Objective: To implement early rehabilitation interventions by physical therapists is recommended. However, the effectiveness of early rehabilitation for severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients in the prevention of post-intensive care syndrome (PICS) is unclear. We analyzed a multicenter prospective observational study (Post-Intensive Care outcomeS in patients with COronaVIrus Disease 2019) to examine the association between early rehabilitation interventions and PICS physical impairment. Methods: An analysis was performed on COVID-19 patients who were admitted to intensive care units (ICUs) between March 2020 and March 2021, and required mechanical ventilation. The primary outcome was the incidence of PICS physical impairment (Barthel Index≤90) after one year. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was used to estimate the association between early rehabilitation interventions and PICS physical impairment by adjusting ICU mobility scale (IMS) during seven-day following ICU admission, and clinically relevant risk factors. Results: The analysis included 259 patients, 54 of whom developed PICS physical impairment one year later. In 81 patients, physical therapists intervened within seven days of ICU admission. There was no significant difference in mean IMS by day seven of admission between the early and non-early rehabilitation patients (0.70 and 0.61, respectively). Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that early rehabilitation interventions were significantly associated with a low incidence of PICS physical impairment (odds ratio, 0.294; 95% confidence interval, 0.123–0.706; p=0.006). Conclusion Early rehabilitation interventions by physical therapists were an independent factor associated with the decreased development of PICS physical impairment at one year, even though early rehabilitation had no significant effect on IMS.

Objective: To implement early rehabilitation interventions by physical therapists is recommended. However, the effectiveness of early rehabilitation for severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients in the prevention of post-intensive care syndrome (PICS) is unclear. We analyzed a multicenter prospective observational study (Post-Intensive Care outcomeS in patients with COronaVIrus Disease 2019) to examine the association between early rehabilitation interventions and PICS physical impairment. Methods: An analysis was performed on COVID-19 patients who were admitted to intensive care units (ICUs) between March 2020 and March 2021, and required mechanical ventilation. The primary outcome was the incidence of PICS physical impairment (Barthel Index≤90) after one year. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was used to estimate the association between early rehabilitation interventions and PICS physical impairment by adjusting ICU mobility scale (IMS) during seven-day following ICU admission, and clinically relevant risk factors. Results: The analysis included 259 patients, 54 of whom developed PICS physical impairment one year later. In 81 patients, physical therapists intervened within seven days of ICU admission. There was no significant difference in mean IMS by day seven of admission between the early and non-early rehabilitation patients (0.70 and 0.61, respectively). Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that early rehabilitation interventions were significantly associated with a low incidence of PICS physical impairment (odds ratio, 0.294; 95% confidence interval, 0.123–0.706; p=0.006). Conclusion Early rehabilitation interventions by physical therapists were an independent factor associated with the decreased development of PICS physical impairment at one year, even though early rehabilitation had no significant effect on IMS.

Objective: To implement early rehabilitation interventions by physical therapists is recommended. However, the effectiveness of early rehabilitation for severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients in the prevention of post-intensive care syndrome (PICS) is unclear. We analyzed a multicenter prospective observational study (Post-Intensive Care outcomeS in patients with COronaVIrus Disease 2019) to examine the association between early rehabilitation interventions and PICS physical impairment. Methods: An analysis was performed on COVID-19 patients who were admitted to intensive care units (ICUs) between March 2020 and March 2021, and required mechanical ventilation. The primary outcome was the incidence of PICS physical impairment (Barthel Index≤90) after one year. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was used to estimate the association between early rehabilitation interventions and PICS physical impairment by adjusting ICU mobility scale (IMS) during seven-day following ICU admission, and clinically relevant risk factors. Results: The analysis included 259 patients, 54 of whom developed PICS physical impairment one year later. In 81 patients, physical therapists intervened within seven days of ICU admission. There was no significant difference in mean IMS by day seven of admission between the early and non-early rehabilitation patients (0.70 and 0.61, respectively). Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that early rehabilitation interventions were significantly associated with a low incidence of PICS physical impairment (odds ratio, 0.294; 95% confidence interval, 0.123–0.706; p=0.006). Conclusion Early rehabilitation interventions by physical therapists were an independent factor associated with the decreased development of PICS physical impairment at one year, even though early rehabilitation had no significant effect on IMS.

