SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: A previous systematic review identified 115 outcomes in 60 trials and systematic reviews evaluating treatments for children with appendicitis, suggesting the need for a COS.
METHODS: The development process consisted of 4 phases: (1) an updated systematic review identifying all previously reported outcomes, (2) a 2-stage international Delphi study in which parents with their children and surgeons rated these outcomes for inclusion in the COS, (3) focus groups with young people to identify missing outcomes, and (4) international expert meetings to ratify the final COS.
RESULTS: The systematic review identified 129 outcomes which were mapped to 43 unique outcome terms for the Delphi survey. The first-round included 137 parents (8 countries) and 245 surgeons (10 countries), the second-round response rates were 61% and 85% respectively, with 10 outcomes emerging with consensus. After 2 young peoples' focus groups, 2 additional outcomes were added to the final COS (12): mortality, bowel obstruction, intraabdominal abscess, recurrent appendicitis, complicated appendicitis, return to baseline health, readmission, reoperation, unplanned appendectomy, adverse events related to treatment, major and minor complications.
CONCLUSION: An evidence-informed COS based on international consensus, including patients and parents has been developed. This COS is recommended for all future studies evaluating treatment ofsimple appendicitis in children, to reduce heterogeneity between studies and facilitate data synthesis and evidence-based decision-making.
METHOD: A single-blind RCT was conducted among 30 randomized patients with dental phobia to either VRET or informational pamphlet (IP) condition. Primary outcome anxiety measures (VAS-A, MDAS and DFS) were evaluated at baseline, pre- and post-intervention, 1-week, 3-months and 6-months follow-up. Secondary outcome measures assessed were pre-post behavioral avoidance, temporal variations of heart rate and VR-experience during and post-VRET, and dental treatment acceptance in both conditions at 6-month follow-up.
RESULTS: Intention to treat analysis, using a repeated measures MANOVA, revealed a multivariate interaction effect between time and condition (p = 0.015) for all primary outcome measures (all ps
METHODS: This was a cross-sectional study. 1332 participants aged ≥ 55 years were selected by random sampling from the parliamentary electoral register. Only 1274 participants completed the frailty assessment and 1278 participants completed the contrast sensitivity assessment. Impaired vision was defined as a Snellen visual acuity of worse than 6/12 in the better eye. Poor contrast sensitivity was defined as a score on the Pelli Robson chart of lower than 1.65. Frailty was defined with the Fried's phenotype criteria. Inter-group comparisons were determined with the independent T-test for continuous variables and the Pearson's Chi-squared test for categorical variables. The odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence interval (CI) was used to evaluate the cross-sectional association between frailty and visual function.
RESULTS: The mean age of participants was 68.8 ± 7.5 years, of which 58.1% (774) were women. Impaired vision and poor contrast sensitivity were present in 187 (14%) and 271 (21.2%) subjects respectively. 73 (5.8%) individuals were classified as frail, 1161 (91.0.%) pre-frail, and 40 (2.8%) non-frail. There was no significant difference in frailty phenotypes between those with good and impaired vision (p = 0.241). Fried's component of handgrip strength, gait speed and exhaustion were significantly better in those with good visual function (p
METHODS: World Spine Care convened the GSCI to develop an evidence-based, practical, and sustainable healthcare model for spinal care. The initiative aims to improve the management, prevention, and public health for spine-related disorders worldwide; thus, global representation was essential. A series of meetings established the initiative's mission and goals. Electronic surveys collected contributorship and demographic information, and experiences with spinal conditions to better understand perceptions and potential biases that were contributing to the model of care.
RESULTS: Sixty-eight clinicians and scientists participated in the deliberations and are authors of one or more of the GSCI articles. Of these experts, 57 reported providing spine care in 34 countries, (i.e., low-, middle-, and high-income countries, as well as underserved communities in high-income countries.) The majority reported personally experiencing or having a close family member with one or more spinal concerns including: spine-related trauma or injury, spinal problems that required emergency or surgical intervention, spinal pain referred from non-spine sources, spinal deformity, spinal pathology or disease, neurological problems, and/or mild, moderate, or severe back or neck pain. There were no substantial reported conflicts of interest.
CONCLUSION: The GSCI participants have broad professional experience and wide international distribution with no discipline dominating the deliberations. The GSCI believes this set of papers has the potential to inform and improve spine care globally. These slides can be retrieved under Electronic Supplementary Material.
METHODS AND DESIGN: This is a single-center, randomized, controlled, two-arm parallel design clinical trial that will be carried out in a tertiary hospital in Malaysia. In this study, 100 patients diagnosed with type 2 diabetes will be enrolled. Diabetic patients who meet the eligibility criteria will be randomly allocated to two groups, which are diabetic C. caudatus treated(U) group and diabetic control (C) group. Primary and secondary outcomes will be measured at baseline, 4, 8, and 12 weeks. The serum and urine metabolome of both groups will be examined using proton NMR spectroscopy.
DISCUSSION: The study will be the first randomized controlled trial to assess whether C. caudatus can confer beneficial effect in patients with type 2 diabetes. The results of this trial will provide clinical evidence on the effectiveness and safety of C. caudatus in patients with type 2 diabetes.
TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02322268.