Search

Aims: The aim of this study was to evaluate the prevalence, clinical features, and the independent impact of frailty-a geriatric syndrome characterized by the decline of physiological systems-and its components, on prognosis after heart failure (HF) hospitalization.Methods and Results: FRAIL-HF is a prospective cohort study including 450 non-dependent patients ≥70 years old hospitalized for HF. Frailty was screened according to the biological phenotype criteria (low physical activity, weight loss, slow walking speed, weak grip strength, and exhaustion). The independent influence of frailty on mortality, functional decline, and readmission risks was calculated adjusted for HF characteristics and co-morbidities. Mean age was 80 ± 6 years; 76% fulfilled frailty criteria. Frail patients were older, more often female, but showed no differences in chronic co-morbidities, LVEF, and NT-proBNP levels. Slow walking speed was the most discriminative component between frail (89.2%) and non-frail patients (26%). Overall, 1-year survival was 89% in the non-frail group and 75% in frail subjects (P = 0.003). After adjusting for age, gender, chronic and acute co-morbidities, NYHA, and NT-proBNP, frail patients showed higher risks for 30-day functional decline [odds ratio (OR) 2.20, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.19-4.08], 1-year all-cause mortality [hazard ratio (HR) 2.13, 95% CI 1.07-4.23], and 1-year readmission (OR 1.96, 95% CI 1.14-3.34). The association of individual components with 1-year adjusted mortality risk was HR 2.14, 95% CI 1.05-4.39 for low physical activity and HR 1.77, 95% CI 0.95-3.29 for slow walking speed.Conclusion: Frailty is highly prevalent even among non-dependent elderly HF patients, and is an independent predictor of early disability, long-term mortality, and readmission. Individual frailty components may be useful for risk prediction. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: The aim of this study was to evaluate the prevalence, clinical features, and the independent impact of frailty--a geriatric syndrome characterized by the decline of physiological systems--and its components, on prognosis after heart failure (HF) hospitalization. Methods and results: FRAIL-HF is a prospective cohort study including 450 non-dependent patients ≽70 years old hospitalized for HF. Frailty was screened according to the biological phenotype criteria (low physical activity, weight loss, slow walking speed, weak grip strength, and exhaustion). The independent influence of frailty on mortality, functional decline, and readmission risks was calculated adjusted for HF characteristics and co-morbidities. Mean age was 80±6 years; 76% fulfilled frailty criteria. Frail patients were older, more often female, but showed no differences in chronic co-morbidities, LVEF, and NT-proBNP levels. Slow walking speed was the most discriminative component between frail (89.2%) and non-frail patients (26%). Overall, 1-year survival was 89% in the non-frail group and 75% in frail subjects (P = 0.003). After adjusting for age, gender, chronic and acute co-morbidities, NYHA, and NT-proBNP, frail patients showed higher risks for 30-day functional decline [odds ratio (OR) 2.20, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.19-4.08], 1-year all-cause mortality [hazard ratio (HR) 2.13, 95% CI 1.07-4.23], and 1-year readmission (OR 1.96, 95% CI 1.14-3.34). The association of individual components with 1-year adjusted mortality risk was HR 2.14, 95% CI 1.05-4.39 for low physical activity and HR 1.77, 95% CI 0.95-3.29 for slow walking speed. Conclusion: Frailty is highly prevalent even among non-dependent elderly HF patients, and is an independent predictor of early disability, long-term mortality, and readmission. Individual frailty components may be useful for risk prediction. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Prioritisation of clinical trials ensures that the research conducted meets the needs of stakeholders, makes the best use of resources and avoids duplication. The aim of this review was to identify and critically appraise approaches to research prioritisation applicable to clinical trials, to inform best practice guidelines for clinical trial networks and funders. Methods: A scoping review of English-language published literature and research organisation websites (January 2000 to January 2020) was undertaken to identify primary studies, approaches and criteria for research prioritisation. Data were extracted and tabulated, and a narrative synthesis was employed. Results: Seventy-eight primary studies and 18 websites were included. The majority of research prioritisation occurred in oncology and neurology disciplines. The main reasons for prioritisation were to address a knowledge gap (51 of 78 studies [65%]) and to define patient-important topics (28 studies, [35%]). In addition, research organisations prioritised in order to support their institution’s mission, invest strategically, and identify best return on investment. Fifty-seven of 78 (73%) studies used interpretative prioritisation approaches (including Delphi surveys, James Lind Alliance and consensus workshops); six studies used quantitative approaches (8%) such as prospective payback or value of information (VOI) analyses; and 14 studies used blended approaches (18%) such as nominal group technique and Child Health Nutritional Research Initiative. Main criteria for prioritisation included relevance, appropriateness, significance, feasibility and cost-effectiveness. Conclusion: Current research prioritisation approaches for groups conducting and funding clinical trials are largely interpretative. There is an opportunity to improve the transparency of prioritisation through the inclusion of quantitative approaches. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Yaws is targeted for eradication by 2020 in the WHA66.12 resolution of the World Health Assembly. The objective of this study was to describe the occurrence of yaws in the Americas and to contribute to the compilation of evidence based on published data to undertake the certification of yaws eradication. Methodology: A systematic review of the epidemiological situation of yaws in the Americas was performed by searching in MEDLINE, Embase, LILACS, SCOPUS, Web of Science, DARE and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. Experts on the topic were consulted, and institutional WHO/PAHO library databases were reviewed. Principal findings: Seventy-five full-text articles published between 1839 and 2012 met the inclusion criteria. Haiti and Jamaica were the two countries with the highest number of papers (14.7% and 12.0%, respectively). Three-quarters of the studies were conducted before 1970. Thirty-three countries reported yaws case count or prevalence data. The largest foci in the history were described in Brazil and Haiti. The most recent cases reported were recorded in eight countries: Suriname, Guyana, Colombia, Haiti, Martinique, Dominica, Trinidad and Tobago, and Brazil. Gaps in information and heterogeneity were detected in the methodologies used and outcome reporting, making cross-national and chronological comparisons difficult. Conclusions: The lack of recent yaws publications may reflect, in the best-case scenario, the interruption of yaws transmission. It should be possible to reach the eradication goal in the region of the Americas, but it is necessary to collect more information. We suggest updating the epidemiological status of yaws, especially in two countries that need to assess ongoing transmission. Twenty-four countries need to demonstrate the interruption of transmission and declare its status of yaws endemicity, and sixteen countries should declare if they are yaws-free. It is necessary to formally verify the achievement of this goal in Ecuador. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]