Citations

Objective The aim of the study was to compare incidence and outcomes of acute pancreatitis among advanced heart failure therapies. Methods Two retrospective cohorts are as follows: A, patients with heart failure presenting to our hospitals and B, the US National Inpatient Sample. Three groups were compared: left ventricular assist device (LVAD) recipients, transplant recipients, and controls who did not qualify for advanced therapies. Primary outcomes were pancreatitis incidence and mortality. Secondary outcomes included kidney failure, multiorgan failure, shock, and health care utilization. Results Cohort A included 1344 heart failure patients, and cohort B included 677,905 patients with acute pancreatitis. In cohort A, annual pancreatitis incidence was 6.7 cases per 1000 LVAD recipients, 4.1 per 1000 LVAD bridge-to-transplant, 2.3 per 1000 transplant recipients, and 3.2 per 1000 heart failure controls ( P = 0.03). Combined, the incidence was 5.6 per 1000 LVAD users and 2.7 in 1000 non-LVAD users (relative risk, 2.1; P = 0.009). In cohort B, increased mortality was seen in LVAD users, but not in transplant recipients. Left ventricular assist device patients had higher odds of kidney failure, multiorgan failure, shock, and intensive care. Conclusions Patients with LVAD have double risk of pancreatitis, worse clinical outcomes, and increased healthcare utilization. Studies elucidating the mechanisms behind pancreatic injury in advanced heart failure are suggested.

AbstractRecent modifications in the management of well‐differentiated thyroid cancer have resulted in significant alterations in clinical approach. Utilizing a series of preoperative and postoperative risk factors involving both the patient and the disease pathology, we offer the term “staged thyroidectomy” to help organize these risk factors for patients and the endocrine team to optimize management. This approach is intended to incorporate our latest nuanced understanding of certain endocrine pathology and may serve to optimize patient outcomes.

Background: This study aimed to evaluate the risk factors and the association of acute kidney injury (AKI) with outcomes, and resource utilization in patients hospitalized due to salicylate intoxication in the United States. Methods: Hospitalized patients with a primary diagnosis of salicylate intoxication from 2003 to 2014 were identified in the National Inpatient Sample (NIS) database. End-stage kidney disease patients were excluded. The occurrence of AKI was identified using hospital diagnosis code. Clinical characteristics, in-hospital treatment, outcomes and resource utilization were compared between patients with and without AKI. Results: A total of 13,787 eligible hospital admissions were included in the analysis. AKI occurred in 1,279 (9.3%) admissions. Older age, male sex, more recent year of hospitalization, anemia, hypertension, congestive heart failure, chronic kidney disease, volume depletion, sepsis, and ventricular arrhythmia/cardiac arrest were significantly associated with increased risk of AKI, whereas Hispanic race was associated with decreased risk. AKI was significantly associated with increased risk of organ failure, and in-hospital mortality. In addition, the need for ventilation support, blood component transfusion, renal replacement therapy, length of hospital stay, and hospitalization cost were higher in AKI patients. Conclusion: Approximately one tenth of salicylate intoxication patients developed AKI during hospitalization. AKI was associated with higher morbidity, mortality, and resource utilizations.

Abstract Background: Chronic conditions are placing a serious burden on individuals as well as the health care system. Health coaching (HC) has emerged as a promising approach that can support effective lifestyle interventions for chronic conditions. However, until now there is no particularly comprehensive systematic review of HC impact on a chronic condition from the angle of patient improvement and detail coaching characteristics reported. Objective: To synthesize available studies on the efficacy and current status of HC interventions on the health of chronically ill adult patients. Methods: The literature search will be conducted for trials published in English within the past four years. Electronic databases CINAHL, Cochrane Library, Embase, MEDLINE, and Scopus will be searched with keywords describing HC for chronic diseases. Randomized controlled trials that compare HC interventions to conventional care or other alternative therapies will be included. Data extraction will be conducted by two reviewers independently, and enrolled trials will be evaluated for quality and bias assessment. If appropriate, meta-analysis will be conducted on the last stage of the review; otherwise, the study findings will be described narratively. The software Review Manager (Revman version 5.3.5.) provided by the Cochrane Collaboration will be applied for the meta-analysis. Results: This is the first study to comprehensively explore the effectiveness and current status of HC intervention for patients with chronic conditions. Discussion: Study findings from this review will advance the appropriate utilization of coaching practice by determining whether HC is effective and feasible among patients with chronic disease. If proven effective, this approach may be applied more broadly through public health interventions. The current status findings will also provide evidence to inform decisions for integrating HC interventions into the current management pathway for individuals with chronic conditions. Systematic review registration: PROSPERO CRD42020153280.

