Care home versus hospital and own home environments for rehabilitation of older people

Background Rehabilitation for older people has acquired an increasingly important profile for both policy‐makers and service providers within health and social care agencies. This has generated an increased interest in the use of alternative care environments including care home environments. Yet, there appears to be limited evidence on which to base decisions. This review is the first update of the Cochrane review which was published in 2003. Objectives To compare the effects of care home environments (e.g. nursing home, residential care home and nursing facilities) versus hospital environments and own home environments in the rehabilitation of older people. Search methods We searched the Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care Specialised Register and Pending Folder, MEDLINE (1950 to March Week 3 2007), EMBASE (1980 to 2007 Week 13), CINAHL (1982 to March, Week 4, 2007), other databases and reference lists of relevant review articles were additionally reviewed. Date of most recent search: March 2007. Selection criteria Randomised controlled trials (RCTs), controlled clinical trials (CCTs), controlled before and after studies (CBAs) and interrupted time series (ITS) that compared rehabilitation outcomes for persons 60 years or older who received rehabilitation whilst residing in a care home with those who received rehabilitation in hospital or own home environments. Data collection and analysis Two review authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted data. Main results In this update, 8365 references were retrieved. Of these, 339 abstracts were independently assessed by 2 review authors, and 56 studies and 5 review articles were subsequently obtained. Full text papers were independently assessed by two or three review authors and none of these met inclusion criteria. Authors' conclusions There is insufficient evidence to compare the effects of care home environments versus hospital environments or own home environments on older persons rehabilitation outcomes. Although the authors acknowledge that absence of effect is not no effect. There are three main reasons; the first is that the description and specification of the environment is often not clear; secondly, the components of the rehabilitation system within the given environments are not adequately specified and; thirdly, when the components are clearly specified they demonstrate that the control and intervention sites are not comparable with respect to the methodological criteria specified by Cochrane EPOC group. The combined effect of these factors resulted in the comparability between intervention and control groups being very weak

Pilot cluster randomised controlled trial of flooring to reduce injuries from falls in wards for older people

Background: falls disproportionately affect older people, who are at increased risk of falls and injury. This pilot study investigates shock-absorbing flooring for fall-related injuries in wards for frail older people.Methods: we conducted a non-blinded cluster randomised trial in eight hospitals in England between April 2010 and August 2011. Each site allocated one bay as the ‘study area’, which was randomised via computer to intervention (8.3-mm thick Tarkett Omnisports EXCEL) or control (2-mm standard in situ flooring). Sites had an intervention period of 1 year. Anybody admitted to the study area was eligible. The primary outcome was the fall-related injury rate. Secondary outcomes were injury severity, fall rate and adverse events.Results: during the intervention period, 226 participants were recruited to each group (219 and 223 were analysed in the intervention and control group, respectively). Of 35 falls (31 fallers) in the intervention group, 22.9% were injurious, compared with 42.4% of 33 falls (22 fallers) in the control group [injury incident rate ratio (IRR) = 0.58, 95% CI = 0.18–1.91]. There were no moderate or major injuries in the intervention group and six in the control group. The fall IRR was 1.07 (95% CI = 0.64–1.81). Staff at intervention sites raised concerns about pushing equipment, documenting one pulled back.Conclusions: future research should assess shock-absorbing flooring with better ‘push/pull’ properties and explore increased faller risk. We estimate a future trial will need 33,480–52,840 person bed-days per arm.Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov (ID: NCT00817869); UKCRN (ID: 5735)

Mechanisms of Acute Eosinophil Mobilization from the Bone Marrow Stimulated by Interleukin 5: The Role of Specific Adhesion Molecules and Phosphatidylinositol 3-Kinase

Mobilization of bone marrow eosinophils is a critical early step in their trafficking to the lung during allergic inflammatory reactions. We have shown previously that the cytokine interleukin (IL)-5, generated during an allergic inflammatory reaction in the guinea pig, acts systemically to mobilize eosinophils from the bone marrow. Here, we have investigated the mechanisms underlying this release process. Examination by light and electron microscopy revealed the rapid migration of eosinophils from the hematopoietic compartment and across the bone marrow sinus endothelium in response to IL-5. Using an in situ perfusion system of the guinea pig hind limb, we showed that IL-5 stimulated a dose-dependent selective release of eosinophils from the bone marrow. Eosinophils released from the bone marrow in response to IL-5 expressed increased levels of β2 integrin and a decrease in L-selectin, but no change in α4 integrin levels. A β2 integrin–blocking antibody markedly inhibited the mobilization of eosinophils from the bone marrow stimulated by IL-5. In contrast, an α4 integrin blocking antibody increased the rate of eosinophil mobilization induced by IL-5. In vitro we demonstrated that IL-5 stimulates the selective chemokinesis of bone marrow eosinophils, a process markedly inhibited by two structurally distinct inhibitors of phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase, wortmannin and LY294002. Wortmannin was also shown to block eosinophil release induced by IL-5 in the perfused bone marrow system. The parallel observations on the bone marrow eosinophil release process and responses in isolated eosinophils in vitro suggest that eosinophil chemokinesis is the driving force for release in vivo and that this release process is regulated by α4 and β2 integrins acting in opposite directions

Pennsylvania Folklife Vol. 16, No. 3

• Reminiscences of a Boyhood in Reading, 1883-1890 • Preserving York\u27s Architectural Heritage • Jordan Museum of the Twenty • Pennsylvania Broadsides: II • Memoirs of a Lutheran Minister, 1850-1881 • Notes and Documents: Nicknames from a Mennonite Family • The Crafts at Newport • Anglicizing the Pennsylvania Dutch, 1966 and 1875 • Nicknames: Folk-Cultural Questionnaire #3https://digitalcommons.ursinus.edu/pafolklifemag/1027/thumbnail.jp

Body composition is associated with tacrolimus pharmacokinetics in kidney transplant recipients

PURPOSE: A population pharmacokinetic (popPK) model may be used to improve tacrolimus dosing and minimize under- and overexposure in kidney transplant recipients. It is unknown how body composition parameters relate to tacrolimus pharmacokinetics and which parameter correlates best with tacrolimus exposure. The aims of this study were to investigate which body composition parameter has the best association with the pharmacokinetics of tacrolimus and to describe this relationship in a popPK model. METHODS: Body composition was assessed using bio-impedance spectroscopy (BIS). Pharmacokinetic analysis was performed using nonlinear mixed effects modeling (NONMEM). Lean tissue mass, adipose tissue mass, over-hydration, and phase angle were measured with BIS and then evaluated as covariates. The final popPK model was evaluated using goodness-of-fit plots, visual predictive checks, and a bootstrap analysis. RESULTS: In 46 kidney transplant recipients, 284 tacrolimus concentrations were measured. The base model without body composition parameters included age, plasma albumin, plasma creatinine, CYP3A4 and CYP3A5 genotypes, and hematocrit as covariates. After full forward inclusion and backward elimination, only the effect of the phase angle on clearance (dOFV =  − 13.406; p < 0.01) was included in the final model. Phase angle was positively correlated with tacrolimus clearance. The inter-individual variability decreased from 41.7% in the base model to 34.2% in the final model. The model was successfully validated. CONCLUSION: The phase angle is the bio-impedance spectroscopic parameter that correlates best with tacrolimus pharmacokinetics. Incorporation of the phase angle in a popPK model can improve the prediction of an individual’s tacrolimus dose requirement after transplantation. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00228-022-03323-0