IMAGINE study protocol of a clinical trial: a multi-center, investigator-blinded, randomized, 36-month, parallel-group to compare the effectiveness of motivational interview in rehabilitation of older stroke survivors

Background: Rehabilitation pathways are crucial to reduce stroke-related disability. Motivational Interviewing (MI), as a person-centered complex intervention, aimed to empower and motivate, and could be a resource to improve rehabilitation outcomes for older stroke survivors. The IMAGINE project aims to assess the impact of MI, as a complement to standard geriatric rehabilitation, on functional improvement at 30 days after admission, compared to standard geriatric rehabilitation alone, in persons admitted to geriatric rehabilitation after a stroke. Secondary objectives include assessing the impact of MI on physical activity and performance, self-efficacy, safety, cost-utility, participants' experiences and functional status at 3 months. Methods: We will conduct a multicenter randomized clinical trial in three geriatric rehabilitation hospitals in Spain. Older adults after mild-moderate stroke without previous severe cognitive impairment or disability will be randomized into the control or intervention group (136 per group, total N = 272). The intervention group will receive 4 sessions of MI by trained nurses, including the design of a personalized rehabilitation plan agreed between stroke survivors and nurses based on stroke survivors´ goals, needs, preferences and capabilities. Main outcome will be the Functional Independence Measure (FIM). In-hospital physical activity will be measured through accelerometers and secondary outcomes using validated scales. The study includes a process evaluation and cost-utility analysis. Discussion: Final results are expected by end of 2020. This study will provide relevant information on the implementation of MI as a rehabilitation reinforcement tool in older stroke survivors. A potential reduction in post-stroke disability and dependence would increase person's health-related quality of life and well-being and reduce health and social care costs. IMAGINE has the potential to inform practice and policymakers on how to move forward towards shared decision-making and shared responsibilities in the vulnerable population of older stroke survivors

Is routine ophthalmoscopy really necessary in candidemic patients?

The purpose of this study was to determine among patients with candidemia the real rate of ophthalmoscopy and the impact of performing ocular assessment on the outcome of the disease. We performed a post hoc analysis of a prospective, multicenter, population-based candidemia surveillance program implemented in Spain during 2010-2011 (CANDIPOP). Ophthalmoscopy was performed in only 168 of the 365 patients with candidemia (46%). Ocular lesions related to candidemia were found in only 13/168 patients (7.7%), of whom 1 reported ocular symptoms (incidence of symptomatic disease in the whole population, 0.27% [1/365]). Ophthalmological findings led to a change in antifungal therapy in only 5.9% of cases (10/168), and performance of the test was not related to a better outcome. Ocular candidiasis was not associated with a worse outcome and progressed favorably in all but 1 evaluable patient, who did not experience vision loss. The low frequency of ophthalmoscopy and ocular involvement and the asymptomatic nature of ocular candidiasis, with a favorable outcome in almost all cases, lead us to reconsider the need for systematic ophthalmoscopy in all candidemic patients

Multivariate logistic regression analysis of prognostic factors associated with 30-day mortality.

<p>Multivariate logistic regression analysis of prognostic factors associated with 30-day mortality.</p

Univariate analysis of risk factors for ocular candidiasis.

<p>Univariate analysis of risk factors for ocular candidiasis.</p

Risk conditions for ocular candidiasis.

<p>Multivariate analysis.</p

Multivariate logistic regression analysis of prognostic factors associated with 30-day mortality.

<p>Multivariate logistic regression analysis of prognostic factors associated with 30-day mortality.</p

Is routine ophthalmoscopy really necessary in candidemic patients?

The purpose of this study was to determine among patients with candidemia the real rate of ophthalmoscopy and the impact of performing ocular assessment on the outcome of the disease. We performed a post hoc analysis of a prospective, multicenter, population-based candidemia surveillance program implemented in Spain during 2010-2011 (CANDIPOP). Ophthalmoscopy was performed in only 168 of the 365 patients with candidemia (46%). Ocular lesions related to candidemia were found in only 13/168 patients (7.7%), of whom 1 reported ocular symptoms (incidence of symptomatic disease in the whole population, 0.27% [1/365]). Ophthalmological findings led to a change in antifungal therapy in only 5.9% of cases (10/168), and performance of the test was not related to a better outcome. Ocular candidiasis was not associated with a worse outcome and progressed favorably in all but 1 evaluable patient, who did not experience vision loss. The low frequency of ophthalmoscopy and ocular involvement and the asymptomatic nature of ocular candidiasis, with a favorable outcome in almost all cases, lead us to reconsider the need for systematic ophthalmoscopy in all candidemic patients