Excessive TV viewing and cardiovascular disease risk factors in adolescents. The AVENA cross-sectional study

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Excessive television (TV) viewing might play an important role in the development of cardiovascular disease (CVD). The aim of this study was to examine the independent associations between TV viewing and CVD risk factors in adolescents.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>A sample of 425 adolescents, aged 13- to 18.5-year-old, was included in this study. Body mass index (BMI), waist circumference (WC), glucose, total cholesterol, triglycerides, HDL-cholesterol, LDL-cholesterol, apolipoprotein (apo) A-1, apo B-100, and lipoprotein(a) levels were determined. A composite CVD risk score was computed based on age-, sex-, sexual maturation- and race-standardized triglycerides, HDL-cholesterol, LDL-cholesterol and glucose. TV viewing was self-reported.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Two hundred and twenty-five adolescents (53%) who spent >3 hrs/day watching TV were considered as the "high TV viewing" group. Ninety-nine adolescents (23%) from the total sample were classified as overweight according to International age- and sex-specific BMI values. The high TV viewing group had significantly less favorable values of HDL-cholesterol, glucose, apo A1 and CVD score, independent of age, sex, sexual maturation, race and weight status. There was a significant interaction effect of TV viewing × weight status (P = 0.002) on WC, and the negative influence of TV viewing on WC persisted in the overweight group (P = 0.031) but was attenuated in non-overweight adolescents (P > 0.05).</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Excessive TV viewing seems to be related to an unfavorable CVD risk factors profile in adolescence. Reducing TV viewing in overweight adolescents might be beneficial to decrease abdominal body fat.</p

Ten golden rules for optimal antibiotic use in hospital settings: the WARNING call to action

Antibiotics are recognized widely for their benefits when used appropriately. However, they are often used inappropriately despite the importance of responsible use within good clinical practice. Effective antibiotic treatment is an essential component of universal healthcare, and it is a global responsibility to ensure appropriate use. Currently, pharmaceutical companies have little incentive to develop new antibiotics due to scientific, regulatory, and financial barriers, further emphasizing the importance of appropriate antibiotic use. To address this issue, the Global Alliance for Infections in Surgery established an international multidisciplinary task force of 295 experts from 115 countries with different backgrounds. The task force developed a position statement called WARNING (Worldwide Antimicrobial Resistance National/International Network Group) aimed at raising awareness of antimicrobial resistance and improving antibiotic prescribing practices worldwide. The statement outlined is 10 axioms, or “golden rules,” for the appropriate use of antibiotics that all healthcare workers should consistently adhere in clinical practice

Trauma Surgeon and Palliative Care Physician Attitudes Regarding Goals-of-Care Delineation for Injured Geriatric Patients

Background: The value of defining goals of care (GoC) for geriatric patients is well known to the palliative care community but is a newer concept for many trauma surgeons. Palliative care specialists and trauma surgeons were surveyed to elicit the specialties’ attitudes regarding (1) importance of GoC conversations for injured seniors; (2) confidence in their own specialty’s ability to conduct these conversations; and (3) confidence in the ability of the other specialty to do so. Methods: A 13-item survey was developed by the steering committee of a multicenter, palliative care-focused consortium and beta-tested by trauma surgeons and palliative care specialists unaffiliated with the consortium. The finalized instrument was electronically circulated to active physician members of the American Association for the Surgery of Trauma and American Academy for Hospice and Palliative Medicine. Results: Respondents included 118 trauma surgeons (8.8%) and 244 palliative care specialists (5.7%). Palliative physicians rated being more familiar with GoC, were more likely to report high-quality training in performing conversations, believed more palliative specialists were needed in intensive care units, and had more interest in conducting conversations relative to trauma surgeons. Both groups believed themselves to perform GoC discussions better than the other specialty perceived them to do so and favored their own specialty leading team discussions. Conclusions: Both groups believe themselves to conduct GoC discussions for injured seniors better than the other specialty perceived them to do so, which led to disparate views on the optimal leadership of these discussions. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved

Burn Surgeon and Palliative Care Physician Attitudes Regarding Goals of Care Delineation for Burned Geriatric Patients

