Search

Background: On 20 September 2022, the Ugandan Ministry of Health declared an outbreak of Ebola disease caused by Sudan ebolavirus., Methods: From 6 October 2022 to 10 January 2023, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) staff conducted public health assessments at five US ports of entry for travellers identified as having been in Uganda in the past 21 days. CDC also recommended that state, local and territorial health departments ('health departments') conduct post-arrival monitoring of these travellers. CDC provided traveller contact information, daily to 58 health departments, and collected health department data regarding monitoring outcomes., Results: Among 11 583 travellers screened, 132 (1%) required additional assessment due to potential exposures or symptoms of concern. Fifty-three (91%) health departments reported receiving traveller data from CDC for 10 114 (87%) travellers, of whom 8499 (84%) were contacted for monitoring, 1547 (15%) could not be contacted and 68 (1%) had no reported outcomes. No travellers with high-risk exposures or Ebola disease were identified., Conclusion: Entry risk assessment and post-arrival monitoring of travellers are resource-intensive activities that had low demonstrated yield during this and previous outbreaks. The efficiency of future responses could be improved by incorporating an assessment of risk of importation of disease, accounting for individual travellers' potential for exposure, and expanded use of methods that reduce burden to federal agencies, health departments, and travellers., (Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of International Society of Travel Medicine 2024.)

Background: During the 2022-2023 influenza season, the United States experienced the highest influenza-associated pediatric hospitalization rate since 2010-2011. Influenza A/H3N2 infections were predominant., Methods: We analyzed acute respiratory illness (ARI)-associated emergency department or urgent care (ED/UC) encounters or hospitalizations at 3 health systems among children and adolescents aged 6 months-17 years who had influenza molecular testing during October 2022-March 2023. We estimated influenza A vaccine effectiveness (VE) using a test-negative approach. The odds of vaccination among influenza-A-positive cases and influenza-negative controls were compared after adjusting for confounders and applying inverse-propensity-to-be-vaccinated weights. We developed overall and age-stratified VE models., Results: Overall, 13 547 of 44 787 (30.2%) eligible ED/UC encounters and 263 of 1862 (14.1%) hospitalizations were influenza-A-positive cases. Among ED/UC patients, 15.2% of influenza-positive versus 27.1% of influenza-negative patients were vaccinated; VE was 48% (95% confidence interval [CI], 44-52%) overall, 53% (95% CI, 47-58%) among children aged 6 months-4 years, and 38% (95% CI, 30-45%) among those aged 9-17 years. Among hospitalizations, 17.5% of influenza-positive versus 33.4% of influenza-negative patients were vaccinated; VE was 40% (95% CI, 6-61%) overall, 56% (95% CI, 23-75%) among children ages 6 months-4 years, and 46% (95% CI, 2-70%) among those 5-17 years., Conclusions: During the 2022-2023 influenza season, vaccination reduced the risk of influenza-associated ED/UC encounters and hospitalizations by almost half (overall VE, 40-48%). Influenza vaccination is a critical tool to prevent moderate-to-severe influenza illness in children and adolescents., Competing Interests: Potential conflicts of interest . N. P. K. reports research support from Sanofi Pasteur and Seqirus for unrelated adult influenza vaccine effectiveness studies, and from Pfizer, Merck, and GlaxoSmithKline for unrelated studies. S. R. received funds from GlaxoSmithKline. M. G. reports a research grant and contract for the CDC Ambulatory US Flu/COVID VE Network, a grant for HAIVEN Adult Inpatient Flu/COVID VE, a contract for SYNERGY FLU/COVID study, and subcontracts for the IVY COVID/FLU VE PHS project and RECOVER-PROTECT COVID Cohort studies. D.-H. Y., L. K., M. M. D., S. W. B., and Z. A. W. report payments made to Westat via CDC contract number 200-2019-F-06819. A. B. K., A. L. N., J. A., K. D., K. N., M. B. D., M. G., N. G., P. J. E., S. A. I, S. J. G., S. R., and T. C. O. report payments made to their institution by CDC via Westat. All other authors report no potential conflicts. All authors have submitted the ICMJE Form for Disclosure of Potential Conflicts of Interest. Conflicts that the editors consider relevant to the content of the manuscript have been disclosed., (Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of Infectious Diseases Society of America 2023.)

Purpose: This study aimed to examine the effects of a multi-component mobile health intervention (wearable, apps, and social media) on cancer survivors' (CS') physical activity (PA), quality of life, and PA determinants compared to exercise prescription only, social media only, and attention control conditions., Methods: A total of 126 CS (age = 60.37 ± 7.41 years, mean ± SD) were recruited from the United States. The study duration was 6 months and participants were randomly placed into 4 groups. All participants received a Fitbit tracker and were instructed to install its companion app to monitor their daily PA. They (1) received previously established weekly personalized exercise prescriptions via email, (2) received weekly Facebook health education and interacted with one another, (3) received both Conditions 1 and 2, or (4) were part of the control condition, meaning they adopted usual care. CS PA daily steps, quality of life (i.e., physical health and mental health), and PA determinants (e.g., self-efficacy, social support) were measured at baseline, 3 months, and 6 months., Results: The final sample size included 123 CS. The results revealed only the multi-component condition had greater improvements in PA daily steps than the control condition post-intervention (95% confidence interval (95%CI): 368-2951; p < 0.05). Similarly, those in the multi-component condition had significantly greater increased physical health than the control condition (95%CI: -0.41 to -0.01; p < 0.05) over time. In addition, the social media condition had significantly greater increased perceived social support than the control condition (95%CI: 0.01-0.93; p < 0.05). No other significant differences on outcomes were identified., Conclusion: The study findings suggest that the implementation of a multi-component mobile health intervention had positive effects on CS PA steps and physical health. Also, offering social media intervention has the potential to improve CS perceived social support., Competing Interests: Competing interests The authors declare that they have no competing interests., (Copyright © 2023. Production and hosting by Elsevier B.V.)

Readers of Samuel Shem's medical satire The House of God (1978) have long worried about the bad attitude of his main characters: young male internal medicine trainees. This article examines the interns' atrocious affections, using the feminist classic Our Bodies, Ourselves (1973) as a counterweight to the masculinist perspective of House of God. These radically different critiques of United States medicine derive from a shared sociopolitical context and represent a historically specific response to the personal politics of sexual liberation and self-actualization in the 1970s. I show that Shem and the Boston Women's Health Book Collective share a rhetorical strategy of "loose expertise" grounded in embodied knowledge, which connects both texts to the radical social movements of the late 1960s. Loose expertise enables institutional critique by shifting the domain of knowledge away from traditional structures of authority, but inhibits intersectional critique by essentializing the individual subject position of the author. The article concludes by examining the relationship of both texts to the medical humanities., (© The Author(s) 2023. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Introduction: Understanding the changing epidemiology of adults hospitalized with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) informs research priorities and public health policies., Methods: Among adults (≥18 years) hospitalized with laboratory-confirmed, acute COVID-19 between 11 March 2021, and 31 August 2022 at 21 hospitals in 18 states, those hospitalized during the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) Omicron-predominant period (BA.1, BA.2, BA.4/BA.5) were compared to those from earlier Alpha- and Delta-predominant periods. Demographic characteristics, biomarkers within 24 hours of admission, and outcomes, including oxygen support and death, were assessed., Results: Among 9825 patients, median (interquartile range [IQR]) age was 60 years (47-72), 47% were women, and 21% non-Hispanic Black. From the Alpha-predominant period (Mar-Jul 2021; N = 1312) to the Omicron BA.4/BA.5 sublineage-predominant period (Jun-Aug 2022; N = 1307): the percentage of patients who had ≥4 categories of underlying medical conditions increased from 11% to 21%; those vaccinated with at least a primary COVID-19 vaccine series increased from 7% to 67%; those ≥75 years old increased from 11% to 33%; those who did not receive any supplemental oxygen increased from 18% to 42%. Median (IQR) highest C-reactive protein and D-dimer concentration decreased from 42.0 mg/L (9.9-122.0) to 11.5 mg/L (2.7-42.8) and 3.1 mcg/mL (0.8-640.0) to 1.0 mcg/mL (0.5-2.2), respectively. In-hospital death peaked at 12% in the Delta-predominant period and declined to 4% during the BA.4/BA.5-predominant period., Conclusions: Compared to adults hospitalized during early COVID-19 variant periods, those hospitalized during Omicron-variant COVID-19 were older, had multiple co-morbidities, were more likely to be vaccinated, and less likely to experience severe respiratory disease, systemic inflammation, coagulopathy, and death., Competing Interests: Potential conflicts of interest. J. C. reports grants from the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and Department of Defense (DoD), outside the submitted work. J. C. reports receiving grants from the NIH, DoD, outside the submitted work. A. D, reports grants from the NIH and National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI) for the Accelerating COVID-19 Therapeutic Interventions and Vaccines (ACTIV) platform and Prevention and Early Treatment of Acute Lung Injury (PETAL) network respectively, as well as consulting fees for Alung Technologies, outside the submitted work. S. C. reports receiving consulting fees from PureTech Health and Kiniksa Pharmaceuticals and participating as a Data and Safety Monitoring Board (DSMB) member for a neuromodulation study at University of California, Los Angeles, outside the submitted work. M. E. reports grants from NIH and Regeneron, personal funds for speaking at the ASPEN conference for Abbott Labs, and payment for testimony from Medical Legal Expert Witness, outside the submitted work. M. G. reports receiving grants from CDC, CDC-Abt Associates, CDC-Westat, and Janssen, and served as co-chair of the Infectious Diseases and Immunization Committee for the Texas Pediatric Society, outside the submitted work. K. G. reports grants from NIH and DoD, outside the submitted work. A. G. reports receiving grants from NIH, DoD, AbbVie, and Faron Pharmaceuticals, outside the submitted work. M. N. G. reports grants from NHLBI, CDC, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ), speaking at medicine grand rounds at New York Medical College, travel support for the American Thoracic Society (ATS) executive meeting and serving as ATS Chair Critical Care Assembly, DSMB membership fees from Regeneron, and participating on the scientific advisory panel for Endpoint, outside the submitted work. D. H. reports receiving grants from NHLBI, outside the submitted work. A. K. reports receiving grants from United Therapeutics, Johnson & Johnson, 4D Medical, Eli Lily, Dompe Pharmaceuticals, and GlaxoSmithKline; and serves on the guidelines committee for Chest, outside the submitted work. J. K. reports a grant from NIH, outside the submitted work A. L. reports receiving grants from CDC, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), and Burroughs Wellcome Fund, Michigan Department of Health and Human Services, Flu Lab, and consulting fees from Sanofi and Roche for consulting on oseltamivir and baloxavir respectively, outside the submitted work. E. M. reports grants from Flu Lab, Merck, and NIH outside the submitted work. T. N. reports receiving a grant from CDC, receiving a one-time payment for participating as a virtual webinar panelist for Clinical Updates in Heart Failure, and being a Practice Management Committee member for Society of Hospital Medicine, outside the submitted work. I. D, P. reports grants from NIH/NHLBI, Janssen Pharmaceuticals and institutional support from Regeneron, outside the submitted work. J. S. reports a grant from NHLBI, outside the submitted work. W. B. S, reports grants from NIH/NHLBI, outside the submitted work. J. W. reports a grant from NIH/NHLBI, payment for the American College of Emergency Physicians speaker honorarium and participating on the American Board of Internal Medicine Critical Care Exam Committee, outside the submitted work. All other authors report no potential conflicts. All authors have submitted the ICMJE Form for Disclosure of Potential Conflicts of Interest. Conflicts that the editors consider relevant to the content of the manuscript have been disclosed., (Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of Infectious Diseases Society of America 2023.)

