Risk factors for chest infection in acute stroke: a prospective cohort study

<p><b>Background and Purpose:</b> Pneumonia is a major cause of morbidity and mortality after stroke. We aimed to determine key characteristics that would allow prediction of those patients who are at highest risk for poststroke pneumonia.</p> <p><b>Methods:</b> We studied a series of consecutive patients with acute stroke who were admitted to hospital. Detailed evaluation included the modified National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale; the Abbreviated Mental Test; and measures of swallow, respiratory, and oral health status. Pneumonia was diagnosed by set criteria. Patients were followed up at 3 months after stroke.</p> <p><b>Results:</b> We studied 412 patients, 391 (94.9%) with ischemic stroke and 21 (5.1%) with hemorrhagic stroke; 78 (18.9%) met the study criteria for pneumonia. Subjects who developed pneumonia were older (mean±SD age, 75.9±11.4 vs 64.9±13.9 years), had higher modified National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale scores, a history of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, lower Abbreviated Mental Test scores, and a higher oral cavity score, and a greater proportion tested positive for bacterial cultures from oral swabs. In binary logistic-regression analysis, independent predictors (P<0.05) of pneumonia were age >65 years, dysarthria or no speech due to aphasia, a modified Rankin Scale score ≥4, an Abbreviated Mental Test score <8, and failure on the water swallow test. The presence of 2 or more of these risk factors carried 90.9% sensitivity and 75.6% specificity for the development of pneumonia.</p> <p><b>Conclusions:</b> Pneumonia after stroke is associated with older age, dysarthria/no speech due to aphasia, severity of poststroke disability, cognitive impairment, and an abnormal water swallow test result. Simple assessment of these variables could be used to identify patients at high risk of developing pneumonia after stroke.</p&gt

Recent data from radiofrequency denervation trials further emphasise that treating nociception is not the same as treating pain

Chronic low back pain is a condition that current health care provision is failing and we suggest that recent evidence from the interventional pain medicine field points to what these failings are. Radiofrequency denervation is performed on the presumption that denervation of a peripheral structure will eradicate or significantly reduce pain and improve function. The results of six moderately sized and well conducted clinical trials that demonstrate no efficacy and no real-world effectiveness for denervation procedures are a stark illustration of how flawed this approach is. We suggest that these results represent a line-in-the-sand for back pain research and management. This is a clear signal to finally abandon research agendas and management paradigms that focus primarily on nociception and instead, truly embrace the biopsychosocial model of pain

A study of blood contamination of Siqveland matrix bands

AIMS To use a sensitive forensic test to measure blood contamination of used Siqveland matrix bands following routine cleaning and sterilisation procedures in general dental practice. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Sixteen general dental practices in the West of Scotland participated. Details of instrument cleaning procedures were recorded for each practice. A total of 133 Siqveland matrix bands were recovered following cleaning and sterilisation and were examined for residual blood contamination by the Kastle-Meyer test, a well-recognised forensic technique. RESULTS: Ultrasonic baths were used for the cleaning of 62 (47%) bands and retainers and the remainder (53%) were hand scrubbed prior to autoclaving. Overall, 21% of the matrix bands and 19% of the retainers gave a positive Kastle-Meyer test, indicative of residual blood contamination, following cleaning and sterilisation. In relation to cleaning method, 34% of hand-scrubbed bands and 32% of hand-scrubbed retainers were positive for residual blood by the Kastle-Meyer test compared with 6% and 3% respectively of ultrasonically cleaned bands and retainers (P less than 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: If Siqveland matrix bands are re-processed in the assembled state, then adequate pre-sterilisation cleaning cannot be achieved reliably. Ultrasonic baths are significantly more effective than hand cleaning for these items of equipment

Reviews may overestimate the effectiveness of medicines for back pain: Systematic review and meta-analysis

