According to the principle and current domestic and international construction processes of core outcome set(COS) and the characteristics of post-stroke aphasia, this study built COS with evidence-based support for traditional Chinese medicine(TCM) treatment of post-stroke aphasia. Firstly, a comprehensive review was conducted on the articles about the TCM treatment of post-stroke aphasia that were published in the four major Chinese databases, three major English databases, and three clinical registration centers over the past five years. The articles were analyzed and summarized, on the basis of which the main part of the COS for clinical research on the TCM treatment of post-stroke aphasia was formed. Secondly, clinical doctors and related nursing personnel were interviewed, and important outcome indicators in the clinical diagnosis and treatment process were supplemented to form a pool of core outcome indicators. Two rounds of Delphi surveys were carried out to score the importance of the core outcome indicators in the pool. Finally, a consensus meeting of experts was held to establish the COS for clinical research on the TCM treatment of post-stroke aphasia. The final COS included a total of 268 studies [236 randomized controlled trials(RCTs), 21 Meta-analysis, and 11 clinical registration protocols] and 20 open questionnaire survey results. After two rounds of Delphi surveys, a total of 14 outcome indicators and their corresponding measurement tools were included in the expert consensus meeting. The final expert consensus meeting determined the COS for post-stroke aphasia, which included 9 indicator domains and 12 outcome indicators.
Humans ; Aphasia/therapy* ; Stroke/complications* ; Medicine, Chinese Traditional ; Drugs, Chinese Herbal/therapeutic use* ; Treatment Outcome

OBJECTIVES: To explore the measures to improve the follow-up rate of preterm infants after discharge, and to evaluate the effectiveness of these measures using quality improvement methodology. METHODS: The follow-up status of preterm infants discharged from March to May 2017 was used as the baseline before quality improvement, and a specific quality improvement goal for the follow-up rate was proposed. The Pareto chart was used to analyze the causes of follow-up failure, and a key driver diagram was constructed based on the links involved in improving follow-up rate. The causes of failure were analyzed to determine the key links and intervention measures for quality improvement, and the follow-up rate was monitored weekly using a control chart until the quality improvement goal was achieved. RESULTS: The follow-up rate of preterm infants after discharge was 57.92% (117/202) at baseline before quality improvement, and the quality improvement goal was set to increase the follow-up rate of preterm infants from baseline to more than 80% within 12 months. The Pareto chart analysis showed that the main causes of follow-up failure were deficiencies in follow-up file management and irregular follow-up times (33.70%, 31/92), insufficient follow-up education and poor communication (25.00%, 23/92), and the inability to meet the diverse needs of parents (18.48%, 17/92). Based on the key links for quality improvement and the main causes of follow-up failure, the following intervention measures were adopted: (1) strengthen follow-up publicity and education; (2) build a follow-up team; and (3) establish a follow-up platform and system. The control chart indicated that with the implementation of the above intervention measures, the weekly follow-up rate increased to 74.09% (306/413) in July 2017 and 83.09% (511/615) in December 2017, finally achieving the quality improvement goal. During the COVID-19 pandemic, the follow-up rate of preterm infants fluctuated between 23.54% (460/1 954) and 70.97% (1 931/2 721), and subsequently, it returned to pre-pandemic levels starting in February 2023. CONCLUSIONS The application of quality improvement methodology can help to formulate intervention measures based on the main causes of follow-up failure, thereby improving the follow-up rate of preterm infants after discharge. This quality improvement method is feasible and practical and thus holds promise for clinical application.
Humans ; Quality Improvement ; Infant, Premature ; Infant, Newborn ; Patient Discharge ; Follow-Up Studies ; Female ; Male

