Rising patient numbers and limited resources are creating a challenging environment for healthcare providers recently. Anaesthesiologists are also increasingly faced with complex situations, requiring high adaptability in the operating room. To enhance team adaptability during emergencies, effective communication methods are essential. This study aimed to compare the impact of mobile phones and intercoms on the response time and effectiveness of anaesthesiologist teams in emergency situations.

Prospective, observational and simulation study.

Anaesthesiology and Critical Care, Yokohama City University Medical Center, Yokohama, Japan.

This study, conducted at Yokohama City University Medical Center (Yokohama, Japan), evaluated how communication methods (intercoms vs mobile phones) impact the efficiency of anaesthesiologists in the simulation setting. Two scenarios were tested: (1) retrieving a video laryngoscope during a difficult intubation and (2) gathering support during cardiac arrest.

Outcomes measured included time to secure equipment, time for assistance to arrive and staff numbers gathered. The Wilcoxon signed-rank test was used to compare the outcomes between the intercom and mobile phone groups.

In scenario 1, the time to secure the video laryngoscope was significantly shorter with intercom use compared with mobile phones (intercom vs mobile phone, median (IQR): 29 (25–33) s vs 50 (39–62) s; p=0.013, effect size 20 (95% CI 7 to 31)). In scenario 2, the time from the request for assistance until the first supporting staff member reached the operating room was significantly shorter in using the intercoms (intercom vs mobile phone, median (IQR): 16 (14–18) s vs 35 (31–38) s; p=0.04, effect size 17 (95% CI 6 to 24)), and more personnel were available in the intercom group (intercom vs mobile phone, median (IQR): 3 (3–3.5) persons vs 2 (1–2) persons; p=0.04, effect size 1.5 (95% CI 1 to 3)).

Real-time information sharing through intercoms improved the ability of the anaesthesiologist team to respond more rapidly and effectively in emergency situations, enhancing overall team adaptability. This approach may improve patients’ outcomes by shortening response times and increasing team coordination.

The 23-valent pneumococcal polysaccharide vaccine (PPSV23) is included in the routine immunisation programme for adults aged 65 years and those aged 60–64 years with serious chronic medical conditions (CMCs). To improve the vaccination coverage rates, a catch-up subsidy programme was implemented by the Japanese government from October 2014 to March 2024, which resulted in no improvement in the coverage rates. For further facilitation of pneumococcal vaccination, research is warranted to understand public attitudes toward pneumococcal vaccination by assessing coverage rates and reasons for vaccination among not only the subsidy-eligible population but also in individuals aged 19–64 years with CMCs who self-pay for pneumococcal vaccination.

Nationwide, cross-sectional survey.

A web-based questionnaire study using a validated consumer panel in Japan.

Japanese adults aged 19–64 years with CMCs and those aged ≥65 years registered in the consumer panel as of March 2023.

Vaccine coverage rates, reasons for receiving or not receiving the vaccination, willingness of unvaccinated individuals to receive the vaccine in the future under the current vaccination programme and factors associated with pneumococcal vaccination coverage rates.

Vaccination coverage rates were 12.4% in those aged 19–49 years, 3.2% in those aged 50–59 years and 4.0% in those aged 60–64 years with CMCs and 55.1% in those aged ≥65 years (61.6% and 52.9% in those with and without CMCs, respectively). The majority (89.1%) of unvaccinated participants aged 19–64 years with CMCs had a positive or neutral attitude towards receiving future pneumococcal vaccinations. Among vaccinated individuals, 79.0% of those aged 19–64 years with CMCs and 56.0% of those aged ≥65 years reported that they had received a doctor’s recommendation. Doctors’ recommendation was the most common reason for receiving the vaccine among participants aged 19–64 years with CMCs (35.1%), whereas notification from the municipality was the most important reason among those aged ≥65 years (46.1%).

Data from this study suggest that recommendations from doctors are crucial for increasing coverage rates of pneumococcal vaccines, particularly among adults aged 19–64 years with CMCs. The majority of unvaccinated participants in this group had a positive or neutral attitude towards future vaccination, highlighting the importance of strong recommendations by doctors.

jRCT1030220606.

This study aimed to assess the methodological quality of published systematic reviews of exercise therapy in knee osteoarthritis and summarise their reported effectiveness on quality of life, knee joint function, or adverse events.

Overview of systematic reviews.

PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, Web of Science and CENTRAL (searched on 14 April 2025), plus grey literature (PROSPERO, Epistemonikos, OpenGrey).

We included systematic reviews of randomised controlled trials in patients diagnosed with knee osteoarthritis by imaging or clinical criteria and treated conservatively with exercise therapy; we excluded reviews that enrolled patients scheduled for surgery, with acute inflammation or osteoarthritis of other joints (hand, hip, ankle), for which relevant author data could not be obtained after one contact attempt, or that did not report at least one primary outcome (quality of life, knee joint function or adverse events).

Two reviewers independently extracted data on study characteristics, interventions and outcomes, and assessed methodological quality using the AMSTAR 2 (A MeaSurement Tool to Assess systematic Reviews 2) tool. Due to heterogeneity in outcome measures across systematic reviews, meta-analysis was not conducted. Effectiveness was defined as any reported beneficial outcome of exercise therapy on predefined outcomes, including quality of life, physical function, pain or adverse events.

58 systematic reviews were selected. Muscle-strengthening (74.1%) and aerobic (48.2%) exercises were the most commonly prescribed exercise-based interventions. SF-36 (36-Item Short Form Health Survey) and the WOMAC (Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index) were the most popular outcome-evaluation tools. Furthermore, 63.7% of the systematic reviews revealed that exercise therapy improved all outcomes. The number of intervention-related adverse events was small. Notably, almost all systematic reviews (87.4%) had a critically low quality.

Current evidence on exercise therapy for knee osteoarthritis is inadequate. Nevertheless, exercise therapy can be considered for conservative treatment of knee osteoarthritis. Future studies should use network meta-analyses to compare the effects of different exercise therapies and determine their superiority over other conservative therapies.