MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4234365048 · doi:10.1093/ageing/afu124.39

39 * THERAPEUTIC USE OF COMPRESSION STOCKINGS FOR ORTHOSTATIC HYPOTENSION: AN ASSESSMENT OF PATIENT AND PHYSICIAN PERSPECTIVES AND PRACTICES

2014· article· en· W4234365048 on OpenAlexaff
C. Quinn, J. Cooke, Brian Deegan, A. Hannigan, C. Dunne, D. Lyons

Bibliographic record

VenueAge and Ageing · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiovascular Syncope and Autonomic Disorders
Canadian institutionsInstitute of Infection and Immunity
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineOrthostatic vital signsCompression stockingsPhysical therapyBlood pressureEmergency medicineInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Elastic compression stockings (ECS) can be used as a non-pharmacological therapeutic option for older patients with orthostatic hypotension (OH). The aims of our study were to investigate the practices and perceptions of patients and physicians regarding the use of ECS for OH. Sampling methods: Two surveys were designed and piloted. The first was sent to 90 patients randomly sampled from department syncope department. This questionnaire included items related to frequency of use, issues related to non-compliance and patients' own assessment of the effectiveness of ECS. The second was sent to 69 consultant physicians in geriatric medicine in the Republic of Ireland. This included items relating to prescribing practices, perceived patient compliance and efficacy of ECS in OH. Results: 67 patients responded to the survey (response rate 74%). 64% were female, with a mean age (SD) of 75.1 years (10.5), range 45–91 years. 33% wore ECS daily while 43% never used them. Over half (51%) of the patients reported difficulty in application, 31% reported discomfort and 13% reported ECS were unhelpful for symptoms. More frequent use was associated with improvement in symptoms (p = 0.001). Those aged 75 years or older were more likely to report difficulty in application compared to those under 75 (p = 0.003). 48 physicians responded to the survey (response rate 70%). 89% prescribe ECS for OH, with 67% prescribing them before initiating pharmacological therapy. 53% chose thigh length class 2 compression strength. There were significant differences between the frequency of use reported by patients and predicted by physicians (p < 0.001), with physicians less likely to predict no use or daily use. 89% of physicians predicted that difficulty in application was the main reason for non-compliance. Conclusion: Our findings suggest that although prescribed frequently, the use of ECS in patients with OH is often limited by issues related to practicality. Physicians correctly predicted the main reasons for non-compliance although underestimated the scale of patient compliance with ECS.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.942
Threshold uncertainty score0.226

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.030
GPT teacher head0.330
Teacher spread0.300 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAge and AgeingSame topicCardiovascular Syncope and Autonomic DisordersFrench-language works237,207