OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this report was to describe the prespecified long-term safety objective of Micra at 12 months and electrical performance through 24 months.
METHODS: The Micra Transcatheter Pacing Study was a prospective single-arm study designed to assess the safety and efficacy of the Micra VVIR leadless/intracardiac pacemaker. Enrolled patients met class I or II guideline recommendations for de novo ventricular pacing. The long-term safety objective was freedom from a system- or procedure-related major complication at 12 months. A predefined historical control group of 2667 patients with transvenous pacemakers was used to compare major complication rates.
RESULTS: The long-term safety objective was achieved with a freedom from major complication rate of 96.0% at 12 months (95% confidence interval 94.2%-97.2%; P < .0001 vs performance goal). The risk of major complications for patients with Micra (N = 726) was 48% lower than that for patients with transvenous systems through 12 months postimplant (hazard ratio 0.52; 95% confidence interval 0.35-0.77; P = .001). Across subgroups of age, sex, and comorbidities, Micra reduced the risk of major complications compared to transvenous systems. Electrical performance was excellent through 24 months, with a projected battery longevity of 12.1 years.
CONCLUSION: Long-term performance of the Micra transcatheter pacemaker remains consistent with previously reported data. Few patients experienced major complications through 12 months of follow-up, and all patient subgroups benefited as compared to transvenous pacemaker historical control group.
OBJECTIVE: This study aims to determine the background of recent studies on wheelchair control based on BCI for disability and map the literature survey into a coherent taxonomy. The study intends to identify the most important aspects in this emerging field as an impetus for using BCI for disability in electric-powered wheelchair (EPW) control, which remains a challenge. The study also attempts to provide recommendations for solving other existing limitations and challenges.
METHODS: We systematically searched all articles about EPW control based on BCI for disability in three popular databases: ScienceDirect, IEEE and Web of Science. These databases contain numerous articles that considerably influenced this field and cover most of the relevant theoretical and technical issues.
RESULTS: We selected 100 articles on the basis of our inclusion and exclusion criteria. A large set of articles (55) discussed on developing real-time wheelchair control systems based on BCI for disability signals. Another set of articles (25) focused on analysing BCI for disability signals for wheelchair control. The third set of articles (14) considered the simulation of wheelchair control based on BCI for disability signals. Four articles designed a framework for wheelchair control based on BCI for disability signals. Finally, one article reviewed concerns regarding wheelchair control based on BCI for disability signals.
DISCUSSION: Since 2007, researchers have pursued the possibility of using BCI for disability in EPW control through different approaches. Regardless of type, articles have focused on addressing limitations that impede the full efficiency of BCI for disability and recommended solutions for these limitations.
CONCLUSIONS: Studies on wheelchair control based on BCI for disability considerably influence society due to the large number of people with disability. Therefore, we aim to provide researchers and developers with a clear understanding of this platform and highlight the challenges and gaps in the current and future studies.
Methods: We conducted a three-day course in February 2011 in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. It was developed to provide attendees with the essential knowledge and skills to become a medication safety officer. Teaching methodologies included didactic teaching, group discussions, case presentations, and an independent study of medication safety materials. The content of the course focused on the various roles of a medication safety officer, the importance of medication safety in a health care setting, the incidence of adverse drug events in a hospital setting, strategies to identify and prevent adverse events, the use of root cause analysis and failure mode and effect analysis, the role of an officer in hospital accreditation, and ways for promoting safety culture. Assessment of the course outcome was accomplished by comparing scores of knowledge level before and after the course. The knowledge level was assessed by a 20-item exam which was developed and validated by course instructors.
Results: Twenty-one participants attended the course and completed both the baseline and after-course assessment questionnaires. The majority was male (N = 14, % = 66.7) with a job experience of 1-5 five years (N = 10, % = 47.6). The knowledge score increased from 14.3 ± 1.90 (mean ± standard deviation) at baseline to 18.5 ± 1.43 after successfully completing the course (P
METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted in primary healthcare centers in Nablus district from May to July 2015. Data were collected using structured questionnaire interviews with parents to collect information on food safety knowledge, attitudes, and practices, alongside sociodemographic characteristics.
RESULTS: Four-hundred and twelve parents were interviewed, 92.7% were mothers. The median knowledge score was 12.0 with an interquartile range (IQR) of 11.0-14.0. The median attitude score was 11.0 with IQR of 10.0-13.0, while the median practice score was 18.0 with IQR of 16.0-19.0. Significant modest positive correlations were found between respondents' knowledge and attitude scores regarding food poisoning (r = 0.24, p
MATERIALS AND METHODS: We pooled data from 17 observational studies involving 1,699 patients treated with either CSII or non-CSII (including premixed and MDI) regimen. The study outcomes were the frequencies of hypoglycemia, hyperglycemia and/or ketosis. Given the lack of patient-level data, separate analyses for premixed and MDI regimen were not carried out.
RESULTS: The CSII-treated group (n = 203) was older (22.9 ± 6.9 vs 17.8 ± 4.0 years), and had longer diabetes duration (116.7 ± 66.5 vs 74.8 ± 59.2 months) and lower glycated hemoglobin (7.8 ± 1.1% vs 9.1 ± 2.0%) at baseline than the non-CSII-treated group (n = 1,496). The non-CSII-treated group had less non-severe hypoglycemia than the CSII-treated group (22%, 95% CI 13-34 vs 35%, 95% CI 17-55). Of the non-CSII-treated group, 7.1% (95% CI 5.8-8.5) developed severe hypoglycemia, but none from the CSII-treated group did. The non-CSII-treated group was more likely to develop hyperglycemia (12%, 95% CI 3-25 vs 8.8%, 95% CI 0-31) and ketosis (2.5%, 95% CI 1.0-4.6 vs 1.6%, 95% CI 0.1-4.7), and discontinue fasting (55%, 95% CI 34-76 vs 31%, 95% CI 9-60) than the CSII-treated group.
CONCLUSIONS: The CSII regimen had lower rates of severe hypoglycemia and hyperglycemia/ketosis, but a higher rate of non-severe hyperglycemia than premixed/MDI regimens. These suggest that appropriate patient selection with regular, supervised fine-tuning of the basal insulin rate with intensive glucose monitoring might mitigate the residual hypoglycemia risk during Ramadan.
METHODS: A qualitative study using in-depth interviews of 31 healthcare practitioners from nine publicly funded, primary care clinics in three states in peninsular Malaysia was conducted for this study. The participants included family medicine specialists, doctors, pharmacists, pharmacist assistants, nurses and assistant medical officers. The interviews were audiotaped and transcribed verbatim. Analysis of the data was guided by the framework approach.
RESULTS: Six themes and 28 codes were identified. Despite the availability of a reporting system, most of the participants agreed that MEs were underreported. The nature of the error plays an important role in determining the reporting. The reporting system, organisational factors, provider factors, reporter's burden and benefit of reporting also were identified.
CONCLUSIONS: Healthcare practitioners in primary care clinics understood the importance of reporting MEs to improve patient safety. Their perceptions and attitudes towards reporting of MEs were influenced by many factors which affect the decision-making process of whether or not to report. Although the process is complex, it primarily is determined by the severity of the outcome of the errors. The participants voluntarily report the errors if they are familiar with the reporting system, what error to report, when to report and what form to use.