Explore the vast range of titles available.

BackgroundNMF are currently poorly evaluated in therapeutic decisions. A quantification of their severity would facilitate their integration. The objective of this study was to validate an autoquestionnaire evaluating the severity of non-motor fluctuations (NMF) in Parkinson’s disease (PD).MethodsPatients with PD were included in presurgical situation for deep brain stimulation of subthalamic nuclei. They participated in the PREDISTIM cohort (a study evaluating the predictive factors for therapeutic response of subthalamic stimulation in PD) in 17 centres in France. Our questionnaire, resulting from previous phases of development, included 11 non-motor symptoms (NMS). Their severity ranged from 0 to 10 and was assessed in OFF and then ON-Dopa to study their fluctuations.Results310 patients were included, of whom 98.8% had NMS and 98.0% had NMF. Each NMS was significantly improved by L-Dopa (decrease in severity score ranging from 43.1% to 69.9%). Fatigue was the most frequent and most severe NMS. NMS were considered more bothersome than motor symptoms by 37.5% of patients in OFF-Dopa and 34.9% in ON-Dopa.ConclusionsThis is the first questionnaire allowing a real-time quantification of the severity of NMS and their fluctuation with levodopa. It was able to confirm and measure the effect of L-dopa and show differences according to the patients and the NMS. It differs from other questionnaires by its measurement at a precise moment of the severity of the NMS, allowing its use during pretherapeutic assessments.Our questionnaire has been validated to measure the severity of NMF. It will be able to quantify the non-motor effect of anti-parkinsonian treatments and could facilitate the integration of NMF in therapeutic decisions.

Background Central catheters expose ICU patients at risk of catheter-related bloodstream infections. A mechanism by which these infections occur is the contamination of the catheter during its insertion if aseptic techniques are not strictly applied. Recent studies suggest that the use of ultrasound guidance (USG) may increase the risk of catheter contamination during insertion. We assessed current practices regarding the use of USG during catheter insertion, with a focus on identifying breaches of the surgical asepsis required for this invasive procedure. Methods In 26 intensive care units, we evaluated the use of USG during catheter insertion, using a questionnaire addressed to intensivists and direct observation of their practices. Results We analyzed 111 questionnaires and 36 observations of intensivists placing catheters. The questionnaires revealed that 88% of intensivists used USG for catheter insertion. Among those using USG, 56% had received specific training, 17% benefited from specific recommendations, 76% marked the insertion site before skin antisepsis, and during catheter insertion, 96% used sterile gel and 100% used a sterile sheath and sterile gloves. We identified potential deviations from strict aseptic technique, including contact between the sheath and the needle (19.4%), handling of the US system during catheter insertion (2.8%), and use of sterile devices, where they were not yet necessary (during the marking site or skin antisepsis), resulting in their contamination at the time of catheter insertion. Conclusions Interventions aimed at ensuring compliance with measures to prevent CRBs should be organized to prevent an increase in infections associated with US-guided catheter insertion.