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic was associated with historically low influenza circulation during the 2020-2021 season, followed by an increase in influenza circulation during the 2021-2022 US season. The 2a.2 subgroup of the influenza A(H3N2) 3C.2a1b subclade that predominated was antigenically different from the vaccine strain., Methods: To understand the effectiveness of the 2021-2022 vaccine against hospitalized influenza illness, a multistate sentinel surveillance network enrolled adults aged ≥18 years hospitalized with acute respiratory illness and tested for influenza by a molecular assay. Using the test-negative design, vaccine effectiveness (VE) was measured by comparing the odds of current-season influenza vaccination in influenza-positive case-patients and influenza-negative, SARS-CoV-2-negative controls, adjusting for confounders. A separate analysis was performed to illustrate bias introduced by including SARS-CoV-2-positive controls., Results: A total of 2334 patients, including 295 influenza cases (47% vaccinated), 1175 influenza- and SARS-CoV-2-negative controls (53% vaccinated), and 864 influenza-negative and SARS-CoV-2-positive controls (49% vaccinated), were analyzed. Influenza VE was 26% (95% CI: -14% to 52%) among adults aged 18-64 years, -3% (-54% to 31%) among adults aged ≥65 years, and 50% (15-71%) among adults aged 18-64 years without immunocompromising conditions. Estimated VE decreased with inclusion of SARS-CoV-2-positive controls., Conclusions: During a season where influenza A(H3N2) was antigenically different from the vaccine virus, vaccination was associated with a reduced risk of influenza hospitalization in younger immunocompetent adults. However, vaccination did not provide protection in adults ≥65 years of age. Improvements in vaccines, antivirals, and prevention strategies are warranted., Competing Interests: Potential conflicts of interest. M. G. reports grants from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), CDC-Abt Associates, CDC-Westat, and Janssen, and a leadership position as co-chair of the Infection Diseases and Immunizations Committee. J. S. S. reports a grant from the National Institutes of Health (NIH). A. D. reports grants from the NIH-PETAL Network, ACTIV-3b, ACTIV-4d, and GRAIL and consulting fees from Alung Technologies. M. E. P. reports a grant from the US Department of Defense and support for speaking at the 2022 North American Congress of Clinical Toxicology. I. D. P. reports grants from NIH, Janssen, Regeneron, and Asahi Kasei Pharma. D. N. H. reports grants from NIH (ACTIV-4d and Host Tissue-Nectar Trial). M. N. G. reports a grant from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI); consulting fees for scientific advisory from Endpoint; support for attending an ATS Board of Executives Meeting; and participation in a Regeneron Data Safety and Monitoring Board (DSMB) for a monoclonal antibody trial. M. C. E. reports grants from NIH, Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, and payment from Abbott Labs for attending/lecture at the ASPEN Annual Meeting and on an Abbott webinar on nutrition in patients with COVID019. A. A. G. reports grants from NIH, Department of Defense, AbbVie, and Faron Pharmaceuticals. N. M. M. reports grants from the US CDC. E. T. M. reports grants from NIH and Merck and payment for lectures from the Michigan Infectious Diseases Society. K. W. G. reports grants from the Department of Defense and NIH support for ACTIV-4HT and Department of Defence support for Military Health System Research Symposium 2022 travel. J. H. K. is supported by grant 1K23AI137321-01A1 from the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases. N. H. reports grants from Sanofi and Quidel. A. S. L. reports grants from the US CDC, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, and Burroughs Wellcome Fund; consulting fees from Sanofi and Roche; and membership on the American Society of Virology governing council (unpaid). C. J. L. reports grants from NIH, Department of Defense, CDC, bioMerieux, Entegrion Inc, Endpoint Health, Astra Zeneca, and AbbVie; patents for risk stratification in sepsis and septic shock issued to the Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center; participation on DSMBs for clinical trials for Study Principal Investigators unrelated to the current work; and stock options in Bioscape Digital unrelated to the current work. C. G. G. reports grants from NIH, CDC, the Food and Drug Administration, the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, Sanofi, and Syneos Health and consulting fees from Pfizer, Merck, and Sanofi. All other authors report no potential conflicts. All authors have submitted the ICMJE Form for Disclosure of Potential Conflicts of Interest. Conflicts that the editors consider relevant to the content of the manuscript have been disclosed., (Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of Infectious Diseases Society of America 2022.)

Background: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) messenger RNA (mRNA) vaccines were authorized in the United States in December 2020. Although vaccine effectiveness (VE) against mild infection declines markedly after several months, limited understanding exists on the long-term durability of protection against COVID-19-associated hospitalization., Methods: Case-control analysis of adults (≥18 years) hospitalized at 21 hospitals in 18 states 11 March-15 December 2021, including COVID-19 case patients and reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction-negative controls. We included adults who were unvaccinated or vaccinated with 2 doses of a mRNA vaccine before the date of illness onset. VE over time was assessed using logistic regression comparing odds of vaccination in cases versus controls, adjusting for confounders. Models included dichotomous time (<180 vs ≥180 days since dose 2) and continuous time modeled using restricted cubic splines., Results: A total of 10 078 patients were included, 4906 cases (23% vaccinated) and 5172 controls (62% vaccinated). Median age was 60 years (interquartile range, 46-70), 56% were non-Hispanic White, and 81% had ≥1 medical condition. Among immunocompetent adults, VE <180 days was 90% (95% confidence interval [CI], 88-91) versus 82% (95% CI, 79-85) at ≥180 days (P < .001). VE declined for Pfizer-BioNTech (88% to 79%, P < .001) and Moderna (93% to 87%, P < .001) products, for younger adults (18-64 years) (91% to 87%, P = .005), and for adults ≥65 years of age (87% to 78%, P < .001). In models using restricted cubic splines, similar changes were observed., Conclusions: In a period largely predating Omicron variant circulation, effectiveness of 2 mRNA doses against COVID-19-associated hospitalization was largely sustained through 9 months., Competing Interests: Potential conflicts of interest. All authors have completed and submitted the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors form for disclosure of potential conflicts of interest. W. H. S. reports grant funding from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) for this work, grants and consultant fees from Merck (for research on the surveillance of pneumococcal infections) and Gilead Sciences (for research on the surveillance of hepatitis C virus infections) outside this work. M. G. reports grant support from CDC (Ambulatory US Flu/COVID VE Network and Adult Inpatient Flu/COVID VE Network, HAIVEN), CDC-Abt Associates (Flu Vax Immunogenitiy RCT and RECVOERPROTECT COVID/Flu VE studies), CDC-Westat (VISION COVID Study), and Janssen (Johnson & Johnson) (RSV Severity App Birth Cohort Study). A. A. G. reports grant support from CDC, National Institute of Health (NIH), Department of Defense (DoD), AbbVie, and Faron Pharmaceuticals. J. D. C. reports grants from the CDC, NIH (K23HL153584), and Department of Defense. N. M. reports grants from the CDC (funded two other multicenter COVID-related projects separate from this work through payments to my institution). T. M. reports a grant from CDC and fees from the Society of Hospital Medicine for a talk about managing patients with congestive heart failure. K. G. reports grants from the CDC and the received grant funding for participation in executive committee of COVID-19 therapeutics from the NIH (ACTIV-4HT NECTAR Trial). D. C. F. reports grant support from CDC, consultant fees from Cytovale, and membership on a Medpace Data Safety Monitoring Board (DSMB). D. N. H. reports contracts from CDC, National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI; funding for participation in the ACTIV4d - Host Tissue Trial), and Incyte Corporation (funding to enroll in RUCOVID-DEVENT) and membership on the SAFE EVICT Trial of VIT C in COVID-19 as DSMB chair. M. C. E. reports talks on nutrition in COVID pneumonia at the American Society of Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition (ASPEN) conference sponsored by Abbott Labs. M. N. G. reports grant support from CDC, NHLBI, NIH, and Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ), travel support for American Thoracic Society board meeting, and membership on the Regeneron DSMB for monoclonal antibodies in COVID-19. N. J. reports grants from CDC, NIH/NHLBI/NINDS, and University of Washington Royalty Research Fund, and payment for expert testimony from the Washington Department of Health. I. D. P. reports grants from CDC, NIH, Intermountain Research & Medical Foundation, and Janssen Pharmaceuticals, and institutional fees from Asahi Kasei Pharma and from Regeneron Pharmaceuticals. S. M. B. reports grants from CDC, NIH (for trials and other research activities related to COVID), and DoD (to study COVID); fees from Hamilton ventilators for chairing a DSMB; and personal fees from New York University for service on a DSMB. E. T. M. reports a grant from Merck outside the submitted work. A. M. reports grant support from CDC, NIH, NIAID, and membership on a DSMB for the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). A. K. reports grants from CDC, Gilead Sciences, Ely Lily, United Therapeutics, BOA-Medical, and 4D Medical and membership on the Guidelines Committee for Chest. C. L. H. reports grants from CDC, NIH, and the American Lung Association. A. D. reports a grant from the CDC and consulting fees from ALung Technologies (Steering Committee). J. W. reports grants from the CDC and NIH (ARREST Pneumonia Trial UH3HL141722, ACTIV3a and 3b trials, and ACTIV4a trial), and membership on the American Board of Internal Medicine Critical Care Medicine exam committee. S. Y. C. reports grants from CDC and Regeneron (for 6R88-COV-2040 trial) and consulting fees from PureTech Health (for COVID study) and Kiniska (for possible ARDS study). J. H. K. reports grant support from CDC and NIH (1K23 AI137321-01A1). A. S. L. reports grants from the CDC, NIH, and Burroughs Wellcome Fund, consultant fees for antiviral drugs from Sanofi and fees from Roche for membership on a baloxavir trial steering committee. N. H. reports grants from CDC, NIH, Sanofi, and Quidel and honoraria for speaking at a continuing medical education event at American Academy of Pediatrics. C. G. G. reports consultant fees from Pfizer, Merck, and Sanofi and grants from Syneos Health, CDC, NIH, FDA, AHRQ, and Sanofi. T. R. reports grants from CDC and Abbvie Inc, consultant fees from Cytovale, Inc. and Cumberland Pharmaceuticals Inc., membership on a Sanofi, Inc. DSMB, a voluntary role as the Immediate Past President of ASPEN and stock in Cumberland Pharmaceuticals, Inc. I. J. reports grants/contracts from the CDC, NIH, Quidel, and Sanofi. C. J. L. reports grants/contracts from CDC, NIH, DoD, bioMerieux, Endpoint Health, Entegrion, Inc., and AbbVie; a patent issued to Cincinnati Children’s Hospital Medical Center for risk stratification in sepsis and septic shock, membership on a Study Principal Investigators DSMB for clinical trials unrelated to the current work, Executive Committee; Immediate Past President, Member, Board of Directors, Association for Clinical and Translational Science, and stock options in Bioscape Digita unrelated to the current work. W. B. S. reports a grant from the CDC and NIH (5K12HL133117-05). All other authors report no potential conflicts. All authors have submitted the ICMJE Form for Disclosure of Potential Conflicts of Interest. Conflicts that the editors consider relevant to the content of the manuscript have been disclosed., (Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Infectious Diseases Society of America 2022.)

