Creatine Activity as a Neuromodulator in the Central Nervous System

Creatine is a nutritional compound that potentially influences cognitive processing and neuroprotection. Recent evidence has demonstrated that similar to neurotransmitters, creatine is released in an excitotoxic and action potential-dependent manner and acts as a neuromodulator. Creatine deficiency syndromes are characterized by severe mental and developmental disorders. Studies have reported that brain creatine content could be enhanced with creatine supplementation. Nevertheless, there is still limited knowledge about the effects of creatine on the central nervous system. However, ample evidence has proved the neuroprotective effects of creatine on various mental aspects, such as cognition, memory skills, and spatial memory. The present review aimed to review available experimental data and clinical observations confirming creatine roles in the central transmission process. A systematic search in the literature was performed in PubMed, Scopus, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and Google Scholar database using all available MeSH terms for Creatine, Phosphocreatine, Bioenergetics, Nervous system, Brain, Cognition, and Neuroprotection. Electronic database searches were combined and duplicates were removed. Here, first, creatine and its potential influence on cognitive health and performance were briefly reviewed. Next, the existing experimental and clinical evidence was specifically explored to understand how creatine could interact as a neurotransmitter in the nervous system. Studies have revealed that exogenous creatine supplementation decreases neuronal cell loss in experimental paradigms of neurological diseases. It was observed that creatine could interact with the N-methyl-D-aspartate receptor, Na+-K+-ATPase enzyme, GABAA receptor, serotonin 1A receptors, and presumably α1-adrenoceptor and play critical roles in the central transmission process which implies that creatine can be considered a neuromodulator.

Electronic versus paper patient-reported outcome measure compliance rates: A retrospective analysis

OBJECTIVE

Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are key tools used to inform clinical research and patient-centered care. Application of data collected from PROMs, however, may be limited by incomplete responses, and little is known regarding the efficacy of varied PROM delivery methods. The objective of this study was to compare PROMs compliance when delivered via paper and electronic formats.

METHODS

Elective adult spinal deformity patients were screened for inclusion. Data collected included demographics, type of surgery, PROMs compliance, and discharge care. Descriptive statistics and multivariate analysis (MVA) were performed to compare pre- and postoperative compliance rates.

RESULTS

Of the 474 included patients, 177 were administered paper PROMs, while 297 were electronic. Preoperatively, 101 patients (57.1%) had any portion of their paper PROMs available; 179 (60.3%) had any of their electronic PROMs available (p = 0.492). Among all patients, 76 (42.9%) and 170 (57.2%) had all of their completed preop PROMs available (p = 0.003). Among patients with any of their preop PROMs completed, 75.2% with paper and 95.0% with electronic were completed in their entirety (p < 0.001). Similar trends were observed among postoperative PROMs. MVA demonstrated electronic delivery as the only significant correlate with pre- and post-operative PROMs compliance (p < 0.001 and p = 0.003, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

No differences were observed across modalities when considering any available PROMs, yet electronic PROM delivery was associated with higher completion of PROMs. In order to improve the quality of patient-reported data, electronic delivery with alternative methods of quality improvement may be considered to increase PROMs retention rates.