The aim of this workshop was to assess the ability of individual autoantibody (ab) assays and their use in combination to discriminate between type 1 diabetic and control sera. Coded aliquots of sera were measured in a total of 119 assays by 49 participating laboratories in 17 countries. The sera were from 51 patients with new onset type 1 diabetes and 101 healthy control subjects with no family history of diabetes. In the final analysis, data on diabetic sera were restricted to 43 subjects younger than age 30 years. The laboratories were asked to report results for these sera using their currently available anti-islet autoantibody assays. In addition, they were asked to combine information from their assays to classify sera as having high, moderate, or low probability of originating from a patient with type 1 diabetes. Actual strategies for combining assays were determined by each laboratory. There were no significant differences in sensitivity among 19 radioimmunoassays (RIAs) for IA-2 autoantibodies (cytoplasmic islet cell antibody [ICA] 512) using different constructs that included the intracellular portion of the molecule (mean sensitivity 73%). However, an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) using the extracellular portion of the IA-2 molecule did not discriminate between diabetic and control sera. Among GAD autoantibody assays that achieved sensitivity >70%, 26 were RIAs and one was an ELISA. When the sera were ranked according to their autoantibody levels, the concordance for insulin autoantibodies (IAAs) in different laboratories was markedly less than for IA-2ab and GADab. Using a combination of autoantibody assays, several laboratories achieved excellent discrimination between diabetic and control sera (sensitivity up to 80% with false-positive rate of 0%). A variety of strategies for combining information from different assays were successful (e.g., those including and excluding ICA), and no one strategy emerged as clearly superior. In conclusion, IA-2/ICA512 autoantibodies are a marker of type 1 diabetes and can be measured consistently by most assays. Several different strategies for combining assays achieved high sensitivity with a low false-positive rate.
Residents of long-term care facilities have highly complex care needs and quality of care is of international concern. Maintaining resident wellness through proactive assessment and early intervention is key to decreasing the need for acute hospitalization. The Residential Aged Care Integration Program (RACIP) is a quality improvement intervention to support residential aged care staff and includes on-site support, education, clinical coaching, and care coordination provided by gerontology nurse specialists (GNSs) employed by a large district health board. The effect of the outreach program was evaluated through a randomized comparison of hospitalization 1 year before and after program implementation. The sample included 29 intervention facilities (1,425 residents) and 25 comparison facilities (1,128 residents) receiving usual care. Acute hospitalization rate unexpectedly increased for both groups after program implementation, although the rate of increase was significantly less for the intervention facilities. The hospitalization rate after the intervention increased 59% for the comparison group and 16% for the intervention group (rate ratio (RR) = 0.73, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.61-0.86, P < .001). Subgroup analysis showed a significantly lower rate change for those admitted for medical reasons for the intervention group (13% increase) than the comparison group (69% increase) (RR = 0.67, 95% CI = 0.56-0.82, P < .001). Conversely, there was no significant difference in the RR for surgical admissions between the intervention and comparison groups (RR = 1.0, 95% CI = 0.68-1.46, P = .99). The integration of GNS expertise through the RACIP intervention may be one approach to support staff to provide optimal care and potentially improve resident health.
It has been postulated that treatment with nicotinamide may prevent or delay the onset of insulin dependent diabetes mellitus. We report the findings of a population based diabetes prevention trial which tests this hypothesis. 33,658 school children aged 5-7.9 years were randomly selected (by school) from a total population of 81,993 of such children in the Auckland (New Zealand) region. They were offered testing for islet cell antibodies. 20,195 (60%) consented to testing. Of these 185 had islet cell antibodies and met the criteria for treatment with nicotinamide. 173 received this treatment. The study population has an average follow up time of 7.1 years. The diabetes incidence of the untested controls was: 16.07 (12.4-20.5 95% CI) /100,000 person years at risk; in the group who were tested and treated when deemed appropriate: 7.14 (3.1-14.1 95% CI); and in the group offered testing but who did not consent ("refusers'): 18.48 (10.1-31.0 95% CI). The tested group had a rate of diabetes of 41% (20-85 95% CI) of the other groups combined after an age adjustment, which is significant (p = 0.008). The tested group combined with the "refuser' group (i.e. "intention to treat') also has a lower incidence than the control group (p = 0.12). Nicotinamide has a protective effect against the development of insulin dependent diabetes in this setting but the size of the effect has a wide confidence interval. Further follow up may define the magnitude of the protective effect within narrower limits.
Objective: The objective was to test the ability of the Brief Risk Identification for Geriatric Health Tool (BRIGHT) to identify older emergency department (ED) patients with functional and physical impairment.Methods: This was a cross-sectional study in which 139 persons ‡75 years, who presented to an urban New Zealand ED over a 12-week period, completed the 11-item BRIGHT case-finding tool. Then, within 10 days of their index ED visit, 114 persons completed a comprehensive geriatric assessment. A ''yes'' response to at least 3 of the 11 BRIGHT items was considered ''positive.'' Primary outcome measures were instrumental activities of daily living (IADL), cognitive performance scale (CPS), and activities of daily living (ADL).Results: The BRIGHT-identified IADL deficit (64% prevalence) with a sensitivity of 0.76, specificity of 0.79, and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) of 0.83 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.74 to 0.91, p < 0.01); cognitive deficit (35% prevalence) sensitivity of 0.78, specificity of 0.54, and ROC of 0.66 (95% CI = 0.55 to 0.76, p = 0.006); and ADL deficit (29% prevalence) sensitivity of 0.83, specificity of 0.53, and ROC of 0.64 (95% CI = 0.53 to 0.75, p = 0.020). Positive likelihood ratios (LR+) for the three outcomes of interest were 3.6, 1.7, and 1.8, respectively. Negative likelihood ratios (LR)) were 0.3, 0.4, and 0.3. Conclusions:The 11-item BRIGHT successfully identifies older adults in the ED with decreased function and may be useful in differentiating elder patients in need of comprehensive assessment. ACADEMIC EMERGENCY MEDICINE 2008; 15:598-606 ª 2008 by the Society for Academic Emergency MedicineKeywords: risk assessment, aged, emergency services, case finding, geriatric assessment O lder adult patients commonly present to the emergency department (ED) with a complex mix of health and psychosocial issues. Functional dependence at the time of ED admission is a risk factor for subsequent health and functional decline, ED and hospital readmission, institutionalization, and death.1-4 Other risk factors for adverse outcomes include living alone, lack of social support, multiple comorbidity, polypharmacy, and diagnoses such as cardiovascular disease, diabetes, cognitive impairment, and depression. 5,6 Research has demonstrated that systematic case-finding, assessment, and prompt intervention can forestall health and functional decline, decrease hospital length of stay and readmission, and decrease long-term care admission. 7,8 In the Discharge of Elderly from the Emergency Department (DEED) II trial, ED-based comprehensive geriatric assessment followed by multidisciplinary community outreach resulted in a lower rate of
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.