The Effect of Token Reinforcement on Standardized I.Q. Test Scores as a Function of Initial I.Q. Level

24 leaves. Advisor: Margaret E. LloydThe probLem. Standardized I.Q. test scores are frequently used as a source of information for making decisions about academic placement (Kolstoe, 1967). Recent research has indicated that individuals differ in motivational level and thus test scores may be reflecting differences in motivation as well as differences in cognitive ability and informational achievements. The present study was concerned with determining whether maximizing motivational level through the use of a token reinforcement program would improve the I.Q. scores of all children or only those children with low I.Q. scores, as previous research has indicated (Clingman & Fowler, 1976). Procedure. All children were tested on the Wechsler Preschool and Primary Scale of Intelligence (WPPSI) according to standardized instructions. On the basis of the test scores they were placed in either a high I.Q. or a low I.Q. group. Children in each group were randomly assigned to either the experimental or the control condition. Four weeks later, all the children were given a reinforcer effectiveness test. Then the children in the control condition were retested according to standardized instructions. Subjects in the experimental condition were given a token after each correct response. Tokens were exchangable for a variety of activity and tangible items. Findings. Children in the experimental conditions improved their I.Q. scores significantly over children in the control condition. No interaction was found between condition and I.Q. level. That is, the high experimental group improved over the high control group as much as the low experimental group improved over the low control group. Conclusions. A token reinforcement program applied contingently for correct responding increased I.Q. scores of preschool children, regardless of initial I.Q. level. Recommendations. Findings of this study suggest that some children may have motivational deficits and that by maximizing their motivation with a token reinforcement program, their scores may more truly reflect thelr cognitive ability and informational achievements

Length of hospital stay for elective electrophysiological procedures: a survey from the European Heart Rhythm Association

AIMS: Electrophysiological (EP) operations that have traditionally involved long hospital lengths of stay (LOS) are now being undertaken as day case procedures. The coronavirus disease-19 pandemic served as an impetus for many centres to shorten LOS for EP procedures. This survey explores LOS for elective EP procedures in the modern era. METHODS AND RESULTS: An online survey consisting of 27 multiple-choice questions was completed by 245 respondents from 35 countries. With respect to de novo cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) implantations, day case procedures were reported for 79.5% of implantable loop recorders, 13.3% of pacemakers (PMs), 10.4% of implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs), and 10.2% of cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) devices. With respect to CIED generator replacements, day case procedures were reported for 61.7% of PMs, 49.2% of ICDs, and 48.2% of CRT devices. With regard to ablations, day case procedures were reported for 5.7% of atrial fibrillation (AF) ablations, 10.7% of left-sided ablations, and 17.5% of right-sided ablations. A LOS ≥ 2 days for CIED implantation was reported for 47.7% of PM, 54.5% of ICDs, and 56.9% of CRT devices and for 54.5% of AF ablations, 42.2% of right-sided ablations, and 46.1% of left-sided ablations. Reimbursement (43-56%) and bed availability (20-47%) were reported to have no consistent impact on the organization of elective procedures. CONCLUSION: There is a wide variation in the LOS for elective EP procedures. The LOS for some procedures appears disproportionate to their complexity. Neither reimbursement nor bed availability consistently influenced LOS

Sudden cardiac death while waiting: do we need the wearable cardioverter-defibrillator?

Sudden cardiac death (SCD) is the most frequent cause of cardiovascular death in industrialized nations. Patients with cardiomyopathy are at increased risk for SCD and may benefit from an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD). The risk of SCD is highest in the first months after myocardial infarction or first diagnosis of severe non-ischemic cardiomyopathy. On the other hand, left ventricular function may improve in a subset of patients to such an extent that an ICD might no longer be needed. To offer protection from a transient risk of SCD, the wearable cardioverter-defibrillator (WCD) is available. Results of the first randomized clinical trial investigating the role of the WCD after myocardial infarction were recently published. This review is intended to provide insight into data from the VEST trial, and to put these into perspective with studies and clinical experience. As a non-invasive, temporary therapy, the WCD may offer advantages over early ICD implantation. However, recent data demonstrate that patient compliance and education play a crucial role in this new concept of preventing SCD

Same-day discharge vs. overnight stay following catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation: a comprehensive review and meta-analysis by the European Heart Rhythm Association Health Economics Committee

