FreshRSS

🔒
❌ Acerca de FreshRSS
Hay nuevos artículos disponibles. Pincha para refrescar la página.
AnteayerPLOS ONE Medicine&Health

A high-fat and fructose diet in dogs mirrors insulin resistance and β-cell dysfunction characteristic of impaired glucose tolerance in humans

by Justin M. Gregory, Guillaume Kraft, Chiara Dalla Man, James C. Slaughter, Melanie F. Scott, Jon R. Hastings, Dale S. Edgerton, Mary C. Moore, Alan D. Cherrington

This study examined the impact of a hypercaloric high-fat high-fructose diet (HFFD) in dogs as a potential model for human impaired glucose tolerance (IGT) and type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). The HFFD not only led to weight gain but also triggered metabolic alterations akin to the precursors of human T2DM, notably insulin resistance and β-cell dysfunction. Following the HFFD intervention, the dogs exhibited a 50% decrease in insulin sensitivity within the first four weeks, paralleling observations in the progression from normal to IGT in humans. Calculations of the insulinogenic index using both insulin and C-peptide measurements during oral glucose tolerance tests revealed a significant and sustained decrease in early-phase insulin release, with partial compensation in the later phase, predominantly stemming from reduced hepatic insulin clearance. In addition, the Disposition Index, representing the β-cell’s capacity to compensate for diminished insulin sensitivity, fell dramatically. These results confirm that a HFFD can instigate metabolic changes in dogs akin to the early stages of progression to T2DM in humans. The study underscores the potential of using dogs subjected to a HFFD as a model organism for studying human IGT and T2DM.

Efficient assessment of brain fog and fatigue: Development of the Fatigue and Altered Cognition Scale (FACs)

by Timothy R. Elliott, Yu-Yu Hsiao, Kathleen Randolph, Randall J. Urban, Melinda Sheffield-Moore, Richard B. Pyles, Brent E. Masel, Tamara Wexler, Traver J. Wright

Debilitating symptoms of fatigue and accompanying “brain fog” are observed among patients with various chronic health conditions. Unfortunately, an efficient and psychometrically sound instrument to assess these co-occurring symptoms is unavailable. Here, we report the development and initial psychometric properties of the Fatigue and Altered Cognition Scale (the FACs), a measure of self-reported central fatigue and brain fog. Traumatic brain injury (TBI) was chosen to model and develop the FACs due to research team expertise and established links between TBI and the symptom complex. Potential items were generated by researchers and clinicians with experience treating these symptoms, drawing from relevant literature and review of patient responses to measures from past and current TBI studies. The 20 candidate items for the FACs—ten each to assess altered cognition (i.e., brain fog) and central fatigue–were formatted on an electronic visual analogue response scale (eVAS) via an online survey. Demographic information and history of TBI were obtained. A total of 519 participants consented and provided usable data (average age = 40.23 years; 73% female), 204 of whom self-reported a history of TBI (75% reported mild TBI). Internal consistency and reliability values were calculated. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) examined the presumed two-factor structure of the FACs and a one-factor solution for comparison. A measurement invariance test of the two latent constructs (altered cognition, fatigue) among participants with and without TBI was conducted. All items demonstrated normal distribution. Cronbach’s alpha coefficients indicated good internal consistency for both factors (α’s = .95). Omega reliability values were favorable (α’s = .95). CFA supported the presumed two-factor model and item loadings which outperformed the one-factor model. Measurement invariance found the two-factor structure was consistent between the two groups. Implications of these findings, study limitations, and potential use of the FACs in clinical research and practice are discussed.

Healthcare professionals’ views on the most important outcomes for non-infectious uveitis of the posterior segment: A qualitative study

by Mohammad O. Tallouzi, David J. Moore, Nicholas Bucknall, Philip I. Murray, Melanie J. Calvert, Alastair K. Denniston, Jonathan Mathers

Background

Uveitis comprises a range of conditions that result in intraocular inflammation. Most sight-threatening uveitis falls into the broad category known as Non-infectious Posterior Segment-Involving Uveitis (PSIU). To evaluate treatments, trialists and clinicians must select outcome measures. The aim of this study was to understand healthcare professionals’ perspectives on what outcomes are important to adult patients with PSIU and their carers.

Methods

Twelve semi-structured telephone interviews were undertaken to understand the perspectives of healthcare professionals. Interviews were audio recorded, transcribed and thematically analysed. Findings were compared with the views of patients and carers and outcomes abstracted from a previously published systematic review.

Results

Eleven core domains were identified as important to healthcare professionals: (1) visual function, (2) symptoms, (3) functional ability, (4) impact on relationships, (5) financial impact, (6) psychological morbidity and emotional well-being (7) psychosocial adjustment to uveitis, (8) doctor / patient / interprofessional relationships and access to health care, (9) treatment burden, (10) treatment side effects, (11) disease control. Healthcare professionals recognised a similar range of domains to patients and carers but placed more emphasis on certain outcomes, particularly in the disease control domain. In contrast the range of outcomes identified via the systematic review was limited.

Conclusion

Healthcare professionals recognise all of the published outcome domains as patients/carers in the previous publication but with subtly differing emphasis within some domains and with a priority for certain types of measures. Healthcare professionals discussed the disease control and side effects/complications to a greater degree than patients and carers in the focus groups

❌