Annual and seasonal movements of migrating short-tailed shearwaters reflect environmental variation in sub-Arctic and Arctic waters

The marine ecosystems of the Bering Sea and adjacent southern Chukchi Sea are experiencing rapid changes due to recent reductions in sea ice. Short-tailed shearwaters Puffinus tenuirostris visit this region in huge numbers between the boreal summer and autumn during non-breeding season, and represent one of the dominant top predators. To understand the implications for this species of ongoing environmental change in the Pacific sub-Arctic and Arctic seas, we tracked the migratory movements of 19 and 24 birds in 2010 and 2011, respectively, using light-level geolocators. In both years, tracked birds occupied the western (Okhotsk Sea and Kuril Islands) and eastern (southeast Bering Sea) North Pacific from May to July. In August–September of 2010, but not 2011, a substantial proportion (68 % of the tracked individuals in 2010 compared to 38 % in 2011) moved through the Bering Strait to feed in the Chukchi Sea. Based on the correlation with oceanographic variables, the probability of shearwater occurrence was highest in waters with sea surface temperatures (SSTs) of 8–10 °C over shallow depths. Furthermore, shearwaters spent more time flying when SST was warmer than 9 °C, suggesting increased search effort for prey. We hypothesized that the northward shift in the distribution of shearwaters may have been related to temperature-driven changes in the abundance of their dominant prey, krill (Euphausiacea), as the timing of krill spawning coincides with the seasonal increase in water temperature. Our results indicate a flexible response of foraging birds to ongoing changes in the sub-Arctic and Arctic ecosystems

Interdisciplinary diabetes care teams operating on the interface between primary and specialty care are associated with improved outcomes of care: findings from the Leuven Diabetes Project

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Type 2 diabetes mellitus is a complex, progressive disease which requires a variety of quality improvement strategies. Limited information is available on the feasibility and effectiveness of interdisciplinary diabetes care teams (IDCT) operating on the interface between primary and specialty care. A first study hypothesis was that the implementation of an IDCT is feasible in a health care setting with limited tradition in shared care. A second hypothesis was that patients who make use of an IDCT would have significantly better outcomes compared to non-users of the IDCT after an 18-month intervention period. A third hypothesis was that patients who used the IDCT in an Advanced quality Improvement Program (AQIP) would have significantly better outcomes compared to users of a Usual Quality Improvement Program (UQIP).</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>This investigation comprised a two-arm cluster randomized trial conducted in a primary care setting in Belgium. Primary care physicians (PCPs, n = 120) and their patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (n = 2495) were included and subjects were randomly assigned to the intervention arms. The IDCT acted as a cornerstone to both the intervention arms, but the number, type and intensity of IDCT related interventions varied depending upon the intervention arm.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Final registration included 67 PCPs and 1577 patients in the AQIP and 53 PCPs and 918 patients in the UQIP. 84% of the PCPs made use of the IDCT. The expected participation rate in patients (30%) was not attained, with 12,5% of the patients using the IDCT. When comparing users and non-users of the IDCT (irrespective of the intervention arm) and after 18 months of intervention the use of the IDCT was significantly associated with improvements in HbA1c, LDL-cholesterol, an increase in statins and anti-platelet therapy as well as the number of targets that were reached. When comparing users of the IDCT in the two intervention arms no significant differences were noted, except for anti-platelet therapy.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>IDCT's operating on the interface between primary and specialty care are associated with improved outcomes of care. More research is required on what team and program characteristics contribute to improvements in diabetes care.</p> <p>Trial registration</p> <p>NTR 1369.</p

A cluster randomized trial to improve adherence to evidence-based guidelines on diabetes and reduce clinical inertia in primary care physicians in Belgium: study protocol [NTR 1369]

