A New Model of Delirium Care in the Acute Geriatric Setting: Geriatric Monitoring Unit

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Delirium is a common and serious condition, which affects many of our older hospitalised patients. It is an indicator of severe underlying illness and requires early diagnosis and prompt treatment, associated with poor survival, functional outcomes with increased risk of institutionalisation following the delirium episode in the acute care setting. We describe a new model of delirium care in the acute care setting, titled Geriatric Monitoring Unit (GMU) where the important concepts of delirium prevention and management are integrated. We hypothesize that patients with delirium admitted to the GMU would have better clinical outcomes with less need for physical and psychotropic restraints compared to usual care.</p> <p>Methods/Design</p> <p>GMU models after the Delirium Room with adoption of core interventions from Hospital Elder Life Program and use of evening bright light therapy to consolidate circadian rhythm and improve sleep in the elderly patients. The novelty of this approach lies in the amalgamation of these interventions in a multi-faceted approach in acute delirium management. GMU development thus consists of key considerations for room design and resource planning, program specific interventions and daily core interventions. Assessments undertaken include baseline demographics, comorbidity scoring, duration and severity of delirium, cognitive, functional measures at baseline, 6 months and 12 months later. Additionally we also analysed the pre and post-GMU implementation knowledge and attitude on delirium care among staff members in the geriatric wards (nurses, doctors) and undertook satisfaction surveys for caregivers of patients treated in GMU.</p> <p>Discussion</p> <p>This study protocol describes the conceptualization and implementation of a specialized unit for delirium management. We hypothesize that such a model of care will not only result in better clinical outcomes for the elderly patient with delirium compared to usual geriatric care, but also improved staff knowledge and satisfaction. The model may then be transposed across various locations and disciplines in the acute hospital where delirious patients could be sited.</p> <p>Trial Registration</p> <p>Current Controlled Trials <a href="http://www.controlled-trials.com/ISRCTN52323811">ISRCTN52323811</a></p

Automated Reporter Quantification In Vivo: High-Throughput Screening Method for Reporter-Based Assays in Zebrafish

Reporter-based assays underlie many high-throughput screening (HTS) platforms, but most are limited to in vitro applications. Here, we report a simple whole-organism HTS method for quantifying changes in reporter intensity in individual zebrafish over time termed, Automated Reporter Quantification in vivo (ARQiv). ARQiv differs from current “high-content” (e.g., confocal imaging-based) whole-organism screening technologies by providing a purely quantitative data acquisition approach that affords marked improvements in throughput. ARQiv uses a fluorescence microplate reader with specific detection functionalities necessary for robust quantification of reporter signals in vivo. This approach is: 1) Rapid; achieving true HTS capacities (i.e., >50,000 units per day), 2) Reproducible; attaining HTS-compatible assay quality (i.e., Z'-factors of ≥0.5), and 3) Flexible; amenable to nearly any reporter-based assay in zebrafish embryos, larvae, or juveniles. ARQiv is used here to quantify changes in: 1) Cell number; loss and regeneration of two different fluorescently tagged cell types (pancreatic beta cells and rod photoreceptors), 2) Cell signaling; relative activity of a transgenic Notch-signaling reporter, and 3) Cell metabolism; accumulation of reactive oxygen species. In summary, ARQiv is a versatile and readily accessible approach facilitating evaluation of genetic and/or chemical manipulations in living zebrafish that complements current “high-content” whole-organism screening methods by providing a first-tier in vivo HTS drug discovery platform

A systematic review on the effectiveness of physical and rehabilitation interventions for chronic non-specific low back pain

Low back pain (LBP) is a common and disabling disorder in western society. The management of LBP comprises a range of different intervention strategies including surgery, drug therapy, and non-medical interventions. The objective of the present study is to determine the effectiveness of physical and rehabilitation interventions (i.e. exercise therapy, back school, transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS), low level laser therapy, education, massage, behavioural treatment, traction, multidisciplinary treatment, lumbar supports, and heat/cold therapy) for chronic LBP. The primary search was conducted in MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, CENTRAL, and PEDro up to 22 December 2008. Existing Cochrane reviews for the individual interventions were screened for studies fulfilling the inclusion criteria. The search strategy outlined by the Cochrane Back Review Groups (CBRG) was followed. The following were included for selection criteria: (1) randomized controlled trials, (2) adult (≥18 years) population with chronic (≥12 weeks) non-specific LBP, and (3) evaluation of at least one of the main clinically relevant outcome measures (pain, functional status, perceived recovery, or return to work). Two reviewers independently selected studies and extracted data on study characteristics, risk of bias, and outcomes at short, intermediate, and long-term follow-up. The GRADE approach was used to determine the quality of evidence. In total 83 randomized controlled trials met the inclusion criteria: exercise therapy (n = 37), back school (n = 5), TENS (n = 6), low level laser therapy (n = 3), behavioural treatment (n = 21), patient education (n = 1), traction (n = 1), and multidisciplinary treatment (n = 6). Compared to usual care, exercise therapy improved post-treatment pain intensity and disability, and long-term function. Behavioural treatment was found to be effective in reducing pain intensity at short-term follow-up compared to no treatment/waiting list controls. Finally, multidisciplinary treatment was found to reduce pain intensity and disability at short-term follow-up compared to no treatment/waiting list controls. Overall, the level of evidence was low. Evidence from randomized controlled trials demonstrates that there is low quality evidence for the effectiveness of exercise therapy compared to usual care, there is low evidence for the effectiveness of behavioural therapy compared to no treatment and there is moderate evidence for the effectiveness of a multidisciplinary treatment compared to no treatment and other active treatments at reducing pain at short-term in the treatment of chronic low back pain. Based on the heterogeneity of the populations, interventions, and comparison groups, we conclude that there are insufficient data to draw firm conclusion on the clinical effect of back schools, low-level laser therapy, patient education, massage, traction, superficial heat/cold, and lumbar supports for chronic LBP