PurposeCardiac troponin T (cTnT), a useful marker for diagnosing acute myocardial infarction (AMI) in the general population, is significantly higher than the usual cut-off value in many end-stage renal disease (ESRD) patients without clinically apparent evidence of AMI. The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical usefulness of cTnT in ESRD patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS).Materials and MethodsTwo hundred eighty-four ESRD patients with ACS were enrolled between March 2002 and February 2008. These patients were followed until death or June 2009. Medical records were reviewed retrospectively. The cut-off value of cTnT for AMI was evaluated using a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve. We calculated Kaplan-Meier survival curves, and potential outcome predictors were determined by Cox proportional hazard analysis.ResultsAMIs were diagnosed in 40 patients (14.1%). The area under the curve was 0.98 in the ROC curve (p<0.001; 95% CI, 0.95-1.00). The summation of sensitivity and specificity was highest at the initial cTnT value of 0.35 ng/mL (sensitivity, 0.95; specificity, 0.97). Survival analysis showed a statistically significant difference in all-cause and cardiovascular mortalities for the group with an initial cTnT ≥0.35 ng/mL compared to the other groups. Initial serum cTnT concentration was an independent predictor for mortality.ConclusionBecause ESRD patients with an initial cTnT concentration ≥0.35 ng/mL have a poor prognosis, it is suggested that urgent diagnosis and treatment be indicated in dialysis patients with ACS when the initial cTnT levels are ≥0.35 ng/mL.

Background: Pain is common during cancer treatment, and patient self-reporting of pain is an essential first step for ideal cancer pain management. However, many studies on cancer pain management report that, because pain may be underestimated, it is often inadequately managed. Objective: The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of bedside self-assessment of pain intensity for inpatients using a self-reporting pain board. Methods: Fifty consecutive inpatients admitted to the Oncology Department of Chungbuk National University Hospital were included in this observational prospective study from February 2011 to December 2011. The medical staff performed pain assessments by asking patients questions and using verbal rated scales (VRS) over 3 consecutive days. Then, for 3 additional days, patients used a self-reporting pain board attached to the bed, which had movable indicators representing 0-10 on a numeric rating scale (NRS) and the frequency of breakthrough pain. Results: Patient reliability over the medical staff's pain assessment increased from 74% to 96% after applying the self-reporting pain board ( p = 0.004). The gap (mean -standard deviation [SD]) between the NRS reported by patients and the NRS recorded on the medical records decreased from 3.16 -2.08 to 1.00 -1.02 ( p < 0.001), and the level of patient satisfaction with pain management increased from 54% to 82% ( p = 0.002). Conclusion: This study suggests that the self-reporting bedside pain assessment tool provides a reliable and effective means of assessing pain in oncology inpatients.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract