Investigation in haemodynamic stability during intermittent haemodialysis in the critically ill

No abstract available

An investigation into the effects of commencing haemodialysis in the critically ill

<b>Introduction:</b> We have aimed to describe haemodynamic changes when haemodialysis is instituted in the critically ill. 3 hypotheses are tested: 1)The initial session is associated with cardiovascular instability, 2)The initial session is associated with more cardiovascular instability compared to subsequent sessions, and 3)Looking at unstable sessions alone, there will be a greater proportion of potentially harmful changes in the initial sessions compared to subsequent ones. <b>Methods:</b> Data was collected for 209 patients, identifying 1605 dialysis sessions. Analysis was performed on hourly records, classifying sessions as stable/unstable by a cutoff of >+/-20% change in baseline physiology (HR/MAP). Data from 3 hours prior, and 4 hours after dialysis was included, and average and minimum values derived. 3 time comparisons were made (pre-HD:during, during HD:post, pre-HD:post). Initial sessions were analysed separately from subsequent sessions to derive 2 groups. If a session was identified as being unstable, then the nature of instability was examined by recording whether changes crossed defined physiological ranges. The changes seen in unstable sessions could be described as to their effects: being harmful/potentially harmful, or beneficial/potentially beneficial. <b>Results:</b> Discarding incomplete data, 181 initial and 1382 subsequent sessions were analysed. A session was deemed to be stable if there was no significant change (>+/-20%) in the time-averaged or minimum MAP/HR across time comparisons. By this definition 85/181 initial sessions were unstable (47%, 95% CI SEM 39.8-54.2). Therefore Hypothesis 1 is accepted. This compares to 44% of subsequent sessions (95% CI 41.1-46.3). Comparing these proportions and their respective CI gives a 95% CI for the standard error of the difference of -4% to 10%. Therefore Hypothesis 2 is rejected. In initial sessions there were 92/1020 harmful changes. This gives a proportion of 9.0% (95% CI SEM 7.4-10.9). In the subsequent sessions there were 712/7248 harmful changes. This gives a proportion of 9.8% (95% CI SEM 9.1-10.5). Comparing the two unpaired proportions gives a difference of -0.08% with a 95% CI of the SE of the difference of -2.5 to +1.2. Hypothesis 3 is rejected. Fisher’s exact test gives a result of p=0.68, reinforcing the lack of significant variance. <b>Conclusions:</b> Our results reject the claims that using haemodialysis is an inherently unstable choice of therapy. Although proportionally more of the initial sessions are classed as unstable, the majority of MAP and HR changes are beneficial in nature

Explaining anomalous responses to treatment in the Intensive Care Unit

The Intensive Care Unit (ICU) provides treatment to critically ill patients. When a patient does not respond as expected to such treatment it can be challenging for clinicians, especially junior clinicians, as they may not have the relevant experience to understand the patient’s anomalous response. Datasets for 10 patients from Glasgow Royal Infirmary’s ICU have been made available to us. We asked several ICU clinicians to review these datasets and to suggest sequences which include anomalous or unusual reactions to treatment. Further, we then asked two ICU clinicians if they agreed with their colleagues’ assessments, and if they did to provide possible explanations for these anomalous sequences. Subsequently we have developed a system which is able to replicate the clinicians’ explanations based on the knowledge contained in its several ontologies; further the system can suggest additional explanations which will be evaluated by the senior consultant

Optimization of human, animal, and environmental health by using the One Health approach

Emerging diseases are increasing burdens on public health, negatively affecting the world economy, causing extinction of species, and disrupting ecological integrity. One Health recognizes that human, domestic animal, and wildlife health are interconnected within ecosystem health and provides a framework for the development of multidisciplinary solutions to global health challenges. To date, most health-promoting interventions have focused largely on single-sector outcomes. For example, risk for transmission of zoonotic pathogens from bush-meat hunting is primarily focused on human hygiene and personal protection. However, bush-meat hunting is a complex issue promoting the need for holistic strategies to reduce transmission of zoonotic disease while addressing food security and wildlife conservation issues. Temporal and spatial separation of humans and wildlife, risk communication, and other preventative strategies should allow wildlife and humans to co-exist. Upstream surveillance, vaccination, and other tools to prevent pathogen spillover are also needed. Clear multi-sector outcomes should be defined, and a systems-based approach is needed to develop interventions that reduce risks and balance the needs of humans, wildlife, and the environment. The ultimate goal is long-term action to reduce forces driving emerging diseases and provide interdisciplinary scientific approaches to management of risks, thereby achieving optimal outcomes for human, animal, and environmental health

Evaluation of the “Three Steps in Screening for Dyslexia” Assessment Protocol Designed for New Zealand Teachers

Traditionally, the New Zealand Ministry of Education opposed the recognition of dyslexia. However, since 2007, the Ministry of Education’s position has started to change, evidenced by the development of a working definition. In 2021 the Ministry of Education released Three Steps in Screening for Dyslexia (TSSD), an assessment protocol designed to support teachers to screen for dyslexia. The current research evaluated the TSSD with a sample of 209 children in Years 4 to 6 (8–10 years-of-age) from New Zealand. The research investigated whether children could be accurately classified using tests from the TSSD, whether the three-step protocol described in the TSSD was a valid assessment approach, and what effect operationalising the term average at different cut-off points had on dyslexia screening. Children were classified using two cluster analyses. The first analysis was based on tests from the Woodcock Johnson IV and the second analysis was based on tests from the TSSD. Subsequent analyses investigated specific aspects of the TSSD protocol, including its sequential design and the placement of cut-off points. Results revealed a number of limitations to the TSSD approach. The authors discuss three changes that could be made to improve the validity and reliability of the TSSD, including a broader assessment of the decoding and language comprehension constructs; directing teachers to assess both decoding and language comprehension, irrespective of a child’s language comprehension ability; and placing a greater emphasis on discrepancy bands over cut-off points.Publishe