Case Reports: Trial Dysphagia Interventions Conducted via Telehealth.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Cassel SG
PROVIDER: S-EPMC5536731 | biostudies-other | 2016
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other
Similar Datasets
Project description:Identifying the needs of dementia caregivers is critical for supporting dementia home care. This study identified a typology of expert interventions delivered to dementia caregivers during an innovative telehealth trial that used in-home video recordings to directly observe care challenges. Qualitative content analysis was used to analyze narrative notes describing interventions that were developed based on video data submitted by 33 caregiver-care recipient dyads. Two major themes emerged: education and skills for dementia care and caregiver support. Ten subthemes included education and skills related to: behavioral and psychological symptoms of dementia, disease expectations, safety, activities of daily living, medical care optimization, and medication utilization and caregiver support related to: respite, positive reinforcement, social and financial support, and self-care. Families providing in-home dementia care experience a wide range of care challenges. By using video data, dementia care experts were able to witness and evaluate challenging care situations and provide individualized feedback.
| S-EPMC6661218 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The advent of well-tolerated and effective anti-retroviral drugs against human immunodeficiency virus-1 (HIV-1) infection has been a major step forward that has achieved long-term survival in recent years. The number of HIV-1 infected patients who experience difficulty in swallowing tablets is expected to increase as the HIV-infected population advances in age or develops comorbidities or treatment sequelae affecting the central nervous system.Here, we describe two HIV-1-infected patients who experienced progressive dysphagia leading to inability to swallow the antiretroviral tablets included in the standard regimen. Both patients had a plasma viral load <?40 copies/mL while receiving anti-retroviral therapy with the recommended combination antiretroviral therapy (cART) regimen, but the dysphagia necessitated a switch. By switching to much smaller sized combined regimen of dolutegravir (DTG) plus rilpivirine (RPV) tablets, both of our patients were able to successfully continue treatment and maintain adherence without the need for crushing tablets or preparing an oral suspension. Additionally, switching from the recommended cART regimen to DTG plus RPV successfully maintained viral suppression. At the last available follow-up (12 months after switching to DTG/RPV), HIV-1 viral load remained below the lower limit of quantification.An alternative therapeutic option that takes tablet size into consideration could not only contribute to improved patient adherence, but also a reduced care burden for HIV-infected patients with dysphagia. Thus, switching to the "small-tablet regimen" of DTG plus RPV has the potential to improve the survival and well-being of patients with dysphagia.
| S-EPMC5606108 | biostudies-other
Project description:ObjectivesTo compare the frequency of discrepancies in retracted reports of clinical trials with those in adjacent unretracted reports in the same journal.DesignBlinded case-control study.SettingJournals in PubMed.Population50 manuscripts, classified on PubMed as retracted clinical trials, paired with 50 adjacent unretracted manuscripts from the same journals. Reports were randomly selected from PubMed in December 2012, with no restriction on publication date. Controls were the preceding unretracted clinical trial published in the same journal. All traces of retraction were removed. Three scientists, blinded to the retraction status of individual reports, reviewed all 100 trial reports for discrepancies. Discrepancies were pooled and cross checked before being counted into prespecified categories. Only then was the retraction status unblinded for analysis.Main outcome measureTotal number of discrepancies (defined as mathematically or logically contradictory statements) in each clinical trial report.ResultsOf 479 discrepancies found in the 100 trial reports, 348 were in the 50 retracted reports and 131 in the 50 unretracted reports. On average, individual retracted reports had a greater number of discrepancies than unretracted reports (median 4 (interquartile range 2-8.75) v 0 (0-5); P<0.001). Papers with a discrepancy were significantly more likely to be retracted than those without a discrepancy (odds ratio 5.7 (95% confidence interval 2.2 to 14.5); P<0.001). In particular, three types of discrepancy arose significantly more frequently in retracted than unretracted reports: factual discrepancies (P=0.002), arithmetical errors (P=0.01), and missed P values (P=0.02). Results from a retrospective analysis indicated that citations and journal impact factor were unlikely to affect the result.ConclusionsDiscrepancies in published trial reports should no longer be assumed to be unimportant. Scientists, blinded to retraction status and with no specialist skill in the field, identify significantly more discrepancies in retracted than unretracted reports of clinical trials. Discrepancies could be an early and accessible signal of unreliability in clinical trial reports.
