2 - Schools incorporating the Life Sciences and Medicine
Permanent URI for this communityhttps://hdl.handle.net/2164/330
Browse
17 results
Search Results
Item Implementing selective digestive tract decontamination in the intensive care unit : A qualitative analysis of nurse-identified considerations(2014-01) Marshall, Andrea P; Weisbrodt, Leonie; Rose, Louise; Duncan, Eilidh; Prior, Maria; Todd, Laura; Wells, Elisabeth; Seppelt, Ian; Cuthbertson, Brian; Francis, Jill; University of Aberdeen.Other Applied Health Sciences; University of Aberdeen.Aberdeen Health Psychology GroupItem A pragmatic randomised, controlled trial of intensive care follow up programmes in improving longer-term outcomes from critical illness : the PRACTICAL study(2007-07-23) Cuthbertson, Brian; Rattray, Janice; Johnston, Marie; Wildsmith, J Anthony; Wilson, Edward; Hernandez, Rodolfo; Ramsay, Craig; Hull, Alastair M; Norrie, John; Campbell, Marion; PRaCTICaL Study Group; University of Aberdeen.Other Applied Health Sciences; University of Aberdeen.Institute of Applied Health SciencesItem Effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of arthroscopic lavage in the treatment of osteoarthritis of the knee: a mixed methods study of the feasibility of conducting a surgical placebo-controlled trial (the KORAL study)(2010-01-01) Campbell, Marion Kay; Skea, Zoe Christina; Sutherland, Alasdair George; Cuthbertson, Brian; Entwistle, Vikki Ann; McDonald, Alison Mary; Norrie, John David Taylor; Carlson, R V; Bridgman, S; KORAL study group; University of Aberdeen.Other Applied Health Sciences; University of Aberdeen.Institute of Applied Health Sciences; University of Aberdeen.Applied Medicine; University of Aberdeen.Aberdeen Centre for EvaluationItem A pragmatic multi-centre randomised controlled trial of fluid loading and level of dependency in high-risk surgical patients undergoing major elective surgery : trial protocol(2010-04-16) Cuthbertson, Brian; Campbell, Marion Kay; Stott, S.a.; Vale, Luke David; Norrie, John David; Kinsella, John; Cook, Jonathan Alistair; Brittenden, Julie; Grant, Adrian Maxwell; Foccus Study Group; University of Aberdeen.Other Applied Health Sciences; University of Aberdeen.Applied Medicine; University of Aberdeen.Institute of Applied Health SciencesItem Evidence-based selection of theories for designing behaviour change interventions : using methods based on theoretical construct domains to understand clinicians' blood transfusion behaviour(2009-11) Francis, Jillian; Stockton, Charlotte; Eccles, Martin P.; Johnston, Marie; Cuthbertson, Brian; Grimshaw, Jeremy M.; Hyde, Chris; Tinmouth, Alan; Stanworth, Simon J.; University of Aberdeen.Other Applied Health SciencesItem Quality of life in the five years after intensive care : a cohort study(2010-01-20) Cuthbertson, Brian; Roughton, Sian; Jenkinson, David James; MacLennan, Graeme Stewart; Vale, Luke David; University of Aberdeen.Other Applied Health Sciences; University of Aberdeen.Institute of Applied Health SciencesItem The PRaCTICaL study of nurse led, intensive care follow-up programmes for improving long term outcomes from critical illness : a pragmatic randomised controlled trial(BMJ, 2009) Cuthbertson, Brian; Rattray, J; Campbell, Marion Kay; Gager, M; Roughton, S; Smith, A; Hull, A; Breeman, S; Norrie, John David; Jenkinson, David James; Hernández, Rodolfo Andrés; Johnston, Marie; Wilson, E; Waldman, C; PRaCTICaL Study Group; University of Aberdeen, School of Medicine & Dentistry, Division of Applied Health SciencesObjectives To test the hypothesis that nurse led follow-up programmes are effective and cost effective in improving quality of life after discharge from intensive care. Design A pragmatic, non-blinded, multicentre, randomised controlled trial. Setting Three UK hospitals (two teaching hospitals and one district general hospital). Participants 286 patients aged ≥18 years were recruited after discharge from intensive care between September 2006 and October 2007. Intervention Nurse led intensive care follow-up programmes versus standard care. Main outcome measure(s) Health related quality of life (measured with the SF-36 questionnaire) at 12 months after randomisation. A cost effectiveness analysis was also performed. Results 286 patients were recruited and 192 completed one year follow-up. At 12 months, there was no evidence of a difference in the SF-36 physical component score (mean 42.0 (SD 10.6) v 40.8 (SD 11.9), effect size 1.1 (95% CI −1.9 to 4.2), P=0.46) or the SF-36 mental