Objective To investigate the appropriate venous access for obese patients undergoing metabolic and bariatric surgery by comparing the clinical outcomes of different lengths of peripheral intravenous catheters.Methods Inpatients who underwent bariatric surgery in a tertiary hospital in Zhejiang from August 2022 to December 2022 were selected as the study population using a fixed-point continuous convenience sampling method.A stratified block randomisation method was used to divide the group into an experimental group 1(mini-midline catheters),an experimental group 2(midline catheters)and a control group(short peripheral intravenous catheters,Short PIVCs).The incidence of catheter-related complications,the rate of extubation due to complications,the duration of catheter retention,the time to first catheter-related complication were compared in the 3 groups.Results A total of 186 patients were included,with 62 patients in each group.The overall incidence of catheter-related complications in experimental group 1,experimental group 2,and control group were 25.81％,8.06％,and 58.06％.The extubation rates due to complications were 19.35％,4.84％,and 41.94％,and the duration of catheter retention was 7.00(6.00,7.00)d,7.00(6.00,7.00)d,6.00(3.00,6.25)d.The differences were statistically different(P＜0.05)when comparing the 3 groups.Among them,the differences in the overall incidence of catheter-related complications and the rate of extubation due to complications were statistically significant when comparing experimental group 1 with the control group,experimental group 2 with the control group,and experimental group 1 with experimental group 2(P＜0.017);the duration of catheter retention in both experimental group 1 and experimental group 2 were higher than it in the control group,and the differences were statistically different(P＜0.017).Conclusion The complication rate of mini-midline catheters and midline catheters is lower than that of short ones,and the indwelling time is consistent with the perioperative period of metabolic and bariatric surgery,which is suitable for use in patients undergoing metabolic and bariatric surgery.

Purpose: Protective ileostomy and colostomy are performed in patients undergoing low anterior resection with a high leakage risk. We aimed to compare surgical, medical, and daily care complications between these 2 ostomies in order to make individual choice. Methods: Patients who underwent low anterior resection for rectal tumors with protective stomas between January 2011 and September 2018 were enrolled. Stoma-related complications were prospectively recorded by wound, ostomy, and continence nurses. The cancer stage and treatment data were obtained from the Taiwan Cancer Database of our Big Data Center. Other demographic data were collected retrospectively from medical notes. The complications after stoma creation and after the stoma reversal were compared. Results: There were 176 patients with protective colostomy and 234 with protective ileostomy. Protective ileostomy had higher proportions of high output from the stoma for 2 consecutive days than protective colostomy (11.1% vs. 0%, P<0.001). Protective colostomy resulted in more stoma retraction than protective ileostomy (21.6% vs. 9.4%, P=0.001). Female, open operation, ileostomy, and carrying stoma more than 4 months were also significantly associated with a higher risk of stoma-related complications during diversion. For stoma retraction, the multivariate analysis revealed that female (odds ratio [OR], 4.00; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.13–7.69; P<0.001) and long diversion duration (≥4 months; OR, 2.33; 95% CI, 1.22–4.43; P=0.010) were independent risk factors, but ileostomy was an independent favorable factor (OR, 0.40; 95% CI, 0.22–0.72; P=0.003). The incidence of complication after stoma reversal did not differ between colostomy group and ileostomy group (24.3% vs. 20.9%, P=0.542). Conclusion We suggest avoiding colostomy in patients who are female and potential prolonged diversion when stoma retraction is a concern. Otherwise, ileostomy should be avoided for patients with impaired renal function. Wise selection and flexibility are more important than using one type of stoma routinely.

By using thioflavin T(ThT)as displacement-based fluorescent probes,three kinds of aptasensors were constructed for rapid detection of three kinds of small molecules such as ochratoxin A(OTA),aflatoxin B1(AFB1)and adenosine.In the absence of target molecule,ThT bound with the aptamer to form an aptamer-ThT complex and exhibited a significant fluorescence response.Upon the addition of target molecule,because of the higher affinity between target and aptamer than that between ThT and the aptamer,ThT was displaced by the target molecule from the aptamer-ThT complex,resulting in weakened fluorescence signal.Based on this principle,the target molecule could be detected quantitatively.Further study through circular dichroism spectra showed that there was no significant change in the conformation of the aptamer after addition of ThT or target molecules.The stoichiometric ratios of ThT to OTAapt,AFB1apt and Adeapt measured through the method of equimolar continuous variation was 1∶1,1∶1 and 2∶1,respectively,and their dissociation constants were all larger than those between the target molecule and its aptamer.Therefore,the principle of this detection method was the displacement of fluorescent probe(ThT)in aptamer-ThT complex by target molecule,resulting in decrease of fluorescence intensity.Under optimal experimental conditions,the limits of detection(LODs)were 0.8 nmol/L for OTA,1.3 nmol/L for AFB1,and 0.10 μmol/L for adenosine,respectively.This method was label-free,simple to operate,with low cost,good selectivity and high sensitivity.The developed assay kit based on this method could be used for actual sample detection.

