Patients Above 18 Years

Diabetes and prediabetes prevail among obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) patients. OSA and short sleep both detrimentally affect glycemic control regardless of obesity. With 1 in 10 adults having diabetes, 1 in 10 with prediabetes, and an estimated 600,000 affected by OSA in Sweden, attaining glycemic control is crucial. Though continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) is the most effective treatment for OSA, its application lacks personalization, ignoring factors like comorbidities and sleep duration. Key unanswered questions regarding CPAP's impact on glycemic control include: 1) Does high CPAP adherence optimize glycemic control? 2) Should short sleep be addressed alongside OSA treatment for glycemic control? 3) Does long-term diabetes hinder CPAP's glycemic control efficacy? The purpose of this project is to enable precision health in CPAP treatment and producing a personalized treatment model for achieving glycemic control in patients with OSA, treated with CPAP. Taking advantage of a large unique patient cohort (600 patients followed over 18 months) with extensive and objective measures on CPAP adherence, OSA reduction, sleep duration, as well as information on comorbidities, anthropometric, lifestyle data, and a wide range of biomarkers related to glycemic control. This comprehensive approach and in-depth analysis will address these questions and generate a personalized treatment strategy for glycemic control in CPAP-treated OSA patients.

Pace maker implantation after the procedure of TAVR can be estimated at 15% of patients. However, some studies have shown that the conduction disturbances after TAVR could resolve over time, and that roughly between one- and two-thirds of patients who required a permanent pace maker implantation post TAVR were not found to be dependent at subsequent follow-up. This study aims to evaluate a cohort of patients permanently implanted with a pacemaker post-TAVR for high-grade conductive disorders and to describe the prevalence of effective pacemaker stimulation at 1 year follow-up. Secondary objectives include the evaluation of the prevalence of effective stimulation 3 months after implantation of the pace maker , description of the types of conductive disorders associated with atrial and/or ventricular stimulation, description of the initial indication for pacemaker implantation, description of the characteristics of the population with or without stimulation dependency. The objective is to better rationalize indication of permanent stimulation after TAVI

This randomized, double-blind study aimed to determine the effect of ShotBlocker on IMI pain in adult patients who received diclofenac sodium and metamizole sodium as IMI in the emergency department. The main question(s) it aims to answer are as follows: • \[Is there a difference between the pain score averages between the intervention group and the control group after ShotBlocker? Participants \[Participants in both groups are individuals who applied to the emergency department and received IM injections according to the doctor\'s order.\] If there is a comparison group: Researchers will make a comparison with the control group.