BackgroundDelirium is common in the early stages of hospitalization for a variety of acute and chronic diseases.ObjectivesTo evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of two delirium screening tools, the Confusion Assessment Method (CAM) and the Confusion Assessment Method for the Intensive Care Unit (CAM-ICU).MethodsWe searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and PsychInfo for relevant articles published in English up to March 2013. We compared two screening tools to Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders IV criteria. Two reviewers independently assessed studies to determine their eligibility, validity, and quality. Sensitivity and specificity were calculated using a bivariate model.ResultsTwenty-two studies (n = 2,442 patients) met the inclusion criteria. All studies demonstrated that these two scales can be administered within ten minutes, by trained clinical or research staff. The pooled sensitivities and specificity for CAM were 82% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 69%–91%) and 99% (95% CI: 87%–100%), and 81% (95% CI: 57%–93%) and 98% (95% CI: 86%–100%) for CAM-ICU, respectively.ConclusionBoth CAM and CAM-ICU are validated instruments for the diagnosis of delirium in a variety of medical settings. However, CAM and CAM-ICU both present higher specificity than sensitivity. Therefore, the use of these tools should not replace clinical judgment.
BackgroundEndometriosis is a chronic and underdiagnosed disease which affects 5–10% of women of childbearing age and is characterized by growth of endometrial tissue outside of the uterus, most often in the peritoneal cavity. Delay in diagnosis is a major problem for management of this disorder, and treatment is often not initiated until the disease has progressed for many years. Although the exact etiology of endometriosis remains unknown, retrograde menstruation is recognized as a common underlying factor leading to the deposit of menstrual effluent (ME) into the peritoneal cavity. Differences in the cellular biology and genetics of the cells within ME are therefore likely to explain why endometriosis develops in only a subset of women.MethodsPatients with and without endometriosis were consented to provide ME. ME was analyzed by flow cytometry for CD45- and CD45+ cell populations or used to isolate stromal fibroblast cells. ME-derived stromal fibroblast cells were assessed using decidualization assays following the addition of cAMP and IGFBP-1 concentrations in the culture supernatants were measured by ELISA. In addition, RNA was collected and analyzed by RNA-Seq and qPCR for markers of decidualization and to identify differentially expressed genes in ME-derived stromal fibroblast cells obtained from controls and subjects with endometriosis (±cAMP).ResultsFlow cytometry analysis of cell subsets within the CD45+ fraction of ME revealed a significant decrease in the number of uterine NK cells in endometriosis patients compared with controls (p < 0.01). No other significant differences within either the CD45+ or CD45- cell populations were observed. Most strikingly, ME-derived stromal fibroblast cells cultured from endometriosis subjects showed impaired decidualization potential compared with controls. Highly significant differences in decidualization response were detected by measuring IGFBP-1 production at multiple time points after cAMP stimulation (p = 0.0025 at 6 h; p = 0.0045 at 24 h; p = 0.0125 at 48 h). RNA-Seq and qPCR analyses were used to identify genes differentially expressed by ME-derived stromal fibroblast cells obtained from endometriosis and control subjects.ConclusionsMenstrual effluent can be useful for investigating the pathobiology of endometriosis and for developing a non-invasive diagnostic for endometriosis which may lead to earlier and more effective treatments for this common disorder.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1186/s10020-018-0009-6) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
Background:Indigenous populations may be at increased risk, compared with majority populations, for the development of dementia due to lower education levels and socio-economic status, higher rates of diabetes, hypertension, cardiovascular disease and alcohol abuse, an aging population structure, and poorer overall health. This is the first systematic review investigating the prevalence and incidence of dementia in indigenous populations worldwide.Methods:This systematic review was conducted in accordance with PRISMA guidelines. We searched MEDLINE, Embase, and PsycInfo for relevant papers published up to April 2015. Studies were included if they reported prevalence or incidence, the disease typically occurred after the age of 45, the study population included indigenous people, and the study was conducted in the general population.Results:Fifteen studies representing five countries (Canada, Australia, the USA, Guam, Brazil) met the inclusion criteria. Dementia prevalence ranged from 0.5% to 20%. Retrospective studies relying on medical records for diagnoses had much lower prevalence rates and a higher risk of bias than population-based prospective studies performing their own diagnoses with culturally appropriate cognitive assessment methods.Conclusions:The prevalence of dementia among indigenous populations appears to be higher than it is for non-indigenous populations. Despite a building body of evidence supporting the need for dementia research among indigenous populations, there is a paucity of epidemiological research, none of which is of high quality.
Both surgical and conservative interventions provide treatment benefits in CTS. Further studies on long-term outcome are needed.
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.