| S-EPMC4575810 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC8492369 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC8759487 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:Telehealth employs technology to connect patients to the right healthcare resources at the right time. Women are high utilizers of healthcare with gender-specific health issues that may benefit from the convenience and personalization of telehealth. Thus, we produced an evidence map describing the quantity, distribution, and characteristics of evidence assessing the effectiveness of telehealth services designed for women. METHODS:We searched MEDLINE® (via PubMed®) and Embase® from inception through March 20, 2018. We screened systematic reviews (SRs), randomized trials, and quasi-experimental studies using predetermined eligibility criteria. Articles meeting inclusion criteria were identified for data abstraction. To assess emerging trends, we also conducted a targeted search of ClinicalTrials.gov . RESULTS:Two hundred thirty-four primary studies and three SRs were eligible for abstraction. We grouped studies into focused areas of research: maternal health (n?=?96), prevention (n?=?46), disease management (n?=?63), family planning (n?=?9), high-risk breast cancer assessment (n?=?10), intimate partner violence (n?=?7), and mental health (n?=?3). Most interventions focused on phone as the primary telehealth modality and featured healthcare team-to-patient communication and were limited in duration (e.g., <?12 weeks). Few interventions were conducted with older women (??60 years) or in racially/ethnically diverse populations. There are few SRs in this area and limited evidence regarding newer telehealth modalities such as mobile-based applications or short message service/texting. Targeted search of clinical.trials.gov yielded 73 ongoing studies that show a shift in the use of non-telephone modalities. DISCUSSION:Our systematic evidence map highlights gaps in the existing literature, such as a lack of studies in key women's health areas (intimate partner violence, mental health), and a dearth of relevant SRs. With few existing SRs in this literature, there is an opportunity for examining effects, efficiency, and acceptability across studies to inform efforts at implementing telehealth for women.
| S-EPMC6258612 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Oropharyngeal dysphagia is common in nursing home residents. The objective of this scoping review was to summarize and disseminate the findings from the literature on interventions for dysphagia in nursing home residents. Searches were conducted in four databases. The criteria for including the studies were nursing home residents, dysphagia, interventions, original research, published in English, Danish, Norwegian, or Swedish with no restriction placed regarding publication date. Excluded were literature reviews, editorial comments, conference abstracts, protocols, papers not available in full text, and studies with a mixed population, for example, geriatric patients and nursing home residents and where the results were not separated between the groups. A total of 14 papers were included and analyzed. The included papers represented interventions focusing on feeding intervention, oral hygiene, caregiver algorithm, stimulation (taste and smell), teaching the residents what to eat, mobilization of the spine, exercises/training, and positioning. This scoping review identifies sparse knowledge about interventions affecting nursing home residents' dysphagia. But the results indicate that multi-component interventions, including staff training, training of residents, and/or next of kin, might be successful. This scoping review clarifies that there is a need for well-designed studies that uncover which specific interventions have an effect in relation to nursing home residents with dysphagia and can serve as a guide for designing multi-component person-centered intervention studies. Future studies should implement high evidence study designs, define the measures of dysphagia, and quantify the severity of dysphagia, its underlying diseases, and comorbidities.