Abstract Coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) has affected millions of people and may disproportionately affect those with hypertension and diabetes. Because of inadequate methods in published systematic reviews, the prevalence of diabetes and hypertension and associated risks of poor outcomes in Covid-19 patients are unknown. We searched databases from December 1, 2019, to April 6, 2020, and selected observational peer-reviewed studies in English of patients with Covid-19. Independent reviewers extracted data on study participants, interventions, and outcomes and assessed risk of bias, and the certainty of evidence. We included 65 (15 794 participants) observational studies at moderate to high risk of bias. Overall prevalence of diabetes and hypertension was 12% (95% confidence interval [CI], 10-15; n = 12 870; I2: 89%), and 17% (95% CI, 13-22; n = 12 709; I2: 95%), respectively. In severe Covid-19, the prevalence of diabetes and hypertension were 18% (95% CI, 16-20; n = 1099; I2: 0%) and 32% (95% CI, 16-54; n = 1078; I2: 63%), respectively. Unadjusted relative risk for intensive care unit admission and mortality were 1.96 (95% CI, 1.19-3.22; n = 8890; I2: 80%; P = .008) and 2.78 (95% CI, 1.39-5.58; n = 2058; I2: 75%; P = .0004) for diabetics; and 2.95 (95% CI, 2.18-3.99; n = 1737; I2: 0%; P < .001) and 2.39 (95% CI, 1.54-3.73; n = 3107; I2: 66%; P < .001) for hypertensives. Neither diabetes (1.50; 95% CI, 0.90-2.50; n = 1991; I2: 74%; P = .119) nor hypertension (1.48; 95% CI, 0.99-2.23; n = 2023; I2: 69%; P = .058) was associated with severe Covid-19. In conclusion, the risk of intensive care unit admission and mortality for patients with diabetes or hypertension who developed Covid-19 is increased compared with those without these comorbidities. PROSPERO registration number CRD42020176582.

Objectives The use of more medicalised labels can increase both concern about illness and the desire for more invasive treatment. This study analyses the media’s coverage of an Analysis article in The BMJ which generated a large amount of high-profile international media coverage. It aims to understand how to better communicate messages about low-risk cancers and overdiagnosis to the public. Design Content analysis of media coverage. Setting Media was identified by Isentia Media Portal, searched in Google News and cross-checked in Factiva and Proquest databases from August 2018. Methods Media headlines, full text and open access public comments responding to the coverage on the article proposing to ‘rename low-risk conditions currently labelled as cancer’ were analysed to determine the main themes. Results 45 original media articles and their associated public comments (n=167) were identified and included in the analysis. Overall, headlines focused on cancer generally and there was little mention of ‘low-risk’, ‘overdiagnosis’ or ‘overtreatment’. The full text generally presented a more balanced view of the evidence and were supportive of the proposal, however, public responses tended to be more negative towards the idea of renaming low-risk cancers and indicated confusion. Comments seemed to focus on the headlines rather than the full article. Conclusions This study offers a novel insight into media coverage of the complex and counterintuitive problem of overdiagnosis. Continued deliberation on how to communicate similar topics to the public through the mainstream media is needed. Future work in the area of low-risk cancer communication should consider the powerful impact of people’s previous experience with a cancer diagnosis and the criticism about being paternalistic and concealing the truth from patients.