Achievement of combined goals of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol and non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol with three different statins: Results from VOYAGER

AbstractBackgroundGuidelines suggest that the combination of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) and non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (non-HDL-C) is the most clinically relevant goal for lipid-lowering treatments.MethodsData from VOYAGER, an individual patient data meta-analysis including 32,258 patients from 37 clinical trials, was used to determine the percentage of patients reaching combined goals of LDL-C and non-HDL-C following treatment with simvastatin, atorvastatin, or rosuvastatin. Paired comparisons were made between each dose of rosuvastatin and the same or higher doses of simvastatin and atorvastatin.ResultsEach dose of rosuvastatin brought significantly more patients to the combined goal of LDL-C < 100 mg/dL and non-HDL-C < 130 mg/dL than the same or double dose of atorvastatin; atorvastatin 80 mg was significantly superior to rosuvastatin 10 mg (all p < 0.001). Each dose of rosuvastatin helped significantly more patients reach the combined goal than any dose of simvastatin (all p < 0.001), except for rosuvastatin 10 mg versus simvastatin 80 mg (non-significant). Also, each dose of rosuvastatin helped significantly more patients to reach the combined goal of LDL-C < 70 mg/dL and non-HDL-C < 100 mg/dL than the same or double dose of atorvastatin (all p < 0.001). Every dose of rosuvastatin was significantly superior to all doses of simvastatin (all p ≤ 0.020), except for rosuvastatin 10 mg versus simvastatin 40 mg and 80 mg (non-significant).ConclusionsPhysicians' choice of statin and dose is important in helping patients achieve the combined LDL-C and non-HDL-C goals recommended in established guidelines

Return to work after a workplace-oriented intervention for patients on sick-leave for burnout - a prospective controlled study

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>In the present study the effect of a workplace-oriented intervention for persons on long-term sick leave for clinical burnout, aimed at facilitating return to work (RTW) by job-person match through patient-supervisor communication, was evaluated. We hypothesised that the intervention group would show a more successful RTW than a control group.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>In a prospective controlled study, subjects were identified by the regional social insurance office 2-6 months after the first day on sick leave. The intervention group (n = 74) was compared to a control group who had declined participation, being matched by length of sick leave (n = 74). The RTW was followed up, using sick-listing register data, until 1.5 years after the time of intervention.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>There was a linear increase of RTW in the intervention group during the 1.5-year follow-up period, and 89% of subjects had returned to work to some extent at the end of the follow-up period. The increase in RTW in the control group came to a halt after six months, and only 73% had returned to work to some extent at the end of the 1.5-year follow-up.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>We conclude that the present study demonstrated an improvement of long-term RTW after a workplace-oriented intervention for patients on long-term sick leave due to burnout.</p> <p>Trial registration</p> <p>Current Controlled Trials NCT01039168.</p

Sleep and recovery in physicians on night call: a longitudinal field study

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>It is well known that physicians' night-call duty may cause impaired performance and adverse effects on subjective health, but there is limited knowledge about effects on sleep duration and recovery time. In recent years occupational stress and impaired well-being among anaesthesiologists have been frequently reported for in the scientific literature. Given their main focus on handling patients with life-threatening conditions, when on call, one might expect sleep and recovery to be negatively affected by work, especially in this specialist group. The aim of the present study was to examine whether a 16-hour night-call schedule allowed for sufficient recovery in anaesthesiologists compared with other physician specialists handling less life-threatening conditions, when on call.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Sleep, monitored by actigraphy and Karolinska Sleep Diary/Sleepiness Scale on one night after daytime work, one night call, the following first and second nights post-call, and a Saturday night, was compared between 15 anaesthesiologists and 17 paediatricians and ear, nose, and throat surgeons.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Recovery patterns over the days after night call did not differ between groups, but between days. Mean night sleep for all physicians was 3 hours when on call, 7 h both nights post-call and Saturday, and 6 h after daytime work (p < 0.001). Scores for mental fatigue and feeling well rested were poorer post-call, but returned to Sunday morning levels after two nights' sleep.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Despite considerable sleep loss during work on night call, and unexpectedly short sleep after ordinary day work, the physicians' self-reports indicate full recovery after two nights' sleep. We conclude that these 16-hour night duties were compatible with a short-term recovery in both physician groups, but the limited sleep duration in general still implies a long-term health concern. These results may contribute to the establishment of safe working hours for night-call duty in physicians and other health-care workers.</p

Are frail elderly patients treated in a CGA unit more satisfied with their hospital care than those treated in conventional acute medical care?

Objectives: Our aim was to study whether the acute care of frail elderly patients directly admitted to a comprehensive geriatric assessment (CGA) unit is superior to the care in a conventional acute medical care unit in terms of patient satisfaction. Design: TREEE (Is the TReatment of frail Elderly patients Effective in an Elderly care unit?) is a clinical, prospective, controlled, one-center intervention trial comparing acute treatment in CGA units and in conventional wards. Setting: This study was conducted in the NAL-Uddevalla county hospital in western Sweden. Participants: In this follow-up to the TREEE study, 229 frail patients, aged amp;gt;= 75 years, in need of acute in-hospital treatment, were eligible. Of these patients, 139 patients were included in the analysis, 72 allocated to the CGA unit group and 67 to the conventional care group. Mean age was 85 years and 65% were female. Intervention: Direct admittance to an acute elderly care unit with structured, systematic interdisciplinary CGA-based care, compared to conventional acute medical care via the emergency room. Measurements: The primary outcome was the satisfaction reported by the patients shortly after discharge from hospital. A four-item confidential questionnaire was used. Responses were given on a 4-graded scale. Results: The response rate was 61%. In unadjusted analyses, significantly more patients in the intervention group responded positively to the following three questions about the hospitalization: "Did you get the nursing from the ward staff that you needed?" (p=0.003), "Are you satisfied with the information you received on your diseases and medication?" (p=0.016), and "Are you satisfied with the planning before discharge from the hospital?" (p=0.032). After adjusted analyses by multiple regression, a significant difference in favor of the intervention remained for the first question (p=0.027). Conclusion: Acute care in a CGA unit with direct admission was associated with higher levels of patient satisfaction compared with conventional acute care via the emergency room.Funding Agencies|Healthcare subcommittee, Region Vastra Gotaland; Department of Research and Development, NU Hospital Group; Fyrbodal Research and Development Council, Region Vastra Gotaland, Sweden</p