| S-EPMC8162353 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The CONSORT 2010 statement provides minimum guidelines for reporting randomized trials. Its widespread use has been instrumental in ensuring transparency in the evaluation of new interventions. More recently, there has been a growing recognition that interventions involving artificial intelligence (AI) need to undergo rigorous, prospective evaluation to demonstrate impact on health outcomes. The CONSORT-AI (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials-Artificial Intelligence) extension is a new reporting guideline for clinical trials evaluating interventions with an AI component. It was developed in parallel with its companion statement for clinical trial protocols: SPIRIT-AI (Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Interventional Trials-Artificial Intelligence). Both guidelines were developed through a staged consensus process involving literature review and expert consultation to generate 29 candidate items, which were assessed by an international multi-stakeholder group in a two-stage Delphi survey (103 stakeholders), agreed upon in a two-day consensus meeting (31 stakeholders) and refined through a checklist pilot (34 participants). The CONSORT-AI extension includes 14 new items that were considered sufficiently important for AI interventions that they should be routinely reported in addition to the core CONSORT 2010 items. CONSORT-AI recommends that investigators provide clear descriptions of the AI intervention, including instructions and skills required for use, the setting in which the AI intervention is integrated, the handling of inputs and outputs of the AI intervention, the human-AI interaction and provision of an analysis of error cases. CONSORT-AI will help promote transparency and completeness in reporting clinical trials for AI interventions. It will assist editors and peer reviewers, as well as the general readership, to understand, interpret and critically appraise the quality of clinical trial design and risk of bias in the reported outcomes.
| S-EPMC7598943 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The CONSORT 2010 statement provides minimum guidelines for reporting randomised trials. Its widespread use has been instrumental in ensuring transparency in the evaluation of new interventions. More recently, there has been a growing recognition that interventions involving artificial intelligence (AI) need to undergo rigorous, prospective evaluation to demonstrate impact on health outcomes. The CONSORT-AI (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials-Artificial Intelligence) extension is a new reporting guideline for clinical trials evaluating interventions with an AI component. It was developed in parallel with its companion statement for clinical trial protocols: SPIRIT-AI (Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Interventional Trials-Artificial Intelligence). Both guidelines were developed through a staged consensus process involving literature review and expert consultation to generate 29 candidate items, which were assessed by an international multi-stakeholder group in a two-stage Delphi survey (103 stakeholders), agreed upon in a two-day consensus meeting (31 stakeholders), and refined through a checklist pilot (34 participants). The CONSORT-AI extension includes 14 new items that were considered sufficiently important for AI interventions that they should be routinely reported in addition to the core CONSORT 2010 items. CONSORT-AI recommends that investigators provide clear descriptions of the AI intervention, including instructions and skills required for use, the setting in which the AI intervention is integrated, the handling of inputs and outputs of the AI intervention, the human-AI interaction and provision of an analysis of error cases. CONSORT-AI will help promote transparency and completeness in reporting clinical trials for AI interventions. It will assist editors and peer reviewers, as well as the general readership, to understand, interpret, and critically appraise the quality of clinical trial design and risk of bias in the reported outcomes.
| S-EPMC8183333 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The CONSORT 2010 (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials) statement provides minimum guidelines for reporting randomised trials. Its widespread use has been instrumental in ensuring transparency when evaluating new interventions. More recently, there has been a growing recognition that interventions involving artificial intelligence (AI) need to undergo rigorous, prospective evaluation to demonstrate impact on health outcomes.The CONSORT-AI extension is a new reporting guideline for clinical trials evaluating interventions with an AI component. It was developed in parallel with its companion statement for clinical trial protocols: SPIRIT-AI. Both guidelines were developed through a staged consensus process, involving a literature review and expert consultation to generate 29 candidate items, which were assessed by an international multi-stakeholder group in a two-stage Delphi survey (103 stakeholders), agreed on in a two-day consensus meeting (31 stakeholders) and refined through a checklist pilot (34 participants).The CONSORT-AI extension includes 14 new items, which were considered sufficiently important for AI interventions, that they should be routinely reported in addition to the core CONSORT 2010 items. CONSORT-AI recommends that investigators provide clear descriptions of the AI intervention, including instructions and skills required for use, the setting in which the AI intervention is integrated, the handling of inputs and outputs of the AI intervention, the human-AI interaction and providing analysis of error cases.CONSORT-AI will help promote transparency and completeness in reporting clinical trials for AI interventions. It will assist editors and peer-reviewers, as well as the general readership, to understand, interpret and critically appraise the quality of clinical trial design and risk of bias in the reported outcomes.
| S-EPMC7490784 | biostudies-literature