Both multifocal IOLs seemed to be good options for patients with intermediate-vision requirements, whereas the trifocal IOL might be better for patients with near-vision requirements. The significant perception of visual side effects indicates that patients still must be counseled about these effects before a multifocal IOL is implanted.
The use of medication with anticholinergic properties is widespread among older subjects. Many drugs of common use such as antispasmodics, bronchodilators, antiarrhythmics, antihistamines, anti-hypertensive drugs, antiparkinson agents, skeletal muscle relaxants, and psychotropic drugs have been demonstrated to have an anticholinergic activity. The most frequent adverse effects are dry mouth, nausea, vomiting, constipation, abdominal pain, urinary retention, blurred vision, tachycardia and neurologic impairment such as confusion, agitation and coma. A growing evidence from experimental studies and clinical observations suggests that drugs with anticholinergic properties can cause physical and mental impairment in the elderly population. However, the morbidity and management issues associated with unwanted anticholinergic activity are underestimated and frequently overlooked. Moreover, their possible relation with specific negative outcome in the elderly population is still not firmly established. The aim of the present review was to evaluate the relationship between the use of drugs with anticholinergic activity and negative outcomes in older persons. We searched PubMed and Cochrane combining the search terms "anticholinergic", "delirium", "cognitive impairment", "falls", "mortality" and "discontinuation". Medicines with anticholinergic properties may increase the risks of functional and cognitive decline, morbidity, institutionalization and mortality in older people. However, such evidences are still not conclusive probably due to possible confounding factors. In particular, more studies are needed to investigate the effects of discontinuation of drug with anticholinergic properties. Overall, minimizing anticholinergic burden should always be encouraged in clinical practice to improve short-term memory, confusion and delirium, quality of life and daily functioning.
BackgroundAging of the workforce is a growing problem. As workers age, their physical, physiological and psychosocial capabilities change. Keeping older workers healthy and productive is a key goal of European labor policy and health promotion is a key to achieve this result. Previous studies about workplace health promotion (WHP) programs are usually focused on the entire workforce or to a specific topic. Within the framework of the EU-CHAFEA ProHealth65+ project, this paper aims to systematically review the literature on WHP interventions specifically targeted to older workers (OWs).MethodsThis systematic review was conducted by making a comprehensive search of MEDLINE, ISI Web of Science, SCOPUS, The Cochrane Library, CINAHL and PsychINFO databases. Search terms included ageing (and synonyms), worker (and synonyms), intervention (and synonyms), and health (and synonyms). The search was limited to papers in English or Italian published between January, 1st 2000 and May, 31st 2015. Relevant references in the selected articles were also analyzed.ResultsOf the 299 articles initially identified as relating to the topic, 18 articles met the inclusion criteria. The type, methods and outcome of interventions in the WHP programs retrieved were heterogenous, as was the definition of the age at which a worker is considered to be ‘older’. Most of the available studies had been conducted on small samples for a limited period of time.ConclusionOur review shows that, although this issue is of great importance, studies addressing WHP actions for OWs are few and generally of poor quality. Current evidence fails to show that WHP programs improve the work ability, productivity or job retention of older workers. In addition, there is limited evidence that WHP programs are effective in improving lifestyles and concur to maintain the health and well-being of older workers. There is a need for future WHP programs to be well-designed so that the effectiveness and cost-benefit of workplace interventions can be properly investigated.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12913-016-1518-z) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
Few data exist on differences in gut microbiota composition among principal gastrointestinal (GI) diseases. We evaluated the differences in gut microbiota composition among uncomplicated diverticular disease (DD), irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) and inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD) patients. DD, IBS, and IBD patients along with healthy controls (CT) were enrolled in our Italian GI outpatient clinic. Stool samples were collected. Microbiota composition was evaluated through a metagenomic gene-targeted approach. GI pathology represented a continuous spectrum of diseases where IBD displayed one extreme, while CT displayed the other. Among Phyla, Biplot PC2/PC3 and dendogram plot showed major differences in samples from IBS and IBD. DD resembled species CT composition, but not for Bacteroides fragilis. In IBS, Dialister spp. and then Faecalibacterium prausnitzii were the most representative species. Ulcerative colitis showed a reduced concentration of Clostridium difficile and an increase of Bacteroides fragilis. In Crohn's disease, Parabacteroides distasonis was the most represented, while Faecalibacterium prausnitzii and Bacteroides fragilis were significantly reduced. Each disorder has its definite overall microbial signature, which produces a clear differentiation from the others. On the other hand, shared alterations constitute the “core dysbiosis” of GI diseases. The assessment of these microbial markers represents a parameter that may complete the diagnostic assessment.
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.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.