Objective: Systematic-reviews of analgesics for low back pain generally include published data only. Obtaining data from unpublished trials is potentially important because they may impact effect sizes in meta-analyses. We determined whether including unpublished data from trial registries changes the effect sizes in meta-analyses of analgesics for low back pain. Study Design and Setting: Trial registries were searched for unpublished data that conformed to the inclusion criteria of n=5 individual source systematic-reviews. We reproduced the meta-analyses using data available from the original reviews then re-ran the same analyses with the addition of new unpublished data. Results: Sixteen completed, unpublished, trials were eligible for inclusion in four of the source reviews. Data were available for five trials. We updated the analyses for two of the source reviews. The addition of data from two trials reduced the effect size of muscle relaxants, compared to sham, for recent-onset low back pain from -21.71 (95%CI -28.23 to -15.19) to -2.34 (95%CI -3.34 to -1.34) on a 0-100 scale for pain intensity. The addition of data from three trials (one enriched design) reduced the effect size of opioid analgesics, compared to sham, for chronic low back pain from -10.10 (95%CI -12.81 to -7.39) to -9.31 (95%CI -11.51 to -7.11). The effect reduced in the subgroup of enriched design studies, from -12.40 (95%CI -16.90 to -7.91) to 11.34 (95%CI -15.36 to -7.32), and in the subgroup of non-enriched design studies; from -7.27 (95%CI -9.97 to -4.57) to -7.19 (95%CI -9.24 to -5.14). Conclusion: Systematic-reviews should include reports of unpublished trials. The result for muscle relaxants conflicts with the conclusion of the published review and recent international guidelines. Adding unpublished data strengthens the evidence that opioid analgesics have small effects on persistent low back pain and more clearly suggests these effects may not be clinically meaningful

Systematic reviews that include only published data may overestimate the effectiveness of analgesic medicines for low back pain: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Objective: Systematic reviews of analgesics for low back pain generally include published data only. Obtaining data from unpublished trials is potentially important because they may impact effect sizes in meta-analyses. We determined whether including unpublished data from trial registries changes the effect sizes in meta-analyses of analgesics for low back pain. Study Design and Setting: Trial registries were searched for unpublished data that conformed to the inclusion criteria of n = 5 individual source systematic reviews. We reproduced the meta-analyses using data available from the original reviews and then reran the same analyses with the addition of new unpublished data. Results: Sixteen completed, unpublished, trials were eligible for inclusion in four of the source reviews. Data were available for five trials. We updated the analyses for two of the source reviews. The addition of data from two trials reduced the effect size of muscle relaxants, compared with sham, for recent-onset low back pain from −21.71 (95% CI: −28.23 to −15.19) to −2.34 (95% CI: −3.34 to −1.34) on a 0–100 scale for pain intensity. The addition of data from three trials (one enriched design) reduced the effect size of opioid analgesics, compared with sham, for chronic low back pain from −10.10 (95% CI: −12.81 to −7.39) to −9.31 (95% CI: −11.51 to −7.11). The effect reduced in the subgroup of enriched design studies, from −12.40 (95% CI: −16.90 to −7.91) to −11.34 (95% CI: −15.36 to −7.32), and in the subgroup of nonenriched design studies, from −7.27 (95% CI: −9.97 to −4.57) to −7.19 (95% CI: −9.24 to −5.14). Conclusion: Systematic reviews should include reports of unpublished trials. The result for muscle relaxants conflicts with the conclusion of the published review and recent international guidelines. Adding unpublished data strengthens the evidence that opioid analgesics have small effects on persistent low back pain and more clearly suggests these effects may not be clinically meaningful

A systematic review highlights the need to improve the quality and applicability of trials of physical therapy interventions for low back pain

Objectives: The objective of this study was to review and assess the methodological quality of randomized controlled trials that test physical therapy interventions for low back pain. Study Design and Setting: This is a systematic review of trials of physical therapy interventions to prevent or treat low back pain (of any duration or type) in participants of any age indexed on the Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro). Existing PEDro scale ratings were used to evaluate methodological quality. Results: This review identified 2,215 trials. The majority of trials were for adults (n = 2136, 96.4%), low back pain without specific etiology (n = 1,863, 84.1%), and chronic duration (n = 947, 42.8%). The quality of trials improved over time; however, most were at risk of bias. Less than half of the trials concealed allocation to intervention (n = 813, 36.7%), used intention-to-treat principles (n = 778, 35.1%), and blinded assessors (n = 810, 36.6%), participants (n = 174, 7.9%), and therapists (n = 39, 1.8%). These findings did not vary by the type of therapy. Conclusion: Most trials that test physical therapy interventions for low back pain have methodological limitations that could bias treatment effect estimates. Greater attention to methodological features, such as allocation concealment and the reporting of intention-to-treat effects, would improve the quality of trials testing physical therapy interventions for low back pain

Dental treatment and risk of variant CJD - a case control study

Abstract Objective: Knowledge of risk factors for variant CJD (vCJD) remains limited, but transmission of prion proteins via re-useable medical devices, including dental instruments, or enhanced susceptibility following trauma to the oral cavity is a concern. This study aimed to identify whether previous dental treatment is a risk factor for development of vCJD. Design: Case control study Methods: Risk factor questionnaires completed by interview with relatives of 130 vCJD patients and with relatives of 66 community and 53 hospital controls were examined by a dental surgeon. Responses regarding dental treatments were analysed. Results: We did not find a statistically significant excess of risk of vCJD associated with dental treatments with the exception of extractions in an unmatched analysis of vCJD cases with community controls (p=0.02). However, this result may be explained by multiple testing. Conclusions: This is the first published study to date to examine potential links between vCJD and dental treatment. There was no convincing evidence found of an increased risk of variant CJD associated with reported dental treatment. However, the power of the study is restricted by the number of vCJD cases to date and does not preclude the possibility that some cases have resulted from secondary transmission via dental procedures. Due to the limitations of the data available, more detailed analyses of dental records are required to fully exclude the possibility of transmission via dental treatment