The 2022-23 influenza season shows an early rise in pediatric influenza-associated hospitalizations (1). SARS-CoV-2 viruses also continue to circulate (2). The current influenza season is the first with substantial co-circulation of influenza viruses and SARS-CoV-2 (3). Although both seasonal influenza viruses and SARS-CoV-2 can contribute to substantial pediatric morbidity (3-5), whether coinfection increases disease severity compared with that associated with infection with one virus alone is unknown. This report describes characteristics and prevalence of laboratory-confirmed influenza virus and SARS-CoV-2 coinfections among patients aged <18 years who had been hospitalized or died with influenza as reported to three CDC surveillance platforms during the 2021-22 influenza season. Data from two Respiratory Virus Hospitalizations Surveillance Network (RESP-NET) platforms (October 1, 2021-April 30, 2022), § and notifiable pediatric deaths associated ¶ with influenza virus and SARS-CoV-2 coinfection (October 3, 2021-October 1, 2022)** were analyzed. SARS-CoV-2 coinfections occurred in 6% (32 of 575) of pediatric influenza-associated hospitalizations and in 16% (seven of 44) of pediatric influenza-associated deaths. Compared with patients without coinfection, a higher proportion of those hospitalized with coinfection received invasive mechanical ventilation (4% versus 13%; p = 0.03) and bilevel positive airway pressure or continuous positive airway pressure (BiPAP/CPAP) (6% versus 16%; p = 0.05). Among seven coinfected patients who died, none had completed influenza vaccination, and only one received influenza antivirals. †† To help prevent severe outcomes, clinicians should follow recommended respiratory virus testing algorithms to guide treatment decisions and consider early antiviral treatment initiation for pediatric patients with suspected or confirmed influenza, including those with SARS-CoV-2 coinfection who are hospitalized or at increased risk for severe illness. The public and parents should adopt prevention strategies including considering wearing well-fitted, high-quality masks when respiratory virus circulation is high and staying up-to-date with recommended influenza and COVID-19 vaccinations for persons aged ≥6 months., Competing Interests: All authors have completed and submitted the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors form for disclosure of potential conflicts of interest. Stacy Huang reports personal fees from Goldbelt Professional Services. Dawud Ujamaa reports personal fees from General Dynamics Information Technology. Evan J. Anderson reports grants from Pfizer, Merck, PaxVax, Micron, Sanofi-Pasteur, Janssen, MedImmune, and GSK outside the submitted work; personal fees from Sanofi-Pasteur, Pfizer, Medscape, Kentucky Bioprocessing, Inc, Janssen, GSK, WCG and ACI Clinical, and Moderna outside the submitted work; and his institution has also received funding from the National Institutes of Health to conduct clinical trials of COVID-19 vaccines. Libby Reeg reports grants from Michigan Department of Health and Human Services. Lauren Leegwater reports grants from the Michigan Department of Health and Human Services. Eli Shiltz reports grants from the Council of State and Territorial Epidemiologists (CSTE) outside the submitted work. Nancy Moran reports grants from CSTE, outside the submitted work. No other potential conflicts of interest were disclosed.

Background: Test-negative design (TND) studies have produced validated estimates of vaccine effectiveness (VE) for influenza vaccine studies. However, syndrome-negative controls have been proposed for differentiating bias and true estimates in VE evaluations for COVID-19. To understand the use of alternative control groups, we compared characteristics and VE estimates of syndrome-negative and test-negative VE controls., Methods: Adults hospitalized at 21 medical centers in 18 states March 11-August 31, 2021 were eligible for analysis. Case patients had symptomatic acute respiratory infection (ARI) and tested positive for SARS-CoV-2. Control groups were test-negative patients with ARI but negative SARS-CoV-2 testing, and syndrome-negative controls were without ARI and negative SARS-CoV-2 testing. Chi square and Wilcoxon rank sum tests were used to detect differences in baseline characteristics. VE against COVID-19 hospitalization was calculated using logistic regression comparing adjusted odds of prior mRNA vaccination between cases hospitalized with COVID-19 and each control group., Results: 5811 adults (2726 cases, 1696 test-negative controls, and 1389 syndrome-negative controls) were included. Control groups differed across characteristics including age, race/ethnicity, employment, previous hospitalizations, medical conditions, and immunosuppression. However, control-group-specific VE estimates were very similar. Among immunocompetent patients aged 18-64 years, VE was 93 % (95 % CI: 90-94) using syndrome-negative controls and 91 % (95 % CI: 88-93) using test-negative controls., Conclusions: Despite demographic and clinical differences between control groups, the use of either control group produced similar VE estimates across age groups and immunosuppression status. These findings support the use of test-negative controls and increase confidence in COVID-19 VE estimates produced by test-negative design studies., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interests: All authors have completed and submitted the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) disclosure form. Funding for this work was provided to all participating sites by the United States Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Samuel Brown reports grants from National Institutes of Health (NIH) and Department of Defense (DoD), participation as the DSMB chair for Hamilton Ventilators, and participation as a member of the DSMB for New York University COVID clinical trials. Jonathan Casey reports funding from NIH and DoD. Steven Chang reports consulting fees from La Jolla Pharmaceuticals, PureTech Health, and Kiniska Pharmaceuticals, payment/honoraria from La Jolla Pharmaceuticals, and participation on a DSMB for an investigator-initiated study conducted at UCLA. James Chappell reports grants and other support from NIH. Abhijit Duggal reports consulting fees from ALung technologies. Matthew Exline reports payment/honorariua from Abbott Lab for sponsored talks. D. Clark Files reports consulting fees from Cytovale and participation on a DSMB for Medpace. Anne Frosch reports grants from NIH. Manjusha Gaglani reports grants from Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), CDC-Abt Associates, CDC-Westat, and Janssen, and a leadership role as co-chair of the Infectious Disease and Immunization Committee of the Texas Pediatric Society, Texas Chapter of American Academy of Pediatrics. Kevin Gibbs reports funding from NIH/ National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI) for the ACTIV-4HT NECTAR trial. Nicholas Mohr reports grants from the CDC (funded 2 other multicenter COVID-related projects separate from this work through payments to author’s institution). Adit Ginde reports grants from NIH, DoD, AbbVie, and Faron Pharmaceuticals. Michelle Gong reports grants from NIH/NHLBI and Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ), consulting fees from Endpoint, a leadership role on the American Thoracic Society (ATS) executive committee and board as well as support from ATS for meeting travel expenses, and participation on a DSMB for Regeneron. Carlos Grijalva reports grants from NIH, CDC, Food and Drug Administration (FDA), AHRQ, Sanofi, and Syneos Health and consulting fees from Pfizer, Merck, and Sanofi. David Hager reports grants from NIH/NHLBI for the ACTIV-4HT NECTAR trial and Incyte Corporation and participation as a DSMB chair for the SAFE EVICT Trial of vitamin C in COVID-19. Jennifer Wilson reports grants from the CDC and NIH (ARREST Pneumonia Trial UH3HL141722, ACTIV3a and 3b trials, and ACTIV4a trial), and membership on the American Board of Internal Medicine Critical Care Medicine exam committee. Natasha Halasa reports grants from NIH, Quidel, and Sanofi and honoraria for speaking at the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) conference. Nicholas Johnson reports grants from NIH/NHLBI/NINDS and the University of Washington Royalty Research Fund and payment for expert testimony for the Washington Department of Health. Akram Khan reports grants from United Therapeutics, Gilead Sciences, and 4D Medical and a leadership role on the guidelines committee for Chest. Jennie Kwon reports grants from NIH/NIAID. Adam Lauring reports grants from CDC, NIH/NIAID, and Burroughs Wellcome Fund and consulting fees from Sanofi and Roche. Christopher Lindsell reports grants from NIH, DoD, CDC, bioMerieux, Entegrion Inc., Endpoint Health, and AbbVie, patents for risk stratification in sepsis and septic shock, participation on DSMBs for clinical trials unrelated to the current work, a leadership role on the executive committee for the Board of Directors of the Association for Clinical and Translational Science, and stock options in Bioscape Digita. Emily Martin reports grants from Merck, CDC, and NIH and payment/honoraria from the Michigan Infectious Disease Society. Tresa McNeal reports payment/honoraria from the Society of Hospital Medicine. Ithan Peltan reports grants from NIH, Janssen, Regeneron, and Asahi Kasei Pharma. Todd Rice reports grants from AbbVie Inc., consulting fees from Cumberland Pharmaceuticals, Inc. and Cytovale, Inc., membership on a DSMB for Sanofi, Inc., a leadership role as immediate past president of the American Society of Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition, and stock options in Cumberland Pharmaceuticals, Inc. Wesley Self reports receiving the primary funding for this project from the United States Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and research funding from Merck and Gilead Sciences. William Stubblefield reports grants from the NIH/NHLBI., (Published by Elsevier Ltd.)

The SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant (B.1.1.529 or BA.1) became predominant in the United States by late December 2021 (1). BA.1 has since been replaced by emerging lineages BA.2 (including BA.2.12.1) in March 2022, followed by BA.4 and BA.5, which have accounted for a majority of SARS-CoV-2 infections since late June 2022 (1). Data on the effectiveness of monovalent mRNA COVID-19 vaccines against BA.4/BA.5-associated hospitalizations are limited, and their interpretation is complicated by waning of vaccine-induced immunity (2-5). Further, infections with earlier Omicron lineages, including BA.1 and BA.2, reduce vaccine effectiveness (VE) estimates because certain persons in the referent unvaccinated group have protection from infection-induced immunity. The IVY Network † assessed effectiveness of 2, 3, and 4 doses of monovalent mRNA vaccines compared with no vaccination against COVID-19-associated hospitalization among immunocompetent adults aged ≥18 years during December 26, 2021-August 31, 2022. During the BA.1/BA.2 period, VE 14-150 days after a second dose was 63% and decreased to 34% after 150 days. Similarly, VE 7-120 days after a third dose was 79% and decreased to 41% after 120 days. VE 7-120 days after a fourth dose was 61%. During the BA.4/BA.5 period, similar trends were observed, although CIs for VE estimates between categories of time since the last dose overlapped. VE 14-150 days and >150 days after a second dose was 83% and 37%, respectively. VE 7-120 days and >120 days after a third dose was 60%and 29%, respectively. VE 7-120 days after the fourth dose was 61%. Protection against COVID-19-associated hospitalization waned even after a third dose. The newly authorized bivalent COVID-19 vaccines include mRNA from the ancestral SARS-CoV-2 strain and from shared mRNA components between BA.4 and BA.5 lineages and are expected to be more immunogenic against BA.4/BA.5 than monovalent mRNA COVID-19 vaccines (6-8). All eligible adults aged ≥18 years § should receive a booster dose, which currently consists of a bivalent mRNA vaccine, to maximize protection against BA.4/BA.5 and prevent COVID-19-associated hospitalization., Competing Interests: All authors have completed and submitted the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors form for disclosure of potential conflicts of interest. Samuel M. Brown reports personal fees from Hamilton Ventilators outside the submitted work. Jonathan D. Casey reports grants from the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and U.S. Department of Defense (DoD), outside the submitted work. Steven Y. Chang reports consulting for PureTech Health in 2020 and Kiniksa Pharmaceuticals and membership on the safety monitoring board (DSMB) for an investigator-initiated study at UCLA. James D. Chappell reports grants from NIH and DoD during the conduct of the study. David J. Douin reports grants received from NIH and National Institute of General Medical Sciences, outside the submitted work. Abhijit Duggal reports grants from NIH and participation on a steering committee for ALung technologies, outside the submitted work. Matthew C. Exline reports grants from the NIH and Regeneron, as well as support from Abbott Labs for sponsored talks, outside the submitted work. D. Clark Files reports personal consultant fees from Cytovale and membership on DSMB from Medpace, outside the submitted work. Anne P. Frosch reports grants from NIH, outside the submitted work. Manjusha Gaglani reports grants from Abt Associates, Westat, Janssen, and participation as co-chair on the Infection Diseases and Immunizations Committee for the Texas Pediatric Society, outside the submitted work. Kevin W. Gibbs reports grants from NIH and DoD, and DoD funds for Military Health System Research Symposium travel in 2022, outside the submitted work. Adit A. Ginde reports grants from NIH, DoD, AbbVie, and Faron Pharmaceuticals, outside the submitted work. Michelle N. Gong reports grants from NIH, speaking at medicine grand rounds at New York Medical College, travel support for the American Thoracic Society executive meeting, DSMB membership fees from Regeneron, and participation on the scientific advisory panel for Endpoint, outside the submitted work. Carlos G. Grijalva reports consultancy fees from Pfizer, Merck, and Sanofi-Pasteur; grants from Campbell Alliance/Syneos Health, NIH, the Food and Drug Administration, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, and Sanofi, outside the submitted work. David N. Hager grants from NIH, outside the submitted work. Natasha Halasa reports grants and nonfinancial support from Sanofi, and grants from Quidel outside the submitted work. Nicholas J. Johnson reports grants from the NIH, DoD, University of Washington, and Medic One Foundation, outside the submitted work. Akram Khan reports grants from United Therapeutics, Johnson & Johnson, Ely Lilly, 4D Medical, Dompe Pharmaceuticals, and GlaxoSmithKline, outside the submitted work. Jennie H. Kwon reports grants from National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), outside the submitted work. Adam S. Lauring reports personal fees from Sanofi and Roche and grants from NIAID, Burroughs Wellcome Fund, Flu Lab, outside the submitted work. Emily T. Martin reports grants from Merck, outside the submitted work. Tresa McNeal reports participation as a webinar invited panelist and a Practice Management Committee member for Society of Hospital Medicine, outside the submitted work. Ithan D. Peltan reports grants from NIH, Janssen Pharmaceuticals and institutional support from Asahi Kasei Pharma and Regeneron, outside the submitted work. Todd W. Rice reports grants from Abbvie Inc, and personal fees from Cumberland Pharmaceuticals, Inc, Cytovale, Inc., and Sanofi, Inc., outside the submitted work. William B. Stubblefield reports grants from NIH, outside the submitted work. Jennifer G. Wilson reports grants from NIH, and personal funds from the American College of Emergency Physicians and American Board of Internal Medicine, outside the submitted work. No other potential conflicts of interest were disclosed.

Background . Adults in the United States (US) began receiving the adenovirus vector coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine, Ad26.COV2.S (Johnson & Johnson [Janssen]), in February 2021. We evaluated Ad26.COV2.S vaccine effectiveness (VE) against COVID-19 hospitalization and high disease severity during the first 10 months of its use. Methods . In a multicenter case-control analysis of US adults (≥18 years) hospitalized 11 March to 15 December 2021, we estimated VE against susceptibility to COVID-19 hospitalization (VEs), comparing odds of prior vaccination with a single dose Ad26.COV2.S vaccine between hospitalized cases with COVID-19 and controls without COVID-19. Among hospitalized patients with COVID-19, we estimated VE against disease progression (VEp) to death or invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV), comparing odds of prior vaccination between patients with and without progression. Results . After excluding patients receiving mRNA vaccines, among 3979 COVID-19 case-patients (5% vaccinated with Ad26.COV2.S) and 2229 controls (13% vaccinated with Ad26.COV2.S), VEs of Ad26.COV2.S against COVID-19 hospitalization was 70% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 63-75%) overall, including 55% (29-72%) among immunocompromised patients, and 72% (64-77%) among immunocompetent patients, for whom VEs was similar at 14-90 days (73% [59-82%]), 91-180 days (71% [60-80%]), and 181-274 days (70% [54-81%]) postvaccination. Among hospitalized COVID-19 case-patients, VEp was 46% (18-65%) among immunocompetent patients. Conclusions . The Ad26.COV2.S COVID-19 vaccine reduced the risk of COVID-19 hospitalization by 72% among immunocompetent adults without waning through 6 months postvaccination. After hospitalization for COVID-19, vaccinated immunocompetent patients were less likely to require IMV or die compared to unvaccinated immunocompetent patients., Competing Interests: Potential conflicts of interest. M. G.: CDC: Baylor Scott & White Health (BSWH) US Flu/COVID VE Network, HAIVEN, Synergy studies; CDC-Abt: BSWH FluVax Trial and RECOVER-PROTECT Cohort Studies; CDC-Westat: BSWH VISION COVID-Flu VE Study; Janssen: BSWH Respiratory Syncytial Virus (RSV) Severity App Birth Cohort Study; Co-Chair of Infectious Diseases and Immunization Committee—Texas Pediatric Society—Texas Chapter of American Academy of Pediatrics. A. G.: National Institutes of Health (NIH), Department of Defense; Faron Pharmaceuticals; AbbVie; D Douin: NIH/National Institute of General Medical Sciences (NIGMS) Institutional Training Grant. J. C.: NIH and Department of Defense grants unrelated to this work. T. A. M.: Panelist for Society of Hospital Medicine Updates in Heart Failure; Board member for Scott & White Clinic Physicians Board of Directors. K. G.: NECTAR Executive Committee member ACTIV4-HT; D. C. F.: Cytovale consulting fees; Medpace Data Safety Monitoring Board. D. N. H.: National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NIHLBI) participant in the ACTIV4d-Host Tissue Trial; Chair DSMD—SAFE EVICT Trial of VIT C in COVID-19. M. N. G.: Grants from NHLBI and Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ); Consulting fees for Endpoint for scientific advisory panel; Honoraria—Medicine Grand Rounds from Westchester Medical Center; Support for attending ATS Board of Directors meeting; Data and Safety Monitoring Board (DSMB) for Regeneron study and REPLENISH trial. N. J. J.: IH grants paid to University of Washington Royalty Research Fund; Department of Defense grants; Medic One Foundation grants; WA Department of Health expert testimony payment; DSMB for Opticyte, Inc.; Chair, ACEP Critical Care Section. I. P.: NIH grants; Regeneron Pharmaceuticals grant; Intermountain Research & Medical Foundation grant; Asahi Kasei Pharma grant; Janssen Pharmaceuticals grant. S. B.: NIH grants and Department of Defense grants; DSMB for Hamilton ventilators and NYU. E. T. M.: Merck grant. A. S. M.: NIH grant. A. K.: NIH grants; United Therapeutics grants; Eli Lily grants; Johnson & Johnson—BOA Medical—4DMedical research grants; rA. D.: Center PI for PETAL network through NHLBI grant; on steering committee for A Lung technologies. J. G. W.: NIH/NHLBI funding for ACTIV-3 and ACTIV-4 trials; American Board of Internal Medicine—member of Critical Care Exam Committee. S. Y. C.: Consulting fees for PureTech Health and Kiniska Pharmaceuticals; Honoraria for La Jolla. H. M. B.: CDC grant for HCP COVID vaccine effectiveness. J. H. K.: NIAID grant. M. C. E.: Abbott Labs honoraria for speaking on ASPEN on nutrition in critical illness from COVID. A. L.: grants from CDC, NIH, and Burroughs Wellcome Fund; consulting fees from Sanofi on antiviral drugs and for Roche on baloxavir trial steering committee. N. H.: grants from NIH, Quidel, and Sanofi; Honoraria for speaking at CME event at AAP. C. G. G.: grants from Campbell Alliance/Syneos Health, Sanofi, CDC, AHRQ, NIH, and FDA; consulting fees from Merck, Pfizer, and Sanofi-Pasteur. T. W. R.: grants from NIH, Department of Defense and AbbVie; consulting fees for Cumberland Pharmaceuticals, Inc. and Cytovale, Inc.; DSMB for Sanofi, Inc.; Immediate Past President—ASPEN; Stock in Cumberland Pharmaceuticals, Inc. for consulting work. W. B. S.: NIH training grants. C. J. L.: grants from NIH, Department of Defense; CDC; bioMerieux; Entegrion, Inc.; Endpoint Health; AbbVie; Patents for risk stratification in sepsis and septic shock issued to Cincinnati Children’s Hospital Medical Center; DSMBs for clinical trials for Study Principal Investigators; Association for Clinical and Translational Science (Executive Committee, Immediate Past President, and Board of Directors); stock options in Bioscape Digita. All other authors report no potential conflicts. All authors have submitted the ICMJE Form for Disclosure of Potential Conflicts of Interest. Conflicts that the editors consider relevant to the content of the manuscript have been disclosed., (Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Infectious Diseases Society of America 2022.)