Contains fulltext : 70617.pdf (publisher's version ) (Open Access)ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: Most quality improvement programs in diabetes care incorporate aspects of clinician education, performance feedback, patient education, care management, and diabetes care teams to support primary care physicians. Few studies have applied all of these dimensions to address clinical inertia. AIM: To evaluate interventions to improve adherence to evidence-based guidelines for diabetes and reduce clinical inertia in primary care physicians. DESIGN: Two-arm cluster randomized controlled trial. PARTICIPANTS: Primary care physicians in Belgium. INTERVENTIONS: Primary care physicians will be randomly allocated to 'Usual' (UQIP) or 'Advanced' (AQIP) Quality Improvement Programs. Physicians in the UQIP will receive interventions addressing the main physician, patient, and office system factors that contribute to clinical inertia. Physicians in the AQIP will receive additional interventions that focus on sustainable behavior changes in patients and providers. OUTCOMES: Primary endpoints are the proportions of patients within targets for three clinical outcomes: 1) glycosylated hemoglobin < 7%; 2) systolic blood pressure differences </=130 mmHg; and 3) low density lipoprotein/cholesterol < 100 mg/dl. Secondary endpoints are individual improvements in 12 validated parameters: glycosylated hemoglobin, low and high density lipoprotein/cholesterol, total cholesterol, systolic blood pressure, diastolic blood pressure, weight, physical exercise, healthy diet, smoking status, and statin and anti-platelet therapy. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY ANALYSIS: Statistical analyses will be performed using an intent-to-treat approach with a multilevel model. Linear and generalized linear mixed models will be used to account for the clustered nature of the data, i.e., patients clustered withinimary care physicians, and repeated assessments clustered within patients. To compare patient characteristics at baseline and between the intervention arms, the generalized estimating equations (GEE) approach will be used, taking the clustered nature of the data within physicians into account. We will also use the GEE approach to test for differences in evolution of the primary and secondary endpoints for all patients, and for patients in the two interventions arms, accounting for within-patient clustering. TRIAL REGISTRATION: number: NTR 1369

Lack of Utility of Routine Screening Tests for Early Detection of Peritonitis in Patients Requiring Intermittent Peritoneal Dialysis

AbstractA prospective study was undertaken to examine the clinical presentation of peritonitis in patients maintained on intermittent peritoneal dialysis and to determine the value of qualitative and quantitative dialysate cultures, gram stain, neutrophil counts, and a semiquantitative leukocyte test strip for case detection. Seven cases of peritonitis developed among 30 patients who underwent 553 dialyses. In most cases, neutrophil counts, cultures, and leukocyte test strip determinations were done within 48 hours prior to the clinical onset of peritonitis and in all instances failed to provide clues for incipient infection. Peritonitis was associated with a dialysate neutrophil count of &gt;500/mm3 and leukocyte test strips were highly sensitive and specific for the detection of this quantity of neutrophils. A total of 16 dialysate cultures was positive in asymptomatic patients who did not have peritonitis. None of these patients subsequently developed peritonitis with the same organism. Dialysate gram stains, cultures, neutrophil counts or leukocyte test strips did not provide an early diagnosis of peritonitis and their use in the absence of symptoms is therefore not recommended.</jats:p

Quantifying interhospital patient sharing as a mechanism for infectious disease spread

BACKGROUND. Assessments of infectious disease spread in hospitals seldom account for interfacility patient sharing. This is particularly important for pathogens with prolonged incubation periods or carrier states. METHODS. We quantified patient sharing among all 32 hospitals in Orange County (OC), California, using hospital discharge data. Same-day transfers between hospitals were considered "direct" transfers, and events in which patients were shared between hospitals after an intervening stay at home or elsewhere were considered "indirect" patient-sharing events. We assessed the frequency of readmissions to another OC hospital within various time points from discharge and examined interhospital sharing of patients with Clostridium difficile infection. RESULTS. In 2005, OC hospitals had 319,918 admissions. Twenty-nine percent of patients were admitted at least twice, with a median interval between discharge and readmission of 53 days. Of the patients with 2 or more admissions, 75% were admitted to more than 1 hospital. Ninety-four percent of interhospital patient sharing occurred indirectly. When we used 10 shared patients as a measure of potential interhospital exposure, 6 (19%) of 32 hospitals "exposed" more than 50% of all OC hospitals within 6 months, and 17 (53%) exposed more than 50% within 12 months. Hospitals shared 1 or more patient with a median of 28 other hospitals. When we evaluated patients with C. difficile infection, 25% were readmitted within 12 weeks; 41% were readmitted to different hospitals, and less than 30% of these readmissions were direct transfers. CONCLUSIONS. In a large metropolitan county, interhospital patient sharing was a potential avenue for transmission of infectious agents. Indirect sharing with an intervening stay at home or elsewhere composed the bulk of potential exposures and occurred unbeknownst to hospitals. © 2010 by The Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America. All rights reserved