COVID-19 printable project

We are seeing hundreds of people being assessed for COVID-19. Only some of them will be tested. Everyone can do their part to help with self-management, social distancing and self-isolation. As physicians, we want to support patients to self-manage at home. With OCADU's Health Design Studio, we developed the following tools. Adapt, use, share. Drop us a line. Keep well. Current resources updated: 04/08/202

Association between routine and standardized blood pressure measurements and left ventricular hypertrophy among patients on hemodialysis

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Left ventricular (LV) hypertrophy is common among patients on hemodialysis. While a relationship between blood pressure (BP) and LV hypertrophy has been established, it is unclear which BP measurement method is the strongest correlate of LV hypertrophy. We sought to determine agreement between various blood pressure measurement methods, as well as identify which method was the strongest correlate of LV hypertrophy among patients on hemodialysis.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>This was a post-hoc analysis of data from a randomized controlled trial. We evaluated the agreement between seven BP measurement methods: standardized measurement at baseline; single pre- and post-dialysis, as well as mean intra-dialytic measurement at baseline; and cumulative pre-, intra- and post-dialysis readings (an average of 12 monthly readings based on a single day per month). Agreement was assessed using Lin's concordance correlation coefficient (CCC) and the Bland Altman method. Association between BP measurement method and LV hypertrophy on baseline cardiac MRI was determined using receiver operating characteristic curves and area under the curve (AUC).</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Agreement between BP measurement methods in the 39 patients on hemodialysis varied considerably, from a CCC of 0.35 to 0.94, with overlapping 95% confidence intervals. Pre-dialysis measurements were the weakest predictors of LV hypertrophy while standardized, post- and inter-dialytic measurements had similar and strong (AUC 0.79 to 0.80) predictive power for LV hypertrophy.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>A single standardized BP has strong predictive power for LV hypertrophy and performs just as well as more resource intensive cumulative measurements, whereas pre-dialysis blood pressure measurements have the weakest predictive power for LV hypertrophy. Current guidelines, which recommend using pre-dialysis measurements, should be revisited to confirm these results.</p

Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) checklist.

Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) checklist.</p

Inclusion and exclusion criteria for Research Question 1.

Inclusion and exclusion criteria for Research Question 1.</p

Inclusion and exclusion criteria for Research Question 2.

Inclusion and exclusion criteria for Research Question 2.</p

Search strategy.

IntroductionPain affects all children, and in hospitals across North America, this pain is often undertreated. Children who visit the emergency department (ED) experience similar undertreatment, and they will often experience a painful procedure as part of their diagnostic journey. Further, children and their caregivers who experience social injustices through marginalization are more likely to experience healthcare disparities in their pain management. Still, most of our knowledge about children’s pain management comes from research focused on well-educated, white children and caregivers from a middle- or upper-class background. The aim of this scoping review is to identify, map, and describe existing research on (a) how aspects of marginalization are documented in randomized controlled trials related to children’s pain and (b) to understand the pain treatment and experiences of marginalized children and their caregivers in the ED setting.Methods and analysisThe review will follow Joanna Briggs Institute methodology for scoping reviews using the Participant, Concept, Context (PCC) framework and key terms related to children, youth, pain, ED, and aspects of marginalization. We will search Medline, Embase, PsychInfo, CINAHL, Web of Science, Cochrane Library Trials, iPortal, and Native Health Database for articles published in the last 10 years to identify records that meet our inclusion criteria. We will screen articles in a two-step process using two reviewers during the abstract and full-text screening stages. Data will be extracted using Covidence for data management and we will use a narrative approach to synthesize the data.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval is not required for this review. Findings will be disseminated in academic manuscripts, at academic conferences, and with partners and knowledge users including funders of pain research and healthcare professionals. Results of this scoping review will inform subsequent quantitative and qualitative studies regarding pain experiences and treatment of marginalized children in the ED.</div