86 research outputs found

    Does psychological status influence clinical outcomes in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) and other chronic gastroenterological diseases: An observational cohort prospective study

    Get PDF
    Background: Whether there is a temporal relationship between psychological problems and clinical outcomes in patients with diseases of the digestive tract has not been widely researched. Thus, our aims were 1) To observe and compare prospectively clinical outcomes in relation to psychological co-morbidity in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) and chronic hepatitis C (HCV) and, 2) To test the hypothesis that patients with psychological co-morbidities are less likely to have a satisfactory response to standard treatment at 12 months. Methods: Overall, 139 patients were enrolled in this observational cohort prospective study. Over the ensuing year, physical and psychological measures were made at baseline and after 12 months (HADS, SCL90, SF-12 and disease activity measures). A logistic regression was conducted to observe any relationship between baseline characteristics and patients' clinical outcomes after 12 months. Results: Overall, there was no relationship between psychological status and quality of life at baseline and relapse at 12 months (p > 0.05). However, patients with inactive disease at baseline were at lower risk of relapse after 12 months (OR = 0.046, CI: 0.012–0.178). No significant relationship was found between psychological problems such as depression/anxiety and a total number of relapses in the IBD group. However, interestingly, patients with an active disease at baseline tended to have a greater number of relapses (OR = 3.07, CI: 1.650–5.738) and CD participants were found at lower risk of relapse than UC participants (OR = 0.382, CI: 0.198–0.736). Conclusion: In contrast to previous investigations, this study suggests that there is no temporal relationship between psychological problems at baseline and clinical outcomes over time. Longer and larger prospective studies are needed to better understand this result.Antonina A Mikocka-Walus, Deborah A Turnbull, Nicole T Moulding, Ian G Wilson, Gerald J Holtmann and Jane M Andrew

    Epithelial damage and tissue γδ T cells promote a unique tumor-protective IgE response

    Get PDF
    IgE is an ancient and conserved immunoglobulin isotype with potent immunological function. Nevertheless, the regulation of IgE responses remains an enigma, and evidence of a role for IgE in host defense is limited. Here we report that topical exposure to a common environmental DNA-damaging xenobiotic initiated stress surveillance by γδTCR+ intraepithelial lymphocytes that resulted in class switching to IgE in B cells and the accumulation of autoreactive IgE. High-throughput antibody sequencing revealed that γδ T cells shaped the IgE repertoire by supporting specific variable-diversity-joining (VDJ) rearrangements with unique characteristics of the complementarity-determining region CDRH3. This endogenous IgE response, via the IgE receptor FcεRI, provided protection against epithelial carcinogenesis, and expression of the gene encoding FcεRI in human squamous-cell carcinoma correlated with good disease prognosis. These data indicate a joint role for immunosurveillance by T cells and by B cells in epithelial tissues and suggest that IgE is part of the host defense against epithelial damage and tumor development

    What is the value and impact of quality and safety teams? A scoping review

    Get PDF
    <p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The purpose of this study was to conduct a scoping review of the literature about the establishment and impact of quality and safety team initiatives in acute care.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Studies were identified through electronic searches of Medline, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, ABI Inform, Cochrane databases. Grey literature and bibliographies were also searched. Qualitative or quantitative studies that occurred in acute care, describing how quality and safety teams were established or implemented, the impact of teams, or the barriers and/or facilitators of teams were included. Two reviewers independently extracted data on study design, sample, interventions, and outcomes. Quality assessment of full text articles was done independently by two reviewers. Studies were categorized according to dimensions of quality.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Of 6,674 articles identified, 99 were included in the study. The heterogeneity of studies and results reported precluded quantitative data analyses. Findings revealed limited information about attributes of successful and unsuccessful team initiatives, barriers and facilitators to team initiatives, unique or combined contribution of selected interventions, or how to effectively establish these teams.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Not unlike systematic reviews of quality improvement collaboratives, this broad review revealed that while teams reported a number of positive results, there are many methodological issues. This study is unique in utilizing traditional quality assessment and more novel methods of quality assessment and reporting of results (SQUIRE) to appraise studies. Rigorous design, evaluation, and reporting of quality and safety team initiatives are required.</p

    Sources, composition, and export of particulate organic matter across British estuaries

    Get PDF
    Estuaries receive and process a large amount of particulate organic carbon (POC) prior to its export into coastal waters. Studying the origin of this POC is key to understanding the fate of POC and the role of estuaries in the global carbon cycle. Here, we evaluated the concentrations of POC, as well as particulate organic nitrogen (PON), and used stable carbon and nitrogen isotopes to assess their sources across 13 contrasting British estuaries during five different sampling campaigns over 1 year. We found a high variability in POC and PON concentrations across the salinity gradient, reflecting inputs, and losses of organic material within the estuaries. Catchment land cover appeared to influence the contribution of POC to the total organic carbon flux from the estuary to coastal waters, with POC contributions >36% in estuaries draining catchments with a high percentage of urban/suburban land, and <11% in estuaries draining catchments with a high peatland cover. There was no seasonal pattern in the isotopic composition of POC and PON, suggesting similar sources for each estuary over time. Carbon isotopic ratios were depleted (−26.7 ± 0.42‰, average ± sd) at the lowest salinity waters, indicating mainly terrigenous POC (TPOC). Applying a two-source mixing model, we observed high variability in the contribution of TPOC at the highest salinity waters between estuaries, with a median value of 57%. Our results indicate a large transport of terrigenous organic carbon into coastal waters, where it may be buried, remineralized, or transported offshore