Background/Aims: The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety of sedation with propofol as an alternative to benzodiazepine drugs in outpatient endoscopy. Methods: In this prospective study, examinees who underwent outpatient endoscopy under propofol sedation and submitted a nextday questionnaire with providing informed consent were evaluated. Periprocedural acute responses, late adverse events within 24 hours, and examinee satisfaction were evaluated. Results: Among the 4,122 patients who received propofol in the 17,978 outpatient-based endoscopic examinations performed between November 2016 and March 2018, 2,305 eligible examinees (esophagogastroduodenoscopy for 1,340, endoscopic ultrasonography for 945, and total colonoscopy for 20) were enrolled, and their responses to a questionnaire were analyzed. The mean propofol dose was 69.6±24.4 mg (range, 20–200 mg). Diazepam, midazolam, and/or pentazocine in combination with propofol was administered to 146 examinees. Mild oxygen desaturation was observed in 59 examinees (2.6%); and mild bradycardia, in 2 (0.09%). Other severe reactions or late events did not occur. After eliminating 181 invalid responses, 97.7% (2,065/2,124) of the patients desired propofol sedation in future examinations. Conclusions Propofol sedation was found to be safe—without severe adverse events or accidents—for outpatient endoscopy on the basis of the patients’ next-day self-evaluation. Given the high satisfaction level, propofol sedation might be an ideal tool for painless endoscopic screening.

Background/Aims: The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety of sedation with propofol as an alternative to benzodiazepine drugs in outpatient endoscopy. Methods: In this prospective study, examinees who underwent outpatient endoscopy under propofol sedation and submitted a nextday questionnaire with providing informed consent were evaluated. Periprocedural acute responses, late adverse events within 24 hours, and examinee satisfaction were evaluated. Results: Among the 4,122 patients who received propofol in the 17,978 outpatient-based endoscopic examinations performed between November 2016 and March 2018, 2,305 eligible examinees (esophagogastroduodenoscopy for 1,340, endoscopic ultrasonography for 945, and total colonoscopy for 20) were enrolled, and their responses to a questionnaire were analyzed. The mean propofol dose was 69.6±24.4 mg (range, 20–200 mg). Diazepam, midazolam, and/or pentazocine in combination with propofol was administered to 146 examinees. Mild oxygen desaturation was observed in 59 examinees (2.6%); and mild bradycardia, in 2 (0.09%). Other severe reactions or late events did not occur. After eliminating 181 invalid responses, 97.7% (2,065/2,124) of the patients desired propofol sedation in future examinations. Conclusions Propofol sedation was found to be safe—without severe adverse events or accidents—for outpatient endoscopy on the basis of the patients’ next-day self-evaluation. Given the high satisfaction level, propofol sedation might be an ideal tool for painless endoscopic screening.

The conventional crushing method for administration of drugs to patients with feeding tubes has been commonly used at the Hyogo College of Medicine College Hospital. Compared with this conventional method, the simple suspension method can reduce drug degradation due to light and moisture absorption as well as avoid drug loss and contamination. We conducted a workshop to introduce this method to pharmacists. We asked the participants to fill a questionnaire-based survey both before and after the workshop to determine the effects of the workshop on the change in the degree of awareness among participants about these methods. The awareness of participants about the simple suspension method was approximately 80% before the workshop. Approximately 60% of participants answered that they had questions about simple suspension method from individuals from other occupations, suggesting a high awareness of this method. After the workshop, approximately 98% of participants answered that they were “satisfied” or “slightly satisfied,” suggesting that they were in favor of introducing the suspension method. The results of text mining indicated a requirement for participants to consider incompatibilities and to educate the nursing department. Participants who actively considered the proposal of simple suspension method had an altered perception toward the introduction and utilization of this method. Therefore, this survey suggested that workshops could alter the perception and behavior of pharmacists about the methods of drug administration via feeding tube.