Background: Medication reconciliation (MR) can detect medication history discrepancies at interfaces-in-care and help avoid downstream adverse drug events. However, organisations have struggled to implement high-quality MR programmes. The literature has identified systems barriers, including technology capabilities and data interoperability. However, organisational culture as a root cause has been underexplored., Objectives: Our objectives were to develop an implementation readiness questionnaire and measure staff attitudes towards MR across a healthcare enterprise., Methods: We developed and distributed a questionnaire to 170 Veterans' Health Affairs (VHA) sites using Research Electronic Data Capture (REDCap) software. The questionnaire contained 21 Likert-scale items that measured three constructs, such as: (1) the extent that clinicians valued MR; (2) perceptions of workflow compatibility and (3) perceptions concerning organisational climate of implementation., Results: 8704 clinicians and staff responded to our questionnaire (142 of 170 VHA facilities). Most staff believed reconciling medications can improve medication safety (approximately 90% agreed it was 'important'). However, most (approximately 90%) also expressed concerns about changes to their workflow. One-third of respondents prioritised other duties over MR and reported barriers associated with implementation climate. Only 47% of respondents agreed they had enough resources to address discrepancies when identified., Interpretation: Our findings indicate that an MR readiness assessment can forecast challenges and inform development of a context-sensitive implementation bundle. Clinicians surveyed struggled with resources, technology challenges and implementation climate. A strong campaign should include clear leadership messaging, credible champions and resources to overcome technical challenges., Conclusions: This manuscript provides a method to conduct a readiness assessment and highlights the importance of organisational culture in an MR campaign. The data can help assess site or network readiness for an MR change management programme., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Introduction: Opioid overdoses are a major public health emergency in the United States. Despite effective treatments that can save lives, access to and utilization of such treatments are limited. Community context plays an important role in addressing treatment barriers and increasing access. The HEALing Communities Study (HCS) is a multisite community-level cluster-randomized trial that will study implementation and outcomes of a community coalition-based intervention (Communities that HEAL [CTH]) that implements evidence-based practices (EBPs) to reduce opioid overdose deaths in four states. To examine contextual factors critical to understanding implementation, we assessed the perspectives of community members about their communities, current substance use-related services, and other important issues that could impact intervention implementation., Methods: Researchers conducted 382 semi-structured qualitative interviews in the HCS communities. Interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed; researchers subsequently analyzed data using directed content analysis based on the constructs of the RE-AIM/PRISM implementation science framework to identify key themes within the external community context., Results: Despite the diversity in states and communities, four similar themes related to the external community context emerged across communities: These themes included the importance of understanding: 1) community risk perceptions, 2) levels of stigma, 3) the health services environment and the availability of substance use services, and 4) funding for substance use services., Conclusion: Understanding and addressing the external community context in which the CTH intervention and EBPs are implemented are crucial for successful health services-related and community engaged interventions. While implementing EBPs is a challenging undertaking, doing so will help us to understand if and how a community-based intervention can successfully reduce opioid overdose deaths and influence both community beliefs and the community treatment landscape., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Ageing is associated with decreased physical activity, obesity and subsequently an increased risk of developing type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2dm). Master athletes (MA) have initiated exercise or sport later in life or pursued a physically active lifestyle for an extended period. Subsequently, MAs have been proposed as a model of successful ageing as this active lifestyle is associated with health benefits including decreased health risk of chronic diseases and a reduction in premature mortality. Given long-term physical activity/exercise has previously been shown to be protective against hyperglycemia, a risk factor for T2dm, it is plausible that MA may have protective benefit against developing hyperglycemia. Therefore, the aim of this study was to investigate the prevalence of hyperglycemia via fasting plasma glucose (FPG) in MAs competing at the World Masters Games (WMG)., Methods: This cross-sectional, observational survey utilized an online survey using open-source web-based software was used to investigate MAs physiological and medical-related parameters. Over 28,000 MAs competed in the WMG, of which 8,072 MAs completed the survey. Of these MAs, a total of 486 (males 277, females 209; range 27 to 91 years, mean age 55.1 ± 10.2 years) attained recent pathology results which included FPG which was subsequently analyzed for this study. FPG and other outcome variables were compared between genders and to the Australian and United States general population., Results: Mean FPG for MAs was 5.03 mmol (±1.2, 95% CI [4.9-5.1] mmol) with majority (75.5%) of MAs reporting a normal (<5.5 mmol) FPG, followed by pre-diabetes (20.2%, >5.51 to <5.99 mmol) and abnormal (4.3%, >7.0 mmol). There was no significant difference ( P = 0.333) in FPG between genders however, males had a slightly higher (+2.1%) FPG as compared to females (5.08 ± 1.2 mmol (95% CI [4.9-5.22] mmol) versus 4.98 ± 1.1 mmol (95% CI 4.8-5.1 mmol)). The majority of males (71.8%) and females (80.3%) were classified with a normal FPG. With regard to an abnormal FPG level, only 4.0% of males and 4.9% of females were classified abnormal which was suggestive of undiagnosed T2dm. With regard to age by decade, there was no significant difference ( P = 0.06-1.00) between age groups and no relationship between the MAs' age and FPG ( r  = .054, P = 0.24). As a group, MAs had a significantly lower FPG as compared to the Australian (-3.2%, P = 0.005) and United States general populations (-13.9%, P < 0.001)., Conclusions: Most, however not all, MAs were found to have normal glycaemia, with only a small percentage indicating a risk of developing T2dm (i.e., impaired fasting glucose) and a smaller percentage identified with an abnormal FPG, suggestive of T2dm. These findings suggest MAs appear to be at low metabolic risk for developing T2dm based upon FPG and the physical activity/exercise they complete as MAs may indeed be protective against hyperglycemia whilst maintaining an active lifestyle., Competing Interests: Mike Climstein is an Academic Editor for PeerJ., (©2022 Climstein et al.)

Purpose: To determine whether a brief leadership curriculum including high-fidelity simulation can improve leadership skills among resident physicians., Method: This was a double-blind, randomized controlled trial among obstetrics-gynecology and emergency medicine (EM) residents across 5 academic medical centers from different geographic areas of the United States, 2015-2017. Participants were assigned to 1 of 3 study arms: the Leadership Education Advanced During Simulation (LEADS) curriculum, a shortened Team Strategies and Tools to Enhance Performance and Patient Safety (TeamSTEPPS) curriculum, or as active controls (no leadership curriculum). Active controls were recruited from a separate site and not randomized to limit any unintentional introduction of materials from leadership curricula. The LEADS curriculum was developed in partnership with the Council on Resident Education in Obstetrics and Gynecology and Council of Residency Directors in Emergency Medicine as a novel way to provide a leadership toolkit. Both LEADS and the abbreviated TeamSTEPPS were designed as six 10-minute interactive web-based modules.The primary outcome of interest was the leadership performance score from the validated Clinical Teamwork Scale instrument measured during standardized high-fidelity simulation scenarios. Secondary outcomes were 9 key components of leadership from the detailed leadership evaluation measured on 5-point Likert scales. Both outcomes were rated by a blinded clinical video reviewer., Results: One hundred ten obstetrics-gynecology and EM residents participated in this 2-year trial. Participants in both LEADS and TeamSTEPPS had statistically significant improvement in leadership scores from "average" to "good" ranges both immediately and at the 6-month follow-up, while controls remained unchanged in the "average" category throughout the study. There were no differences between LEADS and TeamSTEPPS curricula with respect to the primary outcome., Conclusions: Residents who participated in a brief structured leadership training intervention had improved leadership skills that were maintained at 6-month follow-up., (Copyright © 2021 by the Association of American Medical Colleges.)

COVID-19 mRNA vaccines (BNT162b2 [Pfizer-BioNTech] and mRNA-1273 [Moderna]) are effective at preventing COVID-19-associated hospitalization (1-3). However, how well mRNA vaccines protect against the most severe outcomes of these hospitalizations, including invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) or death is uncertain. Using a case-control design, mRNA vaccine effectiveness (VE) against COVID-19-associated IMV and in-hospital death was evaluated among adults aged ≥18 years hospitalized at 21 U.S. medical centers during March 11, 2021-January 24, 2022. During this period, the most commonly circulating variants of SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19, were B.1.1.7 (Alpha), B.1.617.2 (Delta), and B.1.1.529 (Omicron). Previous vaccination (2 or 3 versus 0 vaccine doses before illness onset) in prospectively enrolled COVID-19 case-patients who received IMV or died within 28 days of hospitalization was compared with that among hospitalized control patients without COVID-19. Among 1,440 COVID-19 case-patients who received IMV or died, 307 (21%) had received 2 or 3 vaccine doses before illness onset. Among 6,104 control-patients, 4,020 (66%) had received 2 or 3 vaccine doses. Among the 1,440 case-patients who received IMV or died, those who were vaccinated were older (median age = 69 years), more likely to be immunocompromised* (40%), and had more chronic medical conditions compared with unvaccinated case-patients (median age = 55 years; immunocompromised = 10%; p<0.001 for both). VE against IMV or in-hospital death was 90% (95% CI = 88%-91%) overall, including 88% (95% CI = 86%-90%) for 2 doses and 94% (95% CI = 91%-96%) for 3 doses, and 94% (95% CI = 88%-97%) for 3 doses during the Omicron-predominant period. COVID-19 mRNA vaccines are highly effective in preventing COVID-19-associated death and respiratory failure treated with IMV. CDC recommends that all persons eligible for vaccination get vaccinated and stay up to date with COVID-19 vaccination (4)., Competing Interests: All authors have completed and submitted the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors form for disclosure of potential conflicts of interest. Samuel M. Brown reports personal fees from Hamilton ventilators, and grants from the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and the U.S. Department of Defense (DoD). Jonathan D. Casey reports grants from the NIH and DoD. Steven Y. Chang was a speaker for La Jolla Pharmaceuticals in 2018, consulted for PureTech Health in 2020, and consulted for Kiniska Pharmaceuticals in December 2021. David J. Douin reports a grant from NIH/National Institute of General Medical Sciences. Abhijit Duggal reports grants from NIH and participation on a Steering Committee for ALung Technologies. Matthew C. Exline reports support from Abbott Labs for sponsored talks. D. Clark Files reports personal consultant fees from Cytovale and membership on a data and safety monitoring board (DSMB) from Medpace. Anne E. Frosch reports grants from NIH/National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), NIH/National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI), and NIH/INSIGHT/ICC. Manjusha Gaglani reports grants from Abt Associates, Westat, and Janssen. Adit A. Ginde reports grants from NIH, DoD, AbbVie, and Faron Pharmaceuticals. Michelle N. Gong reports grants from NIH and the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ), and DSMB membership fees from Regeneron, outside the submitted work. Carlos G. Grijalva reports consultancy fees from Pfizer, Merck, and Sanofi-Pasteur; grants from Campbell Alliance/Syneos Health, NIH, the Food and Drug Administration, AHRQ, and Sanofi. David N. Hager reports grants from NIH/NHLBI. Natasha Halasa reports grants and nonfinancial support from Sanofi, and grants from Quidel and NIH. Nicholas J. Johnson reports grants from NIH, DoD, and Medic One Foundation. Akram Khan reports grants from United Therapeutics, Johnson & Johnson, and Eli Lilly. Jennie H. Kwon reports grants from NIH/NIAID. Adam S. Lauring reports personal fees from Sanofi and Roche, and grants from NIH and Burroughs Wellcome Fund. Christopher J. Lindsell reports grants from NIH, DoD, and the Marcus Foundation; contract fees from bioMerieux, Endpoint Health, Entegrion Inc, and AbbVie; and a patent for risk stratification in sepsis and septic shock. Emily T. Martin reports grants from Merck. Arnold S. Monto reports a grant from NIH. Ithan D. Peltan reports grants from NIH, Janssen Pharmaceuticals, and Intermountain Research and Medical Foundation, and institutional support from Asahi Kasei Pharma and Regeneron. Todd W. Rice reports grants from NIH, DoD, and AbbVie and personal fees from Cumberland Pharmaceuticals, Inc., and Cytovale, Inc. No other potential conflicts of interest were disclosed.

