Oxidative Stability of Polyunsaturated Edible Oils Mixed With Microcrystalline Cellulose

The oxidative stability of mixtures of edible oils containing polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFA) and microcrystalline cellulose (MCC) was investigated. The mixtures studied consisted of oils of either camelina (CAM), cod liver (CLO), or salmon (SO) mixed with either colloidal or powdered MCC. A 50:50 (w/w) ratio of oil:MCC resulted in an applicable mixture containing high levels of PUFA edible oil and dietary fiber. The oxidative stability of the formulated mixtures and the pure oils was investigated over a period of 28 days. The peroxide value (PV) was assessed as a parameter for primary oxidation products and dynamic headspace gas chromatography mass spectrometry (GC/MS) was used to analyze secondary volatile organic compounds (VOC). CAM and the respective mixtures were oxidatively stable at both 4 and 22 °C during the storage period. The marine oils and the respective mixtures were stable at 4 °C. At 22 °C, an increase in hydroperoxides was found, but no increase in VOC was detected during the time-frame investigated. At 42 °C, prominent increases in PV and VOC were found for all oils and mixtures. Hexanal, a common marker for the degradation of n-6 fatty acids, propanal and 2,4-heptadienal (E,E), common indicators for the degradation of n-3 fatty acids, were among the volatiles detected in the headspace of oils and mixtures. This study showed that a mixture containing a 50:50 ratio of oil:MCC can be obtained by a low-tech procedure that does not induce oxidation when stored at low temperatures during a period of 1 month

Study protocol for the recreational stimulation for elders as a vehicle to resolve delirium superimposed on dementia (Reserve For DSD) trial

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Delirium is a state of confusion characterized by an acute and fluctuating decline in cognitive functioning. Delirium is common and deadly in older adults with dementia, and is often referred to as delirium superimposed on dementia, or DSD. Interventions that treat DSD are not well-developed because the mechanisms involved in its etiology are not completely understood. We have developed a theory-based intervention for DSD that is derived from the literature on cognitive reserve and based on our prior interdisciplinary work on delirium, recreational activities, and cognitive stimulation in people with dementia. Our preliminary work indicate that use of simple, cognitively stimulating activities may help resolve delirium by helping to focus inattention, the primary neuropsychological deficit in delirium. Our primary aim in this trial is to test the efficacy of Recreational Stimulation for Elders as a Vehicle to resolve DSD (RESERVE- DSD).</p> <p>Methods/Design</p> <p>This randomized repeated measures clinical trial will involve participants being recruited and enrolled at the time of admission to post acute care. We will randomize 256 subjects to intervention (RESERVE-DSD) or control (usual care). Intervention subjects will receive 30-minute sessions of tailored cognitively stimulating recreational activities for up to 30 days. We hypothesize that subjects who receive RESERVE-DSD will have: decreased severity and duration of delirium; greater gains in attention, orientation, memory, abstract thinking, and executive functioning; and greater gains in physical function compared to subjects with DSD who receive usual care. We will also evaluate potential moderators of intervention efficacy (lifetime of complex mental activities and APOE status). Our secondary aim is to describe the costs associated with RESERVE-DSD.</p> <p>Discussion</p> <p>Our theory-based intervention, which uses simple, inexpensive recreational activities for delivering cognitive stimulation, is innovative because, to our knowledge it has not been tested as a treatment for DSD. This novel intervention for DSD builds on our prior delirium, recreational activity and cognitive stimulation research, and draws support from cognitive reserve theory.</p> <p>Trial registration</p> <p>ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: <a href="http://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01267682">NCT01267682</a></p

Discomfort and agitation in older adults with dementia

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>A majority of patients with dementia present behavioral and psychological symptoms, such as agitation, which may increase their suffering, be difficult to manage by caregivers, and precipitate institutionalization. Although internal factors, such as discomfort, may be associated with agitation in patients with dementia, little research has examined this question. The goal of this study is to document the relationship between discomfort and agitation (including agitation subtypes) in older adults suffering from dementia.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>This correlational study used a cross-sectional design. Registered nurses (RNs) provided data on forty-nine residents from three long-term facilities. Discomfort, agitation, level of disability in performing activities of daily living (ADL), and severity of dementia were measured by RNs who were well acquainted with the residents, using the Discomfort Scale for patients with Dementia of the Alzheimer Type, the Cohen-Mansfield Agitation Inventory, the ADL subscale of the Functional Autonomy Measurement System, and the Functional Assessment Staging, respectively. RNs were given two weeks to complete and return all scales (i.e., the Cohen-Mansfield Agitation Inventory was completed at the end of the two weeks and all other scales were answered during this period). Other descriptive variables were obtained from the residents' medical file or care plan.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Hierarchical multiple regression analyses controlling for residents' characteristics (sex, severity of dementia, and disability) show that discomfort explains a significant share of the variance in overall agitation (28%, <it>p </it>< 0.001), non aggressive physical behavior (18%, <it>p </it>< 0.01) and verbally agitated behavior (30%, <it>p </it>< 0.001). No significant relationship is observed between discomfort and aggressive behavior but the power to detect this specific relationship was low.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Our findings provide further evidence of the association between discomfort and agitation in persons with dementia and reveal that this association is particularly strong for verbally agitated behavior and non aggressive physical behavior.</p