component score (effect size 0.4 (−3.0 to 3.7), P=0.83). There were no statistically significant differences in secondary outcomes or subgroup analyses. Follow-up programmes were significantly more costly than standard care and are unlikely to be considered cost effective. Conclusions A nurse led intensive care follow-up programme showed no evidence of being effective or cost effective in improving patients’ quality of life in the year after discharge from intensive care. Further work should focus on the roles of early physical rehabilitation, delirium, cognitive dysfunction, and relatives in recovery from critical illness. Intensive care units should review their follow-up programmes in light of these results.Item Predicting death and readmission after intensive care discharge(Oxford Journals, 2008-06) Campbell, Alison J.; Cook, Jonathan Alistair; Adey, Gillian; Cuthbertson, Brian; University of Aberdeen, School of Medicine & Dentistry, Division of Applied Health SciencesBackground: Despite initial recovery from critical illness, many patients deteriorate after discharge from the intensive care unit (ICU). We examined prospectively collected data in an attempt to identify patients at risk of readmission or death after intensive care discharge. Methods: This was a secondary analysis of clinical audit data from patients discharged alive from a mixed medical and surgical (non-cardiac) ICU. Results: Four hundred and seventy-five patients (11.2%) died in hospital after discharge from the ICU. Increasing age, time in hospital before intensive care admission, Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II (APACHE II) score, and discharge Therapeutic Intervention Scoring System (TISS) score were independent risk factors for death after intensive care discharge. Three hundred and eighty-five patients (8.8%) were readmitted to intensive care during the same hospital admission. Increasing age, time in hospital before intensive care, APACHE II score, and discharge to a high dependency unit were independent risk factors for readmission. One hundred and forty-three patients (3.3%) were readmitted within 48 h of intensive care discharge. APACHE II scores and discharge to a high dependency or other ICU were independent risk factors for early readmission. The overall discriminant ability of our models was moderate with only marginal benefit over the APACHE II scores alone. Conclusions: We identified risk factors associated with death and readmission to intensive care. It was not possible to produce a definitive model based on these risk factors for predicting death or readmission in an individual patient.Item Systematic review of the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of oesophageal Doppler monitoring in critically ill and high-risk surgical patients(National Institute for Health Research, 2009-01) Mowatt, Graham; Houston, G.; Hernández, Rodolfo Andrés; De Verteuil, Robyn; Fraser, Cynthia Mary; Cuthbertson, Brian; Vale, Luke David; University of Aberdeen, School of Medicine & Dentistry, Division of Applied Health SciencesObjectives: To assess the effectiveness and costeffectiveness of oesophageal Doppler monitoring (ODM) compared with conventional clinical assessment and other methods of monitoring cardiovascular function. Data sources: Electronic databases and relevant websites from 1990 to May 2007 were searched. Review methods: This review was based on a systematic review conducted by the US Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ), supplemented by evidence from any additional studies identified. Comparator interventions for effectiveness were standard care, pulmonary artery catheters (PACs), pulse contour analysis monitoring and lithium or thermodilution cardiac monitoring. Data were extracted on mortality, length of stay overall and in critical care, complications and quality of life. The economic assessment evaluated strategies involving ODM compared with standard care, PACs, pulse contour analysis monitoring and lithium or thermodilution cardiac monitoring. Results: The AHRQ report contained eight RCTs and was judged to be of high quality overall. Four comparisons were reported: ODM plus central venous pressure (CVP) monitoring plus conventional assessment vs CVP monitoring plus conventional assessment during surgery; ODM plus conventional assessment vs CVP monitoring plus conventional assessment during surgery; ODM plus conventional assessment vs conventional assessment during surgery; and ODM plus CVP monitoring