Intermittent positive pressure ventilation administered nocturnally via a nasal mask has been associated with improvements in pulmonary function and symptoms in patients with restrictive ventilatory disorders. We hypothesized that nocturnal nasal ventilation (NNV) would bring about similar improvements in patients with severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). The study used a randomized, crossover design, with subjects undergoing NNV or "standard care" for sequential 3-month periods. Of 23 patients with obstructive lung disease and a FEV1 less than 1 L who were initially enrolled, 4 were excluded because of obstructive sleep apnea prior to randomization. Among the remaining 19 patients, 7 withdrew because of intolerance of the nose mask, 5 were withdrawn because of intercurrent illnesses, and 7 completed both arms of the protocol. These latter 7 patients used the ventilator for an average of 6.7 h/night, and 3 of the 7 had partial relief of dyspnea during ventilator use. However, in comparison with studies performed upon initiation or after the standard care arm of the study, studies performed after 3 months of NNV revealed no improvements in pulmonary function, respiratory muscle strength, gas exchange, exercise endurance, sleep efficiency, quality or oxygenation, or dyspnea ratings. The only improvements observed were in neuropsychological function, possibly related to a placebo effect or another unknown mechanism. Despite the small sample size, our study indicates that NNV is not well tolerated by and brings about minimal improvements in stable outpatients with severe COPD.
A number of governmental agencies have called for enhancing citizen’s resilience as a means of preparing populations in advance of disasters, and as a counter-balance to social and individual vulnerabilities. This increasing scholarly, policy and programmatic interest in promoting individual and communal resilience presents a challenge to the research and practice communities: to develop a translational framework that can accommodate multi-disciplinary scientific perspectives into a single, applied model. The Resilience Activation Framework provides a basis for testing how access to social resources, such as formal and informal social support and help, promotes positive adaptation or reduced psychopathology among individuals and communities exposed to the acute collective stressors associated with disasters, whether manmade, natural, or technological in origin. Articulating the mechanisms by which access to social resources activate and sustain resilience capacities for optimal mental health outcomes post-disaster can lead to the development of effective preventive and early intervention programs.
Prefracture cognitive impairment and incident cognitive impairment during hospitalization are risk factors for poor functional outcomes. Many incident cognitive problems persisted over 2 to 12 months, and per-sistence predicted later functional and social impairment.
BackgroundAlthough public concern has focused on the environmental impact of the Deepwater Horizon oil spill, the public health impact on a broad range of coastal communities is minimally known.ObjectiveWe sought to determine the acute level of distress (depression, anxiety), mechanisms of adjustment (coping, resilience), and perceived risk in a community indirectly impacted by the oil spill and to identify the extent to which economic loss may explain these factors.MethodsUsing a community-based participatory model, we performed standardized assessments of psychological distress (mood, anxiety), coping, resilience, neurocognition, and perceived risk on residents of fishing communities who were indirectly impacted (n = 71, Franklin County, Florida) or directly exposed (n = 23, Baldwin County, Alabama) to coastal oil. We also compared findings for participants who reported income stability (n = 47) versus spill-related income loss (n = 47).ResultsWe found no significant differences between community groups in terms of psychological distress, adjustment, neurocognition, or environmental worry. Residents of both communities displayed clinically significant depression and anxiety. Relative to those with stable incomes, participants with spill-related income loss had significantly worse scores on tension/anxiety, depression, fatigue, confusion, and total mood disturbance scales; had higher rates of depression; were less resilient; and were more likely to use behavioral disengagement as a coping strategy.ConclusionsCurrent estimates of human health impacts associated with the oil spill may underestimate the psychological impact in Gulf Coast communities that did not experience direct exposure to oil. Income loss after the spill may have a greater psychological health impact than the presence of oil on the immediately adjacent shoreline.
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.