Need-driven dementia-compromised behavior: An alternative view of disruptive behavior

The disruptive behavior of persons with dementia is a problem of considerable clinical interest and growing scientific concern. This paper offers a view of these behaviors as expressions of unmet needs or goals and provides a comprehensive conceptual framework to guide further research and clinical practice. Empiricalfindings and clinical impressions related to wandering, vocalizations and aggression to support and illustrate the framework are presentedPeer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/66887/2/10.1177_153331759601100603.pd

Attention! A good bedside test for delirium?

peer-reviewedBackground Routine delirium screening could improve delirium detection, but it remains unclear as to which screening tool is most suitable. We tested the diagnostic accuracy of the following screening methods (either individually or in combination) in the detection of delirium: MOTYB (months of the year backwards); SSF (Spatial Span Forwards); evidence of subjective or objective 'confusion'.Methods We performed a cross-sectional study of general hospital adult inpatients in a large tertiary referral hospital. Screening tests were performed by junior medical trainees. Subsequently, two independent formal delirium assessments were performed: first, the Confusion Assessment Method (CAM) followed by the Delirium Rating Scale-Revised 98 (DRS-R98). DSM-IV (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, fourth edition) criteria were used to assign delirium diagnosis. Sensitivity and specificity ratios with 95% CIs were calculated for each screening method.Results 265 patients were included. The most precise screening method overall was achieved by simultaneously performing MOTYB and assessing for subjective/objective confusion (sensitivity 93.8%, 95% CI 82.8 to 98.6; specificity 84.7%, 95% CI 79.2 to 89.2). In older patients, MOTYB alone was most accurate, whereas in younger patients, a simultaneous combination of SSF (cutoff 4) with either MOTYB or assessment of subjective/objective confusion was best. In every case, addition of the CAM as a second-line screening step to improve specificity resulted in considerable loss in sensitivity.Conclusions Our results suggest that simple attention tests may be useful in delirium screening. MOTYB used alone was the most accurate screening test in older people.PUBLISHEDpeer-reviewe

Anticholinergic drug burden tools/scales and adverse outcomes in different clinical settings: a systematic review of reviews

Background: Cumulative anticholinergic exposure (anticholinergic burden) has been linked to a number of adverse outcomes. To conduct research in this area, an agreed approach to describing anticholinergic burden is needed. Objective: This review set out to identify anticholinergic burden scales, to describe their rationale, the settings in which they have been used and the outcomes associated with them. Methods: A search was performed using the Healthcare Databases Advanced Search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane, CINAHL and PsycINFO from inception to October 2016 to identify systematic reviews describing anticholinergic burden scales or tools. Abstracts and titles were reviewed to determine eligibility for review with eligible articles read in full. The final selection of reviews was critically appraised using the ROBIS tool and pre-defined data were extracted; the primary data of interest were the anticholinergic burden scales or tools used. Results: Five reviews were identified for analysis containing a total of 62 original articles. Eighteen anticholinergic burden scales or tools were identified with variation in their derivation, content and how they quantified the anticholinergic activity of medications. The Drug Burden Index was the most commonly used scale or tool in community and database studies, while the Anticholinergic Risk Scale was used more frequently in care homes and hospital settings. The association between anticholinergic burden and clinical outcomes varied by index and study. Falls and hospitalisation were consistently found to be associated with anticholinergic burden. Mortality, delirium, physical function and cognition were not consistently associated. Conclusions: Anticholinergic burden scales vary in their rationale, use and association with outcomes. This review showed that the concept of anticholinergic burden has been variably defined and inconsistently described using a number of indices with different content and scoring. The association between adverse outcomes and anticholinergic burden varies between scores and has not been conclusively established