Using the Classification and Regression Tree Analysis in Determining the Relationship Between Functional Movement Assessment, Clinical Measures, and Injury in NBA Players

Musculoskeletal pathology has been linked to games missed in the NBA due to player injury. Sports medicine professionals utilize functional assessments and clinical measures in order to minimize injury risk and maximize performance. The investigation of interactions among non-linear factors may help further the understanding of the interdependence of various measures and missed games due to injury.https://ecommons.udayton.edu/dpt_symposium/1031/thumbnail.jp

Are we asking the right questions? Working with the LGBTQ+ community to prioritise healthcare research themes.

BackgroundConversations about research priorities with members of the public are rarely designed specifically to include people who identify as Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender and Queer (LGBTQ+) and are not researchers.MethodsGenerally, to address this gap, and specifically, to inform future research for CLS, we carried out a rapid review of published research priority sets covering LGBTQ+ topics, and an online workshop to prioritise identified themes.ResultsRapid review: results. The rapid review identified 18 LGBTQ+ research priority sets. Some focussed on specific populations such as women or men, younger or older people or people living within families. Five addressed transgender and gender non- conforming populations. All of the research priority sets originated from English-speaking, high and middle-income countries (UK, US, Canada, and Australia), and date from 2016 onwards. Prioritization approaches were wide-ranging from personal commentary to expert workshops and surveys. Participants involved in setting priorities mostly included research academics, health practitioners and advocacy organisations, two studies involved LGBTQ+ public in their process. Research priorities identified in this review were then grouped into themes which were prioritised during the workshop. Workshop: results. For the workshop, participants were recruited using local (Cambridge, UK) LGBTQ+ networks and a national advert to a public involvement in research matching website to take part in an online discussion workshop. Those that took part were offered payment for their time in preparing for the workshop and taking part. Participants personal priorities and experiences contributed to a consensus development process and a final ranked list of seven research themes and participants' experiences of healthcare, mental health advocacy, care homes, caring responsibilities, schools and family units added additional context.ConclusionsFrom the workshop the three research themes prioritised were: healthcare services delivery, prevention, and particular challenges / intersectionality of multiple challenges for people identifying as LGBTQ+. Research themes interconnected in many ways and this was demonstrated by the comments from workshop participants. This paper offers insights into why these priorities were important from participants' perspectives and detail about how to run an inclusive and respectful public involvement research exercise. On a practical level these themes will directly inform future research direction for CLS

Short-Term Very High Carbohydrate Diet and Gut-Training Have Minor Effects on Gastrointestinal Status and Performance in Highly Trained Endurance Athletes

We implemented a multi-pronged strategy (MAX) involving chronic (2 weeks high carbohydrate [CHO] diet + gut-training) and acute (CHO loading + 90 g·h(−1) CHO during exercise) strategies to promote endogenous and exogenous CHO availability, compared with strategies reflecting lower ranges of current guidelines (CON) in two groups of athletes. Nineteen elite male race walkers (MAX: 9; CON:10) undertook a 26 km race-walking session before and after the respective interventions to investigate gastrointestinal function (absorption capacity), integrity (epithelial injury), and symptoms (GIS). We observed considerable individual variability in responses, resulting in a statistically significant (p < 0.001) yet likely clinically insignificant increase (Δ 736 pg·mL(−1)) in I-FABP after exercise across all trials, with no significant differences in breath H(2) across exercise (p = 0.970). MAX was associated with increased GIS in the second half of the exercise, especially in upper GIS (p < 0.01). Eighteen highly trained male and female distance runners (MAX: 10; CON: 8) then completed a 35 km run (28 km steady-state + 7 km time-trial) supported by either a slightly modified MAX or CON strategy. Inter-individual variability was observed, without major differences in epithelial cell intestinal fatty acid binding protein (I-FABP) or GIS, due to exercise, trial, or group, despite the 3-fold increase in exercise CHO intake in MAX post-intervention. The tight-junction (claudin-3) response decreased in both groups from pre- to post-intervention. Groups achieved a similar performance improvement from pre- to post-intervention (CON = 39 s [95 CI 15–63 s]; MAX = 36 s [13–59 s]; p = 0.002). Although this suggests that further increases in CHO availability above current guidelines do not confer additional advantages, limitations in our study execution (e.g., confounding loss of BM in several individuals despite a live-in training camp environment and significant increases in aerobic capacity due to intensified training) may have masked small differences. Therefore, athletes should meet the minimum CHO guidelines for training and competition goals, noting that, with practice, increased CHO intake can be tolerated, and may contribute to performance outcomes

Effect of Hydrocortisone on Mortality and Organ Support in Patients With Severe COVID-19: The REMAP-CAP COVID-19 Corticosteroid Domain Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Evidence regarding corticosteroid use for severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is limited. Objective: To determine whether hydrocortisone improves outcome for patients with severe COVID-19. Design, Setting, and Participants: An ongoing adaptive platform trial testing multiple interventions within multiple therapeutic domains, for example, antiviral agents, corticosteroids, or immunoglobulin. Between March 9 and June 17, 2020, 614 adult patients with suspected or confirmed COVID-19 were enrolled and randomized within at least 1 domain following admission to an intensive care unit (ICU) for respiratory or cardiovascular organ support at 121 sites in 8 countries. Of these, 403 were randomized to open-label interventions within the corticosteroid domain. The domain was halted after results from another trial were released. Follow-up ended August 12, 2020. Interventions: The corticosteroid domain randomized participants to a fixed 7-day course of intravenous hydrocortisone (50 mg or 100 mg every 6 hours) (n = 143), a shock-dependent course (50 mg every 6 hours when shock was clinically evident) (n = 152), or no hydrocortisone (n = 108). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was organ support-free days (days alive and free of ICU-based respiratory or cardiovascular support) within 21 days, where patients who died were assigned -1 day. The primary analysis was a bayesian cumulative logistic model that included all patients enrolled with severe COVID-19, adjusting for age, sex, site, region, time, assignment to interventions within other domains, and domain and intervention eligibility. Superiority was defined as the posterior probability of an odds ratio greater than 1 (threshold for trial conclusion of superiority >99%). Results: After excluding 19 participants who withdrew consent, there were 384 patients (mean age, 60 years; 29% female) randomized to the fixed-dose (n = 137), shock-dependent (n = 146), and no (n = 101) hydrocortisone groups; 379 (99%) completed the study and were included in the analysis. The mean age for the 3 groups ranged between 59.5 and 60.4 years; most patients were male (range, 70.6%-71.5%); mean body mass index ranged between 29.7 and 30.9; and patients receiving mechanical ventilation ranged between 50.0% and 63.5%. For the fixed-dose, shock-dependent, and no hydrocortisone groups, respectively, the median organ support-free days were 0 (IQR, -1 to 15), 0 (IQR, -1 to 13), and 0 (-1 to 11) days (composed of 30%, 26%, and 33% mortality rates and 11.5, 9.5, and 6 median organ support-free days among survivors). The median adjusted odds ratio and bayesian probability of superiority were 1.43 (95% credible interval, 0.91-2.27) and 93% for fixed-dose hydrocortisone, respectively, and were 1.22 (95% credible interval, 0.76-1.94) and 80% for shock-dependent hydrocortisone compared with no hydrocortisone. Serious adverse events were reported in 4 (3%), 5 (3%), and 1 (1%) patients in the fixed-dose, shock-dependent, and no hydrocortisone groups, respectively. Conclusions and Relevance: Among patients with severe COVID-19, treatment with a 7-day fixed-dose course of hydrocortisone or shock-dependent dosing of hydrocortisone, compared with no hydrocortisone, resulted in 93% and 80% probabilities of superiority with regard to the odds of improvement in organ support-free days within 21 days. However, the trial was stopped early and no treatment strategy met prespecified criteria for statistical superiority, precluding definitive conclusions. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02735707

Effect of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor and angiotensin receptor blocker initiation on organ support-free days in patients hospitalized with COVID-19

