| 1. |
- Almeida, Joao G., et al.
(författare)
-
Impact of the 2016 ASE/EACVI recommendations on the prevalence of diastolic dysfunction in the general population
- 2018
-
Ingår i: European Heart Journal Cardiovascular Imaging. - : Oxford University Press (OUP). - 2047-2404 .- 2047-2412. ; 19:4, s. 380-386
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Aims: Diastolic dysfunction (DD) is frequent in the general population; however, the assessment of diastolic function remains challenging. We aimed to evaluate the impact of the recent 2016 American Society of Echocardiography (ASE)/European Association of Cardiovascular Imaging (EACVI) recommendations in the prevalence and grades of DD compared with the 2009 guidelines and the Canberra Study Criteria (CSC).Methods and results: Within a population-based cohort, a total of 1000 individuals, aged ≥45 years, were evaluated retrospectively. Patients with previously known cardiac disease or ejection fraction <50% were excluded. Diastolic function was assessed by transthoracic echocardiography. DD prevalence and grades were determined according to the three classifications. The mean age was 62.0 ± 10.5 years and 37% were men. The prevalence of DD was 1.4% (n = 14) with the 2016 recommendations, 38.1% (n = 381) with the 2009 recommendations, and 30.4% (n = 304) using the CSC. The concordance between the updated recommendations and the other two was poor (from k = 0.13 to k = 0.18, P < 0.001). Regarding the categorization in DD grades, none of the 14 individuals with DD by the 2016 guidelines were assigned to Grade 1 DD, 64% were classified as Grade 2, 7% had Grade 3, and 29% had indeterminate grade.Conclusion: The application of the new 2016 ASE/EACVI recommendations resulted in a much lower prevalence of DD. The concordance between the classifications was poor. The updated algorithm seems to be able to diagnose only the most advanced cases.
|
|
| 2. |
- Bettencourt-Silva, Rita, et al.
(författare)
-
Diabetes-related symptoms, acute complications and management of diabetes mellitus of patients who are receiving palliative care : a protocol for a systematic review
- 2019
-
Ingår i: BMJ Open. - : BMJ Publishing Group Ltd. - 2044-6055. ; 9:6
-
Forskningsöversikt (refereegranskat)abstract
- Introduction: Worldwide, an estimated 40 million people are in need of palliative care each year, but only 14% receive it. The incidence of diabetes mellitus (DM) in patients receiving palliative care is higher than in the general population. This association is intended to grow as a result of the rising burden of DM worldwide, ageing populations and the improved overall survival time of several diseases over the last few decades. Recommendations for DM management in the context of palliative care are mainly based on expert opinion as there is a lack of suitable evidence base and randomised clinical trials in palliative care are scarce. The aim of our systematic review is to identify the best DM management practices in order to reduce important DM-related symptoms and acute complications in patients receiving palliative care.Methods and analysis: The authors will study the DM treatment and management literature, surveying the different approaches employed to treat adult palliative patients. Core health bibliographic databases will be searched from January 1990 to May 2019. Data sources will include Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, PubMed, Web of Sciences, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Scopus, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature and grey literature. Details regarding diet, oral and injectable glucose-lowering medicines, insulin regimens and blood glucose monitoring strategies will he evaluated. We defined the primary outcomes to compare between DM management approaches as the presence of symptoms (polyuria, polydipsia and polyphagia) and acute complications of DM (hypoglycaemia, hyperglycaemic hyperosmolar state and diabetic ketoacidosis), and secondary outcomes as hospital admissions and deaths due to DM-related complications, health-related quality of life and glycaemic control.Ethics and dissemination: The systematic review methodology does not require ethics approval due to the nature of the study design. The results of the systematic review will be published in a peer-reviewed journal and will he publicly available.PROSPERO registration number: CRD42018115772.
|
|