COVID-19 mRNA vaccines (BNT162b2 [Pfizer-BioNTech] and mRNA-1273 [Moderna]) provide protection against infection with SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19, and are highly effective against COVID-19-associated hospitalization among eligible persons who receive 2 doses (1,2). However, vaccine effectiveness (VE) among persons with immunocompromising conditions* is lower than that among immunocompetent persons (2), and VE declines after several months among all persons (3). On August 12, 2021, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) issued an emergency use authorization (EUA) for a third mRNA vaccine dose as part of a primary series ≥28 days after dose 2 for persons aged ≥12 years with immunocompromising conditions, and, on November 19, 2021, as a booster dose for all adults aged ≥18 years at least 6 months after dose 2, changed to ≥5 months after dose 2 on January 3, 2022 (4,5,6). Among 2,952 adults (including 1,385 COVID-19 case-patients and 1,567 COVID-19-negative controls) hospitalized at 21 U.S. hospitals during August 19-December 15, 2021, effectiveness of mRNA vaccines against COVID-19-associated hospitalization was compared between adults eligible for but who had not received a third vaccine dose (1,251) and vaccine-eligible adults who received a third dose ≥7 days before illness onset (312). Among 1,875 adults without immunocompromising conditions (including 1,065 [57%] unvaccinated, 679 [36%] 2-dose recipients, and 131 [7%] 3-dose [booster] recipients), VE against COVID-19 hospitalization was higher among those who received a booster dose (97%; 95% CI = 95%-99%) compared with that among 2-dose recipients (82%; 95% CI = 77%-86%) (p <0.001). Among 1,077 adults with immunocompromising conditions (including 324 [30%] unvaccinated, 572 [53%] 2-dose recipients, and 181 [17%] 3-dose recipients), VE was higher among those who received a third dose to complete a primary series (88%; 95% CI = 81%-93%) compared with 2-dose recipients (69%; 95% CI = 57%-78%) (p <0.001). Administration of a third COVID-19 mRNA vaccine dose as part of a primary series among immunocompromised adults, or as a booster dose among immunocompetent adults, provides improved protection against COVID-19-associated hospitalization., Competing Interests: All authors have completed and submitted the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors form for disclosure of potential conflicts of interest. Samuel M. Brown reports personal fees from Hamilton, institutional fees from Faron Pharmaceuticals and Sedana, grants from Janssen, the National Institutes of Health (NIH), the Department of Defense (DoD), book royalties from Oxford University and Brigham Young University, outside the submitted work. Steven Y. Chang was a speaker for La Jolla Pharmaceuticals in 2018 and consulted for PureTech Health in 2020. James D. Chappell reports grants from NIH during the conduct of the study. Abhijit Duggal reports grants from NIH and participation on a steering committee for ALung Technologies, Inc., outside the submitted work. Matthew C. Exline reports support from Abbott Labs for sponsored talks, outside the submitted work. D. Clark Files reports personal consultant fees from Cytovale and is a data and safety monitoring board (DSMB) member from Medpace, outside the submitted work. Manjusha Gaglani reports grants from CDC-Vanderbilt University Medical Center for the submitted work, CDC-Abt Associates, CDC-Westat, Janssen and Pfizer, outside the submitted work. Adit A. Ginde reports grants from NIH, DoD, AbbVie, and Faron Pharmaceuticals, outside the submitted work. Michelle N. Gong reports grants from NIH and the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ), DSMB membership fees from Regeneron, outside the submitted work. Carlos G. Grijalva reports consultancy fees from Pfizer, Merck, and Sanofi-Pasteur; grants from Campbell Alliance/Syneos Health, NIH, the Food and Drug Administration, AHRQ, and Sanofi, outside the submitted work. David N. Hager reports salary support from Incyte Corporation and EMPACT Precision Medicine via Vanderbilt University Medical Center and grants from NHLBI, outside the submitted work. Natasha Halasa reports grants and nonfinancial support from Sanofi, and grants from Quidel outside the submitted work. Akram Khan reports grants from United Therapeutics, Johnson & Johnson, Ely Lilly, and GlaxoSmithKline, outside the submitted work. Adam S. Lauring reports personal fees from Sanofi and Roche, outside the submitted work. Christopher J. Lindsell reports grants from NIH, DoD, and the Marcus Foundation; contract fees from bioMerieux, Endpoint LLC, and Entegrion Inc, outside the submitted work; in addition, Dr. Lindsell has a patent for risk stratification in sepsis and septic shock issued. Emily T. Martin reports personal fees from Pfizer and grants from Merck, outside the submitted work. Ithan D. Peltan reports grants from NIH, Janssen Pharmaceuticals and institutional support from Asahi Kasei Pharma and Regeneron, outside the submitted work. Todd W. Rice reports personal fees from Cumberland Pharmaceuticals, Inc, Cytovale, Inc., and Sanofi, Inc., outside the submitted work. Wesley H. Self reports consulting fees from Aeprio Pharmaceuticals and Merck, outside the submitted work. No other potential conflicts of interest were disclosed.

Background: Young survivors of cancer are at increased risk for cancers that are related to human papillomavirus (HPV), primarily caused by oncogenic HPV types 16 and 18. We aimed to examine the immunogenicity and safety of the three-dose series of HPV vaccine in young survivors of cancer., Methods: We conducted an investigator-initiated, phase 2, single-arm, open-label, non-inferiority trial at five National Cancer Institute-designated comprehensive cancer centres in the USA. Eligible participants were survivors of cancer who were HPV vaccine-naive, were aged 9-26 years, in remission, and had completed cancer therapy between 1 and 5 years previously. Participants received three intramuscular doses of either quadrivalent HPV vaccine (HPV4; enrolments on or before March 1, 2016) or nonavalent HPV vaccine (HPV9; enrolments after March 1, 2016) over 6 months (on day 1, at month 2, and at month 6). We also obtained data from published clinical trials assessing safety and immunogenicity of HPV4 and HPV9 in 9-26-year-olds from the general population, as a comparator group. The primary endpoint was antibody response against HPV types 16 and 18 at month 7 in the per-protocol population. A response was deemed non-inferior if the lower bound of the multiplicity-adjusted 95% CI was greater than 0·5 for the ratio of anti-HPV-16 and anti-HPV-18 geometric mean titres (GMTs) in survivors of cancer versus the general population. Responses were examined separately in male and female participants by age group (ie, 9-15 years and 16-26 years). Safety was assessed in all participants who received at least one vaccine dose and for whom safety data were available. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01492582. This trial is now completed., Findings: Between Feb 18, 2013, and June 22, 2018, we enrolled 453 survivors of cancer, of whom 436 received one or more vaccine doses: 203 (47%) participants had survived leukaemia, 185 (42%) were female, and 280 (64%) were non-Hispanic white. Mean age at first dose was 15·6 years (SD 4·6). 378 (83%) of 453 participants had evaluable immunogenicity data; main reasons for exclusion from per-protocol analysis were to loss to follow-up, patient reasons, and medical reasons. Data were also obtained from 26 486 general population controls. The ratio of mean GMT for anti-HPV types 16 and 18 in survivors of cancer versus the general population was more than 1 for all subgroups (ie, aged 9-15 years, aged 16-26 years, male, and female groups) in both vaccine cohorts (ranging from 1·64 [95% CI 1·12-2·18] for anti-HPV type 16 in female participants aged 9-15 years who received HPV9, to 4·77 [2·48-7·18] for anti-HPV type 18 in male participants aged 16-26 years who received HPV4). Non-inferiority criteria were met within each age and sex subgroup, except against HPV type 18 in female participants aged 16-26 years receiving HPV9 (4·30 [0·00-9·05]). Adverse events were reported by 237 (54%) of 435 participants; injection site pain was most common (174 [40%] participants). One serious adverse event (ie, erythema nodosum) was possibly related to vaccine (HPV9; 16-26 year female cohort)., Interpretation: Immunogenicity and safety of HPV vaccine three-dose series in survivors of cancer is similar to that in the general population, providing evidence for use in this clinically vulnerable population., Funding: US National Cancer Institute, Merck, Sharp & Dohme, and American Lebanese Syrian Associated Charities., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests JAC reports payment for a consulting or advisory role for X4 Pharmaceuticals. ARG reports payment for membership of a scientific advisory board and global advisory board for, honoraria from, and funds to their institution to conduct research studies unrelated to this research from Merck Sharp & Dohme. MMH reports payment for a consulting or advisory role for the Oncology Research Information Exchange Network Patient Advisory Committee, Princess Maxima Center Scientific Advisory Board, and SurvivorLink. WL reports non-financial support (provision of vaccine and laboratory analysis) to their institution related to this research from Merck Sharp & Dohme and payment for a consulting or advisory role for SurvivorLink. ML reports payment for consulting for Oncoceutics. All other authors declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: There is significant variation in processes and outcomes of care for patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), suggesting opportunities to improve quality of care. We aimed to determine whether a structured quality of care program can improve IBD outcomes, including the need for unplanned health care utilization., Methods: We used a structured approach to improve adult IBD care in 27 community-based gastroenterology practices and academic medical centers. Patient-reported outcomes (PRO) and health care utilization were collected at clinical visits. Outcomes were monitored monthly using statistical process control charts; improvement was defined by special cause (nonrandom) variation over time. Multivariable logistic regression was applied to patient-level data. Nineteen process changes were offered to improve unplanned health care utilization. Ten outcomes were assessed, including disease activity, remission status, urgent care need, recent emergency department use, hospitalizations, computed tomography scans, health confidence, corticosteroid or opioid use, and clinic phone calls., Results: We collected data prospectively from 20,382 discrete IBD visits. During the 15-month project period, improvement was noted across multiple measures, including need for urgent care, hospitalization, steroid use, and opioid utilization. Adjusted multivariable modeling showed significant improvements over time across multiple outcomes including urgent care need, health confidence, emergency department utilization, hospitalization, corticosteroid use, and opioid use. Attendance at monthly coached webinars was associated with improvement., Discussion: Outcomes of IBD care were improved using a structured quality improvement program that facilitates small process changes, sharing of best practices, and ongoing feedback. Spread of these interventions may facilitate broad improvement in IBD care when applied to a large population., (Copyright © 2021 by The American College of Gastroenterology.)

