How many steps/day are enough? for adults

Physical activity guidelines from around the world are typically expressed in terms of frequency, duration, and intensity parameters. Objective monitoring using pedometers and accelerometers offers a new opportunity to measure and communicate physical activity in terms of steps/day. Various step-based versions or translations of physical activity guidelines are emerging, reflecting public interest in such guidance. However, there appears to be a wide discrepancy in the exact values that are being communicated. It makes sense that step-based recommendations should be harmonious with existing evidence-based public health guidelines that recognize that "some physical activity is better than none" while maintaining a focus on time spent in moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (MVPA). Thus, the purpose of this review was to update our existing knowledge of "How many steps/day are enough?", and to inform step-based recommendations consistent with current physical activity guidelines. Normative data indicate that healthy adults typically take between 4,000 and 18,000 steps/day, and that 10,000 steps/day is reasonable for this population, although there are notable "low active populations." Interventions demonstrate incremental increases on the order of 2,000-2,500 steps/day. The results of seven different controlled studies demonstrate that there is a strong relationship between cadence and intensity. Further, despite some inter-individual variation, 100 steps/minute represents a reasonable floor value indicative of moderate intensity walking. Multiplying this cadence by 30 minutes (i.e., typical of a daily recommendation) produces a minimum of 3,000 steps that is best used as a heuristic (i.e., guiding) value, but these steps must be taken over and above habitual activity levels to be a true expression of free-living steps/day that also includes recommendations for minimal amounts of time in MVPA. Computed steps/day translations of time in MVPA that also include estimates of habitual activity levels equate to 7,100 to 11,000 steps/day. A direct estimate of minimal amounts of MVPA accumulated in the course of objectively monitored free-living behaviour is 7,000-8,000 steps/day. A scale that spans a wide range of incremental increases in steps/day and is congruent with public health recognition that "some physical activity is better than none," yet still incorporates step-based translations of recommended amounts of time in MVPA may be useful in research and practice. The full range of users (researchers to practitioners to the general public) of objective monitoring instruments that provide step-based outputs require good reference data and evidence-based recommendations to be able to design effective health messages congruent with public health physical activity guidelines, guide behaviour change, and ultimately measure, track, and interpret steps/day

Evidence-based physical activity promotion: HEPA Europe, the European network for the promotion of health-enhancing physical activity

There has been a world-wide increase in scientific interest in health-enhancing physical activity (HEPA). The importance of a physically active lifestyle has now been well established both on the individual and on the population level. At the same time, physical inactivity has become a global problem. While sports for all has a long history, only a few examples of long-term integrated physical activity promotion strategies have been in place in Europe until recently, namely in Finland, the Netherlands and England. A number of countries have now begun to develop their own activities. However, there has been a noticeable lack of a platform for sharing the development and implementation of evidence-based policies and strategies. In order to fill this gap, HEPA Europe, the European Network for the Promotion of Health-Enhancing Physical Activity, was founded in May 2005 in Gerlev, Denmark. The goal of the network is to strengthen and support efforts and actions that increase participation in physical activity and improve the conditions favourable to a healthy lifestyle, in particular with respect to HEPA. The Network is working closely with the WHO Regional Office for Europe (http://www.euro.who.int/hepa). The network focuses on population-based approaches for the promotion of HEPA, using the best-available scientific evidence, and is currently implementing its first projects. HEPA Europe has established collaboration with EU Commission projects and Agita Mundo. Priorities for future work have been defined, and interested organisations and institutions have the opportunity to join the network and participate in the process

Aktueller Stand der Durchführung von Nierenersatztherapien auf deutschen Intensivstationen

About 50% of all critically ill patients develop acute kidney injury (AKI) and approximately 15% receive renal replacement therapy (RRT). Although RRT is frequently used in intensive care units in Germany, it is currently unknown which RRT procedures are available, which qualification the involved staff has, which anticoagulation strategies are used and how RRT doses are prescribed. To investigate quality and structural characteristics of the performance of RRT in intensive care units throughout Germany, the German Interdisciplinary Society of Intensivists (Deutsche Interdisziplinäre Vereinigung für Intensiv- und Notfallmedizin [DIVI]) performed an inquiry among their members. A total of 897 members participated in the survey in which practical aspects were queried. In 69.1% of the cases, RRT was performed in hospitals with more than 400 beds and in 74.5% in university hospitals or other primary care hospitals. Furthermore, 93.3% of clinics are equipped with continuous and 75.8% with intermittent renal replacement devices. In 91.9%, indication for initiation of RRT was performed by trained physicians specialized in intensive care medicine or nephrologists. Intermittent as well as continuous modalities are both present in three-quarters of cases, which allows for individualized therapy. However, the documentation of dialysis dose needs to be improved.Eine akute Nierenschädigung (AKI) tritt heute bei 50 % aller kritisch kranken Patienten auf und etwa 15 % müssen mit einer Nierenersatztherapie (NET) behandelt werden. Obwohl eine NET ein häufiges und essenzielles Organersatzverfahren in der deutschen Intensivmedizin darstellt, ist es ist nicht bekannt, in welchem Umfang Nierenersatzverfahren zur Verfügung stehen, wer mit welcher Qualifikation eine NET durchführt, welche Formen der Antikoagulation verwendet werden und wie die Dosis der NET verschrieben wird. Die Deutsche Interdisziplinäre Vereinigung für Intensiv- und Notfallmedizin (DIVI) hat deshalb Ende 2019 unter ihren Mitgliedern eine Umfrage zu den strukturellen Gegebenheiten der NET in ihrem Arbeitsumfeld durchgeführt. Es konnten 897 Datensätze erfasst werden (31,1 % der Befragten), anhand derer die aktuellen strukturellen und prozeduralen Gegebenheiten bei der Durchführung der NET auf deutschen Intensivstationen beschrieben werden können. Es waren Krankenhäuser aller Versorgungsstufen vertreten, allerdings waren Krankenhäuser mit einer Bettenzahl von > 400 Betten (69,1 %) und Krankenhäuser der Schwerpunkt- und Maximalversorgung und Unikliniken (74,5 %) verstärkt vertreten. Kontinuierliche Nierenersatzverfahren stehen auf 93,3 % und intermittierende Verfahren auf 75,8 % der Intensivstationen in Deutschland zur Verfügung. Die Indikation zur NET wird in 91,9 % durch eine/n Facharzt/Fachärztin oder einen Facharzt/Fachärztin mit Zusatzweiterbildung Intensivmedizin und/oder Nephrologie gestellt. In Fragen der Therapiedurchführung sind jedoch Aspekte der Dialysedosis besser zu implementieren und dokumentieren