IMPORTANCE Overactivation of the renin-angiotensin system (RAS) may contribute to poor clinical outcomes in patients with COVID-19. Objective To determine whether angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitor or angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) initiation improves outcomes in patients hospitalized for COVID-19. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS In an ongoing, adaptive platform randomized clinical trial, 721 critically ill and 58 non–critically ill hospitalized adults were randomized to receive an RAS inhibitor or control between March 16, 2021, and February 25, 2022, at 69 sites in 7 countries (final follow-up on June 1, 2022). INTERVENTIONS Patients were randomized to receive open-label initiation of an ACE inhibitor (n = 257), ARB (n = 248), ARB in combination with DMX-200 (a chemokine receptor-2 inhibitor; n = 10), or no RAS inhibitor (control; n = 264) for up to 10 days. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The primary outcome was organ support–free days, a composite of hospital survival and days alive without cardiovascular or respiratory organ support through 21 days. The primary analysis was a bayesian cumulative logistic model. Odds ratios (ORs) greater than 1 represent improved outcomes. RESULTS On February 25, 2022, enrollment was discontinued due to safety concerns. Among 679 critically ill patients with available primary outcome data, the median age was 56 years and 239 participants (35.2%) were women. Median (IQR) organ support–free days among critically ill patients was 10 (–1 to 16) in the ACE inhibitor group (n = 231), 8 (–1 to 17) in the ARB group (n = 217), and 12 (0 to 17) in the control group (n = 231) (median adjusted odds ratios of 0.77 [95% bayesian credible interval, 0.58-1.06] for improvement for ACE inhibitor and 0.76 [95% credible interval, 0.56-1.05] for ARB compared with control). The posterior probabilities that ACE inhibitors and ARBs worsened organ support–free days compared with control were 94.9% and 95.4%, respectively. Hospital survival occurred in 166 of 231 critically ill participants (71.9%) in the ACE inhibitor group, 152 of 217 (70.0%) in the ARB group, and 182 of 231 (78.8%) in the control group (posterior probabilities that ACE inhibitor and ARB worsened hospital survival compared with control were 95.3% and 98.1%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE In this trial, among critically ill adults with COVID-19, initiation of an ACE inhibitor or ARB did not improve, and likely worsened, clinical outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT0273570

Are you getting enough to eat? How food insecurity in Australia is socially understood

Food insecurity is a growing social crisis in Australia. Eighteen percent of the population are unable to access nutritious food, with a diversity of social groups affected, including university students, the elderly and those living in rural and remote areas of Australia. Despite this, there is a lack of awareness and research about this issue. Aim: This research draws from social representations theory to investigate what is socially understood about food insecurity in Australia, and examines whether these understandings are mediated by personal experience and age. Social representations theory posits that unfamiliar ideas and issues come to be understood through a process of ‘anchoring’, whereby new ideas/issues are understood through existing knowledge systems. Method: An online survey, completed by a university sample (N = 491), comprised of word association tasks that asked participants to list the first words that sprung to mind when they thought about people experiencing food insecurity, the groups who experienced food insecurity, along with the reasons why. Participants also completed a 13-item Food Insecurity scale, adapted from Davids & Gouws (2011). Results: Frequency analysis of the word associations revealed that food insecurity was anchored in a network of meanings associated with ‘poor’ and ‘homeless’, suggesting that the diversity of groups who experience food insecurity are not associated with the issue. The reasons for food insecurity coalesced around ‘financially being unable to afford food’. Exploratory factor analysis of the 13 items revealed three sub-scales: access to food, attributions, and fairness of experiencing food insecurity. Participants who had no personal experience of food insecurity reported significantly higher mean scale scores for the access and attribution sub-scales, and lower scores on the fairness sub-scale, than those with experience of food insecurity. No significant differences were found for age. Conclusion: The results indicated that unless food insecurity has been personally experienced, little is known about the issue by society, apart from its association with poverty and homelessness. While many people experiencing food insecurity do live in poverty, the strong association with homelessness obscures its devastating effect on other groups, such as the elderly and those in rural and remote areas of Australia