Aims: Same-day discharge (SDD) after catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation (AF) may address the growing socio-economic health burden of the increasing demand for interventional AF therapies. This systematic review and meta-analysis analyses the current evidence on clinical outcomes in SDD after AF ablation compared with overnight stay (ONS). Methods and results: A systematic search of the PubMed database was performed. Pre-defined endpoints were complications at short-term (24–96 h) and 30-day post-discharge, re-hospitalization, and/or emergency room (ER) visits at 30-day post-discharge, and 30-day mortality. Twenty-four studies (154 716 patients) were included. Random-effects models were applied for meta-analyses of pooled endpoint prevalence in the SDD cohort and for comparison between SDD and ONS cohorts. Pooled estimates for complications after SDD were low both for short-term [2%; 95% confidence interval (CI): 1–5%; I2: 89%) and 30-day follow-up (2%; 95% CI: 1–4%; I2: 91%). There was no significant difference in complications rates between SDD and ONS [short-term: risk ratio (RR): 1.62; 95% CI: 0.52–5.01; I2: 37%; 30 days: RR: 0.65; 95% CI: 0.42–1.00; I2: 95%). Pooled rates of re-hospitalization/ER visits after SDD were 4% (95% CI: 1–10%; I2: 96%) with no statistically significant difference between SDD and ONS (RR: 0.86; 95% CI: 0.58–1.27; I2: 61%). Pooled 30-day mortality was low after SDD (0%; 95% CI: 0–1%; I2: 33%). All studies were subject to a relevant risk of bias, mainly due to study design. Conclusion: In this meta-analysis including a large contemporary cohort, SDD after AF ablation was associated with low prevalence of post-discharge complications, re-hospitalizations/ER visits and mortality, and a similar risk compared with ONS. Due to limited quality of current evidence, further prospective, randomized trials are needed to confirm safety of SDD and define patient- and procedure-related prerequisites for successful and safe SDD strategies

Fully digital data processing during cardiovascular implantable electronic device follow-up in a high-volume tertiary center

Background Increasing numbers of patients with cardiovascular implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) and limited follow-up capacities highlight unmet challenges in clinical electrophysiology. Integrated software (MediConnect®) enabling fully digital processing of device interrogation data has been commercially developed to facilitate follow-up visits. We sought to assess feasibility of fully digital data processing (FDDP) during ambulatory device follow-up in a high-volume tertiary hospital to provide guidance for future users of FDDP software. Methods A total of 391 patients (mean age, 70 years) presenting to the outpatient department for routine device follow-up were analyzed (pacemaker, 44%; implantable cardioverter defibrillator, 39%; cardiac resynchronization therapy device, 16%). Results Quality of data transfer and follow-up duration were compared between digital (n = 265) and manual processing of device data (n = 126). Digital data import was successful, complete and correct in 82% of cases when early software versions were used. When using the most recent software version the rate of successful digital data import increased to 100%. Software-based import of interrogation data was complete and without failure in 97% of cases. The mean duration of a follow-up visit did not differ between the two groups (digital 18.7 min vs. manual data transfer 18.2 min). Conclusions FDDP software was successfully implemented into the ambulatory follow-up of patients with implanted pacemakers and defibrillators. Digital data import into electronic patient management software was feasible and supported the physician’s workflow. The total duration of follow-up visits comprising technical device interrogation and clinical actions was not affected in the present tertiary center outpatient cohort

Length of hospital stay for elective electrophysiological procedures: a survey from the European Heart Rhythm Association

Aims Electrophysiological (EP) operations that have traditionally involved long hospital lengths of stay (LOS) are now being undertaken as day case procedures. The coronavirus disease-19 pandemic served as an impetus for many centres to shorten LOS for EP procedures. This survey explores LOS for elective EP procedures in the modern era. Methods and results An online survey consisting of 27 multiple-choice questions was completed by 245 respondents from 35 countries. With respect to de novo cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) implantations, day case procedures were reported for 79.5% of implantable loop recorders, 13.3% of pacemakers (PMs), 10.4% of implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs), and 10.2% of cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) devices. With respect to CIED generator replacements, day case procedures were reported for 61.7% of PMs, 49.2% of ICDs, and 48.2% of CRT devices. With regard to ablations, day case procedures were reported for 5.7% of atrial fibrillation (AF) ablations, 10.7% of left-sided ablations, and 17.5% of right-sided ablations. A LOS ≥ 2 days for CIED implantation was reported for 47.7% of PM, 54.5% of ICDs, and 56.9% of CRT devices and for 54.5% of AF ablations, 42.2% of right-sided ablations, and 46.1% of left-sided ablations. Reimbursement (43–56%) and bed availability (20–47%) were reported to have no consistent impact on the organization of elective procedures. Conclusion There is a wide variation in the LOS for elective EP procedures. The LOS for some procedures appears disproportionate to their complexity. Neither reimbursement nor bed availability consistently influenced LOS

Perceptions, prevalence, and patterns of cannabis use among cancer patients treated at 12 NCI-Designated Cancer Centers

