Cervical dystonia is the most frequent form of focal dystonia. Symptoms often result in pain and functional disability. Local injections of botulinum neurotoxin are currently the treatment of choice for cervical dystonia. Although this treatment has proven effective and is widely applied worldwide, many issues still remain open in the clinical practice. We performed a systematic review of the literature on botulinum toxin treatment for cervical dystonia based on a question-oriented approach, with the aim to provide practical recommendations for the treating clinicians. Key-questions from the clinical practice were explored. Results suggest that while the beneficial effect of botulinum toxin treatment on different aspects of cervical dystonia is well established, robust evidence is still missing concerning some practical aspects, such as doseequivalence between different formulations, optimal treatment intervals, treatment approaches, and the use of supportive techniques including electromyography (EMG) or ultrasounds. Established strategies to prevent or manage common side effects (including excessive muscle weakness, pain at injection site, dysphagia) and potential contraindications to this treatment (pregnancy and lactation, use of anticoagulants, neurological comorbidities) should also be further explored.
Background: Ventilation with lower positive end–expiratory pressure (PEEP) may cause loss of lung aeration in critically ill invasively ventilated patients. This study investigated whether a systematic lung ultrasound (LUS) scoring system can detect such changes in lung aeration in a study comparing lower versus higher PEEP in invasively ventilated patients without acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). Methods: Single center substudy of a national, multicenter, randomized clinical trial comparing lower versus higher PEEP ventilation strategy. Fifty–seven patients underwent a systematic 12–region LUS examination within 12 h and between 24 to 48 h after start of invasive ventilation, according to randomization. The primary endpoint was a change in the global LUS aeration score, where a higher value indicates a greater impairment in lung aeration. Results: Thirty–three and twenty–four patients received ventilation with lower PEEP (median PEEP 1 (0–5) cm H2O) or higher PEEP (median PEEP 8 (8–8) cm H2O), respectively. Median global LUS aeration scores within 12 h and between 24 and 48 h were 8 (4 to 14) and 9 (4 to 12) (difference 1 (–2 to 3)) in the lower PEEP group, and 7 (2–11) and 6 (1–12) (difference 0 (–2 to 3)) in the higher PEEP group. Neither differences in changes over time nor differences in absolute scores reached statistical significance. Conclusions: In this substudy of a randomized clinical trial comparing lower PEEP versus higher PEEP in patients without ARDS, LUS was unable to detect changes in lung aeration.
Background: The COVID-19 pandemic taught us how to rethink care delivery. It catalyzed creative solutions to amplify the potential of personnel and facilities. This paper presents and evaluates a promptly introduced triaging solution that evolved into a tool to tackle the ever-growing waiting lists at an academic ophthalmology department, the TeleTriageTeam (TTT). A team of undergraduate optometry students, tutor optometrists, and ophthalmologists collaborate to maintain continuity of eye care. In this ongoing project, we combine innovative interprofessional task allocation, teaching, and remote care delivery. Objective: In this paper, we described a novel approach, the TTT; reported its clinical effectiveness and impact on waiting lists; and discussed its transformation to a sustainable method for delivering remote eye care. Methods: Real-world clinical data of all patients assessed by the TTT between April 16, 2020, and December 31, 2021, are covered in this paper. Business data on waiting lists and patient portal access were collected from the capacity management team and IT department of our hospital. Interim analyses were performed at different time points during the project, and this study presents a synthesis of these analyses. Results: A total of 3658 cases were assessed by the TTT. For approximately half (1789/3658, 48.91%) of the assessed cases, an alternative to a conventional face-to-face consultation was found. The waiting lists that had built up during the first months of the pandemic diminished and have been stable since the end of 2020, even during periods of imposed lockdown restrictions and reduced capacity. Patient portal access decreased with age, and patients who were invited to perform a remote, web-based eye test at home were on average younger than patients who were not invited. Conclusions: Our promptly introduced approach to remotely review cases and prioritize urgency has been successful in maintaining continuity of care and education throughout the pandemic and has evolved into a telemedicine service that is of great interest for future purposes, especially in the routine follow-up of patients with chronic diseases. TTT appears to be a potentially preferred practice in other clinics and medical specialties. The paradox is that judicious clinical decision-making based on remotely collected data is possible, only if we as caregivers are willing to change our routines and cognitions regarding face-to-face care delivery.
LINK
