Glucocorticoid-Treated Mice Are an Inappropriate Positive Control for Long-Term Preclinical Studies in the mdx Mouse

Dmd(mdx) (mdx) mice are used as a genetic and biochemical model of dystrophin deficiency. The long-term consequences of glucocorticoid (GC) treatment on dystrophin-deficient skeletal and heart muscle are not yet known. Here we used systematic phenotyping to assess the long-term consequences of GC treatment in mdx mice. Our investigation addressed not only the effects of GC on the disease phenotype but also the question of whether GCs can be used as a positive control for preclinical drug evaluations.We performed nine pre-clinical efficacy trials (treated N = 129, untreated N = 106) of different durations in 9-to-50-week-old dystrophic mdx mice over a 3-year time period using standardized methods. In all these trials, we used either 1 mg/kg body weight of prednisone or 5 mg/kg body weight of prednisolone as positive controls to compare the efficacy of various test drugs. Data from untreated controls and GC-treated mice in the various trials have been pooled and analyzed to assess the effects of GCs on dystrophin-deficient skeletal and cardiac muscles of mdx mice. Our results indicate that continuous GC treatment results in early (e.g., at 50 days) improvements in normalized parameters such as grip strength, motor coordination and maximal in vitro force contractions on isolated EDL muscle, but these initial benefits are followed by a progressive loss of muscle strength after 100 days. We also found a significant increase in heart fibrosis that is reflected in a significant deterioration in cardiac systolic function after 100 days of treatment.Continuous administration of prednisone to mdx mice initially improves skeletal muscle strength, but further therapy result in deterioration of muscle strength and cardiac function associated with enhanced cardiac fibrosis. These results suggest that GCs may not serve as an appropriate positive control for long-term mdx mouse preclinical trials

A Net Energy Analysis of the Global Agriculture, Aquaculture, Fishing and Forestry System

The global agriculture, aquaculture, fishing and forestry (AAFF) energy system is subject to three unsustainable trends: (1) the approaching biophysical limits of AAFF; (2) the role of AAFF as a driver of environmental degradation; and (3) the long-term declining energy efficiency of AAFF due to growing dependence on fossil fuels. In response, we conduct a net energy analysis for the period 1971–2017 and review existing studies to investigate the global AAFF energy system and its vulnerability to the three unsustainable trends from an energetic perspective. We estimate the global AAFF system represents 27.9% of societies energy supply in 2017, with food energy representing 20.8% of societies total energy supply. We find that the net energy-return-on-investment (net EROI) of global AAFF increased from 2.87:1 in 1971 to 4.05:1 in 2017. We suggest that rising net EROI values are being fuelled in part by ‘depleting natures accumulated energy stocks’. We also find that the net energy balance of AAFF increased by 130% in this period, with at the same time a decrease in both the proportion of rural residents and also the proportion of the total population working in AAFF—which decreased from 19.8 to 10.3%. However, this comes at the cost of growing fossil fuel dependency which increased from 43.6 to 62.2%. Given the increasing probability of near-term fossil fuel scarcity, the growing impacts of climate change and environmental degradation, and the approaching biophysical limits of global AAFF, ‘Odum’s hoax’ is likely soon to be revealed

Comparison of user groups' perspectives of barriers and facilitators to implementing electronic health records: a systematic review

