Diabetic nephropathy in African-Americans with type 1 diabetes: The new Jersey 725 study

Diabetic nephropathy is the most common cause of end-stage renal disease (ESRD) in the United States. African-Americans and patients with type 1 diabetes (T1D) are at increased risk. We studied the rate and factors that influenced progression of glomerular filtration rate (GFR) in 401 African-American T1D patients who were followed for 6 years through the observational cohort New Jersey 725 study. Patients with ESRD and/or GFR<20 ml/min were excluded. The mean (SD) baseline GFR was 106.8 (27.04) ml/min and it decreased by 13.8 (mean, SD 32.2) ml/min during the 6-year period (2.3 ml/min/year). In patients with baseline macroproteinuria, GFR decreased by 31.8 (39.0) ml/min (5.3 ml/min/year) compared to 8.2 (mean, SD 27.6) ml/min (1.3 ml/min/year) in patients without it (p<0.00001). Six-year GFR fell to <20 ml/min in 5.25% of all patients, but in 16.8% of macroproteinuric patients.^ A model including baseline GFR, proteinuria category and hypertension category, explained 35% of the 6-year GFR variability (p<0.0001). After adjustment for other variables in the model, 6-year GFR was 24.9 ml/min lower in macroproteinuric patients than in those without proteinuria (p=0.0001), and 12.6 ml/min lower in patients with treated but uncontrolled hypertension compared to normotensive patients (p=0.003). In this sample of patients, with an elevated mean glycosylated hemoglobin of 12.4%, glycemic control did not independently influence GFR deterioration, nor did BMI, cholesterol, gender, age at diabetes onset or socioeconomic level.^ Taken together, our findings suggest that proteinuria and hypertension are the most important factors associated with GFR deterioration in African-American T1D patients.^

Factors determining the use of universal precautions by emergency department nurses

The Health Belief Model (HBM) provided the theoretical framework for examining Universal Precautions (UP) compliance factors by Emergency Department nurses. A random sample of Emergency Nurses Association (ENA) clinical nurses (n = 900) from five states (New York, New Jersey, California, Texas, and Florida), were surveyed to explore the factors related to their decision to comply with UP. Five-hundred-ninety-eight (598) useable questionnaires were analyzed. The responders were primarily female (84.9%), hospital based (94.6%), staff nurses (66.6%) who had a mean 8.5 years of emergency nursing experience. The nurses represented all levels of hospitals from rural (4.5%) to urban trauma centers (23.7%). The mean UP training hours was 3.0 (range 0-38 hours). Linear regression was used to analyze the four hypotheses. The first hypothesis evaluating perceived susceptibility and seriousness with reported UP use was not significant (p = $>$.05). Hypothesis 2 tested perceived benefits with internal and external barriers. Both perceived benefits and internal barriers as well as the overall regression were significant (F = 26.03, p = $<$0.001). Hypothesis 3 which tested modifying factors, cues to action, select demographic variables, and the main effects of the HBM with self reported UP compliance, was also significant (F = 12.39, p = $<$0.001). The additive effects were tested by use of a stepwise regression that assessed the contribution of each of the significant variables. The regression was significant (F = 12.39, p = $<$0.001) and explained 18% of the total variance. In descending order of contribution, the significant variables related to compliance were: internal barriers (t = $-$6.267; p = $<$0.001) such as the perception that because of the nature of the emergency care environment there is sometimes inadequate time to put on UP; cues to action (t = 3.195; p = 0.001) such as posted reminder signs or verbal reminders from peers; the number of Universal Precautions training hours (t = 3.667; p = $<$0.001) meaning that as the number of training hours increase so does compliance; perceived benefits (t = 3.466; p = 0.001) such as believing that UP will provide adequate barrier protection; and perceived susceptibility (t = 2.880; p = 0.004) such as feeling that they are at risk of exposure. ^