plus conventional assessment vs CVP monitoring plus conventional assessment postoperatively. Five studies compared ODM plus CVP monitoring plus conventional assessment with CVP monitoring plus conventional assessment during surgery. There were fewer deaths [Peto odds ratio (OR) 0.13, 95% CI 0.02–0.96], fewer major complications (Peto OR 0.12, 95% CI 0.04–0.31), fewer total complications (fixed-effects OR 0.43, 95% CI 0.26–0.71) and shorter length of stay (pooled estimate not presented, 95% CI –2.21 to –0.57) in the ODM group. The results of the meta analysis of mortality should be treated with caution owing to the low number of events and low overall number of patients in the combined totals. Three studies compared ODM plus conventional assessment with conventional assessment during surgery. There was no evidence of a difference in mortality (fixed-effects OR 0.81, 95% CI 0.23–2.77). Length of hospital stay was shorter in all three studies in the ODM group. Two studies compared ODM plus CVP monitoring plus conventional assessment vs CVP monitoring plus conventional assessment in critically ill patients. The patient groups were quite different (cardiac surgery and major trauma) and neither study, nor a meta-analysis, showed a statistically significant difference in mortality (fixed-effects OR 0.84, 95% CI 0.41–1.70). Fewer patients in the ODM group experienced complications (OR 0.49, 95% CI 0.30–0.81) and both studies reported a statistically significant shorter median length of hospital stay in that group. No economic evaluations that met the inclusion criteria were identified from the existing literature so a series of balance sheets was constructed. The results show that ODM strategies are likely to be cost-effective. Conclusions: More formal economic evaluation would allow better use of the available data. All identified studies were conducted in unconscious patients. However, further research is needed to evaluate new ODM probes that may be tolerated by awake patients. Given the paucity of the existing economic evidence base, any further primary research should include an economic evaluation or should provide data suitable for use in an economic model.Item Hydrocortisone therapy for patients with septic shock(Massachusetts Medical Society., 2008-01-10) Sprung, Charles L.; Annane, Djillali; Keh, Didier; Moreno, Rui; Singer, Mervyn; Freivogel, Klaus; Weiss, Yoram G.; Benbenishy, Julie; Kalenka, Armin; Forst, Helmuth; Laterre, Pierre-Francois; Reinhart, Konrad; Cuthbertson, Brian; Payen, Didier; Briegel, Josef; CORTICUS Study Group; University of Aberdeen, School of Medicine & Dentistry, Division of Applied Health SciencesBackground Hydrocortisone is widely used in patients with septic shock even though a survival benefit has been reported only in patients who remained hypotensive after fluid and vasopressor resuscitation and whose plasma cortisol levels did not rise appropriately after the administration of corticotropin. Methods In this multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, we assigned 251 patients to receive 50 mg of intravenous hydrocortisone and 248 patients to receive placebo every 6 hours for 5 days; the dose was then tapered during a 6-day period. At 28 days, the primary outcome was death among patients who did not have a response to a corticotropin test. Results Of the 499 patients in the study, 233 (46.7%) did not have a response to corticotropin (125 in the hydrocortisone group and 108 in the placebo group). At 28 days, there was no significant difference in mortality between patients in the two study groups who did not have a response to corticotropin (39.2% in the hydrocortisone group and 36.1% in the placebo group, P=0.69) or between those who had a response to corticotropin (28.8% in the hydrocortisone group and 28.7% in the placebo group, P=1.00). At 28 days, 86 of 251 patients in the hydrocortisone group (34.3%) and 78 of 248 patients in the placebo group (31.5%) had died (P=0.51). In the hydrocortisone group, shock was reversed more quickly than in the placebo group. However, there were more episodes of superinfection, including new sepsis and septic shock. Conclusions Hydrocortisone did not improve survival or reversal of shock in patients with septic shock, either overall or in patients who did not have a response to corticotropin, although hydrocortisone hastened reversal of shock in patients in whom shock was reversed. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00147004 [ClinicalTrials.gov] .)