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Electronic health record (EHR) implementation is currently underway in Canada, as in many other countries. These ambitious projects involve many stakeholders with unique perceptions of the implementation process. EHR users have an important role to play as they must integrate the EHR system into their work environments and use it in their everyday activities. Users hold valuable, first-hand knowledge of what can limit or contribute to the success of EHR implementation projects. A comprehensive synthesis of EHR users' perceptions is key to successful future implementation. This systematic literature review was aimed to synthesize current knowledge of the barriers and facilitators influencing shared EHR implementation among its various users.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Covering a period from 1999 to 2009, a literature search was conducted on nine electronic databases. Studies were included if they reported on users' perceived barriers and facilitators to shared EHR implementation, in healthcare settings comparable to Canada. Studies in all languages with an empirical study design were included. Quality and relevance of the studies were assessed. Four EHR user groups were targeted: physicians, other health care professionals, managers, and patients/public. Content analysis was performed independently by two authors using a validated extraction grid with pre-established categorization of barriers and facilitators for each group of EHR users.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Of a total of 5,695 potentially relevant publications identified, 117 full text publications were obtained after screening titles and abstracts. After review of the full articles, 60 publications, corresponding to 52 studies, met the inclusion criteria. The most frequent adoption factors common to all user groups were design and technical concerns, ease of use, interoperability, privacy and security, costs, productivity, familiarity and ability with EHR, motivation to use EHR, patient and health professional interaction, and lack of time and workload. Each user group also identified factors specific to their professional and individual priorities.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>This systematic review presents innovative research on the barriers and facilitators to EHR implementation. While important similarities between user groups are highlighted, differences between them demonstrate that each user group also has a unique perspective of the implementation process that should be taken into account.</p

Recommendations for active correction of hypernatremia in volume-resuscitated shock or sepsis patients should be taken with a grain of salt: A systematic review

Background: Healthcare-acquired hypernatremia (serum sodium >145 mEq/dL) is common among critically ill and other hospitalized patients and is usually treated with hypotonic fluid and/or diuretics to correct a “free water deficit.� However, many hypernatremic patients are eu- or hypervolemic, and an evolving body of literature emphasizes the importance of rapidly returning critically ill patients to a neutral fluid balance after resuscitation. Objective: We searched for any randomized- or observational-controlled studies evaluating the impact of active interventions intended to correct hypernatremia to eunatremia on any outcome in volume-resuscitated patients with shock and/or sepsis. Data sources: We performed a systematic literature search with studies identified by searching MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, ClinicalTrials.gov, IndexCatalogue of the Library of the Surgeon General’s Office, DARE (Database of Reviews of Effects), and CINAHL and scanning reference lists of relevant articles with abstracts published in English. Data synthesis: We found no randomized- or observational-controlled trials measuring the impact of active correction of hypernatremia on any outcome in resuscitated patients. Conclusion: Recommendations for active correction of hypernatremia in resuscitated patients with sepsis or shock are unsupported by clinical research acceptable by modern evidence standards.ECU Open Access Publishing Support Fun

Fluid challenges in intensive care: the FENICE study A global inception cohort study

Fluid challenges (FCs) are one of the most commonly used therapies in critically ill patients and represent the cornerstone of hemodynamic management in intensive care units. There are clear benefits and harms from fluid therapy. Limited data on the indication, type, amount and rate of an FC in critically ill patients exist in the literature. The primary aim was to evaluate how physicians conduct FCs in terms of type, volume, and rate of given fluid; the secondary aim was to evaluate variables used to trigger an FC and to compare the proportion of patients receiving further fluid administration based on the response to the FC.This was an observational study conducted in ICUs around the world. Each participating unit entered a maximum of 20 patients with one FC.2213 patients were enrolled and analyzed in the study. The median [interquartile range] amount of fluid given during an FC was 500 ml (500-1000). The median time was 24 min (40-60 min), and the median rate of FC was 1000 [500-1333] ml/h. The main indication for FC was hypotension in 1211 (59 %, CI 57-61 %). In 43 % (CI 41-45 %) of the cases no hemodynamic variable was used. Static markers of preload were used in 785 of 2213 cases (36 %, CI 34-37 %). Dynamic indices of preload responsiveness were used in 483 of 2213 cases (22 %, CI 20-24 %). No safety variable for the FC was used in 72 % (CI 70-74 %) of the cases. There was no statistically significant difference in the proportion of patients who received further fluids after the FC between those with a positive, with an uncertain or with a negatively judged response.The current practice and evaluation of FC in critically ill patients are highly variable. Prediction of fluid responsiveness is not used routinely, safety limits are rarely used, and information from previous failed FCs is not always taken into account