The Use of Clinical Information Systems to Optimize the Care of Type II Diabetics in an Ambulatory Setting

Background In the search to optimize care of type II diabetics, computers have become an integral part of patient care. Clinical information systems are computerized systems that are increasingly being used in the medical field. Objective To examine the effectiveness of computerized clinical information systems on improving both physician management processes and patient outcomes in the management of type II DM compared to usual care with no system. Research Design and Methods This is a systematic review of Randomized Controlled Trials (RCT), Clinical Controlled Trials (CCT), and Controlled Before and After Studies (CBA) evaluating the effectiveness of clinical information systems used by health professionals in optimizing care for type II diabetics. The MEDLINE database (1994-2004) was searched using keywords: type II diabetes and primary care, community care, or outpatient care. All articles that contained studies involving interventions in outpatient settings, directed at providers, and involving one component of computerized clinical information systems (diabetes registry, point-of-care reminder, feedback) were included in the review. Results A total of 6 studies met the inclusion criteria. Studies were RCTs, CCTs, or CBAs. All studies involved diabetes registries, 5 included physician feedback, and two involved computerized reminders. The quality of the studies ranged from good to poor, with only one study receiving a poor quality assessment. The clinical information systems showed marked improvement in the process of care for diabetic patients by providers. Yet, there was much less of a positive effect on actual patient outcomes. Conclusions Professional interventions that include clinical information systems will improve the process of care for diabetic patients. The effect of clinical information systems on patient outcomes is minimal. Longer studies in the future may reveal better patient outcomes as well as prolonged provider adherence to protocols.Master of Public Healt

Mutations in HYAL2, Encoding Hyaluronidase 2, Cause a Syndrome of Orofacial Clefting and Cor Triatriatum Sinister in Humans and Mice.

Orofacial clefting is amongst the most common of birth defects, with both genetic and environmental components. Although numerous studies have been undertaken to investigate the complexities of the genetic etiology of this heterogeneous condition, this factor remains incompletely understood. Here, we describe mutations in the HYAL2 gene as a cause of syndromic orofacial clefting. HYAL2, encoding hyaluronidase 2, degrades extracellular hyaluronan, a critical component of the developing heart and palatal shelf matrix. Transfection assays demonstrated that the gene mutations destabilize the molecule, dramatically reducing HYAL2 protein levels. Consistent with the clinical presentation in affected individuals, investigations of Hyal2-/- mice revealed craniofacial abnormalities, including submucosal cleft palate. In addition, cor triatriatum sinister and hearing loss, identified in a proportion of Hyal2-/- mice, were also found as incompletely penetrant features in affected humans. Taken together our findings identify a new genetic cause of orofacial clefting in humans and mice, and define the first molecular cause of human cor triatriatum sinister, illustrating the fundamental importance of HYAL2 and hyaluronan turnover for normal human and mouse development

Comparison of Bolus Dosing of Methohexital and Propofol in Elective Direct Current Cardioversion

Background Methohexital and propofol can both be used as sedation for direct current cardioversion (DCCV). However, there are limited data comparing these medications in this setting. We hypothesized that patients receiving methohexital for elective DCCV would be sedated more quickly, recover from sedation faster, and experience less adverse effects. Methods and Results This was a prospective, blinded randomized controlled trial conducted at a single academic medical center. Eligible participants were randomly assigned to receive either methohexital (0.5 mg/kg) or propofol (0.8 mg/kg) as a bolus for elective DCCV. The times from bolus of the medication to achieving a Ramsay Sedation Scale score of 5 to 6, first shock, eyes opening on command, and when the patient could state their age and name were obtained. The need for additional medication dosing, airway intervention, vital signs, and medication side effects were also recorded. Seventy patients who were randomized to receive methohexital (n=37) or propofol (n=33) were included for analysis. The average doses of methohexital and propofol were 0.51 mg/kg and 0.84 mg/kg, respectively. There were no significant differences between methohexital and propofol in the time from end of injection to loss of conscious (1.4±1.8 versus 1.1±0.5 minutes; P=0.33) or the time to first shock (1.7±1.9 versus 1.4±0.5 minutes; P=0.31). Time intervals were significantly lower for methohexital compared with propofol in the time to eyes opening on command (5.1±2.5 versus 7.8±3.7 minutes; P=0.0005) as well as at the time to the ability to answer simple questions of age and name (6.0±2.6 versus 8.6±4.0 minutes; P=0.001). The methohexital group experienced less hypotension (8.1% versus 42.4%; P<0.001) and less hypoxemia (0.0% versus 15.2%; P=0.005), had lower need for jaw thrust/chin lift (16.2% versus 42.4%; P=0.015), and had less pain on injection compared with propofol using the visual analog scale (7.2±9.7 versus 22.4±28.1; P=0.003). Conclusions In this model of fixed bolus dosing, methohexital was associated with faster recovery, more stable hemodynamics, and less hypoxemia after elective DCCV compared with propofol. It can be considered as a preferred agent for sedation for DCCV. Registration URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct; Unique identifier: NCT04187196

Safety and feasibility of peri-device leakage closure after LAAO: an international, multicentre collaborative study

Background: Residual peri-device leakage (PDL) is frequent after left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO). Little is known about management strategies, procedural aspects and outcomes of interventional PDL closure. Aims: The aim of this study was to assess the safety and feasibility of PDL closure after LAAO. Methods: Fifteen centres contributed data on baseline characteristics, in-hospital and follow-up outcomes of patients who underwent PDL closure after LAAO. Outcomes of interest included acute success and complication rates and long-term efficacy of the procedure. Results: A total of 95 patients were included and a cumulative number of 104 leaks were closed. The majority of PDLs were detected within 90 days (range 41-231). Detachable coils were the most frequent approach (42.3%), followed by the use of the AMPLATZER Vascular Plug II (29.8%) and the AMPLATZER Duct Occluder II (17.3%). Technical success was 100% with 94.2% of devices placed successfully within the first attempt. There were no major complications requiring surgical or transcatheter interventions. During follow-up (96 days [range 49-526]), persistent leaks were found in 18 patients (18.9%), yielding a functional success rate of 82.7%, although PDLs were significantly reduced in size (pre-leak sizemax: 6.1±3.6 mm vs post-leak sizemax: 2.5±1.3 mm, p5 mm. Major adverse events during follow-up occurred in 5 patients (2 ischaemic strokes, 2 intracranial haemorrhages, and 1 major gastrointestinal bleeding). Conclusions: Several interventional techniques have become available to achieve PDL closure. They are associated with high technical and functional success and low complication rates