Background: Abdominal wall hernia is a common surgical condition. Patients may present in an emergency with bowel obstruction, incarceration or strangulation. Small bowel obstruction (SBO) is a serious surgical condition associated with significant morbidity. The aim of this study was to describe current management and outcomes of patients with obstructed hernia in the UK as identified in the National Audit of Small Bowel Obstruction (NASBO). Methods: NASBO collated data on adults treated for SBO at 131 UK hospitals between January and March 2017. Those with obstruction due to abdominal wall hernia were included in this study. Demographics, co-morbidity, imaging, operative treatment, and in-hospital outcomes were recorded. Modelling for factors associated with mortality and complications was undertaken using Cox proportional hazards and multivariable regression modelling. Results: NASBO included 2341 patients, of whom 415 (17⋅7 per cent) had SBO due to hernia. Surgery was performed in 312 (75⋅2 per cent) of the 415 patients; small bowel resection was required in 198 (63⋅5 per cent) of these operations. Non-operative management was reported in 35 (54 per cent) of 65 patients with a parastomal hernia and in 34 (32⋅1 per cent) of 106 patients with an incisional hernia. The in-hospital mortality rate was 9⋅4 per cent (39 of 415), and was highest in patients with a groin hernia (11⋅1 per cent, 17 of 153). Complications were common, including lower respiratory tract infection in 16⋅3 per cent of patients with a groin hernia. Increased age was associated with an increased risk of death (hazard ratio 1⋅05, 95 per cent c.i. 1⋅01 to 1⋅10; P = 0⋅009) and complications (odds ratio 1⋅05, 95 per cent c.i. 1⋅02 to 1⋅09; P = 0⋅001). Conclusion: NASBO has highlighted poor outcomes for patients with SBO due to hernia, highlighting the need for quality improvement initiatives in this group. *Members of the National Audit of Small Bowel Obstruction (NASBO) Steering Group and NASBO Collaborators are co-authors of this study and are listed in Appendix S1 (supporting information) Funding information
BackgroundImmunotherapy has revolutionized the treatment of solid malignancies, but is associated with endocrine-related adverse events. This study aims to dissect the natural course of immunotherapy-induced hypothyroidism and provide guidance regarding diagnosis and management in patients with and without pre-existing hypothyroidism.MethodsA retrospective analysis was conducted using patients who received immunotherapy between 2010‐2019 within a multicenter hospital system. Participants were separated in three groups—those with pre-existing hypothyroidism, those who developed primary hypothyroidism and those with hypophysitis within a year of their first immunotherapy. Serial effects of immunotherapy on thyroid function tests (TFTs) and levothyroxine dosing were evaluated.Results822 patients were screened, with 85 determined to have pre-existing hypothyroidism, 48 de-novo primary hypothyroidism and 12 de-novo hypophysitis. All groups displayed fluctuations in TFTs around weeks 6‐8 of treatment. In the pre-existing hypothyroidism group, the levothyroxine dose was higher at 54 weeks than at baseline with the difference showing a trend towards statistical significance (p=0.06). The observed mean levothyroxine dose was significantly lower than the mean calculated weight-based dose for all groups. This finding was most clinically significant for the de-novo hypophysitis group (mean difference: -58.3 mcg, p<0.0001). The mean 0.9 mcg/kg levothyroxine dose at week 54 for the de-novo hypophysitis group was statistically lower than the other groups (p=0.009).ConclusionIt is reasonable to screen with TFTs every 4 weeks, and space out TFTs surveillance to every 12 weeks after week 20. Our findings suggest a more conservative approach for levothyroxine dosing in those developing de-novo hypothyroidism, especially hypophysitis, such as initiating at 0.9-1.2 mcg/kg.
Background: DCM interventions improve glycemic control and readmission. Cost effectiveness studies typically use only system EHR data. We implemented a 3-month technology-enabled DCM intervention (Diabetes Boot Camp (DBC)) for adults with uncontrolled T2DM in a regional health system. Using EHR data, DBC was shown to reduce A1C and hospitalizations compared to matched controls. The aim of this study was a TCOC assessment of DBC among Medicaid participants using claims data. Methods: Medicaid-enrolled DBC completers and controls were linked to Maryland’s Medicaid Management Information System. The impact of DBC on different components of spending and TCOC at 90 days was evaluated. Results: Among the 47 cases and 60 controls, average age was 52; 72.9% were Black; and 67.3% were female. DBC was associated with a per person reduction of $197 in ED/inpatient spending but an increase of $1,471 in TCOC, driven primarily by greater pharmacy spending and outpatient visits. Increased pharmacy spending was driven by spending on insulins and newer medication classes (Table 1). Conclusions: In a TCOC analysis of DBC, estimated savings from reduced hospital use were more than offset by pharmacy and professional service spending. Pharmacy spending change is likely due to improved adherence/regimen intensification. To promote sustainable TCOC payment models for DCM, consideration of medication effects is needed. Disclosure A.R. Montero: None. C. Betley: None. J.R. Brown: Employee; Spouse/Partner; LabCorp. D.M. Delia: None. N. Francis: None. L. Spicer: None. M.F. Magee: Consultant; Self; Mytonomy. Employee; Spouse/Partner; U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Research Support; Self; AstraZeneca, Eli Lilly and Company, National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases. Speaker’s Bureau; Self; American Diabetes Association, Pri-Med LLC. Other Relationship; Self; Endocrine Society.
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.