Diabetic individuals need to tightly control their blood glucose concentration. Several methods have been developed for this purpose, such as the finger-prick or continuous glucose monitoring systems (CGMs). However, these methods present the disadvantage of being invasive. Moreover, CGMs have limited accuracy, notably to detect hypoglycemia. It is also known that physical exercise, and even daily activity, disrupt glucose dynamics and can generate problems with blood glucose regulation during and after exercise. In order to deal with these challenges, devices for monitoring patients’ physical activity are currently under development. This review focuses on non-invasive sensors using physiological parameters related to physical exercise that were used to improve glucose monitoring in type 1 diabetes (T1DM) patients. These devices are promising for diabetes management. Indeed they permit to estimate glucose concentration either based solely on physical activity parameters or in conjunction with CGM or non-invasive CGM (NI-CGM) systems. In these last cases, the vital signals are used to modulate glucose estimations provided by the CGM and NI-CGM devices. Finally, this review indicates possible limitations of these new biosensors and outlines directions for future technologic developments.

Objective: To identify risk factors and interventions preventing or reducing contrast medium extravasation. Introduction: Computed tomography (CT) is a radiological examination essential for the diagnosis and monitoring of many diseases. It is often performed with the intravenous (IV) injection of contrast agents. Use of these products can result in a significant complication, extravasation, which is the accidental leakage of IV material into the surrounding tissue. Patients may feel a sharp pain and skin ulceration or necrosis may develop. Inclusion criteria: This review considered studies that included patients (adults and children) undergoing a CT with IV administration of contrast media. The risk factors considered were patient demographics, comorbidities and medication history. This review also investigated any strategies related to: contrast agent, injection per se, material used for injection, apparatus used, healthcare professionals involved, and patient risk assessment performed by the radiology personnel. The comparators were other interventions or usual care. This review investigated randomized controlled trials and non-randomized controlled trials. When neither of these were available, other study designs, such as prospective and retrospective cohort studies, case-control studies and case series, were considered for inclusion. Primary outcomes considered were: extravasation frequency, volume, severity and complications. Methods: The databases PubMed, CINAHL, Embase, the Cochrane Register of Controlled Trials, Web of Science PsycINFO, ProQuest Dissertations and Theses A&I, TRIP Database and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched to find both published and unpublished studies from 1980 to September 2016. Papers were assessed by two independent reviewers for methodological validity using the Joanna Briggs Institute System for the Unified Management, Assessment and Review of Information (JBI SUMARI). Data were extracted using the standardized data extraction tool from JBI SUMARI. In one case, quantitative data from two cohort studies were pooled in a statistical meta-analysis. However, generally, statistical pooling was not possible due to heterogeneity of the interventions, populations of interest or outcomes. Accordingly, the findings have been presented in narrative form. Results: Fifteen articles were selected from a total of 2151 unique studies identified. Two were randomized controlled trials and 13 were quasi-experimental and observational studies. The quality of these studies was judged to be low to moderate. Some patient characteristics, such as female sex and inpatient status, appeared to be risk factors for extravasation. Additionally, injection rate, venous access site and catheter dwelling time could affect the volume extravasated. Preliminary studies seemed to indicate the potential of extravasation detection accessories to identify extravasation and reduce the volume extravasated. The other interventions either did not result in significant reduction in the frequency/volume of extravasation, or the results were mixed across the studies. Conclusions: The majority of the studies included in this review evaluated the outcomes of extravasation frequency and volume. Given the quality of the primary studies, this systematic review identified only potential risk factors and interventions. It further highlighted the research gap in this area and the importance of conducting trials with solid methodological designs.

Purpose: This systematic review aimed to compare the effect of contrast media (CM) dose adjustment based on lean body weight (LBW) method versus other calculation protocols for abdominopelvic CT examinations. Method: Studies published from 2002 onwards were systematically searched in June 2024 across Medline, Embase, CINAHL, Cochrane CENTRAL, Web of Science, Google Scholar and four other grey literature sources, with no language limit. Randomised controlled trials (RCT) and quasi-RCT of abdominopelvic or abdominal CT examinations in adults with contrast media injection for oncological and acute diseases were included. The comparators were other contrast dose calculation methods such as total body weight (TBW), fixed volume (FV), body surface area (BSA), and blood volume. The main outcomes considered were liver and aortic enhancement. Titles, abstracts and full texts were independently screened by two reviewers. Results: Eight studies were included from a total of 2029 articles identified. Liver parenchyma and aorta contrast enhancement did not significantly differ between LBW and TBW protocols (p = 0.07, p = 0.06, respectively). However, the meta-analysis revealed significantly lower contrast volume injected with LBW protocol when compared to TBW protocol (p = 0.003). No statistical differences were found for contrast enhancement and contrast volume between LBW and the other strategies. Conclusion: Calculation of the CM dosage based on LBW allows a reduction in the injected volume for abdominopelvic CT examination, ensuring the same image quality in terms of contrast enhancement.

Objective: The objective of this review is to map the global evidence on interventions aiming to enhance the patient experience during mammography examination. Introduction: Mammography is the examination of choice to detect breast cancer, which is the most common malignant condition among women globally. However, this examination can cause psychological distress, discomfort, and pain for patients. To limit these negative experiences, and to promote patient engagement in diagnostic and screening examinations, some interventions have been tested in clinical practice. Each intervention has key differing features that need to be explored in a scoping review. This mapping will help inform mammography professionals and researchers. Inclusion criteria: This review will consider studies that focus on women, men, transgender, nonbinary, or intersexual persons undergoing diagnostic or screening mammography. It will consider studies evaluating interventions and reporting data on the patient experience. These interventions may, for instance, be related to the information provided, breast compression, relaxation, medication, or physical environment. The review will also describe the outcomes related to patient experience (eg, anxiety, pain, discomfort). Methods: The search strategy will aim to find published and unpublished studies and will be conducted in MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Web of Science, and ProQuest Dissertation and Theses. Furthermore, three registries will be searched for ongoing studies. This review will be conducted following JBI methodology, utilizing the three-step search strategy with two independent reviewers performing study selection and data extraction. The results, frequencies, and conceptual categories will be presented in a tabular and narrative summary. Scoping review registration: Open Science Framework (https://osf.io/fn865/)