With ageing, there is a greater risk of dehydration. This study investigated the diuretic effect of alcoholic beverages varying in alcohol concentration in elderly men. Three alcoholic beverages (beer (AB), wine (AW), and spirits (S)) and their non-alcoholic counterparts (non-alcoholic beer (NAB), non-alcoholic wine (NAW), and water (W)) were tested in a diet-controlled randomized crossover trial. For the alcoholic beverages, alcohol intake equaled a moderate amount of 30 g. An equal volume of beverage was given for the non-alcoholic counterpart. After consumption, the urine output was collected every hour for 4 h and the total 24 h urine output was measured. AW and S resulted in a higher cumulative urine output compared to NAW and W during the first 4 h (effect size: 0.25 mL p < 0.003, effect size: 0.18 mL, p < 0.001, respectively), but not after the 24h urine collection (p > 0.40, p > 0.10). AB and NAB did not differ at any time point (effect size: -0.02 mL p > 0.70). For urine osmolality, and the sodium and potassium concentration, the findings were in line. In conclusion, only moderate amounts of stronger alcoholic beverages, such as wine and spirits, resulted in a short and small diuretic effect in elderly men.
OBJECTIVE: Previous systematic reviews on occupational therapy for elderly included studies until 2003. The present evidence mapping summarizes recent evidence for the efficacy of occupational therapy with older persons based on randomised controlled trials from 2004-2012.METHOD: An electronic search in Cochrane and Medline databases identified publications of randomised controlled trials on occupational therapy interventions for persons≥65 years old. Two raters independently extracted data and analysed the quality of samples, interventions and outcome evalutations according to PRISMA criteria.RESULTS: In all, 136 abstracts were identified and 48 studies analysed, from these 12 on stroke, 15 on falls and mobility, 7 on dementia, 4 on prevention and 10 on other conditions. Reports of adverse events and evaluations of costs and long-term outcomes are frequently lacking.CONCLUSION: The most promising fields for further research are primary and secondary prevention in persons with stroke, falls or mobility problems and tertiary prevention in persons with dementia. Future trials should be conducted and reported according to consented reporting guidelines of the equator network.
BACKGROUND: Blended physiotherapy, in which physiotherapy sessions and an online application are integrated, might support patients in taking an active role in the management of their chronic condition and may reduce disease related costs. The aim of this study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of a blended physiotherapy intervention (e-Exercise) compared to usual physiotherapy in patients with osteoarthritis of hip and/or knee, from the societal as well as the healthcare perspective.METHODS: This economic evaluation was conducted alongside a 12-month cluster randomized controlled trial, in which 108 patients received e-Exercise, consisting of physiotherapy sessions and a web-application, and 99 patients received usual physiotherapy. Clinical outcome measures were quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) according to the EuroQol (EQ-5D-3 L), physical functioning (HOOS/KOOS) and physical activity (Actigraph Accelerometer). Costs were measured using self-reported questionnaires. Missing data were multiply imputed and bootstrapping was used to estimate statistical uncertainty.RESULTS: Intervention costs and medication costs were significantly lower in e-Exercise compared to usual physiotherapy. Total societal costs and total healthcare costs did not significantly differ between groups. No significant differences in effectiveness were found between groups. For physical functioning and physical activity, the maximum probability of e-Exercise being cost-effective compared to usual physiotherapy was moderate (< 0.82) from both perspectives. For QALYs, the probability of e-Exercise being cost-effective compared to usual physiotherapy was 0.68/0.84 at a willingness to pay of 10,000 Euro and 0.70/0.80 at a willingness to pay of 80,000 Euro per gained QALY, from respectively the societal and the healthcare perspective.CONCLUSIONS: E-Exercise itself was significantly cheaper compared to usual physiotherapy in patients with hip and/or knee osteoarthritis, but not cost-effective from the societal- as well as healthcare perspective. The decision between both interventions can be based on the preferences of the patient and the physiotherapist.TRIAL REGISTRATION: NTR4224 (25 October 2013).
