We reviewed the literature to determine the effectiveness of HIV-related interventions in reducing HIV/AIDS stigma. Studies selected had randomized controlled trial (RCT), pretest–posttest with a non-randomized control group, or pretest–posttest one group study designs in which HIV-related interventions were being evaluated, and in which HIV/AIDS stigma was one of the outcomes being measured. A checklist was used to extract data from accepted studies, assess their internal validity, and overall quality. Data were extracted from 19 studies, and 14 of these studies demonstrated effectiveness in reducing HIV/ AIDS stigma. Only 2 of these 14 effective studies were considered good studies, based on quality, the extent to which the intervention focused on reducing HIV/AIDS stigma, and the statistics reported to demonstrate effectiveness. Future studies to reduce HIV/AIDS stigma could improve by designing interventions that pay greater attention to internal validity, use validated HIV/AIDS stigma instruments, and achieve both statistical and public health significance.

OBJECTIVES:In response to the need for an evidencebased review of factors within long-term care settings that affect the quality of care, this review compared characteristics of nursing homes and other residential long-term care settings for people with dementia and their informal family caregivers with respect to health and psychosocial outcomes. DESIGN: Databases were searched for literature published between 1990 and March 2012 that met review criteria, including that at least 80% of the subject population had dementia. RESULTS: Fourteen articles meeting review criteria that were of at least fair quality were found: four prospective cohort studies, nine randomized controlled trials (RCTs), and one nonrandomized controlled trial. Overall, low or insufficient strength of evidence was found regarding the effect of most organizational characteristics, structures, and processes of care on health and psychosocial outcomes for people with dementia and no evidence for informal caregivers. Findings of moderate strength of evidence indicate that pleasant sensory stimulation reduces agitation for people with dementia. Also, although the strength of evidence is low, protocols for individualized care and to improve function result in better outcomes for these individuals. Finally, outcomes do not differ between nursing homes and residential care or assisted living settings for people with dementia except when medical care is indicated. CONCLUSION:Given the paucity of high-quality studies in this area, additional research is needed to develop a sufficient evidence base to support consumer selection, practice, and policy regarding the best settings and characteristics of settings for residential long-term care of people with dementia. J Am Geriatr Soc 61:1399-1409, 2013.Key words: dementia; structures; processes; nursing homes; residential care/assisted living; systematic review M ore than 5 million Americans have dementia.1 This number will rise to between 8 and 13 million by 2050.2 Dementia causes significant morbidity and mortality and creates a substantial burden on the people affected, caregivers, health systems, and society.1 It gradually erodes an individual's ability to make decisions, manage personal affairs, and eventually to perform simple tasks such as dressing, toileting, and eating. Weight loss, limited mobility, and frequent infections characterize the late stages of dementia. Unless another illness is fatal sooner, dementia will lead to death. The course of dementia from diagnosis to death is variable but typically is from 8 to 12 years. Costs of dementia care, including medical care and informal caregiver time, are estimated at more than $148 billion in the United States annually. 3Although family members provide the majority of care for people with dementia, increasing needs over time often lead to placement in a long-term care setting; dementia is the most common reason for entry into nursing homes (NHs) and residential care or assisted living (RC/AL), where together more than 1 million people with dementi...

The objective of this study is to compare the efficacy and safety of sitagliptin and saxagliptin with placebo and other hypoglycaemic medications in adults with type 2 diabetes. We searched MEDLINE®, Embase, the Cochrane Library and the International Pharmaceuticals from their inception through 3 February 2011. Studies were included of adults with type 2 diabetes that were 12 weeks or more in duration. Meta-analyses were conducted when included studies were homogenous enough to justify combining their results. A total of 32 articles met inclusion criteria. Sitagliptin 100 mg monotherapy and saxagliptin 5 mg resulted in greater HbA1c reduction compared to placebo [weighted mean difference (WMD) -0.82%, 95% CI -0.95 to -0.70 and WMD -0.70, 95% CI -0.84 to -0.56, respectively]. Sitagliptin was similar to sulfonylureas for HbA1c reduction (WMD 0.08%, 95% CI 0-0.16, 3 trials) and to saxagliptin in one head-to-head trial. There was no statistically significant difference in hypoglycaemia between sitagliptin (pooled RR 1.55, 95% CI 0.55-4.36) or saxagliptin (pooled RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.28-3.81) and placebo. Sitagliptin and saxagliptin result in similar modest HbA1c reductions and do not increase the risk of hypoglycaemia unless combined with other therapies. Their role in the long-term treatment of type 2 diabetes remains unclear given the lack of long-term data on efficacy, harms and health outcomes.

Background Opioid induced chest wall rigidity was first described in the early 1950s during surgical anesthesia and has often been referred to as fentanyl induced rigid chest syndrome (FIRCS). It has most commonly been described in the setting of procedural sedation and bronchoscopy, characterized by pronounced abdominal and thoracic rigidity, asynchronous ventilation, and respiratory failure. FIRCS has been infrequently described in the setting of continuous analgesia in critically ill adult patients. We postulate that FIRCS can occur in this setting and is likely under recognized, leading to increased morbidity and mortality. Methods Patients admitted to the intensive care unit with suspected FIRCS were included in this retrospective analysis. The objective of this analysis is to describe the clinical presentation and treatment strategies for FIRCS. Results Forty-two patients exhibiting symptoms of FIRCS were included in this analysis. Twenty-two of the forty-two patients with descriptive documentation had evidence of thoracic or abdominal rigidity on examination (52.4%). Twelve of sixteen (75%) patients treated solely with naloxone had documented ventilator compliance following intervention, compared to six of eleven (55%) managed with cisatracurium alone. Nine of twelve patients who ultimately received naloxone after initial treatment with cisatracurium had documented ventilator compliance following naloxone administration (75%). Standard interventions, including sedation optimization and ventilator adjustments were attempted to rule out and treat other potential causes of dyssynchrony. In most cases, the administration of naloxone resulted in appropriate compliance with both ventilator and patient-initiated breaths, suggesting the ventilator dyssynchrony was due to fentanyl. Conclusions This is the largest case series to date describing FIRCS in the intensive care setting. Recognition and prompt management is necessary for improved patient outcomes. Research is needed to increase awareness and recognition, identify patient risk factors, and analyze the efficacy and safety of interventions.