A double-blind, randomized, controlled trial of topical polysporin triple compound versus topical mupirocin for the eradication of colonization with methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus in a complex continuing care population

BACKGROUND: Intranasal mupirocin or Polysporin Triple (PT) ointment (polymyxin B, bacitracin, gramicidin), in combination with chlorhexidine body washes, have been used for eradicating methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA), but no comparative studies have been done

Generation of a functional, soluble tapasin protein from an alternatively spliced mRNA

The loading of newly synthesised MHC class I molecules (MHCI) with peptides requires the involvement of several endoplasmic reticulum (ER)-resident cofactors including calnexin, calreticulin, transporter associated with antigen processing, ERp57 and tapasin. In the absence of tapasin, MHC I complexes are loaded with suboptimal peptides and their recognition by cytotoxic T cells raised to high-affinity, immunodominant peptide epitopes is impaired. Here, we describe the cloning and functional assessment of an alternative spliced form of tapasin. From the EST database, we obtained a partially spliced tapasin cDNA that retained introns 4-6. When transfected into the tapasin-deficient cell line 0.220, the cDNA produced an alternatively spliced tapasin transcript that contained intron 5 (74 bp). This introduced a new stop codon that terminated translation immediately before the putative transmembrane domain and led to a tapasin molecule containing the lumenal domain plus 8 extra novel amino acids at its C-terminus. This molecule promoted peptide loading of HLA-B5 in 0.220 cell line, and restored normal HLA-B5 surface expression. However, the peptides loaded onto HLA-B5 were suboptimal compared to those loaded onto HLA-B5 in the presence of wild-type tapasin

Designing a Strategy Trial for the Management of Gout: The Use of a Modified Delphi Panel.

ObjectiveDisagreement exists between rheumatology and primary care societies regarding gout management. This paper describes a formal process for gathering input from stakeholders in the planning of a trial to compare gout management strategies.MethodsWe recruited patients, nurses, physician assistants, primary care clinicians, and rheumatologists to participate in a modified Delphi panel (mDP) to provide input on design of a trial focused on optimal management for primary care patients with gout. The 16 panelists received a plain-language briefing document that discussed the rationale for the trial, key clinical issues in gout, and aspects of trial design. The panelists also received information and considerations on nine voting questions (VQs), judged to be the key design questions. Cognitive interviews with panelists ensured that the VQs were understood by the range of panelists involved in the mDP. Panelists were asked to score all VQs from 1 (definitely no) to 9 (definitely yes). Two voting rounds were conducted-round 1 by email and round 2 by video conference.ResultsThe VQs were modified through the cognitive interviews. The round 1 voting resulted in consensus on eight items, with consensus defined as median voting score in the same tercile (1-3, 4-6 or 7-9). Re-voting at the meeting (round 2) reached consensus on the remaining item.ConclusionAn mDP with various stakeholders facilitated consensus on the design of a trial of different management strategies for chronic gout. This method may be useful for designing trials of clinical questions with substantial disagreement across stakeholders

Designing a Strategy Trial for the Management of Gout: The Use of a Modified Delphi Panel

ObjectiveDisagreement exists between rheumatology and primary care societies regarding gout management. This paper describes a formal process for gathering input from stakeholders in the planning of a trial to compare gout management strategies.MethodsWe recruited patients, nurses, physician assistants, primary care clinicians, and rheumatologists to participate in a modified Delphi panel (mDP) to provide input on design of a trial focused on optimal management for primary care patients with gout. The 16 panelists received a plain-language briefing document that discussed the rationale for the trial, key clinical issues in gout, and aspects of trial design. The panelists also received information and considerations on nine voting questions (VQs), judged to be the key design questions. Cognitive interviews with panelists ensured that the VQs were understood by the range of panelists involved in the mDP. Panelists were asked to score all VQs from 1 (definitely no) to 9 (definitely yes). Two voting rounds were conducted-round 1 by email and round 2 by video conference.ResultsThe VQs were modified through the cognitive interviews. The round 1 voting resulted in consensus on eight items, with consensus defined as median voting score in the same tercile (1-3, 4-6 or 7-9). Re-voting at the meeting (round 2) reached consensus on the remaining item.ConclusionAn mDP with various stakeholders facilitated consensus on the design of a trial of different management strategies for chronic gout. This method may be useful for designing trials of clinical questions with substantial disagreement across stakeholders

ACR Appropriateness Criteria® dialysis fistula malfunction

The creation and maintenance of a dialysis access is vital for the reduction of morbidity, mortality, and cost of treatment for end stage renal disease patients. One\u27s longevity on dialysis is directly dependent upon the quality of dialysis. This quality hinges on the integrity and reliability of the access to the patient\u27s vascular system. All methods of dialysis access will eventually result in dialysis dysfunction and failure. Arteriovenous access dysfunction includes 3 distinct classes of events, namely thrombotic flow-related complications or dysfunction, nonthrombotic flow-related complications or dysfunction, and infectious complications. The restoration of any form of arteriovenous access dysfunction may be supported by diagnostic imaging, clinical consultation, percutaneous interventional procedures, surgical management, or a combination of these methods. This document provides a rigorous evaluation of how variants of each form of dysfunction may be appraised and approached systematically. The American College of Radiology Appropriateness Criteria are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed annually by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and revision process support the systematic analysis of the medical literature from peer reviewed journals. Established methodology principles such as Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation or GRADE are adapted to evaluate the evidence. The RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method User Manual provides the methodology to determine the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures for specific clinical scenarios. In those instances where peer reviewed literature is lacking or equivocal, experts may be the primary evidentiary source available to formulate a recommendation