No abstract

Background: The performance of commercial point-of-care crossmatch (CM) tests compared to laboratory tube agglutination CM is unknown. Additionally, there is limited information regarding CM incompatibility in ill dogs. Objectives: To determine if point-of-care major CM methods are accurate in detecting compatible and incompatible tests when compared to laboratory CM methods, and to identify factors associated with CM incompatibility in dogs. Animals: Part 1 (prospective) included 63 client-owned dogs potentially requiring blood transfusion. Part 2 (retrospective) included all dogs from part 1, plus medical records of 141 dogs with major CM results. Methods: For part 1, major CM was performed using a tube agglutination assay (LAB-CM), a gel-based point-of-care test (GEL-CM), and an immunochromatographic point-of-care test (IC-CM). For part 2, medical record data were collected to determine rates of and risk factors for CM incompatibility. Results: Kappa agreement between the LAB-CM and GEL-CM methods could not be calculated due to a relative lack of incompatible results. Kappa agreement between the LAB-CM and IC-CM methods was 0.16 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 0-0.31, P = .007) indicating no agreement. The LAB-CM incompatibility in transfusion-naïve vs dogs that had a transfusion was 25% and 35%, (P = .3). Conclusions and Clinical Importance: Compared to laboratory methods, point-ofcare methods evaluated in our study lacked sensitivity for detecting incompatibilities. Dogs had similar rates of major CM incompatibility regardless of transfusion history. This suggests CM testing prior to transfusion be considered in all dogs however our study did not investigate clinical relevancy of incompatible LAB-CM.

Background:There has been speculation that rest during the regular season for players in the National Basketball Association (NBA) improves player performance in the postseason.Purpose:To determine whether there is a correlation between the amount of regular-season rest among NBA players and playoff performance and injury risk in the same season.Study Design:Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3.Methods:The Basketball Reference and Pro Sports Transactions archives were searched from the 2005 to 2015 seasons. Data were collected on players who missed fewer than 5 regular-season games because of rest (group A) and 5 to 9 regular-season games because of rest (group B) during each season. Inclusion criteria consisted of players who played a minimum of 20 minutes per game and made the playoffs that season. Players were excluded if they missed ≥10 games because of rest or suspension or missed ≥20 games in a season for any reason. Matched pairs were formed between the groups based on the following criteria: position, mean age at the start of the season within 2 years, regular-season minutes per game within 5 minutes, same playoff seeding, and player efficiency rating (PER) within 2 points. The following data from the playoffs were collected and compared between matched pairs at each position (point guard, shooting guard, forward/center): points per game, assists per game, PER, true shooting percentage, blocks, steals, and number of playoff games missed because of injury.Results:A total of 811 players met the inclusion and exclusion criteria (group A: n = 744 players; group B: n = 67 players). Among all eligible players, 27 matched pairs were formed. Within these matched pairs, players in group B missed significantly more regular-season games because of rest than players in group A (6.0 games vs 1.3 games, respectively; P < .0001). There were no significant differences between the groups at any position in terms of points per game, assists per game, PER, true shooting percentage, blocks, steals, or number of playoff games missed because of injury.Conclusion:Rest during the NBA regular season does not improve playoff performance or affect the injury risk during the playoffs in the same season.

No abstract