Methadone is a difficult medicine to assess the efficacy at an initial stage because the blood concentration of it varies greatly among individuals and it takes days to reach a steady state and cannot be increased for 7 days. Nevertheless, there are few reports of blood concentration together with effects after administration of methadone about Japanese cancer patients. In this study, we investigated changes in blood concentration and pain score (NRS), and factors that affect blood concentration. Dose per body weight was only correlated with blood concentration of methadone. In the effective cases, NRS decreased chronologically until the 7th day after treatment initiation, and significantly decreased from the 1st day compared to before treatment initiation, but in the ineffective cases, it tended to decrease until the 3rd day, but there was no change thereafter. The blood concentration increased to 110 ng/ml on the 7th day in the effective cases, and in the ineffective cases, it reached the concentration on the 3rd day. Thus there was no correlation between the blood concentration and the drug efficacy. The individual blood concentrations tended to increase slightly or decrease after the 3rd day, but in only one case, it continued to increase. From the above-mentioned, it was shown that the effect could be judged at an early stage, however, since there was a case in which the blood concentration continued to rise until the 7th day, it was considered that the early dose increase within 7 days after initiation should be performed carefully.

The novel coronavirus infection (COVID-19) has significantly impacted medical education and the need to respond to rapidly changing and uncertain situation. In addition, with the decision to hold this year’s annual meeting, it was deemed necessary to have a forum for information sharing and discussion. Therefore, a special committee was formed to organize a cyber-symposium on medical education, and four symposia were held every two weeks, starting May 2020, under the themes of ‘Future Clinical Clerkship’, ‘Examinations’, ‘Post-graduate Education’ and ‘Medical Education with Corona’. This paper reports these symposia and provides an overview and future considerations.

Background/Aims: There are few published registry studies from Asia on pediatric inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). Registry network data enable comparisons among ethnic groups. This study examined the characteristics of IBD in Japanese children and compared them with those in European children. Methods: This was a cross-sectional multicenter registry study of newly diagnosed Japanese pediatric IBD patients. The Paris classification was used to categorize IBD features, and results were compared with published EUROKIDS data. Results: A total of 265 pediatric IBD patients were initially registered, with 22 later excluded for having incomplete demographic data. For the analysis, 91 Crohn’s disease (CD), 146 ulcerative colitis (UC), and 6 IBD-unclassified cases were eligible. For age at diagnosis, 20.9% of CD, 21.9% of UC, and 83.3% of IBD-unclassified cases were diagnosed before age 10 years. For CD location, 18.7%, 13.2%, 64.8%, 47.3%, and 20.9% were classified as involving L1 (ileocecum), L2 (colon), L3 (ileocolon), L4a (esophagus/stomach/duodenum), and L4b (jejunum/proximal ileum), respectively. For UC extent, 76% were classified as E4 (pancolitis). For CD behavior, B1 (non-stricturingon-penetrating), B2 (stricturing), B3 (penetrating), and B2B3 were seen in 83.5%, 11.0%, 3.3%, and 2.2%, respectively. A comparison between Japanese and European children showed less L2 involvement (13.2% vs. 27.3%, P< 0.01) but more L4a (47.3% vs. 29.6%, P< 0.01) and L3 (64.8% vs. 52.7%, P< 0.05) involvement in Japanese CD children. Pediatric perianal CD was more prevalent in Japanese children (34.1% vs. 9.7%, P< 0.01). Conclusions Upper gastrointestinal and perianal CD lesions are more common in Japanese children than in European children.