Background: Older people with diabetes have an increased risk for disability and cognitive dysfunction, which may impede self-care capacity. These are not evaluated routinely in current health systems. In the Center for Successful Aging with Diabetes, patients over the age of 60 undergo multi-disciplinary evaluation days and are provided with an integrated (cognitive, physical, nutritional, and medical) treatment plan. Among individuals with below-normal cognitive function, self-adherence to these recommendations poses a challenge. Thus, the aim of this study was to test the feasibility of a multidisciplinary intervention amongst older people with diabetes with below-normal cognitive function and sub-optimal glucose control. Methods: Patients with a MoCA score under 26 and A1C >= 7.5% participated in a two-arm intervention: (A) a medical intervention: monthly meetings with a diabetes nurse-educator, supervised by a diabetes specialist and study psychologist during which changes in their pharmacological regimen of glucose, blood pressure, and lipid control were made and (B) a cognitive/physical rehabilitation intervention. This arm consisted of (1) an intensive phase-group meetings which included computerized cognitive training, aerobic, balance, and strength exercise, and group discussions and (2) a monthly consolidation phase. Outcomes included change in A1C, change in strength, balance, and aerobic exercise capacity as well as change in quality of life. Results: After 12 months there was a 0.7% reduction in A1C. After 3 months there was a statistically significant improvement in physical indices, including aerobic capacity (6-min walk), balance (FSST) and indices assessing the risk of fall (10-meter walk, time up and go). There was no additional improvement in physical indices between the 3 and 12 month visits. For some of the physical measures, the improvement observed after 3 months persisted partially to the 12-month visit. Conclusions: This feasibility study provides preliminary data that support the efficacy of the complex interventions described. The findings suggest that this older population would require an ongoing “intensive phase” intervention. Larger prospective randomized trials are needed.

These results support a negative effect of ADHD on the functioning of young adults in a military setting.

The role of a clinical nurse specialist in oncology varies greatly between healthcare systems, and implementing this healthcare role with its multifaceted and co-existing responsibilities may prove challenging. While already integrated into healthcare systems and services in several European countries, Asia, Canada, and the United States, other countries are just beginning to develop clinical nursing specialties. The current study aims to provide healthcare policymakers with up-to-date evidence that focuses on the diverse modes of oncology clinical nurse specialist role implementation across several healthcare systems and pertinent implementation challenges as described in the literature. A rapid evidence assessment was carried out in order to provide policymakers with a rigorous review in a condensed timescale. Initially, only items in the English language were included, and “grey literature” was excluded. We searched PubMed between 1 January 2022 and 28 February 2022 and two independent scholars reviewed items. Based on 64 papers, both non-scientific and papers that met the initial criteria of the rapid review, we describe the modes of implementation of the oncology clinical nurse specialist in the United States, Canada, United Kingdom, Japan, Brazil and Australia. Barriers to implementation include conflicts around role boundaries, skepticism and lack of organizational support, as well as fears that oncology clinical nurse specialists will “encroach” on doctors’ powers. In contrast, an oncology clinical nurse specialist is found to be universally more accessible to patients and their families and can help physicians deal with difficult workloads, among other advantages. Conclusions: This role offers a myriad of gains for cancer patients, oncology physicians, and the healthcare system. The literature demonstrates that it is a necessary role, albeit one that brings specific implementation challenges.

Use of antidepressants (ADs) in general, and in pregnant notwithstanding, has been increasing globally in recent decades. Associations with a wide range of adverse perinatal and childhood outcomes following prenatal ADs exposure have been observed in registry-based studies, with Autism Spectrum Disorders (ASD) frequently reported. Studies using animal models, sibling analyses, and negative control approaches, have linked dysfunctional serotonin metabolism with ASD, but did not convincingly tease apart the role of maternal mental health from that of ADs. As work to decipher the nature of the AD-ASD association continues, this review raises some public health concerns pertinent to a hypothetical conclusion that this association is causal, including the need to identify specific gestation periods with higher risk, the importance of precise assessment of the ASD potential prevention that might be attributed to AD discontinuation, and the estimation of risks associated with prenatal exposure to untreated depression.

No abstract