Evidence-based Kernels: Fundamental Units of Behavioral Influence

This paper describes evidence-based kernels, fundamental units of behavioral influence that appear to underlie effective prevention and treatment for children, adults, and families. A kernel is a behavior–influence procedure shown through experimental analysis to affect a specific behavior and that is indivisible in the sense that removing any of its components would render it inert. Existing evidence shows that a variety of kernels can influence behavior in context, and some evidence suggests that frequent use or sufficient use of some kernels may produce longer lasting behavioral shifts. The analysis of kernels could contribute to an empirically based theory of behavioral influence, augment existing prevention or treatment efforts, facilitate the dissemination of effective prevention and treatment practices, clarify the active ingredients in existing interventions, and contribute to efficiently developing interventions that are more effective. Kernels involve one or more of the following mechanisms of behavior influence: reinforcement, altering antecedents, changing verbal relational responding, or changing physiological states directly. The paper describes 52 of these kernels, and details practical, theoretical, and research implications, including calling for a national database of kernels that influence human behavior

Epidemiology of pediatric trauma during the COVID-19 pandemic shelter in place

The first COVID-19 cases occurred in the US in January of 2020, leading to the implementation of shelter in place. This study seeks to define the impact of shelter in place on the epidemiology of pediatric trauma. We examined pediatric trauma admissions at 5 Level 1 and 1 Level 2 US pediatric trauma centers between January 1 and June 30, 2017–2020. Demographic and injury data were compared between pre– and post–shelter in place patient cohorts. A total of 8772 pediatric trauma activations were reviewed. There was a 13% decrease in trauma volume in 2020, with a nadir at 16 days following implementation of shelter in place. Injury severity scores were higher in the post–shelter in place cohort. The incidence of nonmotorized vehicle accidents and gunshot wounds increased in the post–shelter in place cohort. We found an overall decrease in pediatric trauma volume following shelter in place. However, injuries tended to be more severe. Our findings help inform targeted injury prevention campaigns during future pandemics. •Shelter-in-place policies led to a 13% decrease in overall pediatric trauma volume.•Biggest decrease occurred in the 30 days surrounding the start of shelter in place.•Nonmotorized vehicle accidents and gunshot wounds increased with shelter in place.•Injury severity was higher among the shelter-in-place cohort compared to controls.•The incidence of nonaccidental trauma did not change with shelter in place

Assessment of stored red blood cells through lab-on-a-chip technologies for precision transfusion medicine

Transfusion of red blood cells (RBCs) is one of the most valuable and widespread treatments in modern medicine. Lifesaving RBC transfusions are facilitated by the cold storage of RBC units in blood banks worldwide. Currently, RBC storage and subsequent transfusion practices are performed using simplistic workflows. More specifically, most blood banks follow the “first-in-first-out” principle to avoid wastage, whereas most healthcare providers prefer the “last-in-first-out” approach simply favoring chronologically younger RBCs. Neither approach addresses recent advances through -omics showing that stored RBC quality is highly variable depending on donor-, time-, and processing-specific factors. Thus, it is time to rethink our workflows in transfusion medicine taking advantage of novel technologies to perform RBC quality assessment. We imagine a future where lab-on-a-chip technologies utilize novel predictive markers of RBC quality identified by -omics and machine learning to usher in a new era of safer and precise transfusion medicine.</p

Evaluation and Management of Primary Spontaneous Pneumothorax in Adolescents and Young Adults: A Systematic Review From the APSA Outcomes & Evidence-Based Practice Committee.

INTRODUCTION: Controversy exists in the optimal management of adolescent and young adult primary spontaneous pneumothorax. The American Pediatric Surgical Association (APSA) Outcomes and Evidence-Based Practice Committee performed a systematic review of the literature to develop evidence-based recommendations. METHODS: Ovid MEDLINE, Elsevier Embase, EBSCOhost CINAHL, Elsevier Scopus, and Wiley Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases were queried for literature related to spontaneous pneumothorax between January 1, 1990, and December 31, 2020, addressing (1) initial management, (2) advanced imaging, (3) timing of surgery, (4) operative technique, (5) management of contralateral side, and (6) management of recurrence. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were followed. RESULTS: Seventy-nine manuscripts were included. Initial management of adolescent and young adult primary spontaneous pneumothorax should be guided by symptoms and can include observation, aspiration, or tube thoracostomy. There is no evidence of benefit for cross-sectional imaging. Patients with ongoing air leak may benefit from early operative intervention within 24-48 h. A video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) approach with stapled blebectomy and pleural procedure should be considered. There is no evidence to support prophylactic management of the contralateral side. Recurrence after VATS can be treated with repeat VATS with intensification of pleural treatment. CONCLUSIONS: The management of adolescent and young adult primary spontaneous pneumothorax is varied. Best practices exist to optimize some aspects of care. Further prospective studies are needed to better determine optimal timing of operative intervention, the most effective operation, and management of recurrence after observation, tube thoracostomy, or operative intervention. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level 4. TYPE OF STUDY: Systematic Review of Level 1-4 studies