A coronavirus (HCoV-19) has caused the novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) outbreak in Wuhan, China. Preventing and reversing the cytokine storm may be the key to save the patients with severe COVID-19 pneumonia. Mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) have been shown to possess a comprehensive powerful immunomodulatory function. This study aims to investigate whether MSC transplantation improves the outcome of 7 enrolled patients with COVID-19 pneumonia in 217 16, 2020. The clinical outcomes, as well as changes of inflammatory and immune function levels and adverse effects of 7 enrolled patients were assessed for 14 days after MSC injection. MSCs could cure or significantly improve the functional outcomes of seven patients without observed adverse effects. The pulmonary function and symptoms of these seven patients were significantly improved in 2 days after MSC transplantation. Among them, two common and one severe patient were recovered and discharged in 10 days after treatment. After treatment, the peripheral lymphocytes were increased, the C-reactive protein decreased, and the overactivated cytokinesecreting immune cells CXCR3+CD4+ T cells, CXCR3+CD8+ T cells, and CXCR3+ NK cells disappeared in 3-6 days. In addition, a group of CD14+CD11c+CD11b mid regulatory DC cell population dramatically increased. Meanwhile, the level of TNF-α was significantly decreased, while IL-10 increased in MSC treatment group compared to the placebo control group. Furthermore, the gene expression profile showed MSCs were ACE2and TMPRSS2which indicated MSCs are free from COVID-19 infection. Thus, the intravenous transplantation of MSCs was safe and effective for treatment in patients with COVID-19 pneumonia, especially for the patients in critically severe condition.
There is a great variation across states in nurse practitioner (NP) scope of practice moderated by state regulations. The purpose of this study was to synthesize the evidence from studies of the impact of state NP practice regulations on U.S. health care delivery outcomes (e.g., health care workforce, access to care, utilization, care quality, or cost of care), guided by Donabedian’s structure, process, and outcomes framework. This systematic review was performed using Medline, CINAHL, PsycINFO, and PubMed according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic and Meta-Analysis on the literature from January 2000 to August 2019. The results indicate that expanded state NP practice regulations were associated with greater NP supply and improved access to care among rural and underserved populations without decreasing care quality. This evidence could provide guidance for policy makers in states with more restrictive NP practice regulations when they consider granting greater practice independence to NPs.
Objective This study sought to investigate factors associated with opioid misuse-related emergency department (ED) visits among older adults and changes in outcomes associated with these visits, using multiple years of nationally representative data. Methods A retrospective analysis of the Nationwide Emergency Department Sample was conducted. Study inclusion was limited to adults aged 65 years and older. Diagnostic codes were used to identify opioid misuse disorder; sampling weights were used to adjust standard estimates of the errors. Descriptive and multivariate procedures were used to describe risk and visit outcomes. Results ED visits by older adults with opioid misuse identified in the ED increased sharply from 2006 to 2014, representing a nearly 220% increase over the study period. Opioid misuse was associated with an increased number of chronic conditions, greater injury risk, and higher rates of alcohol dependence and mental health diagnoses. Conclusion The steep increase in opioid misuse observed among older adult ED visits underscores the critical need for additional research to better understand the national scope and impact of opioid misuse on older adults, as well as to better inform policy responses to meet the needs of this particular age group.
Purpose: Though more people in the United States currently reside in assisted living facilities (ALFs) than nursing homes, little is known about ALF admission policies, resident care needs, and staffing characteristics. We therefore conducted this study using a nationwide sample of ALFs to examine these factors, along with comparison of ALFs by size. Design: Cross-sectional secondary data analysis using data from the 2010 National Survey of Residential Care Facilities. Methods: Measures included nine admission policy items, seven items on the proportion of residents with selected conditions or care needs, and six items on staffing characteristics (e.g., access to licensed nurse, aide training). Facilities (n = 2,301) were divided into three categories by size: small, 4 to 10 beds; medium, 11 to 25 beds; and large, 26 or more beds. Analyses took complex sampling design effects into account to project national U.S. estimates. Findings: More than half of ALFs admitted residents with considerable healthcare needs and served populations that required nursing care, such as for transfers, medications, and eating or dressing. Staffing was largely composed of patient care aides, and fewer than half of ALFs had licensed care provider (registered nurse, licensed practical nurse) hours. Smaller facilities tended to have more inclusive admission policies and residents with more complex care needs (more mobility, eating and medication assistance required, short-term memory issues, p < .01) and less access to licensed nurses than larger ALFs (p < .01). Conclusions: This study suggests ALFs are caring for and admitting residents with considerable care needs, indicating potential overlap with nursing home populations. Despite this finding, ALF regulations lag far behind those in effect for nursing homes. In addition, measurement of care outcomes is critically needed to ensure appropriate ALF care quality. Clinical Relevance: As more people choose ALFs, outcome measures for ALFs, which are now unavailable, should be developed to allow for oversight and monitoring of care quality.
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.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.