Modelo para el comportamiento de planificación de los cuidados a largo plazo

Propósito: Explicar el contexto dinámico de la Planificación del Cuidado a Largo Plazo (LTCP) previos a la crisis, a través del desarrollo y la prueba de un modelo derivado del trabajo de Organización Sistémica de Friedemann, que es consistente con la literatura. Adicionalmente, probar las concepciones teóricas acerca de personas blancas, hispanas y no hispanas y personas negras no hispanas entre los 55 y los 70 años de edad.Diseño y métodos: Dos grupos de enfoque fueron guiados a validar los constructos propuestos y los elementos de la encuesta desarrollados para medirlos. Subsecuentemente, la encuesta fue aplicada en entrevistas telefónicas con 153 residentes de Miami-Dade, Florida. Las respuestas fueron sometidas a análisis confirmatorios y explo- *El soporte para esta investigación se recibió de Grant IR03AG20326 del National Institute on Aging (Instituto Nacional sobre el Envejecimiento), Washintong D.C., E.E.U.U. ratorios para desarrollar y probar el modelo. Las diferencias demográficas y étnicas fueron probadas mediante el uso de procedimientos de análisis de varianza y regresión.Resultados: El análisis confirmó el estilo de respuesta de control dentro de tres ámbitos de planeación: área financiera, bienestar-habilidad funcional y socio-ambiental. La respuesta de aceptación pareció significar una actitud que se traduce en aceptación hacia la ayuda en los tres ámbitos. Fueron evidentes diferencias étnicas pero no de género. Conclusiones: Los resultados proporcionaron un modelo de LTCP para futuras pruebas. Entender el proceso de LTCP formará las bases para intervenciones educativas

Interventions for treating anxiety after stroke

Background: Approximately 20% of stroke patients experience anxiety at some point after stroke. Objectives: To determine if any treatment for anxiety after stroke decreases the proportion of patients with anxiety disorders or symptoms, and to determine the effect of treatment on quality of life, disability, depression, social participation, risk of death or caregiver burden. Search methods: We searched the trials register of the Cochrane Stroke Group (October 2010), CENTRAL (The Cochrane Library 2010, Issue 4), MEDLINE (1950 to October 2010), EMBASE (1947 to October 2010), PsycINFO (1806 to October 2010), Allied and Complementary Medicine database (AMED) (1985 to October 2010), Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health (CINAHL) (1982 to October 2010), Proquest Digital Dissertations (1861 to October 2010), and Psychological Database for Brain Impairment Treatment Efficacy (PsycBITE) (2004 to October 2010). In an effort to identify further published, unpublished and ongoing trials, we searched trial registries and major international stroke conference proceedings, scanned reference lists, and contacted select individuals known to the review team who are actively involved in psychological aspects of stroke research, and the Association of the British Pharmaceutical Industry. Selection criteria: Two review authors independently screened and selected titles and abstracts for inclusion in the review. Randomised trials of any intervention in patients with stroke where the treatment of anxiety was an outcome were eligible. Data collection and analysis: Two review authors independently extracted data for analysis. We performed a narrative review. A meta-analysis was planned but not carried out as studies were not of sufficient quality to warrant doing so. Main results: We included two trials (three interventions) involving 175 participants with co-morbid anxiety and depression in the review. Both trials used the Hamilton Anxiety Scale (HAM-A) to assess anxiety, and neither included a placebo control group. One trial randomised 81 patients to paroxetine, paroxetine plus psychotherapy or standard care. Mean level of anxiety severity scores were 58% and 71% lower in the paroxetine, and paroxetine plus psychotherapy groups respectively compared with those in standard care at follow-up (P < 0.01). The second trial randomised 94 stroke patients, also with co-morbid anxiety and depression, to receive buspirone hydrochloride or standard care. At follow-up, the mean level of anxiety was significantly lower for those receiving buspirone relative to controls (P < 0.01). Half of the participants receiving paroxetine experienced adverse events that included nausea, vomiting or dizziness; however, only 14% of those receiving buspirone experienced nausea or palpitations. No information was provided about the duration of symptoms associated with adverse events. Authors' conclusions: There is insufficient evidence to guide the treatment of anxiety after stroke. The data available suggest that pharmaceutical therapy (paroxetine and buspirone) may be effective in reducing anxiety symptoms in stroke patients with co-morbid anxiety and depression. No information was available for stroke patients with anxiety only. Randomised placebo controlled trials are needed