Aquatic Exercise Therapy for People With Parkinson Disease: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Objective To evaluate the effects of aquatic exercise therapy on gait variability and disability compared with usual care for people with Parkinson disease (PD). Design Single-blind randomized controlled trial. Setting Community-based hydrotherapy pool. Participants Individuals with PD (Hoehn-Yahr stages I–III) (N=21). Interventions Participants were randomly assigned to either an aquatic exercise therapy group (45min, twice a week for 6wk) or a group that received usual care. Main Outcome Measures The primary outcome measure was gait variability as measured using a motion capture system. Secondary outcomes were quality of life measured on the Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire-39 and freezing of gait and motor disability quantified by the Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale. Feasibility was evaluated by measuring safety, adverse events, and participant satisfaction. Results People in the aquatic therapy group and usual care group showed similar small improvements in gait variability. The aquatic therapy group showed greater improvements in disability than the usual care group (P<.01). No differences between groups or over time were identified for freezing of gait or quality of life. Aquatic therapy sessions were safe and enjoyable with no adverse events. Conclusions Aquatic therapy appears feasible and safe for some people in the early stages of PD

The Health and Healthcare Outcomes of Trans and/or Non-Binary Adults in England: Protocol for an Analysis of Responses to the 2021 GP Patient Survey

Background: The large-scale quantitative evidence base to understand and improve health and healthcare outcomes for people who are trans and/or non-binary is still developing, although what research there is suggests that risk of poor health is high, and experiences of healthcare services are often poor. In 2021 the GP Patient Survey, which is carried out annually to measure patient experience in primary care in England, added inclusive questions about gender identity and trans status for the first time. Methods: This protocol paper pre-registers the methods that we will use for this work for a secondary analysis of these data, including both the statistical analysis protocol and early patient and public involvement work, to answer the following three research questions: (1) What are the (a) demographic characteristics, (b) health conditions, and (c) healthcare experiences of trans and/or non-binary adults in England? (2) Was there any difference in whether people who are trans and/or non-binary had been asked to shield during the COVID-19 pandemic or not compared with all other survey responders? (3) Does the relationship between being trans and/or non-binary, and self-reported long-term mental health problems, autism and autistic spectrum disorder and learning disability vary by age, gender, ethnicity, deprivation, sexual orientation or region

The Health and Healthcare Outcomes of Trans and/or Non-Binary Adults in England: Protocol for an Analysis of Responses to the 2021 GP Patient Survey

Background: The large-scale quantitative evidence base to understand and improve health and healthcare outcomes for people who are trans and/or non-binary is still developing, although what research there is suggests that risk of poor health is high, and experiences of healthcare services are often poor. In 2021 the GP Patient Survey, which is carried out annually to measure patient experience in primary care in England, added inclusive questions about gender identity and trans status for the first time. Methods: This protocol paper pre-registers the methods that we will use for this work for a secondary analysis of these data, including both the statistical analysis protocol and early patient and public involvement work, to answer the following three research questions: (1) What are the (a) demographic characteristics, (b) health conditions, and (c) healthcare experiences of trans and/or non-binary adults in England? (2) Was there any difference in whether people who are trans and/or non-binary had been asked to shield during the COVID-19 pandemic or not compared with all other survey responders? (3) Does the relationship between being trans and/or non-binary, and self-reported long-term mental health problems, autism and autistic spectrum disorder and learning disability vary by age, gender, ethnicity, deprivation, sexual orientation or region

The Health and Healthcare Outcomes of Trans and/or Non-Binary Adults in England: Protocol for an Analysis of Responses to the 2021 GP Patient Survey

Background: The large-scale quantitative evidence base to understand and improve health and healthcare outcomes for people who are trans and/or non-binary is still developing, although what research there is suggests that risk of poor health is high, and experiences of healthcare services are often poor. In 2021 the GP Patient Survey, which is carried out annually to measure patient experience in primary care in England, added inclusive questions about gender identity and trans status for the first time. Methods: This protocol paper pre-registers the methods that we will use for this work for a secondary analysis of these data, including both the statistical analysis protocol and early patient and public involvement work, to answer the following three research questions: (1) What are the (a) demographic characteristics, (b) health conditions, and (c) healthcare experiences of trans and/or non-binary adults in England? (2) Was there any difference in whether people who are trans and/or non-binary had been asked to shield during the COVID-19 pandemic or not compared with all other survey responders? (3) Does the relationship between being trans and/or non-binary, and self-reported long-term mental health problems, autism and autistic spectrum disorder and learning disability vary by age, gender, ethnicity, deprivation, sexual orientation or region?</jats:p