Forearm Rotation Range of Motion and Its Velocity in Eating With Chopsticks : a Comparison Among Positions of Dish

The purpose of this study was to determine range of motion of forearm rotation and its velocity in eating. Six young students (age:20.5±0.5 years [range:20-21], 2 men and 4 women) participated in this study. To measure three-dimensional motions, we used an electromagnetic tracking device system. The first sensor was attached to the dorsal/distal of forearm with sprint, and the second sensor was attached to the dorsal/medial ulna with elastic belt. The subjects ate pickles with chopsticks. At a wooden desk with 70cm height they sat on a height-adjustable chair, so their olecranon was as high as the desk top. Three positions of a dish were measured; A: at the distance of length of distal to elbow, B: at the distance of length of the upper extremity, and C: at a middle position between A and B. The results revealed that forearm rotation, range of motion and its velocity were significantly different among three conditions (one-way repeated-measure ANOVA)(p<0.05). Characteristically the motion velocity of B was lower than C, and A was lower than C (p<0.05). Findings suggest that 1) limited forearm range of motion would decrease a burden of forearm by setting a dish at B or C than A, 2) the rotation (maximal pronation and supination: 11 and 49 degrees, respectively) was similar, to a fork (maximal pronation and supination: 10 and 51 degrees, respectively), 3) C may be efficiently operated, and 4) the system may be instructed as a good equipment for eating

Code status documentation at admission in COVID-19 patients: a descriptive cohort study

Objectives The COVID-19 pandemic pressurised healthcare with increased shortage of care. This resulted in an increase of awareness for code status documentation (ie, whether limitations to specific life-sustaining treatments are in place), both in the medical field and in public media. However, it is unknown whether the increased awareness changed the prevalence and content of code status documentation for COVID-19 patients. We aim to describe differences in code status documentation between infectious patients before the pandemic and COVID-19 patients. Setting University Medical Centre of Utrecht, a tertiary care teaching academic hospital in the Netherlands. Participants A total of 1715 patients were included, 129 in the COVID-19 cohort (a cohort of COVID-19 patients, admitted from March 2020 to June 2020) and 1586 in the pre-COVID-19 cohort (a cohort of patients with (suspected) infections admitted between September 2016 to September 2018). Primary and secondary outcome measures We described frequency of code status documentation, frequency of discussion of this code status with patient and/or family, and content of code status. Results Frequencies of code status documentation (69.8% vs 72.7%, respectively) and discussion (75.6% vs 73.3%, respectively) were similar in both cohorts. More patients in the COVID-19 cohort than in the before COVID-19 cohort had any treatment limitation as opposed to full code (40% vs 25%). Within the treatment limitations, 'no intensive care admission' (81% vs 51%) and 'no intubation' (69% vs 40%) were more frequently documented in the COVID-19 cohort. A smaller difference was seen in 'other limitation' (17% vs 9%), while 'no resuscitation' (96% vs 92%) was comparable between both periods. Conclusion We observed no difference in the frequency of code status documentation or discussion in COVID-19 patients opposed to a pre-COVID-19 cohort. However, treatment limitations were more prevalent in patients with COVID-19, especially 'no intubation' and 'no intensive care admission'.Pathophysiology, epidemiology and therapy of agein

Dosage reduction of low weight heparin in patients with renal dysfunction: effects on anti-Xa levels and clinical outcomes

BackgroundTo prevent bio-accumulation of low molecular weight heparins (LMWHs) in patients with decreased kidney function, dosage reduction and anti-Xa monitoring has been suggested. The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of pre-emptive dosage reduction of LMWH on anti-Xa levels. Furthermore, we investigated the association between anti-Xa levels and bleeding, thrombotic events and mortality.MethodsIn this single center study, we followed 499 patients with decreased renal function in whom anti-Xa levels were measured. We observed how many patients had anti-Xa levels that fell within the reference range, with a standard protocol of a pre-emptive dosage reduction of LMWH (25% reduction in patients with an estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) between 30 and 60 ml/min/1.73m(2) and a reduction of 50% in patients with an eGFR below the 30 ml/min/1.73m(2)). Furthermore, Cox proportional hazard analyses were used to estimate hazard ratios to investigate the association between anti-Xa levels and major bleeding, thrombotic events and mortality within three months of follow-up.ResultsIn a cohort of 499 patients (445 dalteparin and 54 nadroparin users), a pre-emptive dosage reduction of LMWH led to adequate levels of anti-Xa in only 19% of the patients (12% for the dalteparin users and 50% for nadroparin users). We did not find an association between anti-Xa levels and bleeding, thrombosis or mortality.ConclusionPre-emptive dosage reduction of LMWH leads to low anti-Xa levels in a large proportion, but this was not associated with bleeding, thrombosis or mortality.Thrombosis and Hemostasi

Simplified diagnostic management of suspected pulmonary embolism (the YEARS study): a prospective, multicentre, cohort study

Thrombosis and Hemostasi