Using interventions to reduce seclusion and mechanical restraint use in adult psychiatric units: an integrative review

The aim of this integrative review was to describe interventions aimed at reducing seclusion and mechanical restraint use in adult psychiatric inpatient units and their possible outcomes. CINAHL, MEDLINE, PsycINFO and Medic databases were searched for studies published between 2008 and 2017. Based on electronic and manual searches, 28 studies were included, and quality appraisal was carried out. Data were analysed using inductive content analysis. Interventions to proactively address seclusion were environmental interventions, staff training, treatment planning, use of information and risk assessment. Interventions to respond to seclusion risk were patient involvement, family involvement, meaningful activities, sensory modulation and interventions to manage patient agitation. Interventions to proactively address mechanical restraint were mechanical restraint regulations, a therapeutic atmosphere, staff training, treatment planning and review of mechanical restraint risks. Interventions to respond to mechanical restraint risks included patient involvement, therapeutic activities, sensory modulation and interventions to manage agitation. Outcomes related to both seclusion and mechanical restraint reduction interventions were varied, with several interventions resulting in both reduced and unchanged or increased use. Outcomes were also reported for combinations of several interventions in the form of reduction programmes for both seclusion and mechanical restraint. Much of the research focused on implementing several interventions simultaneously, making it difficult to distinguish outcomes. Further research is suggested on the effectiveness of interventions and the contexts they are implemented in.     

基于文献分析多囊卵巢综合征的中医证型分布及用药规律

目的:通过文献探析中医治疗多囊卵巢综合征(PCOS)的证型分布及临床用药规律。方法:检索2003年至2018年1月1日中国期刊全文数据库(CNKI)、万方、维普3个中文数据库中相关中医治疗PCOS的临床研究文献,建立中医治疗PCOS的整体证型及临床用药数据库,并对数据进行处理、分析。结果:①共纳入符合标准的文献252篇,方剂284首;②涉及证型共37种,其中常见证型为肾虚血瘀证、痰湿证、肾虚痰瘀证,共占43.31%;③涉及病位要素以肾为主,其次为肝、脾;涉及病性要素以血瘀、痰、湿为主;④涉及药物193味,按功效共分为16类,补虚药占41.44%,活血化瘀药占16.20%,化痰祛湿药占14.90%;⑤中医治疗PCOS药性以温、平为主,药味以甘为主,辛、苦次之。结论:PCOS病因病机复杂,以肾虚为本,血瘀、痰湿为标,治疗以补肾活血、化湿祛痰为主。     

Acute effects of synthetic cannabinoids: Update 2015

Background: Cannabis is the most widely used illicit drug in the United States and Europe. In recent years, a range of new substances with cannabis-like effects—known as synthetic cannabinoids (SCs)—have suddenly burst on the drug scene. However, there is limited information about the clinical hazards linked to the use of these emerging substances. This review summarizes the literature to date relating the health effects of SCs. Method: A systematic literature review of original case studies was performed using PubMed and Web of Science (January 1980–July 2015). Only articles in which a drug screening was reported were included in this review. Results: Forty-six articles meeting the inclusion criteria were included in this review, reporting data on 114 patients who went to hospital emergency departments after exposure to SCs. The majority of patients were adolescent or young adult males (14–25 years; 24.5 ± 10.1 years). The most common route of administration was smoking. The SCs most involved were John William Huffman (JWH) derivatives, followed by XRL-11, ADB-PINACA, AM-2201, MAM-2201, and 5F-PB-22. This analysis showed that the use of these substances may cause minor and moderate side effects similar to those of cannabis intoxication, including tachycardia, nausea, somnolence, hallucinations, paranoia, xerostomia, and injected conjunctivae among others. However, atypical cannabis intoxication effects and worse complications (such as renal injuries, aggressiveness, cerebral ischemia, myocardial infarction, etc.) were also observed, which led to a significant morbidity were also observed. Some SCs were highlighted as being involved in 24 cases of deaths. Conclusions: In this review, the nature and frequency of the signs and symptoms of SC poisoning were estimated in order to inform health professionals about the health risks of these new and emerging substances.     

Comparing midwife-led and doctor-led maternity care: a systematic review of reviews

sutcliffe k., caird j., kavanagh j., rees r., oliver k., dickson k., woodman j., barnett-paIge e. & thomas j. (2012)?Comparing midwife-led and doctor-led maternity care: a systematic review of reviews. Journal of Advanced Nursing68(11), 2376-2386. ABSTRACT: Aims. A report of a systematic review of reviews which examines the impact of having midwives-led maternity care for low-risk women, rather than physicians. Background. A rising birth rate, increasing complexity of births, and economic constraints pose difficulties for maternity services in the UK. Evidence about the most effective, cost-effective, and efficient ways to give maternity services is needed. Data sources. Searches were carried out in August-September 2009 of ten electronic databases, 16 key nursing and research websites, and reference lists of 56 relevant reviews. We also contacted 38 experts for information. No date restrictions were employed. Review methods. A narrative review of systematic reviews or 'meta review' was conducted using transparent and systematic procedures to limit bias at all stages. Systematic reviews that compared midwife-led care during pregnancy and birth with physician-led care were eligible for inclusion. Results. Three meta-analytic reviews were included. Midwife-led care for low-risk women was found to be better for a range of maternal outcomes, reduced the number of procedures in labour, and increased satisfaction with care. For some maternal, foetal, and neonatal outcomes reviews found no evidence that care led by midwives is different to that led by physicians. No adverse outcomes associated with midwife-led care were identified. Conclusions. For low-risk women, health and other benefits can result from having their maternity care led by midwives rather than physicians. Moreover, there appear to be no negative impacts on mothers and infants receiving midwife-led care.