Cross infection control measures and the treatment of patients at risk of Creutzfeldt Jakob disease in UK general dental practice

AIMS: To determine the suitability of key infection control measures currently employed in UK dental practice for delivery of dental care to patients at risk of prion diseases. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Subjects: Five hundred dental surgeons currently registered with the General Dental Council of the UK. Data collection: Structured postal questionnaire. Analysis: Frequencies, cross-tabulations and chi-squared analysis. RESULTS: The valid response rate to the questionnaire was 69%. 33% of practices had no policy on general disinfection and sterilisation procedures. Only 10 of the 327 responding practices (3%) possessed a vacuum autoclave. 49% of dentists reported using the BDA medical history form but less than 25% asked the specific questions recommended by the BDA to identify patients at risk of iatrogenic or familial CJD. However, 63% of practitioners would refer such patients, if identified, to a secondary care facility. Of the 107 practitioners who were prepared to provide dental treatment, 75 (70%) would do so using routine infection control procedures. CONCLUSIONS: Most of the dental practices surveyed were not actively seeking to identify patients at risk of prion diseases. In many cases, recommended procedures for providing safe dental care for such patients were not in place

Efficacy, acceptability, and safety of muscle relaxants for adults with non-specific low back pain : systematic review and meta-analysis

Abstract: Objective To investigate the efficacy, acceptability, and safety of muscle relaxants for low back pain. Design: Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. Data sources: Medline, Embase, CINAHL, CENTRAL, ClinicalTrials.gov, clinicialtrialsregister.eu, and WHO ICTRP from inception to 23 February 2021. Eligibility criteria for study selection: Randomised controlled trials of muscle relaxants compared with placebo, usual care, waiting list, or no treatment in adults (≥18 years) reporting non-specific low back pain. Data extraction and synthesis: Two reviewers independently identified studies, extracted data, and assessed the risk of bias and certainty of the evidence using the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool and Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations, respectively. Random effects meta-analytical models through restricted maximum likelihood estimation were used to estimate pooled effects and corresponding 95% confidence intervals. Outcomes included pain intensity (measured on a 0-100 point scale), disability (0-100 point scale), acceptability (discontinuation of the drug for any reason during treatment), and safety (adverse events, serious adverse events, and number of participants who withdrew from the trial because of an adverse event). Results: 49 trials were included in the review, of which 31, sampling 6505 participants, were quantitatively analysed. For acute low back pain, very low certainty evidence showed that at two weeks or less non-benzodiazepine antispasmodics were associated with a reduction in pain intensity compared with control (mean difference -7.7, 95% confidence interval-12.1 to-3.3) but not a reduction in disability (-3.3, -7.3 to 0.7). Low and very low certainty evidence showed that non-benzodiazepine antispasmodics might increase the risk of an adverse event (relative risk 1.6, 1.2 to 2.0) and might have little to no effect on acceptability (0.8, 0.6 to 1.1) compared with control for acute low back pain, respectively. The number of trials investigating other muscle relaxants and different durations of low back pain were small and the certainty of evidence was reduced because most trials were at high risk of bias. Conclusions: Considerable uncertainty exists about the clinical efficacy and safety of muscle relaxants. Very low and low certainty evidence shows that non-benzodiazepine antispasmodics might provide small but not clinically important reductions in pain intensity at or before two weeks and might increase the risk of an adverse event in acute low back pain, respectively. Large, high quality, placebo controlled trials are urgently needed to resolve uncertainty. Systematic review registration PROSPERO CRD42019126820 and Open Science Framework https://osf.io/mu2f5/

Paracetamol, NSAIDS and opioid analgesics for chronic low back pain: A network meta-analysis (Protocol)

This is a protocol for a Cochrane Review (Intervention). The objectives are as follows: To answer the clinical question: ‘what analgesic medicine shall I prescribe this patient with chronic low back pain to reduce their pain?’. The objectives are to determine the analgesic effects, safety, effect on function, and relative rank according to analgesic effect, safety and effect on function of a single course of opioid analgesics, NSAIDs or paracetamol or combinations of these medicines