FreshRSS

🔒
❌ Acerca de FreshRSS
Hay nuevos artículos disponibles. Pincha para refrescar la página.
AnteayerTus fuentes RSS

Protocol for a prospective cohort study to determine the multimodal biomarkers of delirium and new dementia after acute illness in older adults: ORCHARD-PS

Por: Gan · J. M. · Elderton · L. · Vijayakumar Sheela · M. · Knight · J. · Louca · J. · Evans · S. · Shahab · K. · Lovett · N. G. · Sneade · M. · Muchenje · N. · Fenchyn · M. · Simonato · D. · McColl · A. · Pendlebury · S. T.
Introduction

Delirium is common in the older hospital population and is often precipitated by acute illness. Delirium is associated with poor outcomes including subsequent cognitive decline and dementia and may therefore be a modifiable risk factor for dementia. However, the mechanisms underpinning the delirium–dementia relationship and the role of coexisting acute illness factors remain uncertain. Current biomarker studies of delirium have limitations including lack of detailed delirium characterisation with few studies on neurodegenerative or neuroimaging biomarkers especially in the acute setting. The Oxford and Reading Cognitive Health After Recovery from acute illness and Delirium—Prospective Study (ORCHARD-PS) aims to elucidate the pathophysiology of delirium and subsequent cognitive decline after acute illness in older adults, through acquisition of multimodal biomarkers for deep phenotyping of delirium and acute illness, and follow-up for incident dementia.

Methods and analysis

ORCHARD-PS is a bi-centre, prospective cohort study. Consecutive eligible patients requiring acute hospital admission or assessment are identified by the relevant acute clinical care team. All patients age >65 years without advanced dementia, nursing home residence, end-stage frailty or terminal illness are eligible. Details of potential participants are communicated to the research team and written informed consent or consultee agreement is obtained. Participants are interviewed as soon as possible after admission/assessment using a structured proforma.

Data are collected on demographics, diagnosis and comorbidities, social and functional background. Delirium is assessed using the 4A’s test, Confusion Assessment Method (long-form), Observational Scale of Level of Arousal, Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale and Memorial Delirium Assessment Scale and diagnosed using the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition criteria. Delirium is categorised by time of onset (prevalent vs incident), dementia status, motoric subtype, severity and duration. Cognitive tests include the 10-point Abbreviated Mental Test and Montreal Cognitive Assessment. Participants are reassessed every 48–72 hours if remaining in hospital. Informant questionnaire data and interview are supplemented by hand searching of medical records and linkage to electronic patient records for nursing risk assessments, vital observations, laboratory results and International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision diagnostic and procedure codes.

In-person follow-up with more detailed cognitive testing and informant interview is undertaken at 3 months, and 1 and 3 years supplemented with indirect follow-up using medical records. Blood banking is performed at baseline and all follow-ups for future biomarker analyses. CT-brain and MRI-brain imaging acquired as part of standard care is obtained for quantification of brain atrophy and white matter disease/stroke supplemented by research CT-brain imaging. Outcomes include length of hospitalisation, change in care needs, institutionalisation, mortality, readmission, longitudinal changes in cognitive and functional status and incident dementia. Biomarker associations with delirium, and with incident dementia on follow-up, will be determined using logistic or Cox regression as appropriate, unadjusted and adjusted for covariates including demographics, baseline cognition, frailty, comorbidity and apolipoprotein E genotype.

Ethics and dissemination

ORCHARD-PS is approved by the South Central—Berkshire Research Ethics Committee (REC Reference: 23/SC/0199). Results will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications and conference presentations.

Trial registration number

ISRCTN24171810.

Self-management versus usual care for greater trochanteric pain syndrome (the HIPS trial): study protocol for a randomised controlled trial

Por: Morin Melas · T. · Bjorneboe · J. · Juel · N. G. · Wefring · M. L. · Skatteboe · S. · Killingmo · R. M. · Engebretsen · K. B. · Rathleff · M. S. · Oiestad · B. E. · Soberg · H. L. · Pripp · A. H. · Brox · J. I. · Johnsen · M. B.
Introduction

Greater trochanteric pain syndrome (GTPS) is a common and disabling condition characterised by lateral hip pain. The condition often persists for several months, and there is low evidence for any superior treatment. The aim of this study protocol is to describe a randomised controlled trial (RCT) investigating the effectiveness of a self-management programme versus usual care for patients with GTPS.

Methods and analysis

The study is designed as an observer-blinded, parallel group, superiority RCTcomparing a self-management programme (n=55) with usual care (n=55). Eligible patients with GTPS will be included based on reproduction of pain on palpation in the greater trochanteric region and at least one positive clinical provocation test. The self-management programme includes 3–5 individual sessions with a physiotherapist over 12 weeks, addressing physical, emotional and behavioural factors deemed relevant by the patient. Usual care will receive general information about GTPS, activity management and are free to seek further treatment in primary care as wanted. The primary outcome measure is the Norwegian version of the Victorian Institute of Sports Assessment for gluteal tendinopathy questionnaire (VISA-G-Norwegian). Outcomes will be assessed at baseline, 3, 6 and 12 months. A longitudinal mixed effects model will be used to assess the effectiveness of treatment on pain and disability across all time points, with the primary endpoint at 6 months. Cost-effectiveness will be expressed by mean incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) from a societal and healthcare perspective. Bootstrapping will be used to estimate ICER uncertainty.

Ethics and dissemination

The Norwegian Regional Committees for Medical and Health Research Ethics have approved the project (2023/590816), and it will be in accordance with recommendations from the Data Inspectorate at Oslo University Hospital (22/26396). The results from the study will be disseminated through publications in peer-reviewed journals, in conference presentations and through the user representative.

Trial registration number

NCT06297148.

❌