Background and Objectives: In an effort to improve and standardize the collection of adverse event data, the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality is developing and testing a patient safety surveillance system called the Quality and Safety Review System (QSRS). Its current abstraction from medical records is through manual human coders, taking an average of 75 minutes to complete the review and abstraction tasks for one patient record. With many healthcare systems across the country adopting electronic health record (EHR) technology, there is tremendous potential for more efficient abstraction by automatically populating QSRS. In the absence of real-world testing data and models, which require a substantial investment, we provide a heuristic assessment of the feasibility of automatically populating QSRS questions from EHR data., Methods: To provide an assessment of the automation feasibility for QSRS, we first developed a heuristic framework, the Relative Abstraction Complexity Framework, to assess relative complexity of data abstraction questions. This framework assesses the relative complexity of characteristics or features of abstraction questions that should be considered when determining the feasibility of automating QSRS. Questions are assigned a final relative complexity score (RCS) of low, medium, or high by a team of clinicians, human factors, and natural language processing researchers., Results: One hundred thirty-four QSRS questions were coded using this framework by a team of natural language processing and clinical experts. Fifty-five questions (41%) had high RCS and would be more difficult to automate, such as "Was use of a device associated with an adverse outcome(s)?" Forty-two questions (31%) had medium RCS, such as "Were there any injuries as a result of the fall(s)?" and 37 questions (28%) had low RCS, such as "Did the patient deliver during this stay?" These results suggest that Blood and Hospital Acquired Infections-Clostridium Difficile Infection (HAI-CDI) modules would be relatively easier to automate, whereas Surgery and HAI-Surgical Site Infection would be more difficult to automate., Conclusions: Although EHRs contain a wealth of information, abstracting information from these records is still very challenging, particularly for complex questions, such as those concerning patient adverse events. In this work, we developed a heuristic framework, which can be applied to help guide conversations around the feasibility of automating QSRS data abstraction. This framework does not aim to replace testing with real data but complement the process by providing initial guidance and direction to subject matter experts to help prioritize, which abstraction questions to test for feasibility using real data., Competing Interests: The authors disclose no conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2017 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background NT-proBNP (N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide) is a prognostic biomarker in heart failure (HF) with reduced ejection fraction. However, it is unclear whether there is a sex difference in NT-proBNP response and whether the therapeutic goal of NT-proBNP ≤1000 pg/mL has equivalent prognostic value in men and women with HF with reduced ejection fraction. Methods and Results In a secondary analysis of the GUIDE-IT (Guiding Evidence Based Therapy Using Biomarker Intensified Treatment) trial we analyzed trends in NT-proBNP and goal attainment by sex. Differences in clinical characteristics, HF treatment, and time to all-cause death or HF hospitalization were compared. Landmark analysis at 3 months determined the prognostic value of early NT-proBNP goal achievement in men and women. Of the 286 (32%) women and 608 (68%) men in the GUIDE-IT trial, women were more likely to have a nonischemic cause and shorter duration of HF. Guideline-directed medical therapy was less intense over time in women. The absolute NT-proBNP values were consistently lower in women; however, the change in NT-proBNP and clinical outcomes were similar. After adjustment, women achieving the NT-proBNP goal had an 82% reduction in death or HF hospitalization compared with a 59% reduction in men. Conclusions Men and women with HF with reduced ejection fraction had a similar NT-proBNP response despite less intensive HF treatment among women. However, compared with men, the early NT-proBNP goal of ≤1000 pg/mL had greater prognostic value in women. Future efforts should be aimed at intensifying guideline-directed medical therapy in women, which may result in greater NT-proBNP reductions and improved outcomes in women with HF with reduced ejection fraction. Registration URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT01685840.

In 2015, the United States of America (USA) Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) released an issue brief that addressed opioid addiction, opioid overdoses, and opioid-related deaths as a public health concern within the country. After collaboration with state and stakeholder organizations, the HHS identified three target initiatives aimed to mitigate the negative consequences of opioid use within the USA. One initiative included implementation of guidelines to help reduce inappropriate opioid prescribing with a goal to reduce morbidity and mortality. The aim of this commentary is to discuss the misapplication and unintended consequences of the USA CDC Guideline for Prescribing Opioids for Chronic Pain.

Objectives: To compare pregnancy options counseling and referral practices at state- and Title X-funded family planning organizations in Texas after enforcement of a policy restricting abortion referrals for providers participating in state-funded programs, which differed from Title X guidelines to provide referrals for services upon request., Study Design: Between November 2014 and February 2015, we conducted in-depth interviews with administrators at publicly funded family planning organizations in Texas about how they integrated primary care and family planning services, including pregnancy options counseling and referrals for unplanned pregnancies. We conducted a thematic analysis of transcripts related to organizations' pregnancy options counseling and referral practices, and compared themes across organizations that did and did not receive Title X funding., Results: Of the 37 organizations with transcript segments on options counseling and referrals, 15 received Title X and 22 relied on state funding only. All Title X-funded organizations but only nine state-funded organizations reported offering pregnancy options counseling. Respondents at state-only-funded organizations often described directing pregnant women exclusively to prenatal care. Regardless of funding source, most organizations provided women a list of agencies offering abortion, adoption and prenatal care. However, some respondents expressed concern that providing other information about abortion would threaten their state funding. In contrast, respondents indicated staff would make appointments for prenatal care, assist with Medicaid applications and, in some instances, directly connect women with adoption-related services., Conclusions: Pregnancy options counseling varied by organizations' funding guidelines. Additionally, abortion referrals were less common than referrals for other pregnancy-related care., Implications: Programmatic guidelines restricting information on abortion counseling and referrals may adversely affect care for pregnant women at publicly funded family planning organizations., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective : To aid the implementation of a medication reconciliation process within a hybrid primary-specialty care setting by using qualitative techniques to describe the climate of implementation and provide guidance for future projects. Methods : Guided by McMullen et al's Rapid Assessment Process 1 , we performed semi-structured interviews prior to and iteratively throughout the implementation. Interviews were coded and analyzed using grounded theory 2 and cross-examined for validity. Results : We identified five barriers and five facilitators that impacted the implementation. Facilitators identified were process alignment with user values, and motivation and clinical champions fostered by the implementation team rather than the administration. Barriers included a perceived limited capacity for change, diverging priorities, and inconsistencies in process standards and role definitions. Discussion : A more complete, qualitative understanding of existing barriers and facilitators helps to guide critical decisions on the design and implementation of a successful medication reconciliation process.

Objective: Overall about 10 to 20% of pheochromocytomas/paragangliomas (PHEOs/PGLs) are metastatic, with higher metastatic potential observed in succinate dehydrogenase subunit B/fumarate hydratase (SDHB/FH)-related tumors. Due to the improved availability of biochemical and genetic testing and the frequent use of anatomical/functional imaging, there is currently a higher detection rate of metastatic PHEO/PGL., Methods: A retrospective analysis of 132 patients (27 children, 105 adults) with metastatic PHEO/PGL diagnosed and treated from 2000 to 2014 was conducted., Results: Seventy-seven (58%) males and 55 (42%) females were included; 39 (30%) have died, with no sex preference. Seventy-three (55%) patients had SDHB mutations; 59 (45%) patients had apparently sporadic tumors (AST). SDHB patients had an average age at primary tumor diagnosis of 31 ± 16 years compared to 40 ± 15 years in AST patients (P<.001). The average metastatic interval (MI) decreased with increasing age in both SDHB and AST patients (P = .013 for both). Only 16% of all primary tumors were smaller than 4.5 cm. Eleven percent of patients had biochemically silent disease, more with SDHB. Of SDHB patients, 23% had metastatic tumors at first diagnosis, compared to 15% of AST patients. Five- and 10-year survival rates were significantly better for metastatic AST than SDHB patients (P = .01). Overall survival was significantly different between children and adults (P = .037); this was mostly attributed to the SDHB patients, in whom children had statistically significantly longer survival than adults (P = .006). The deceased patients all died due to the PHEO/PGL and mainly had noradrenergic phenotypes., Conclusion: In children, metastatic PHEOs/PGLs are mainly due to SDHB mutations; in adults they are equally distributed between in SDHB mutations and AST, with better 5- and 10-year survival rates for ASTs. In SDHB patients, children survive longer than adults. Primary metastatic tumors, most presenting as noradrenergic PGLs, are larger than 4.5 cm in >80% of patients. The frequency of metastatic tumors from primary AST increases with age, including a decreased MI compared to SDHB tumors. These results support several recommendations that are summarized in the Discussion.

Unlabelled: Exposure to particulate matter (PM) is associated with adverse health outcomes. There has long been a question as to whether some components of the PM mixture are of greater public health concern than others so that the sources that emit the more toxic components could be controlled. In this paper, we describe the National Particle Component Toxicity (NPACT) initiative, a comprehensive research program that combined epidemiologic and toxicologic approaches to evaluate this critical question, partly relying on information from a national network of air quality monitors that provided data on speciated PM2.5 (PM with an aerodynamic diameter<2.5 μm) starting in 2000. We also consider the results of the NPACT program in the context of selected research on PM components and health in order to assess the current state of the field. Overall, the ambitious NPACT research program found associations of secondary sulfate and, to a somewhat lesser extent, traffic sources with health effects. Although this and other research has linked a variety of health effects to multiple groups of PM components and sources of PM, the collective evidence has not yet isolated factors or sources that would be closely and unequivocally more strongly related to specific health outcomes. If greater success is to be achieved in isolating the effects of pollutants from mobile and other major sources, either as individual components or as a mixture, more advanced approaches and additional measurements will be needed so that exposure at the individual or population level can be assessed more accurately. Enhanced understanding of exposure and health effects is needed before it can be concluded that regulations targeting specific sources or components of PM2.5 will protect public health more effectively than continuing to follow the current practices of targeting PM2.5 mass as a whole., Implications: This paper describes a comprehensive epidemiologic and toxicologic research program to evaluate whether some components and sources of PM may be more toxic than others. This question is important for regulatory agencies in setting air quality standards to protect people's health. The results show that PM from coal and oil combustion and from traffic sources was associated with adverse health outcomes, but other components and sources could not definitively be ruled out. Thus, given current knowledge, the current practice of setting air quality standards for PM mass as a whole likely remains an effective approach to protecting public health.

