The aims of this paper were to provide an overview of available activity monitors used in research in patients with heart failure and to identify the key criteria in the selection of the most appropriate activity monitor for collecting, reporting, and analysing physical activity in heart failure research. This study was conducted in three parts. First, the literature was systematically reviewed to identify physical activity concepts and activity monitors used in heart failure research. Second, an additional scoping literature search for validation of these activity monitors was conducted. Third, the most appropriate criteria in the selection of activity monitors were identified. Nine activity monitors were evaluated in terms of size, weight, placement, costs, data storage, water resistance, outcomes and validation, and cut‐off points for physical activity intensity levels were discussed. The choice of a monitor should depend on the research aims, study population and design regarding physical activity. If the aim is to motivate patients to be active or set goals, a less rigorously tested tool can be considered. On the other hand, if the aim is to measure physical activity and its changes over time or following treatment adjustment, it is important to choose a valid activity monitor with a storage and battery longevity of at least one week. The device should provide raw data and valid cut‐off points should be chosen for analysing physical activity intensity levels. Other considerations in choosing an activity monitor should include data storage location and ownership and the upfront costs of the device.
BackgroundThe 22q11.2 microdeletion syndrome (22q11.2 deletion syndrome -22q11.2DS) refers to congenital abnormalities, including primarily heart defects and facial dysmorphy, thymic hypoplasia, cleft palate and hypocalcaemia. Microdeletion within chromosomal region 22q11.2 constitutes the molecular basis of this syndrome. The 22q11.2 microdeletion syndrome occurs in 1/4000 births. The aim of this study was to determine the frequency of 22q11.2 microdeletion in 87 children suffering from a congenital heart defect (conotruncal or non-conotruncal) coexisting with at least one additional 22q11.2DS feature and to carry out 22q11.2 microdeletion testing of the deleted children's parents. We also attempted to identify the most frequent heart defects in both groups and phenotypic traits of patients with microdeletion to determine selection criteria for at risk patients.MethodsThe analysis of microdeletions was conducted using fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) on metaphase chromosomes and interphase nuclei isolated from venous peripheral blood cultures. A molecular probe (Tuple) specific to the HIRA (TUPLE1, DGCR1) region at 22q11 was used for the hybridisation.ResultsMicrodeletions of 22q11.2 region were detected in 13 children with a congenital heart defect (14.94% of the examined group). Microdeletion of 22q11.2 occurred in 20% and 11.54% of the conotruncal and non-conotruncal groups respectively. Tetralogy of Fallot was the most frequent heart defect in the first group of children with 22q11.2 microdeletion, while ventricular septal defect and atrial septal defect/ventricular septal defect were most frequent in the second group. The microdeletion was also detected in one of the parents of the deleted child (6.25%) without congenital heart defect, but with slight dysmorphism. In the remaining children, 22q11.2 microdeletion originated de novo.ConclusionsPatients with 22q11.2DS exhibit wide spectrum of phenotypic characteristics, ranging from discreet to quite strong. The deletion was inherited by one child. Our study suggests that screening for 22q11.2 microdeletion should be performed in children with conotruncal and non-conotruncal heart defects and with at least one typical feature of 22q11.2DS as well as in the deleted children's parents.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.