Purpose: Protective ileostomy and colostomy are performed in patients undergoing low anterior resection with a high leakage risk. We aimed to compare surgical, medical, and daily care complications between these 2 ostomies in order to make individual choice. Methods: Patients who underwent low anterior resection for rectal tumors with protective stomas between January 2011 and September 2018 were enrolled. Stoma-related complications were prospectively recorded by wound, ostomy, and continence nurses. The cancer stage and treatment data were obtained from the Taiwan Cancer Database of our Big Data Center. Other demographic data were collected retrospectively from medical notes. The complications after stoma creation and after the stoma reversal were compared. Results: There were 176 patients with protective colostomy and 234 with protective ileostomy. Protective ileostomy had higher proportions of high output from the stoma for 2 consecutive days than protective colostomy (11.1% vs. 0%, P<0.001). Protective colostomy resulted in more stoma retraction than protective ileostomy (21.6% vs. 9.4%, P=0.001). Female, open operation, ileostomy, and carrying stoma more than 4 months were also significantly associated with a higher risk of stoma-related complications during diversion. For stoma retraction, the multivariate analysis revealed that female (odds ratio [OR], 4.00; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.13–7.69; P<0.001) and long diversion duration (≥4 months; OR, 2.33; 95% CI, 1.22–4.43; P=0.010) were independent risk factors, but ileostomy was an independent favorable factor (OR, 0.40; 95% CI, 0.22–0.72; P=0.003). The incidence of complication after stoma reversal did not differ between colostomy group and ileostomy group (24.3% vs. 20.9%, P=0.542). Conclusion We suggest avoiding colostomy in patients who are female and potential prolonged diversion when stoma retraction is a concern. Otherwise, ileostomy should be avoided for patients with impaired renal function. Wise selection and flexibility are more important than using one type of stoma routinely.

Purpose: Protective ileostomy and colostomy are performed in patients undergoing low anterior resection with a high leakage risk. We aimed to compare surgical, medical, and daily care complications between these 2 ostomies in order to make individual choice. Methods: Patients who underwent low anterior resection for rectal tumors with protective stomas between January 2011 and September 2018 were enrolled. Stoma-related complications were prospectively recorded by wound, ostomy, and continence nurses. The cancer stage and treatment data were obtained from the Taiwan Cancer Database of our Big Data Center. Other demographic data were collected retrospectively from medical notes. The complications after stoma creation and after the stoma reversal were compared. Results: There were 176 patients with protective colostomy and 234 with protective ileostomy. Protective ileostomy had higher proportions of high output from the stoma for 2 consecutive days than protective colostomy (11.1% vs. 0%, P<0.001). Protective colostomy resulted in more stoma retraction than protective ileostomy (21.6% vs. 9.4%, P=0.001). Female, open operation, ileostomy, and carrying stoma more than 4 months were also significantly associated with a higher risk of stoma-related complications during diversion. For stoma retraction, the multivariate analysis revealed that female (odds ratio [OR], 4.00; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.13–7.69; P<0.001) and long diversion duration (≥4 months; OR, 2.33; 95% CI, 1.22–4.43; P=0.010) were independent risk factors, but ileostomy was an independent favorable factor (OR, 0.40; 95% CI, 0.22–0.72; P=0.003). The incidence of complication after stoma reversal did not differ between colostomy group and ileostomy group (24.3% vs. 20.9%, P=0.542). Conclusion We suggest avoiding colostomy in patients who are female and potential prolonged diversion when stoma retraction is a concern. Otherwise, ileostomy should be avoided for patients with impaired renal function. Wise selection and flexibility are more important than using one type of stoma routinely.

Purpose: Protective ileostomy and colostomy are performed in patients undergoing low anterior resection with a high leakage risk. We aimed to compare surgical, medical, and daily care complications between these 2 ostomies in order to make individual choice. Methods: Patients who underwent low anterior resection for rectal tumors with protective stomas between January 2011 and September 2018 were enrolled. Stoma-related complications were prospectively recorded by wound, ostomy, and continence nurses. The cancer stage and treatment data were obtained from the Taiwan Cancer Database of our Big Data Center. Other demographic data were collected retrospectively from medical notes. The complications after stoma creation and after the stoma reversal were compared. Results: There were 176 patients with protective colostomy and 234 with protective ileostomy. Protective ileostomy had higher proportions of high output from the stoma for 2 consecutive days than protective colostomy (11.1% vs. 0%, P<0.001). Protective colostomy resulted in more stoma retraction than protective ileostomy (21.6% vs. 9.4%, P=0.001). Female, open operation, ileostomy, and carrying stoma more than 4 months were also significantly associated with a higher risk of stoma-related complications during diversion. For stoma retraction, the multivariate analysis revealed that female (odds ratio [OR], 4.00; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.13–7.69; P<0.001) and long diversion duration (≥4 months; OR, 2.33; 95% CI, 1.22–4.43; P=0.010) were independent risk factors, but ileostomy was an independent favorable factor (OR, 0.40; 95% CI, 0.22–0.72; P=0.003). The incidence of complication after stoma reversal did not differ between colostomy group and ileostomy group (24.3% vs. 20.9%, P=0.542). Conclusion We suggest avoiding colostomy in patients who are female and potential prolonged diversion when stoma retraction is a concern. Otherwise, ileostomy should be avoided for patients with impaired renal function. Wise selection and flexibility are more important than using one type of stoma routinely.

