the survey, with a mean age of 44.7 years (SD: 14.1, range: 18–75 years). Participants were predominantly male (53.3%), white (88%) and from Yorkshire (50.4%). The food insecurity prevalence was 50.4% (n = 68). There was statistical significance in food insecurity status by region (p = 0.001); impacts of severe mental illness on activities of daily living (p = 0.02); and the Covid pandemic on food access (p < 0.001). The North West had the highest prevalence of food insecurity (73.3%); followed by the Humber and North East regions (66.7%); and Yorkshire (33.8%). In multivariable binary logistic regression, severe mental illness\u27 impact on daily living was the only predictive variable for food insecurity (odds ratio = 4.618, 95% confidence interval: 1.071–19.924, p = 0.04). Conclusion: The prevalence of food insecurity in this study is higher than is reported in similar studies (41%). Mental health practitioners should routinely assess and monitor food insecurity in people living with severe mental illness. Further research should focus on food insecurity interventions in this population

Retrospective harm benefit analysis of pre-clinical animal research for six treatment interventions

The harm benefit analysis (HBA) is the cornerstone of animal research regulation and is considered to be a key ethical safeguard for animals. The HBA involves weighing the anticipated benefits of animal research against its predicted harms to animals but there are doubts about how objective and accountable this process is.i. To explore the harms to animals involved in pre-clinical animal studies and to assess these against the benefits for humans accruing from these studies; ii. To test the feasibility of conducting this type of retrospective HBA.Data on harms were systematically extracted from a sample of pre-clinical animal studies whose clinical relevance had already been investigated by comparing systematic reviews of the animal studies with systematic reviews of human studies for the same interventions (antifibrinolytics for haemorrhage, bisphosphonates for osteoporosis, corticosteroids for brain injury, Tirilazad for stroke, antenatal corticosteroids for neonatal respiratory distress and thrombolytics for stroke). Clinical relevance was also explored in terms of current clinical practice. Harms were categorised for severity using an expert panel. The quality of the research and its impact were considered. Bateson's Cube was used to conduct the HBA.The most common assessment of animal harms by the expert panel was 'severe'. Reported use of analgesia was rare and some animals (including most neonates) endured significant procedures with no, or only light, anaesthesia reported. Some animals suffered iatrogenic harms. Many were kept alive for long periods post-experimentally but only 1% of studies reported post-operative care. A third of studies reported that some animals died prior to endpoints. All the studies were of poor quality. Having weighed the actual harms to animals against the actual clinical benefits accruing from these studies, and taking into account the quality of the research and its impact, less than 7% of the studies were permissible according to Bateson's Cube: only the moderate bisphosphonate studies appeared to minimise harms to animals whilst being associated with benefit for humans.This is the first time the accountability of the HBA has been systematically explored across a range of pre-clinical animal studies. The regulatory systems in place when these studies were conducted failed to safeguard animals from severe suffering or to ensure that only beneficial, scientifically rigorous research was conducted. Our findings indicate a pressing need to: i. review regulations, particularly those that permit animals to suffer severe harms; ii. reform the processes of prospectively assessing pre-clinical animal studies to make them fit for purpose; and iii. systematically evaluate the benefits of pre-clinical animal research to permit a more realistic assessment of its likely future benefits

Successful recruitment to trials: findings from the SCIMITAR plus Trial

BACKGROUND: Randomised controlled trials (RCT) can struggle to recruit to target on time. This is especially the case with hard to reach populations such as those with severe mental ill health. The SCIMITAR+ trial, a trial of a bespoke smoking cessation intervention for people with severe mental ill health achieved their recruitment ahead of time and target. This article reports strategies that helped us to achieve this with the aim of aiding others recruiting from similar populations. METHODS: SCIMITAR+ is a multi-centre pragmatic two-arm parallel-group RCT, which aimed to recruit 400 participants with severe mental ill health who smoke and would like to cut down or quit. The study recruited primarily in secondary care through community mental health teams and psychiatrists with a smaller number of participants recruited through primary care. Recruitment opened in October 2015 and closed in December 2016, by which point 526 participants had been recruited. We gathered information from recruiting sites on strategies which led to the successful recruitment in SCIMITAR+ and in this article present our approach to trial management along with the strategies employed by the recruiting sites. RESULTS: Alongside having a dedicated trial manager and trial management team, we identified three main themes that led to successful recruitment. These were: clinicians with a positive attitude to research; researchers and clinicians working together; and the use of NHS targets. The overriding theme was the importance of relationships between both the researchers and the recruiting clinicians and the recruiting clinicians and the participants. CONCLUSIONS: This study makes a significant contribution to the limited evidence base of real-world cases of successful recruitment to RCTs and offers practical guidance to those planning and conducting trials. Building positive relationships between clinicians, researchers and participants is crucial to successful recruitment

A model and experimental approach to the middle ear transfer function related to hearing in the humpback whale (Megaptera novaeangliae)

At present, there are no direct measures of hearing for any baleen whale (Mysticeti). The most viable alternative to in vivo approaches to simulate the audiogram is through modeling outer, middle, and inner ear functions based on the anatomy and material properties of each component. This paper describes a finite element model of the middle ear for the humpback whale (Megaptera novaeangliae) to calculate the middle ear transfer function (METF) to determine acoustic energy transmission to the cochlea. The model was developed based on high resolution computed tomography imaging and direct anatomical measurements of the middle ear components for this mysticete species. Mechanical properties for the middle ear tissues were determined from experimental measurements and published values. The METF for the humpback whale predicted a better frequency range between approximately 15 Hz and 3 kHz or between 200 Hz and 9 kHz based on two potential stimulation locations. Experimental measures of the ossicular chain, tympanic membrane, and tympanic bone velocities showed frequency response characteristics consistent with the model. The predicted best sensitivity hearing ranges match well with known vocalizations of this species