BackgroundThe legal climate for cannabis use has dramatically changed with an increasing number of states passing legislation legalizing access for medical and recreational use. Among cancer patients, cannabis is often used to ameliorate adverse effects of cancer treatment. Data are limited on the extent and type of use among cancer patients during treatment and the perceived benefits and harms. This multicenter survey was conducted to assess the use of cannabis among cancer patients residing in states with varied legal access to cannabis.MethodsA total of 12 NCI-Designated Cancer Centers, across states with varied cannabis-access legal status, conducted surveys with a core questionnaire to assess cannabis use among recently diagnosed cancer patients. Data were collected between September 2021 and August 2023 and pooled across 12 cancer centers. Frequencies and 95% confidence intervals for core survey measures were calculated, and weighted estimates are presented for the 10 sites that drew probability samples.ResultsOverall reported cannabis use since cancer diagnosis among survey respondents was 32.9% (weighted), which varied slightly by state legalization status. The most common perceived benefits of use were for pain, sleep, stress and anxiety, and treatment side effects. Reported perceived risks were less common and included inability to drive, difficulty concentrating, lung damage, addiction, and impact on employment. A majority reported feeling comfortable speaking to health-care providers though, overall, only 21.5% reported having done so. Among those who used cannabis since diagnosis, the most common modes were eating in food, smoking, and pills or tinctures, and the most common reasons were for sleep disturbance, followed by pain and stress and anxiety with 60%-68% reporting improved symptoms with use.ConclusionThis geographically diverse survey demonstrates that patients use cannabis regardless of its legal status. Addressing knowledge gaps concerning benefits and harms of cannabis use during cancer treatment is critical to enhance patient-provider communication

Performance Measures Based on How Adults With Cancer Feel and Function: Stakeholder Recommendations and Feasibility Testing in Six Cancer Centers

PURPOSE Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) that assess how patients feel and function have potential for evaluating quality of care. Stakeholder recommendations for PRO-based performance measures (PMs) were elicited, and feasibility testing was conducted at six cancer centers. METHODS Interviews were conducted with 124 stakeholders to determine priority symptoms and risk adjustment variables for PRO-PMs and perceived acceptability. Stakeholders included patients and advocates, caregivers, clinicians, administrators, and thought leaders. Feasibility testing was conducted in six cancer centers. Patients completed PROMs at home 5-15 days into a chemotherapy cycle. Feasibility was operationalized as $75$ 75% patient acceptability. RESULTS Stakeholder priority PRO-PMs for systemic therapy were GI symptoms (diarrhea, constipation, nausea, vomiting), depression/anxiety, pain, insomnia, fatigue, dyspnea, physical function, and neuropathy. Recommended risk adjusters included demographics, insurance type, cancer type, comorbidities, emetic risk, and difficulty paying bills. In feasibility testing, 653 patients enrolled (approximately 110 per site), and 607 (93%) completed PROMs, which indicated high feasibility for home collection. The majority of patients (470 of 607; 77%) completed PROMs without a reminder call, and 137 (23%) of 607 completed them after a reminder call. Most patients (72%) completed PROMs through web, 17% paper, or 2% interactive voice response (automated call that verbally asked patient questions). For acceptability, . 95% of patients found PROM items to be easy to understand and complete. CONCLUSION Clinicians, patients, and other stakeholders agree that PMs that are based on how patients feel and function would be an important addition to quality measurement. This study also shows that PRO-PMs can be feasibly captured at home during systemic therapy and are acceptable to patients. PRO-PMs may add value to the portfolio of PMs as oncology transitions from fee-for-service payment models to performance-based care that emphasizes outcome measures

Predictors and Prognostic Implications of Cardiac Arrhythmias in Patients Hospitalized for COVID-19

Background: Cardiac manifestation of COVID-19 has been reported during the COVID pandemic. The role of cardiac arrhythmias in COVID-19 is insufficiently understood. This study assesses the incidence of cardiac arrhythmias and their prognostic implications in hospitalized COVID-19-patients. Methods: A total of 166 patients from eight centers who were hospitalized for COVID-19 from 03/2020–06/2020 were included. Medical records were systematically analyzed for baseline characteristics, biomarkers, cardiac arrhythmias and clinical outcome parameters related to the index hospitalization. Predisposing risk factors for arrhythmias were identified. Furthermore, the influence of arrhythmia on the course of disease and related outcomes was assessed using univariate and multiple regression analyses. Results: Arrhythmias were detected in 20.5% of patients. Atrial fibrillation was the most common arrhythmia. Age and cardiovascular disease were predictors for new-onset arrhythmia. Arrhythmia was associated with a pronounced increase in cardiac biomarkers, prolonged hospitalization, and admission to intensive- or intermediate-care-units, mechanical ventilation and in-hospital mortality. In multiple regression analyses, incident arrhythmia was strongly associated with duration of hospitalization and mechanical ventilation. Cardiovascular disease was associated with increased mortality. Conclusions: Arrhythmia was the most common cardiac event in association with hospitalization for COVID-19. Older age and cardiovascular disease predisposed for arrhythmia during hospitalization. Whereas in-hospital mortality is affected by underlying cardiovascular conditions, arrhythmia during hospitalization for COVID-19 is independently associated with prolonged hospitalization and mechanical ventilation. Thus, incident arrhythmia may indicate a patient subgroup at risk for a severe course of disease