Oral Morphine Versus Ibuprofen Administered at Home for Postoperative Orthopedic Pain in Children: a Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND: Oral morphine for postoperative pain after minor pediatric surgery, while increasingly popular, is not supported by evidence. We evaluated whether oral morphine was superior to ibuprofen for at-home management of children\u27s postoperative pain. METHODS: We conducted a randomized superiority trial comparing oral morphine (0.5 mg/kg) with ibuprofen (10 mg/kg) in children 5 to 17 years of age who had undergone minor outpatient orthopedic surgery (June 2013 to September 2016). Participants took up to 8 doses of the intervention drug every 6 hours as needed for pain at home. The primary outcome was pain, according to the Faces Pain Scale - Revised, for the first dose. Secondary outcomes included additional analgesic requirements, adverse effects, unplanned health care visits and pain scores for doses 2 to 8. RESULTS: We analyzed data for 77 participants in each of the morphine and ibuprofen groups. Both interventions decreased pain scores with no difference in efficacy. The median difference in pain score before and after the first dose of medication was 1 (interquartile range 0-1) for both morphine and ibuprofen ( INTERPRETATION: Morphine was not superior to ibuprofen, and both drugs decreased pain with no apparent difference in efficacy. Morphine was associated with significantly more adverse effects, which suggests that ibuprofen is a better first-line option after minor surgery. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, no. NCT01686802

Effect of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor and angiotensin receptor blocker initiation on organ support-free days in patients hospitalized with COVID-19

IMPORTANCE Overactivation of the renin-angiotensin system (RAS) may contribute to poor clinical outcomes in patients with COVID-19. Objective To determine whether angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitor or angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) initiation improves outcomes in patients hospitalized for COVID-19. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS In an ongoing, adaptive platform randomized clinical trial, 721 critically ill and 58 non–critically ill hospitalized adults were randomized to receive an RAS inhibitor or control between March 16, 2021, and February 25, 2022, at 69 sites in 7 countries (final follow-up on June 1, 2022). INTERVENTIONS Patients were randomized to receive open-label initiation of an ACE inhibitor (n = 257), ARB (n = 248), ARB in combination with DMX-200 (a chemokine receptor-2 inhibitor; n = 10), or no RAS inhibitor (control; n = 264) for up to 10 days. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The primary outcome was organ support–free days, a composite of hospital survival and days alive without cardiovascular or respiratory organ support through 21 days. The primary analysis was a bayesian cumulative logistic model. Odds ratios (ORs) greater than 1 represent improved outcomes. RESULTS On February 25, 2022, enrollment was discontinued due to safety concerns. Among 679 critically ill patients with available primary outcome data, the median age was 56 years and 239 participants (35.2%) were women. Median (IQR) organ support–free days among critically ill patients was 10 (–1 to 16) in the ACE inhibitor group (n = 231), 8 (–1 to 17) in the ARB group (n = 217), and 12 (0 to 17) in the control group (n = 231) (median adjusted odds ratios of 0.77 [95% bayesian credible interval, 0.58-1.06] for improvement for ACE inhibitor and 0.76 [95% credible interval, 0.56-1.05] for ARB compared with control). The posterior probabilities that ACE inhibitors and ARBs worsened organ support–free days compared with control were 94.9% and 95.4%, respectively. Hospital survival occurred in 166 of 231 critically ill participants (71.9%) in the ACE inhibitor group, 152 of 217 (70.0%) in the ARB group, and 182 of 231 (78.8%) in the control group (posterior probabilities that ACE inhibitor and ARB worsened hospital survival compared with control were 95.3% and 98.1%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE In this trial, among critically ill adults with COVID-19, initiation of an ACE inhibitor or ARB did not improve, and likely worsened, clinical outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT0273570

PALVELUTUOTTEEN HINNOITTELUN KEHITTÄMINEN

Tämän opinnäytetyön aiheena on palvelutuotteen hinnoittelun kehittäminen. Tutkimuksen kohteena on Tili- ja isännöitsijätoimisto Ky. Tili- ja isännöitsijätoimisto Ky on Vaasassa toimiva tili- ja isännöintitoimisto, joka tarjoaa taloushallinto- ja isännöintipalveluita yrityksille. Tutkimuksen tavoitteena on kehittää Tili- ja isännöitsijätoimisto Ky:n isännöitsijän palvelutuotteiden hinnoittelua. Hinnoittelumenetelmäksi valittiin toimintoperusteinen hinnoittelu, jonka lähtökohtana on selvittää asiakaskohtaisia välillisiä kustannuksia. Kysymys oli suorite-kohtaisten kustannusten laskemisesta, eli toimintoperusteisesta prosessilaskennasta. Toimintoperusteinen prosessilaskenta tukee hinnoittelun päätöstä. Toiminto-analyysin jälkeen selvitettiin resurssien kohdistumista yrityksen eri toiminnoille. Aluksi selvitettiin yrityksen kustannusajuri, jonka perusteella kustannukset on kohdistettu eri toiminnoille. Seuraavaksi selvitettiin toimintoajurin avulla toimintoihin liittyvät yksikkökustannukset. Tuotteiden hinnoittelussa myyntihinnan on tarkoituksena sisältää kaikkien kustannusten lisäksi voittotavoite. Tutkimuksen teoriaosuuden keskeisiä asioita ovat toimintoperusteisen kustannuslaskennan, sekä hinnoittelun perusteiden esittely. Niiden avulla voidaan perustella hinnoittelupäätöstä tukeva toimintolaskenta. Opinnäytetyössä esitellään lisäksi kustannusperusteista hinnoittelua sekä isännöintiä ja tilitoimistoa yleisesti. Tutkimusmenetelmänä käytettiin kvalitatiivista eli laadullista tutkimusta. Tutkimuksen teoriaosuuteen käytettiin toimintolaskennan, taloushallinnon alan sekä hinnoittelun teoriaan liittyvää kirjallisuutta. Aineistonkeruussa havainnoitiin yrityksen tilinpäätöstä vuodelta 2016 ja yrityksen toimintaa liittyviä ohjelmia sekä tietokantoja. Lisäksi haastateltiin Tili- ja isännöitsijätoimisto Ky:n omistajaa ja työntekijöitä.This research was designed to develop the used pricing method for the case firm Tili- ja isännöitsijätoimisto Ky. The main area of this research focused on the main service products in property management. The case firm offers financial accounting and management services to house companies and other customer companies. Activity based costing was selected as the new pricing method in order to identify the customer-specific indirect costs. The aim of activity-based costing was to support pricing decisions for the case firm. In the implementation steps, activities must be identified first, and then the process continues with an activity analysis. Once the costs of activity and its drivers have been identified and its costs have been determined, then the costs of activity is allocated to the service product. In the allocation process, when the activity driver has been determined, the cost per unit can then be determined. Once the product cost per unit has been determined then the case firm considers the generated value of its service product, so the pricing of all the service product sales cover the fixed expenses with any remaining contribution margin providing profits. The theoretical study of this thesis introduced activity based costing and pricing to support activity based cost implementation and pricing decisions. In addition, it introduced cost based pricing and property management business and accounting firms in general. This research was implemented using the qualitative research method. The research material consists of related activity based costing, financial management, management accounting and pricing literature. The theoretical information was gathered from scientific research, academic books and some material was collect-ed from the Internet. The empirical data in this research was gathered by observing the case company’s financial statement from the year 2016 together with some business activities related programs and databases. In addition, was collected by interviewing the case company owner and the other employers of the company