IntroductionIntermittent hypoxic–hyperoxic training (IHHT) may complement a multimodal training intervention (MTI) for improving cognitive function and exercise tolerance in geriatric patients.MethodsThirty-four patients (64–92 years) participated in this randomized controlled trial. Before and after the 5- to 7-week intervention period (MTI + IHHT vs. MTI + ambient air), cognitive function was assessed by the Dementia-Detection Test (DemTect) and the Sunderland Clock-Drawing Test (CDT), and functional exercise capacity by the total distance of the 6-Minute Walk Test (6MWT).ResultsDemTect and CDT indicated significantly larger improvements after MTI + IHHT (+16.7% vs. −0.39%, P < .001) and (+10.7% vs. −8%, P = .031) which was also true for the 6MWT (+24.1% vs. +10.8%, P = .021).DiscussionIHHT turned out to be easily applicable to and well tolerated by geriatric patients up to 92 years. IHHT contributed significantly to improvements in cognitive function and functional exercise capacity in geriatric patients performing MTI.

No abstract

Hospital transfers from nursing homes (NHs) are frequent, burdensome for residents, and often avoidable. The evidence regarding the effectiveness of interventions to reduce avoidable transfers is limited, and most projects focus on nurses’ knowledge and skills. In the present project, interventions focusing on nurses and physicians are integrated, elaborated, and implemented in 17 NHs. Results of the 6 months preintervention period are reported. Hospital transfer rates (N = 1,520) and basic data on all residents (N = 1,238) were collected prospectively. Nurses’ preintervention knowledge and self-efficacy were assessed using standardized questionnaires (N = 330). Many hospital transfers were initiated by nurses without physician involvement, polypharmacy was common, and a high potential for reducing transfers by increasing physician presence was observed. Nurses showed rather low knowledge but high self-efficacy. The results are discussed against the background of the interventions including enhancement of physician presence and geriatric quality circles.

No abstract

Background Additional benefits of passive exposures to intermittent hypoxia and hyperoxia on cognitive performance and functional exercise capacity have been demonstrated in geriatric patients who performed a multimodal training program. The main goal of the present study was to evaluate effects of adding intermittent hypoxic-hyperoxic training (IHHT) to a multimodal training intervention (MTI) on mobility and perceived health in old individuals at a Geriatric Day Hospital. Methods Thirty-four patients between 64 and 92 years participated in the double blind, randomized and controlled clinical trial. The elderly patients attended in a 5–7 weeks lasting MTI (strength, endurance, balance, reaction, flexibility, coordination, and cognitive exercises) and performed IHHT (breathing 10–14% oxygen for 4–7 min followed by 2–4 min 30–40% oxygen) in the Hypoxic Group (HG) or placebo treatment with ambient air in the Normoxic Group (NG) in parallel. Before and after all treatments, mobility was assessed by the Tinetti Mobility Test (TMT), the Timed-Up-and-Go Test (TUG) and Barthel-Index, while perceived health was assessed by one part of the EQ-5D Test, the EQ visual analogue scale (EQ VAS). Results After the MTI plus IHHT or normoxia sessions, results of the TMT, TUG, Barthel Index and EQ-VAS revealed no significant difference between HG and NG (+ 14.9% vs + 15.4%, p = 0.25; − 21% vs − 26.3%, p = 0.51; + 4.2% vs + 3.6%, p = 0.56; + 37.9% vs + 33.9%, p = 0.24;). Conclusions IHHT added to MTI did not elicit additional improvements in perceived health and mobility compared to MTI alone.

SummaryRecent studies have indicated controversial effects of low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) on lipid metabolism in patients on chronic hemodialysis as compared to unfractionated heparin (UFH).We therefore conducted a cross-sectional multicentre study comparing 153 patients treated with LMWH and 153 patients with UFH, matched for sex, age and diabetes mellitus. Both groups have been treated with LMWH or UFH for six months or longer (14.9 vs.23.4 months). We observed no differences between the UFH and LMWH treatment groups for total cholesterol, LDL cholesterol, triglycerides, apoB, apoA-IV or Lp(a). The only significant differences were seen for HDL cholesterol and the corresponding apolipoprotein apoA-I, which were significantly higher in the UFH group (HDL cholesterol: 0.97 ± 0.35 mM/l vs. 0.87 ± 0.37 mM/l, p<0.05; apoA-I 1.23 ± 0.27 g/l vs. 1.15 ± 0.27 g/l, p <0.05).We conclude that the results of studies investigating the influence of LMWH on lipid metabolism are as heterogeneous as the substances themselves. This challenges the beneficial influence supposedly had by LMWH preparations on lipid metabolism.

Numerous studies have investigated lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)) plasma concentrations in patients with ESRD, a patient group with an enormous risk for atherosclerosis. The reported differences in Lp(a) between controls and patients vary from a decrease of 49% to an increase of more than 1,000%. However, data are not consistent, mostly because of problems with statistical analysis, and only limited data are available for patients treated by continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis (CAPD). To estimate the significance of Lp(a) in ESRD and to demonstrate the statistical pitfalls concerning Lp(a) in case-control studies, a large multicenter study including 702 patients treated by either hemodialysis (HD) (N = 534) or CAPD (N = 168) was conducted, and results were compared with results from 256 healthy controls. Both patient groups showed significantly elevated Lp(a) levels in comparison with controls: 23.4 +/- 25.0 mg/dL (P < 0.005; HD) and 34.6 +/- 38.4 mg/dL (P < 0.0001; CAPD) versus 18.4 +/- 22.8 mg/dL (controls). CAPD patients showed significantly higher Lp(a) values than did patients treated by HD (P < 0.001). The difference between the two treatment groups possibly reflects an overproduction of Lp(a) to compensate for protein losses in CAPD patients. Both treatment groups included significantly more patients with Lp(a) values greater than the 75th percentile (25.6 mg/dL) of the control group (33.9 and 41.7% for HD and CAPD, respectively; P < 0.005). The higher Lp(a) values in patients were not explained by differences in isoform frequencies and the increase in Lp(a) was apolipoprotein(a) type specific: only patients with high-molecular-weight apolipoprotein(a) isoforms showed a significant elevation in Lp(a) levels. The increased plasma concentrations of Lp(a) may contribute to the high risk for atherosclerosis in ESRD, especially in patients treated by CAPD. Finally, it is believed that small sample sizes are responsible for the diverging results in Lp(a) literature.

No abstract