Methods: A pool of items was generated from a qualitative study, literature reviews, and expert reviews. Exploratory factor analysis (EFA) was performed on the original 40 items of the E-CIS and followed by 27 items for confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). A total of 470 elderly people with chronic constipation were involved.
Results: The mean age of the participants was 68.64 ± 6.57. Finally, only 22 items were indicated as appropriately representing the E-CIS, which were grouped into seven subscales: 'daily activities', 'treatment satisfaction', 'lack of control of bodily function', 'diet restriction', 'symptom intensity', 'anxiety' and 'preventive actions'. The scale was confirmed as valid (root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) = 0.04, comparative fit index (CFI) = 0.961, Tucker-Lewis index (TLI) = 0.952 and chi-square/degree of freedom (chiSq/df) = 1.44) and reliable (Cronbach's alpha: 0.66-0.85, composite reliability (CR) = 0.699-0.851) to assess the impact of chronic constipation on the elderly's QoL.
Conclusions: The E-CIS is useful to measure the impact of chronic constipation on the elderly's QoL. A further test is needed to determine the validity and reliability of this scale in other elderly population.
METHODS: This was a two-centre randomised controlled trial of CI versus IB dosing of beta-lactam antibiotics, which enrolled critically ill participants with severe sepsis who were not on renal replacement therapy (RRT). The primary outcome was clinical cure at 14 days after antibiotic cessation. Secondary outcomes were PK/PD target attainment, ICU-free days and ventilator-free days at day 28 post-randomisation, 14- and 30-day survival, and time to white cell count normalisation.
RESULTS: A total of 140 participants were enrolled with 70 participants each allocated to CI and IB dosing. CI participants had higher clinical cure rates (56 versus 34 %, p = 0.011) and higher median ventilator-free days (22 versus 14 days, p MIC than the IB arm on day 1 (97 versus 70 %, p
METHODS: Seven hundered fifty five individuals from specialist clinics and community health screenings with LDL-c level ≥ 4.0 mmol/L were selected and diagnosed as FH using the DLCC, the SB Register criteria, the US MEDPED and the JFHMC. The sensitivity, specificity, efficiency, positive and negative predictive values of individuals screened with the SB register criteria, US MEDPED and JFHMC were assessed against the DLCC.
RESULTS: We found the SB register criteria identified more individuals with FH compared to the US MEDPED and the JFHMC (212 vs. 105 vs. 195; p