METHODS: This was a single-center, prospective, and single-blind randomized controlled trial conducted at the University Malaya Medical Centre. Patients older than 65 years presenting to the hospital emergency department or geriatric clinic with 1 injurious fall or 2 falls in the past year and with impaired functional mobility were included in the study. The intervention group received a modified OEP intervention (n = 34) for 3 months, while the control group received conventional care (n = 33). All participants were assessed at baseline and 6 months.
RESULTS: Twenty-four participants in both OEP and control groups completed the 6-month follow-up assessments. Within-group analyses revealed no difference in grip strength in the OEP group (P = 1.00, right hand; P = .55, left hand), with significant deterioration in grip strength in the control group (P = .01, right hand; P = .005, left hand). Change in grip strength over 6 months significantly favored the OEP group (P = .047, right hand; P = .004, left hand). Significant improvements were also observed in mobility and balance in the OEP group.
CONCLUSIONS: In addition to benefits in mobility and balance, the OEP also prevents deterioration in upper limb strength. Additional benefits of exercise interventions for secondary prevention of falls in term of sarcopenia and frailty should also be evaluated in the future.
METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The Delphi consensus technique was conducted online to review and evaluate the framework module. A panel of experts, including rehabilitation medicine physicians, occupational therapists, and clinical psychologists in Malaysia, was invited to participate in this study. For each round, the expert consensus was defined as more than 90% of the expert panel agreeing or strongly agreeing with the proposed items.
RESULTS: A total of 33 practitioners completed the three Delphi rounds. 72.7% of the expert panel have been practising in their relevant clinical fields for more than six years (M = 10.67, SD = 5.68). In Round 1, 23% of the experts suggested that the framework module for attention training required further improvements, specifically in the language (M = 1.97, SD = 0.75) and instructions (M = 2.03, SD = 0.71) provided. In Round 2, 15% of the experts recommended additional changes in the instruction (M = 2.15, SD = 0.67) for attention training. Amendments made to the framework module in line with the recommendations provided by the experts resulted in a higher level of consensus, as 94% to 100% of the experts in Round 3 concluded the framework module was suitable and comprehensive for our breast cancer survivors. Following the key results, the objectives were practical, and the proposed approaches, strategies, and techniques for attention and memory training were feasible. The clarity of the instructions, procedures, verbatim transcripts, and timeframe further enhanced the efficacy and utility of the framework module.
CONCLUSIONS: This study found out that the cognitive intervention framework module for breast cancer survivors with cognitive impairment following chemotherapy can be successfully developed and feasible to be implemented using Delphi technique.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: One hundred patients were randomly recruited and then further randomly divided into two groups of 50 patients each. The first group used the POC PCT test along with the standard sepsis parameter monitoring, while the second group had the standard monitoring only (C-reactive protein [CRP] level, total white count, temperature and tracheal aspirate culture). Serial PCT test results and CRP levels were monitored on days 1, 3, 7 and 9. The patients were followed up for 28-day mortality.
RESULTS: Eighty-five patients completed the trial, of whom 43 were in the PCT group and 42 were in the control group. The PCT group had a significantly lower mean (SD) antibiotic treatment duration (10.28 [2.68] days) than the control group (11.52 [3.06]). The mean (SD) difference was -1.25 (95% confidence interval [CI], -2.48 to 0.01; t-statistic [df] = -1.997 [83]; P = 0.049). The PCT group also had a higher number of antibiotic-free days alive during the 28 days after VAP onset than the control group (mean [SD], 10.79 [7.61] vs. 8.72 [6.41]). The Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score was the sole factor for the decrease in duration after VAP onset (regression coefficient β [95% CI], -0.70 [-1.19 to -0.20]; P = 0.006).
CONCLUSIONS: The POC procalcitonin test can reduce the antibiotic treatment duration in patients with VAP.