Palliative care specialists (PCS) and burn surgeons (BS) were surveyed regarding: 1) importance of goals of care (GoC) conversations for burned seniors; 2) confidence in their own specialty\u27s ability to conduct these conversations; and 3) confidence in the ability of the other specialty to do so. A 13-item survey was developed by the steering committee of a multicenter consortium dedicated to palliative care in the injured geriatric patient and beta-tested by BS and PCS unaffiliated with the consortium. The finalized instrument was electronically circulated to active physician members of the American Burn Association and American Academy for Hospice and Palliative Medicine. Forty-five BS (7.3%) and 244 PCS (5.7%) responded. Palliative physicians rated being more familiar with GoC, were more comfortable having a discussion with laypeople, were more likely to have reported high-quality training in performing conversations, believed more palliative specialists were needed in intensive care units, and had more interest in conducting conversations relative to BS. Both groups believed themselves to perform GoC discussions better than the other specialty perceived them to do so. BS favored leading team discussions, whereas palliative specialists preferred jointly led discussions. Both groups agreed that discussions should occur within 72 hours of admission. Both groups believe themselves to conduct GoC discussions for burned seniors better than the other specialty perceived them to do so, which led to disparate views on perceptions for the optimal leadership of these discussions

Burn Surgeon and Palliative Care Physician Attitudes Regarding Goals of Care Delineation for Burned Geriatric Patients

Palliative care specialists (PCS) and burn surgeons (BS) were surveyed regarding: 1) importance of goals of care (GoC) conversations for burned seniors; 2) confidence in their own specialty\u27s ability to conduct these conversations; and 3) confidence in the ability of the other specialty to do so. A 13-item survey was developed by the steering committee of a multicenter consortium dedicated to palliative care in the injured geriatric patient and beta-tested by BS and PCS unaffiliated with the consortium. The finalized instrument was electronically circulated to active physician members of the American Burn Association and American Academy for Hospice and Palliative Medicine. Forty-five BS (7.3%) and 244 PCS (5.7%) responded. Palliative physicians rated being more familiar with GoC, were more comfortable having a discussion with laypeople, were more likely to have reported high-quality training in performing conversations, believed more palliative specialists were needed in intensive care units, and had more interest in conducting conversations relative to BS. Both groups believed themselves to perform GoC discussions better than the other specialty perceived them to do so. BS favored leading team discussions, whereas palliative specialists preferred jointly led discussions. Both groups agreed that discussions should occur within 72 hours of admission. Both groups believe themselves to conduct GoC discussions for burned seniors better than the other specialty perceived them to do so, which led to disparate views on perceptions for the optimal leadership of these discussions

Trauma Surgeon and Palliative Care Physician Attitudes Regarding Goals-of-Care Delineation for Injured Geriatric Patients

Background: The value of defining goals of care (GoC) for geriatric patients is well known to the palliative care community but is a newer concept for many trauma surgeons. Palliative care specialists and trauma surgeons were surveyed to elicit the specialties’ attitudes regarding (1) importance of GoC conversations for injured seniors; (2) confidence in their own specialty’s ability to conduct these conversations; and (3) confidence in the ability of the other specialty to do so. Methods: A 13-item survey was developed by the steering committee of a multicenter, palliative care-focused consortium and beta-tested by trauma surgeons and palliative care specialists unaffiliated with the consortium. The finalized instrument was electronically circulated to active physician members of the American Association for the Surgery of Trauma and American Academy for Hospice and Palliative Medicine. Results: Respondents included 118 trauma surgeons (8.8%) and 244 palliative care specialists (5.7%). Palliative physicians rated being more familiar with GoC, were more likely to report high-quality training in performing conversations, believed more palliative specialists were needed in intensive care units, and had more interest in conducting conversations relative to trauma surgeons. Both groups believed themselves to perform GoC discussions better than the other specialty perceived them to do so and favored their own specialty leading team discussions. Conclusions: Both groups believe themselves to conduct GoC discussions for injured seniors better than the other specialty perceived them to do so, which led to disparate views on the optimal leadership of these discussions. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved