Physical and mental health of older people while cocooning during the COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: Cocooning or shielding, i.e. staying at home and reducing face-to-face interaction with other people, was an important part of the response to the COVID-19 pandemic for older people. However, concerns exist regarding the long-term adverse effects cocooning may have on their physical and mental health. AIM: To examine health trajectories and healthcare utilization while cocooning in a cohort of community-dwelling people aged ≥70 years. DESIGN: Survey of 150 patients (55% female, mean age 80 years and mean Clinical Frailty Scale Score 4.8) attending ambulatory medical services in a large urban university hospital. METHODS: The survey covered four broad themes: access to healthcare services, mental health, physical health and attitudes to COVID-19 restrictions. Survey data were presented descriptively. RESULTS: Almost 40% (59/150) reported that their mental health was 'worse' or 'much worse' while cocooning, while over 40% (63/150) reported a decline in their physical health. Almost 70% (104/150) reported exercising less frequently or not exercising at all. Over 57% (86/150) of participants reported loneliness with 1 in 8 (19/150) reporting that they were lonely 'very often'. Half of participants (75/150) reported a decline in their quality of life. Over 60% (91/150) agreed with government advice for those ≥70 years but over 40% (61/150) reported that they disliked the term 'cocooning'. CONCLUSIONS: Given the likelihood of further restrictions in coming months, clear policies and advice for older people around strategies to maintain social engagement, manage loneliness and continue physical activity and access timely medical care and rehabilitation services should be a priority.

Systemic sclerosis medications and risk of scleroderma renal crisis.

BACKGROUND: Scleroderma Renal Crisis (SRC) is associated with significant morbidity and mortality. While prednisone is strongly associated with SRC, there are no previous large cohort studies that have evaluated ace inhibitor (ACEi) calcium channel blocker (CCB), angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB), endothelin receptor blocker (ERB), non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID), fluticasone, or mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) use in systemic sclerosis (SSc) and the risk of SRC. METHODS: In this retrospective cohort study of the entire military electronic medical record between 2005 and 2016, we compared the use of ACEi, ARB, CCB, NSAID, ERB, fluticasone, and MMF after SSc diagnosis for 31 cases who subsequently developed SRC to 322 SSc without SRC disease controls. RESULTS: ACEi was associated with an increased risk for SRC adjusted for age, race, and prednisone use [odds ratio (OR) 4.1, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.6-10.2, P = 0.003]. On stratified analyses, ACEi was only associated with SRC in the presence [OR 5.3, 95% CI 1.1-29.2, p = 0.03], and not the absence of proteinuria. In addition, a doubling of ACEi dose [61% vs. 12%, p < 0.001) and achieving maximum ACEi dose [45% vs. 4%, p < 0.001] after SSc diagnosis was associated with future SRC. CCB, ARB, NSAIDs, ERB, fluticasone, and MMF use were not significantly associated with SRC. CONCLUSION: ACEi use at SSC diagnosis was associated with an increased risk for SRC. Results suggest that it may be a passive marker of known SRC risk factors, such as proteinuria, or evolving disease. SSC patients that require ACEi should be more closely monitored for SRC.

Can we predict the outcome for people with patellofemoral pain? A systematic review on prognostic factors and treatment effect modifiers.

BACKGROUND: Patellofemoral pain (PFP) is a multifactorial and often persistent knee condition. One strategy to enhance patient outcomes is using clinically assessable patient characteristics to predict the outcome and match a specific treatment to an individual. AIM: A systematic review was conducted to determine which baseline patient characteristics were (1) associated with patient outcome (prognosis); or (2) modified patient outcome from a specific treatment (treatment effect modifiers). METHODS: 6 electronic databases were searched (July 2016) for studies evaluating the association between those with PFP, their characteristics and outcome. All studies were appraised using the Epidemiological Appraisal Instrument. Studies that aimed to identify treatment effect modifiers underwent a checklist for methodological quality. RESULTS: The 24 included studies evaluated 180 participant characteristics. 12 studies investigated prognosis, and 12 studies investigated potential treatment effect modifiers. Important methodological limitations were identified. Some prognostic studies used a retrospective design. Studies aiming to identify treatment effect modifiers often analysed too many variables for the limiting sample size and typically failed to use a control or comparator treatment group. 16 factors were reported to be associated with a poor outcome, with longer duration of symptoms the most reported (>4 months). Preliminary evidence suggests increased midfoot mobility may predict those who have a successful outcome to foot orthoses. CONCLUSIONS: Current evidence can identify those with increased risk of a poor outcome, but methodological limitations make it difficult to predict the outcome after one specific treatment compared with another. Adequately designed randomised trials are needed to identify treatment effect modifiers.

Two cases of methaemoglobinaemia secondary to amyl nitrate use.

We wish to report two cases of methaemoglobinaemia secondary to amyl nitrate use. A 55-year-old male presented with saturations in the mid 80s despite FiO2 of 1.0 and GCS 10 and a 22-year-old female who presented with fluctuating GCS and a slate grey colour. Both were found to have high levels of metheamoglobinaemia on ABG, were treated with methylene blue and made excellent recoveries. These cases illustrate the risk of methaemoglobinaemia secondary to amyl nitrate. Appropriate and prompt management can lead to very good outcomes.

Intravenous versus subcutaneous vitamin K1 in reversing excessive oral anticoagulation.

Our data suggest that compared with the subcutaneous route of administration, intravenous vitamin K1 results in a more prompt reduction in the international normalized ration. However, for most patients, subcutaneous vitamin K1 is an effective and safe alternative when used in conjunction with modification of subsequent warfarin dosing, because virtually all patients achieved a safe level of anticoagulation within 72 hours with this route of administration.