Interventions for treating anxiety after stroke

Background Approximately 20% of stroke patients experience clinically significant levels of anxiety at some point after stroke. Physicians can treat these patients with antidepressants or other anxiety-reducing drugs, or both, or they can provide psychological therapy. This review looks at available evidence for these interventions. This is an update of the review first published in October 2011. Objectives The primary objective was to assess the effectiveness of pharmaceutical, psychological, complementary, or alternative therapeutic interventions in treating stroke patients with anxiety disorders or symptoms. The secondary objective was to identify whether any of these interventions for anxiety had an effect on quality of life, disability, depression, social participation, caregiver burden, or risk of death. Search methods We searched the trials register of the Cochrane Stroke Group (January 2017). We also searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; the Cochrane Library; 2017, Issue 1: searched January 2017); MEDLINE (1966 to January 2017) in Ovid; Embase (1980 to January 2017) in Ovid; the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL; 1937 to January 2017) in EBSCO; and PsycINFO (1800 to January 2017) in Ovid. We conducted backward citation searches of reviews identified through database searches and forward citation searches of included studies. We contacted researchers known to be involved in related trials, and we searched clinical trials registers for ongoing studies. Selection criteria We included randomised trials including participants with a diagnosis of both stroke and anxiety for which treatment was intended to reduce anxiety. Two review authors independently screened and selected titles and abstracts for inclusion. Data collection and analysis Two review authors independently extracted data and assessed risk of bias. We performed a narrative review. We planned to do a meta-analysis but were unable to do so as included studies were not sufficiently comparable. Main results We included three trials (four interventions) involving 196 participants with stroke and co-morbid anxiety. One trial (described as a ’pilot study’) randomised 21 community-dwelling stroke survivors to four-week use of a relaxation CD or to wait list control. This trial assessed anxiety using the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale and reported a reduction in anxiety at three months among participants who had used the relaxation CD (mean (standard deviation (SD) 6.9 (± 4.9) and 11.0 (± 3.9)), Cohen’s d = 0.926, P value = 0.001; 19 participants analysed). The second trial randomised 81 participants with co-morbid anxiety and depression to paroxetine, paroxetine plus psychotherapy, or standard care. Mean levels of anxiety severity scores based on the Hamilton Anxiety Scale (HAM-A) at follow-up were 5.4 (SD ± 1.7), 3.8 (SD ± 1.8), and 12.8 (SD ± 1.9), respectively (P value < 0.01). The third trial randomised 94 stroke patients, also with co-morbid anxiety and depression, to receive buspirone hydrochloride or standard care. At follow-up, the mean levels of anxiety based on the HAM-A were 6.5 (SD± 3.1) and 12.6 (SD± 3.4) in the two groups, respectively, which represents a significant difference (P value < 0.01). Half of the participants receiving paroxetine experienced adverse events that included nausea, vomiting, or dizziness; however, only 14% of those receiving buspirone experienced nausea or palpitations. Trial authors provided no information about the duration of symptoms associated with adverse events. The trial of relaxation therapy reported no adverse events. The quality of the evidence was very low. Each study included a small number of participants, particularly the study of relaxation therapy. Studies of pharmacological agents presented details too limited to allow judgement of selection, performance, and detection bias and lack of placebo treatment in control groups. Although the study of relaxation therapy had allocated participants to treatment using an adequate method of randomisation, study recruitment methods might have introduced bias, and drop-outs in the intervention group may have influenced results. Authors’ conclusions Evidence is insufficient to guide the treatment of anxiety after stroke. Further well-conducted randomised controlled trials (using placebo or attention controls) are required to assess pharmacological agents and psychological therapies

A cluster randomised controlled trial of an occupational therapy intervention for residents with stroke living in UK care homes (OTCH): study protocol.

BACKGROUND: The occupational therapy (OT) in care homes study (OTCH) aims to investigate the effect of a targeted course of individual OT (with task training, provision of adaptive equipment, minor environmental adaptations and staff education) for stroke survivors living in care homes, compared to usual care. METHODS/DESIGN: A cluster randomised controlled trial of United Kingdom (UK) care homes (n = 90) with residents (n = 900) who have suffered a stroke or transient ischaemic attack (TIA), and who are not receiving end-of-life care. Homes will be stratified by centre and by type of care provided and randomised (50:50) using computer generated blocked randomisation within strata to receive either the OT intervention (3 months intervention from an occupational therapist) or control (usual care). Staff training on facilitating independence and mobility and the use of adaptive equipment, will be delivered to every home, with control homes receiving this after the 12 month follow-up.Allocation will be concealed from the independent assessors, but the treating therapists, and residents will not be masked to the intervention. Measurements are taken at baseline prior to randomisation and at 3, 6 and 12 months post randomisation. The primary outcome measure is independence in self-care activities of daily living (Barthel Activities of Daily Living Index). Secondary outcome measures are mobility (Rivermead Mobility Index), mood (Geriatric Depression Scale), preference based quality of life measured from EQ-5D and costs associated with each intervention group. Quality adjusted life years (QALYs) will be derived based on the EQ-5D scores. Cost effectiveness analysis will be estimated and measured by incremental cost effectiveness ratio. Adverse events will be recorded. DISCUSSION: This study will be the largest cluster randomised controlled trial of OT in care homes to date and will clarify the currently inconclusive literature on the efficacy of OT for stroke and TIA survivors residing in care homes. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN00757750.RIGHTS : This article is licensed under the BioMed Central licence at http://www.biomedcentral.com/about/license which is similar to the 'Creative Commons Attribution Licence'. In brief you may : copy, distribute, and display the work; make derivative works; or make commercial use of the work - under the following conditions: the original author must be given credit; for any reuse or distribution, it must be made clear to others what the license terms of this work are

BMQ

BMQ: Boston Medical Quarterly was published from 1950-1966 by the Boston University School of Medicine and the Massachusetts Memorial Hospitals

1936 The Freshman, vol. 3, no. 4

The Freshman was a weekly, student newsletter issued on Mondays throughout the academic year. The newsletter included calendar notices, coverage of campus social events, lectures, and athletic teams. The intent of the publication was to create unity, a sense of community, and class spirit among first year students

1936 The Freshman, vol. 3, no. 5

The Freshman was a weekly, student newsletter issued on Mondays throughout the academic year. The newsletter included calendar notices, coverage of campus social events, lectures, and athletic teams. The intent of the publication was to create unity, a sense of community, and class spirit among first year students. Included in this issue is an editorial about the impact of hunting and buck fever on women