Use of IFNγ/IL10 Ratio for Stratification of Hydrocortisone Therapy in Patients With Septic Shock

Large clinical trials testing hydrocortisone therapy in septic shock have produced conflicting results. Subgroups may benefit of hydrocortisone treatment depending on their individual immune response. We performed an exploratory analysis of the database from the international randomized controlled clinical trial Corticosteroid Therapy of Septic Shock (CORTICUS) employing machine learning to a panel of 137 variables collected from the Berlin subcohort comprising 83 patients including demographic and clinical measures, organ failure scores, leukocyte counts and levels of circulating cytokines. The identified theranostic marker was validated against data from a cohort of the Hellenic Sepsis Study Group (HSSG) (n = 246), patients enrolled in the clinical trial of Sodium Selenite and Procalcitonin Guided Antimicrobial Therapy in Severe Sepsis (SISPCT, n = 118), and another, smaller clinical trial (Crossover study, n = 20). In addition, in vitro blood culture experiments and in vivo experiments in mouse models were performed to assess biological plausibility. A low serum IFNγ/IL10 ratio predicted increased survival in the hydrocortisone group whereas a high ratio predicted better survival in the placebo group. Using this marker for a decision rule, we applied it to three validation sets and observed the same trend. Experimental studies in vitro revealed that IFNγ/IL10 was negatively associated with the load of (heat inactivated) pathogens in spiked human blood and in septic mouse models. Accordingly, an in silico analysis of published IFNγ and IL10 values in bacteremic and non-bacteremic patients with the Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome supported this association between the ratio and pathogen burden. We propose IFNγ/IL10 as a molecular marker supporting the decision to administer hydrocortisone to patients in septic shock. Prospective clinical studies are necessary and standard operating procedures need to be implemented, particularly to define a generic threshold. If confirmed, IFNγ/IL10 may become a suitable theranostic marker for an urging clinical need

Use of IFNγ/IL10 Ratio for Stratification of Hydrocortisone Therapy in Patients With Septic Shock

Large clinical trials testing hydrocortisone therapy in septic shock have produced conflicting results. Subgroups may benefit of hydrocortisone treatment depending on their individual immune response. We performed an exploratory analysis of the database from the international randomized controlled clinical trial Corticosteroid Therapy of Septic Shock (CORTICUS) employing machine learning to a panel of 137 variables collected from the Berlin subcohort comprising 83 patients including demographic and clinical measures, organ failure scores, leukocyte counts and levels of circulating cytokines. The identified theranostic marker was validated against data from a cohort of the Hellenic Sepsis Study Group (HSSG) (n = 246), patients enrolled in the clinical trial of Sodium Selenite and Procalcitonin Guided Antimicrobial Therapy in Severe Sepsis (SISPCT, n = 118), and another, smaller clinical trial (Crossover study, n = 20). In addition, in vitro blood culture experiments and in vivo experiments in mouse models were performed to assess biological plausibility. A low serum IFNg/IL10 ratio predicted increased survival in the hydrocortisone group whereas a high ratio predicted better survival in the placebo group. Using this marker for a decision rule, we applied it to three validation sets and observed the same trend. Experimental studies in vitro revealed that IFNg/IL10 was negatively associated with the load of (heat inactivated) pathogens in spiked human blood and in septic mouse models. Accordingly, an in silico analysis of published IFNg and IL10 values in bacteremic and non-bacteremic patients with the Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome supported this association between the ratio and pathogen burden. We propose IFNg/IL10 as a molecular marker supporting the decision to administer hydrocortisone to patients in septic shock. Prospective clinical studies are necessary and standard operating procedures need to be implemented, particularly to define a generic threshold. If confirmed, IFNg/IL10 may become a suitable theranostic marker for an urging clinical need