Citations

Objective To describe a standardized methodology for the performance of peripheral nerve blocks ( PNB s) in the treatment of headache disorders. Background PNBs have long been employed in the management of headache disorders, but a wide variety of techniques are utilized in literature reports and clinical practice. Methods The A merican H eadache S ociety S pecial I nterest S ection for PNBs and other I nterventional P rocedures convened meetings during 2010‐2011 featuring formal discussions and agreements about the procedural details for occipital and trigeminal PNBs . A subcommittee then generated a narrative review detailing the methodology. Results PNB indications may include select primary headache disorders, secondary headache disorders, and cranial neuralgias. Special procedural considerations may be necessary in certain patient populations, including pregnancy, the elderly, anesthetic allergy, prior vasovagal attacks, an open skull defect, antiplatelet/anticoagulant use, and cosmetic concerns. PNBs described include greater occipital, lesser occipital, supratrochlear, supraorbital, and auriculotemporal injections. Technical success of the PNB should result in cutaneous anesthesia. Targeted clinical outcomes depend on the indication, and include relief of an acute headache attack, terminating a headache cycle, and transitioning out of a medication‐overuse pattern. Reinjection frequency is variable, depending on the indications and agents used, and the addition of corticosteroids may be most appropriate when treating cluster headache. Conclusions These recommendations from the A merican H eadache S ociety S pecial I nterest S ection for PNBs and other I nterventional P rocedures members for PNB methodology in headache disorder treatment are derived from the available literature and expert consensus. With the exception of cluster headache, there is a paucity of evidence, and further research may result in the revision of these recommendations to improve the outcome and safety of these interventions.

“Thunderclap headaches” are severe intensity headaches that reach maximum intensity in less than 1 minute. There are numerous etiologies of thunderclap headache, some associated with substantial morbidity and mortality and others with benign outcomes. Evaluation of the patient with thunderclap headache must occur urgently in order to assess for dangerous etiologies such as subarachnoid hemorrhage. When a cause for thunderclap headache is not identified after initial testing that includes brain computed tomography and cerebrospinal fluid evaluation, additional testing is typically indicated to determine the etiology. “Primary thunderclap headache” is diagnosed when a complete evaluation fails to identify a specific cause for thunderclap headache.

Abstract Objectives Technology‐enhanced simulation is used frequently in emergency medicine ( EM ) training programs. Evidence for its effectiveness, however, remains unclear. The objective of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of technology‐enhanced simulation for training in EM and identify instructional design features associated with improved outcomes by conducting a systematic review. Methods The authors systematically searched MEDLINE , EMBASE , CINAHL , ERIC , Psych INFO , Scopus, key journals, and previous review bibliographies through May 2011. Original research articles in any language were selected if they compared simulation to no intervention or another educational activity for the purposes of training EM health professionals (including student and practicing physicians, midlevel providers, nurses, and prehospital providers). Reviewers evaluated study quality and abstracted information on learners, instructional design (curricular integration, feedback, repetitive practice, mastery learning), and outcomes. Results From a collection of 10,903 articles, 85 eligible studies enrolling 6,099 EM learners were identified. Of these, 56 studies compared simulation to no intervention, 12 compared simulation with another form of instruction, and 19 compared two forms of simulation. Effect sizes were pooled using a random‐effects model. Heterogeneity among these studies was large (I 2 ≥ 50%). Among studies comparing simulation to no intervention, pooled effect sizes were large (range = 1.13 to 1.48) for knowledge, time, and skills and small to moderate for behaviors with patients (0.62) and patient effects (0.43; all p < 0.02 except patient effects p = 0.12). Among comparisons between simulation and other forms of instruction, the pooled effect sizes were small (≤0.33) for knowledge, time, and process skills (all p > 0.1). Qualitative comparisons of different simulation curricula are limited, although feedback, mastery learning, and higher fidelity were associated with improved learning outcomes. Conclusions Technology‐enhanced simulation for EM learners is associated with moderate or large favorable effects in comparison with no intervention and generally small and nonsignificant benefits in comparison with other instruction. Future research should investigate the features that lead to effective simulation‐based instructional design.

The nuclear receptor Rev-erbα has been implicated as a major regulator of the circadian clock and integrates circadian rhythm and metabolism. Rev-erbα controls circadian oscillations of several clock genes and Rev-erbα protein degradation is important for maintenance of the circadian oscillations and also for adipocyte differentiation. Elucidating the mechanisms that regulate Rev-erbα stability is essential for our understanding of these processes. In the present paper, we report that the protein DBC1 (Deleted in Breast Cancer 1) is a novel regulator of Rev-erbα. Rev-erbα and DBC1 interact in cells and in vivo, and DBC1 modulates the Rev-erbα repressor function. Depletion of DBC1 by siRNA (small interfering RNA) in cells or in DBC1-KO (knockout) mice produced a marked decrease in Rev-erbα protein levels, but not in mRNA levels. In contrast, DBC1 overexpression significantly enhanced Rev-erbα protein stability by preventing its ubiquitination and degradation. The regulation of Rev-erbα protein levels and function by DBC1 depends on both the N-terminal and C-terminal domains of DBC1. More importantly, in cells depleted of DBC1, there was a dramatic decrease in circadian oscillations of both Rev-erbα and BMAL1. In summary, our data identify DBC1 as an important regulator of the circadian receptor Rev-erbα and proposes that Rev-erbα could be involved in mediating some of the physiological effects of DBC1.

The aim of this study was to determine the effect of prolonged 11β-hydroxysteroid dehydrogenase-1 (11β-HSD1) inhibition on basal and hormone-stimulated glucose metabolism in fasted conscious dogs. For 7 days prior to study, either an 11β-HSD1 inhibitor (HSD1-I; n = 6) or placebo (PBO; n = 6) was administered. After the basal period, a 4-h metabolic challenge followed, where glucagon (3×-basal), epinephrine (5×-basal), and insulin (2×-basal) concentrations were increased. Hepatic glucose fluxes did not differ between groups during the basal period. In response to the metabolic challenge, hepatic glucose production was stimulated in PBO, resulting in hyperglycemia such that exogenous glucose was required in HSD-I ( P < 0.05) to match the glycemia between groups. Net hepatic glucose output and endogenous glucose production were decreased by 11β-HSD1 inhibition ( P < 0.05) due to a reduction in net hepatic glycogenolysis ( P < 0.05), with no effect on gluconeogenic flux compared with PBO. In addition, glucose utilization ( P < 0.05) and the suppression of lipolysis were increased ( P < 0.05) in HSD-I compared with PBO. These data suggest that inhibition of 11β-HSD1 may be of therapeutic value in the treatment of diseases characterized by insulin resistance and excessive hepatic glucose production.