40 research outputs found

    Sq and EEJ—A Review on the Daily Variation of the Geomagnetic Field Caused by Ionospheric Dynamo Currents

    Full text link

    The Cholecystectomy As A Day Case (CAAD) Score: A Validated Score of Preoperative Predictors of Successful Day-Case Cholecystectomy Using the CholeS Data Set

    Get PDF
    Background Day-case surgery is associated with significant patient and cost benefits. However, only 43% of cholecystectomy patients are discharged home the same day. One hypothesis is day-case cholecystectomy rates, defined as patients discharged the same day as their operation, may be improved by better assessment of patients using standard preoperative variables. Methods Data were extracted from a prospectively collected data set of cholecystectomy patients from 166 UK and Irish hospitals (CholeS). Cholecystectomies performed as elective procedures were divided into main (75%) and validation (25%) data sets. Preoperative predictors were identified, and a risk score of failed day case was devised using multivariate logistic regression. Receiver operating curve analysis was used to validate the score in the validation data set. Results Of the 7426 elective cholecystectomies performed, 49% of these were discharged home the same day. Same-day discharge following cholecystectomy was less likely with older patients (OR 0.18, 95% CI 0.15–0.23), higher ASA scores (OR 0.19, 95% CI 0.15–0.23), complicated cholelithiasis (OR 0.38, 95% CI 0.31 to 0.48), male gender (OR 0.66, 95% CI 0.58–0.74), previous acute gallstone-related admissions (OR 0.54, 95% CI 0.48–0.60) and preoperative endoscopic intervention (OR 0.40, 95% CI 0.34–0.47). The CAAD score was developed using these variables. When applied to the validation subgroup, a CAAD score of ≤5 was associated with 80.8% successful day-case cholecystectomy compared with 19.2% associated with a CAAD score >5 (p < 0.001). Conclusions The CAAD score which utilises data readily available from clinic letters and electronic sources can predict same-day discharges following cholecystectomy

    Sleep Apnea Multilevel Surgery (SAMS) trial protocol: a multicenter randomized clinical trial of upper airway surgery for patients with obstructive sleep apnea who have failed continuous positive airway pressure

    No full text
    Study Objectives: Obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) is a serious and costly public health problem. The main medical treatment, continuous positive airway pressure, is efficacious when used, but poorly tolerated in up to 50% of patients. Upper airway reconstructive surgery is available when medical treatments fail but randomized trial evidence supporting its use is limited. This protocol details a randomized controlled trial designed to assess the clinical effectiveness, safety, and cost-effectiveness of a multilevel upper airway surgical procedure for OSA. Methods: A prospective, parallel-group, open label, randomized, controlled, multicenter clinical trial in adults with moderate or severe OSA who have failed or refused medical therapies. Six clinical sites in Australia randomly allocated participants in a 1:1 ratio to receive either an upper airway surgical procedure consisting of a modified uvulopalatopharyngoplasty and minimally invasive tongue volume reduction, or to continue with ongoing medical management, and followed them for 6 months. Results: Primary outcomes: difference between groups in baseline-adjusted 6 month OSA severity (apnea-hypopnea index) and subjective sleepiness (Epworth Sleepiness Scale). Secondary outcomes: other OSA symptoms (e.g. snoring and objective sleepiness), other polysomnography parameters (e.g. arousal index and 4% oxygen desaturation index), quality of life, 24 hr ambulatory blood pressure, adverse events, and adherence to ongoing medical therapies (medical group). Conclusions: The Sleep Apnea Multilevel Surgery (SAMS) trial is of global public health importance for testing the effectiveness and safety of a multilevel surgical procedure for patients with OSA who have failed medical treatment.A. Simon Carney, Nick A. Antic, Peter G. Catcheside, Ching Li Chai-Coetzer, Peter A. Cistulli, Billingsley Kaambwa, Stuart G. MacKay, Alison J. Pinczel, Edward M. Weaver, Richard J. Woodman, Charmaine M. Woods, and R. Doug McEvo
    corecore