Purpose: Protective ileostomy and colostomy are performed in patients undergoing low anterior resection with a high leakage risk. We aimed to compare surgical, medical, and daily care complications between these 2 ostomies in order to make individual choice. Methods: Patients who underwent low anterior resection for rectal tumors with protective stomas between January 2011 and September 2018 were enrolled. Stoma-related complications were prospectively recorded by wound, ostomy, and continence nurses. The cancer stage and treatment data were obtained from the Taiwan Cancer Database of our Big Data Center. Other demographic data were collected retrospectively from medical notes. The complications after stoma creation and after the stoma reversal were compared. Results: There were 176 patients with protective colostomy and 234 with protective ileostomy. Protective ileostomy had higher proportions of high output from the stoma for 2 consecutive days than protective colostomy (11.1% vs. 0%, P<0.001). Protective colostomy resulted in more stoma retraction than protective ileostomy (21.6% vs. 9.4%, P=0.001). Female, open operation, ileostomy, and carrying stoma more than 4 months were also significantly associated with a higher risk of stoma-related complications during diversion. For stoma retraction, the multivariate analysis revealed that female (odds ratio [OR], 4.00; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.13–7.69; P<0.001) and long diversion duration (≥4 months; OR, 2.33; 95% CI, 1.22–4.43; P=0.010) were independent risk factors, but ileostomy was an independent favorable factor (OR, 0.40; 95% CI, 0.22–0.72; P=0.003). The incidence of complication after stoma reversal did not differ between colostomy group and ileostomy group (24.3% vs. 20.9%, P=0.542). Conclusion We suggest avoiding colostomy in patients who are female and potential prolonged diversion when stoma retraction is a concern. Otherwise, ileostomy should be avoided for patients with impaired renal function. Wise selection and flexibility are more important than using one type of stoma routinely.

Background/Aims: Four-week treatment of linvencorvir (RO7049389) was generally safe and well tolerated, and showed anti-viral activity in chronic hepatitis B (CHB) patients. This study evaluated the efficacy, safety, and pharmacokinetics of 48-week treatment with linvencorvir plus standard of care (SoC) in CHB patients. Methods: This was a multicentre, non-randomized, non-controlled, open-label phase 2 study enrolling three cohorts: nucleos(t)ide analogue (NUC)-suppressed patients received linvencorvir plus NUC (Cohort A, n=32); treatment-naïve patients received linvencorvir plus NUC without (Cohort B, n=10) or with (Cohort C, n=30) pegylated interferon-α (Peg-IFN-α). Treatment duration was 48 weeks, followed by NUC alone for 24 weeks. Results: 68 patients completed the study. No patient achieved functional cure (sustained HBsAg loss and unquantifiable HBV DNA). By Week 48, 89% of treatment-naïve patients (10/10 Cohort B; 24/28 Cohort C) reached unquantifiable HBV DNA. Unquantifiable HBV RNA was achieved in 92% of patients with quantifiable baseline HBV RNA (14/15 Cohort A, 8/8 Cohort B, 22/25 Cohort C) at Week 48 along with partially sustained HBV RNA responses in treatment-naïve patients during follow-up period. Pronounced reductions in HBeAg and HBcrAg were observed in treatment-naïve patients, while HBsAg decline was only observed in Cohort C. Most adverse events were grade 1–2, and no linvencorvir-related serious adverse events were reported. Conclusions 48-week linvencorvir plus SoC was generally safe and well tolerated, and resulted in potent HBV DNA and RNA suppression. However, 48-week linvencorvir plus NUC with or without Peg-IFN did not result in the achievement of functional cure in any patient.