    Constructing Social Problems in an Age of Globalization: A French-American Comparison

    Full text link

    Proceedings of the 3rd Biennial Conference of the Society for Implementation Research Collaboration (SIRC) 2015: advancing efficient methodologies through community partnerships and team science

    Get PDF
    It is well documented that the majority of adults, children and families in need of evidence-based behavioral health interventionsi do not receive them [1, 2] and that few robust empirically supported methods for implementing evidence-based practices (EBPs) exist. The Society for Implementation Research Collaboration (SIRC) represents a burgeoning effort to advance the innovation and rigor of implementation research and is uniquely focused on bringing together researchers and stakeholders committed to evaluating the implementation of complex evidence-based behavioral health interventions. Through its diverse activities and membership, SIRC aims to foster the promise of implementation research to better serve the behavioral health needs of the population by identifying rigorous, relevant, and efficient strategies that successfully transfer scientific evidence to clinical knowledge for use in real world settings [3]. SIRC began as a National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH)-funded conference series in 2010 (previously titled the “Seattle Implementation Research Conference”; $150,000 USD for 3 conferences in 2011, 2013, and 2015) with the recognition that there were multiple researchers and stakeholdersi working in parallel on innovative implementation science projects in behavioral health, but that formal channels for communicating and collaborating with one another were relatively unavailable. There was a significant need for a forum within which implementation researchers and stakeholders could learn from one another, refine approaches to science and practice, and develop an implementation research agenda using common measures, methods, and research principles to improve both the frequency and quality with which behavioral health treatment implementation is evaluated. SIRC’s membership growth is a testament to this identified need with more than 1000 members from 2011 to the present.ii SIRC’s primary objectives are to: (1) foster communication and collaboration across diverse groups, including implementation researchers, intermediariesi, as well as community stakeholders (SIRC uses the term “EBP champions” for these groups) – and to do so across multiple career levels (e.g., students, early career faculty, established investigators); and (2) enhance and disseminate rigorous measures and methodologies for implementing EBPs and evaluating EBP implementation efforts. These objectives are well aligned with Glasgow and colleagues’ [4] five core tenets deemed critical for advancing implementation science: collaboration, efficiency and speed, rigor and relevance, improved capacity, and cumulative knowledge. SIRC advances these objectives and tenets through in-person conferences, which bring together multidisciplinary implementation researchers and those implementing evidence-based behavioral health interventions in the community to share their work and create professional connections and collaborations

    Convalescent plasma in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19 (RECOVERY): a randomised controlled, open-label, platform trial

    Get PDF
    SummaryBackground Azithromycin has been proposed as a treatment for COVID-19 on the basis of its immunomodulatoryactions. We aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of azithromycin in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19.Methods In this randomised, controlled, open-label, adaptive platform trial (Randomised Evaluation of COVID-19Therapy [RECOVERY]), several possible treatments were compared with usual care in patients admitted to hospitalwith COVID-19 in the UK. The trial is underway at 176 hospitals in the UK. Eligible and consenting patients wererandomly allocated to either usual standard of care alone or usual standard of care plus azithromycin 500 mg once perday by mouth or intravenously for 10 days or until discharge (or allocation to one of the other RECOVERY treatmentgroups). Patients were assigned via web-based simple (unstratified) randomisation with allocation concealment andwere twice as likely to be randomly assigned to usual care than to any of the active treatment groups. Participants andlocal study staff were not masked to the allocated treatment, but all others involved in the trial were masked to theoutcome data during the trial. The primary outcome was 28-day all-cause mortality, assessed in the intention-to-treatpopulation. The trial is registered with ISRCTN, 50189673, and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04381936.Findings Between April 7 and Nov 27, 2020, of 16 442 patients enrolled in the RECOVERY trial, 9433 (57%) wereeligible and 7763 were included in the assessment of azithromycin. The mean age of these study participants was65·3 years (SD 15·7) and approximately a third were women (2944 [38%] of 7763). 2582 patients were randomlyallocated to receive azithromycin and 5181 patients were randomly allocated to usual care alone. Overall,561 (22%) patients allocated to azithromycin and 1162 (22%) patients allocated to usual care died within 28 days(rate ratio 0·97, 95% CI 0·87–1·07; p=0·50). No significant difference was seen in duration of hospital stay (median10 days [IQR 5 to >28] vs 11 days [5 to >28]) or the proportion of patients discharged from hospital alive within 28 days(rate ratio 1·04, 95% CI 0·98–1·10; p=0·19). Among those not on invasive mechanical ventilation at baseline, nosignificant difference was seen in the proportion meeting the composite endpoint of invasive mechanical ventilationor death (risk ratio 0·95, 95% CI 0·87–1·03; p=0·24).Interpretation In patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19, azithromycin did not improve survival or otherprespecified clinical outcomes. Azithromycin use in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19 should be restrictedto patients in whom there is a clear antimicrobial indication
    corecore