Conectar
New-onset supraventricular arrhythmia (NOSVA) is the most common arrhythmia in patients with septic shock and is associated with haemodynamic alterations and increased mortality rates. With no data available from randomised trials, clinical practice for patient management varies widely. In this setting, rate control or rhythm control could be beneficial in limiting the duration of shock and preventing evolution to multiorgan dysfunction.
The Control Atrial Fibrillation in Septic shock (CAFS) study is a binational (French and Belgium), multicentre, parallel-group, open-label, randomised controlled superiority trial to compare the efficacy and safety of three management strategies in patients with NOSVA during septic shock. The expected duration of patient enrolment is 42 months, starting from November 2021. Patients will be randomised to receive either risk control (magnesium and control of risk factors for NOSVA), rate control (risk control and low dose of amiodarone) or rhythm control (risk control and cardioversion using high dose of amiodarone with external electrical shock if NOSVA persists) for 7 days. Patients with a history of SVA, NOSVA lasting more than 48 hours, recent cardiac surgery or a contraindication to amiodarone will not be included. We plan to recruit 240 patients. Patients will be randomised on a 1:1:1 basis and stratified by centre. The primary endpoint is a hierarchical criterion at day 28 including all-cause mortality and the duration of septic shock defined as time from randomisation to successful weaning of vasopressors. Secondary outcomes include: individual components of the primary endpoint; arterial lactate clearance at day 3; efficacy at controlling cardiac rhythm at day 7; proportion of patients free from organ dysfunction at day 7; ventricular arrhythmia, conduction disorders, thrombotic events, major bleeding events and acute hepatitis related to amiodarone at day 28; intensive care unit and hospital lengths of stay at day 28.
The study has been approved by the French (Comité Sud-Ouest et Outre-Mer II, France, registration number 2019-A02624-53) and Belgian (Comité éthique de l’hôpital Erasme, Belgium, registration number CCB B4062023000179) ethics committees. Patients will be included after obtaining signed informed consent. The results will be submitted for publication in peer-reviewed journals.
by Milhan Chaze, Laurent Mériade, Corinne Rochette, Mélina Bailly, Rea Bingula, Christelle Blavignac, Martine Duclos, Bertrand Evrard, Anne Cécile Fournier, Lena Pelissier, David Thivel, on behalf of CAUVIM-19 Group
BackgroundWork on long COVID-19 has mainly focused on clinical care in hospitals. Thermal spa therapies represent a therapeutic offer outside of health care institutions that are nationally or even internationally attractive. Unlike local care (hospital care, general medicine, para-medical care), their integration in the care pathways of long COVID-19 patients seems little studied. The aim of this article is to determine what place french thermal spa therapies can take in the care pathway of long COVID-19 patients.
MethodsBased on the case of France, we carry out a geographic mapping analysis of the potential care pathways for long COVID-19 patients by cross-referencing, over the period 2020–2022, the available official data on COVID-19 contamination, hospitalisations in intensive care units and the national offer of spa treatments. This first analysis allows us, by using the method for evaluating the attractiveness of an area defined by David Huff, to evaluate the accessibility of each French department to thermal spas.
ResultsUsing dynamic geographical mapping, this study describes two essential criteria for the integration of the thermal spa therapies offer in the care pathways of long COVID-19 patients (attractiveness of spa areas and accessibility to thermal spas) and three fundamental elements for the success of these pathways (continuity of the care pathways; clinical collaborations; adaptation of the financing modalities to each patient). Using a spatial attractiveness method, we make this type of geographical analysis more dynamic by showing the extent to which a thermal spa is accessible to long COVID-19 patients.
ConclusionBased on the example of the French spa offer, this study makes it possible to place the care pathways of long COVID-19 patients in a wider area (at least national), rather than limiting them to clinical and local management in a hospital setting. The identification and operationalization of two geographical criteria for integrating a type of treatment such as a spa cure into a care pathway contributes to a finer conceptualization of the construction of healthcare pathways.
Opioid use disorder often co-occurs with chronic pain but assessment and treatment of these co-occurring disorders is complex. This review aims to identify current treatments and delivery models for co-occurring chronic pain and opioid use disorder (OUD) documented in the scientific literature.
Scoping review.
The review was conducted in six databases in June 2022 (no time limit): CINAHL, PsycINFO, Web of Science, Cochrane, PubMed and Embase. The PRISMA-ScR checklist was used to guide reporting.
Forty-seven publications addressing the issue of co-occurring chronic pain and OUD management were included. Randomized controlled trials provide evidence for the effectiveness of opioid agonist treatments (OAT) such as methadone or buprenorphine/naloxone, as well as for combining OAT with Mindfulness-Oriented Recovery Enhancement or cognitive behavioural therapy. A number of other pharmacological treatments (opioid and nonopioid), nonpharmacological treatments (e.g. physiotherapy) and service delivery models (e.g. simultaneous treatment of comorbidities, interdisciplinary and interprofessional collaboration) are also underlined. In most cases, authors recommend a combination of strategies to meet patient needs.
The scoping review reveals gaps in evidence-based knowledge to effectively care for co-occurring chronic pain and OUD, but several experts recommend the uptake of known ‘best’ practices such as integrated treatment of the multiple biopsychosocial dimensions of the co-occurring disorders as well as collaborative interdisciplinary work.
Improving services is dependent on alleviating barriers such as working in silos, the costs associated with nonpharmacological treatments, and the double stigma associated with pain in people with a substance use disorder.
FreshRSS