Advances in medical therapies leading to improved patient outcomes are in large part related to successful conduct of clinical trials that offer critical information regarding the efficacy and safety of novel interventions. The conduct of clinical trials in the United States, however, continues to face increasing challenges with recruitment and retention. These trends are paralleled by an increasing shift toward more multinational trials where most participants are enrolled in countries outside the United States, bringing into question the generalizability of the results to the American population. This manuscript presents the perspectives and recommendations from clinicians, researchers, sponsors, and regulators who attended a meeting facilitated by the Food and Drug Administration to improve upon the current clinical trial trends in the United States., (Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: Describe the prevalence of colonoscopy before age 50, when guidelines recommend initiation of colorectal cancer screening for average risk individuals., Method: We assembled administrative health records that captured receipt of colonoscopy between 40 and 49-years of age for a cohort of 204,758 50-year-old members of four US health plans and used backward recurrence time models to estimate trends in receipt of colonoscopy before age 50 and variation in early colonoscopy by age and sex. We also used self-reported receipt of colonoscopy from 27,157 40- to 49-year-old respondents to the 2010 National Health Interview Survey (NHIS) to estimate the association between early colonoscopy and sex, race/ethnicity, and geographic location based on logistic regression models that accounted for the complex NHIS sampling design., Results: About 5% of the health plan cohort had a record of colonoscopy before age 50. Receipt of early colonoscopy increased significantly from 1999 to 2010 (test for linear trend, p<0.0001), was more likely among women than men (RR=1.9, 95% CI 1.14-1.24) and in the east coast health plan compared to west coast and Hawaii plans. The NHIS analysis found that early colonoscopy was more likely in Northeastern residents compared to residents in the West (odds ratio=1.75, 95% CI 1.28-2.39)., Conclusion: Colonoscopy before age 50 is increasingly common., (Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Early childhood adiposity may have significant later health effects. This study examines the prevalence and recognition of obesity and severe obesity among preschool-aged children., Methods: The electronic medical record was used to examine body mass index (BMI), height, sex and race/ethnicity in 42,559 children aged 3-5 years between 2007 and 2010. Normal or underweight (BMI < 85th percentile); overweight (BMI 85th-94th percentile); obesity (BMI ≥ 95th percentile); and severe obesity (BMI ≥ 1.2 × 95th percentile) were classified using the 2000 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention growth charts. Provider recognition of elevated BMI was examined for obese children aged 5 years., Results: Among 42,559 children, 12.4% of boys and 10.0% of girls had BMI ≥ 95th percentile. The prevalence was highest among Hispanics (18.2% boys, 15.2% girls), followed by blacks (12.4% boys, 12.7% girls). A positive trend existed between increasing BMI category and median height percentile, with obesity rates highest in the highest height quintile. The prevalence of severe obesity was 1.6% overall and somewhat higher for boys compared with girls (1.9 vs. 1.4%, P < 0.01). By race/ethnicity, the highest prevalence of severe obesity was seen in Hispanic boys (3.3%). Among those aged 5 years, 77.9% of obese children had provider diagnosis of obesity or elevated BMI, increasing to 89.0% for the subset with severe obesity., Conclusions: Obesity and severe obesity are evident as early as age 3-5 years, with race/ethnic trends similar to older children. This study underscores the need for continued recognition and contextualization of early childhood obesity in order to develop effective strategies for early weight management., (© 2013 The Authors. Pediatric Obesity © 2013 International Association for the Study of Obesity.)

Background and Objective: Screening for hypertension in children occurs during routine care. When blood pressure (BP) is elevated in the hypertensive range, a repeat measurement within 1 to 2 weeks is recommended. The objective was to assess patterns of care after an incident elevated BP, including timing of repeat BP measurement and likelihood of persistently elevated BP., Methods: This retrospective study was conducted in 3 health care organizations. All children aged 3 through 17 years with an incident elevated BP at an outpatient visit during 2007 through 2010 were identified. Within this group, we assessed the proportion who had a repeat BP measured within 1 month of their incident elevated BP and the proportion who subsequently met the definition of hypertension. Multivariate analyses were used to identify factors associated with follow-up BP within 1 month of initial elevated BP., Results: Among 72,625 children and adolescents in the population, 6108 (8.4%) had an incident elevated BP during the study period. Among 6108 with an incident elevated BP, 20.9% had a repeat BP measured within 1 month. In multivariate analyses, having a follow-up BP within 1 month was not significantly more likely among individuals with obesity or stage 2 systolic elevation. Among 6108 individuals with an incident elevated BP, 84 (1.4%) had a second and third consecutive elevated BP within 12 months., Conclusions: Whereas >8% of children and adolescents had an incident elevated BP, the great majority of BPs were not repeated within 1 month. However, relatively few individuals subsequently met the definition of hypertension.

Background: Given declining interest in cardiothoracic (CT) training programs during the last decade, increasing emphasis has been placed on engaging candidates early in their training. We examined the effect of supervised and unsupervised practice on medical students' interest in CT surgery., Methods: Forty-five medical students participated in this study. Participants' interest level in surgery, CT surgery, and simulation were collected before and after a pretest session. Subsequently, participants were randomized to one of three groups: control (n = 15), unsupervised training on a low-fidelity task simulator (n = 15), or supervised training with a CT surgeon or fellow on the same simulator (n = 15). After 3 weeks, attitudes were reassessed at a posttest session. Interest levels were compared before and after the pretest using paired t tests, and the effects of training on interests were assessed with multiple linear regression analyses., Results: After the pretest session, participants were significantly more interested in simulation (p = 0.001) but not in surgery or CT surgery. After training, compared with control group participants, supervised trainees demonstrated a significant increase in their interest level in pursuing a career in surgery (p = 0.028) and an increasing trend towards a career in CT surgery (p = 0.060), whereas unsupervised trainees did not., Conclusions: Supervised training on low-fidelity simulators enhances interest in a career in surgery. Practice that lacks supervision does not, possibly related to the complexity of the simulated task. Mentorship efforts may need to involve sustained interaction to provide medical students with enough exposure to appreciate a surgical career., (Copyright © 2013 The Society of Thoracic Surgeons. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: To examine the prevalence of prehypertension and hypertension among children receiving well-child care in community-based practices., Methods: Children aged 3 to 17 years with measurements of height, weight, and blood pressure (BP) obtained at an initial (index) well-child visit between July 2007 and December 2009 were included in this retrospective cohort study across 3 large, integrated health care delivery systems. Index BP classification was based on the Fourth Report on the Diagnosis, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Pressure in Children and Adolescents: normal BP, <90th percentile; prehypertension, 90th to 94th percentile; hypertension, 3 BP measurements ≥95th percentile (index and 2 subsequent consecutive visits)., Results: The cohort included 199 513 children (24.3% aged 3-5 years, 34.5% aged 6-11 years, and 41.2% aged 12-17 years) with substantial racial/ethnic diversity (35.9% white, 7.8% black, 17.6% Hispanic, 11.7% Asian/Pacific Islander, and 27.0% other/unknown race). At the index visit, 81.9% of participants were normotensive, 12.7% had prehypertension, and 5.4% had a BP in the hypertension range (≥95th percentile). Of the 10 848 children with an index hypertensive BP level, 3.8% of those with a follow-up BP measurement had confirmed hypertension (estimated 0.3% prevalence). Increasing age and BMI were significantly associated with prehypertension and confirmed hypertension (P < .001 for trend). Among racial/ethnic groups, blacks and Asians had the highest prevalence of hypertension., Conclusions: The prevalence of hypertension in this community-based study is lower than previously reported from school-based studies. With the size and diversity of this cohort, these results suggest the prevalence of hypertension in children may actually be lower than previously reported.

Background: In November 2009, the US Preventive Service Task Force (USPSTF) published updated breast cancer screening guidelines. This marked a change from the 2002 recommendations and a significant divergence from the American Cancer Society (ACS) guidelines. In the current study, the potential effect of using the revised 2009 USPSTF guidelines on patient disease stage and survival were evaluated and compared with those actually observed and to predicted under ACS recommendations., Methods: A retrospective chart review was performed for 84 patients who were diagnosed with stage I through III breast cancer at Grady Memorial Hospital during 2008. Previously published tumor volume doubling times were used to model an equation that would estimate tumor sizes. For each patient, a disease stage at diagnosis was predicted, and outcomes were modeled as though the patient had been screened according to the recommended versions of the ACS and USPSTF guidelines. Patient survival rates were then estimated based on prognostic data according to disease stage., Results: The average age of patients in the study was 55 years, and 85% were African American. The USPSTF guidelines predicted later stages at diagnosis (14% stage I, 73% stage II), whereas the ACS guidelines predicted earlier stages (47% stage I, 53% stage II)., Conclusions: A large stage migration was predicted, indicating significantly earlier diagnosis, when the ACS-recommended screening guidelines were followed. The authors concluded that practitioners should understand how race and/or socioeconomic factors increase the risk of breast cancer and should be encouraged to prioritize discussions regarding the benefits and risks of annual mammographic screening, especially among women who have a potentially greater risk of developing breast cancer at a younger age., (Copyright © 2012 American Cancer Society.)

Implanon is a new implantable, progestin-only contraceptive which was approved in the United States in July 2006. Implanon is comprised of a single ethylene vinylacetate copolymer rod that is 4 cm long and 2 mm in diameter. It is inserted subdermally in the groove between the biceps and triceps of the nondominant arm. A literature review was conducted and side effects are discussed. Implanon offers promise as a high-efficacy, long-term contraceptive and can enhance the contraceptive options offered by the women's health care providers. Clinical trial data indicate that the device is both safe and effective.

Obesity and lack of physical activity have been inconsistently associated with pancreatic cancer. Using data from a self-administered baseline questionnaire (1995-1996), the authors investigated the association between adiposity and physical activity and pancreatic cancer in 495,035 participants of the National Institutes of Health-AARP Diet and Health Study who were aged 50-71 years. To avoid the influence of subclinical disease, follow-up time started 1 year after baseline, and subjects with a body mass index (BMI) of <18.5 kg/m(2) were excluded. A subcohort (n = 302,060) completed a second questionnaire with information about physical activity and waist and hip circumference. During follow-up though 2000, 654 pancreatic cancer cases were identified. The authors used Cox proportional hazard models to generate adjusted hazard ratios and 95% confidence intervals. Compared with those with a BMI of 18.5-<25, those with a BMI of >/=35 had a 45% greater pancreatic cancer risk (95% confidence interval (CI): 1.04, 2.02; p(trend) = 0.02). Significant positive associations for BMI were observed among nonsmokers (for BMI > or =35: hazard ratio = 1.70, 95% CI: 1.14, 2.53; p(trend) = 0.004) but not recent smokers (p(interaction) = 0.08). Waist circumference was positively associated with pancreatic cancer (fourth vs. first quartile: hazard ratio = 2.53, 95% CI: 1.13, 5.65; p(trend) = 0.04) in women but not men. The authors observed no association with physical activity. Their results suggest a positive association between adiposity and pancreatic cancer.

Obesity and menopausal estrogen therapy are established risk factors for endometrial cancer. However, the joint effects of obesity and menopausal hormone therapy on endometrial cancer risk are incompletely understood. We addressed this issue in a cohort of 103,882 women ages 50 to 71 years at baseline in 1995 to 1996. During a median of 4.6 years, which contributed to a total of 455,304 person-years of follow-up through 2000, 677 cases of endometrial cancer were ascertained. Both baseline body mass index (BMI) and adult weight gain were associated with increased endometrial cancer risk. The multivariate relative risk (RR) comparing obese with normal weight women (BMI >30 versus <25 kg/m(2)) was 3.03 [95% confidence interval (95% CI), 2.50-3.68]. Compared with women with stable weight (gained or lost <5 kg) between age 18 and baseline, women who gained >or=20 kg had a RR of 2.75 (95% CI, 1.96-3.86). Menopausal hormone therapy significantly modified the relations of BMI (P(interaction) < 0.001) and adult weight gain (P(interaction) = 0.004) to endometrial cancer risk. Compared with normal weight, the RRs for obesity were 5.41 (95% CI, 4.01-7.29) among women who never used menopausal hormone therapy, 2.53 (95% CI, 1.21-5.30) among former menopausal hormone therapy users, and 1.44 (95% CI, 1.00-2.05) among current users. Compared with a stable weight between age 18 and baseline, the RRs for weight gain of >or=20 kg among never users and ever users of menopausal hormone therapy were 5.35 (95% CI, 3.01-9.52) and 1.43 (95% CI, 0.96-2.15), respectively. We conclude that both current adiposity and adult weight gain are associated with substantial increases in the risk of endometrial cancer, with relations particularly evident among never users of menopausal hormone therapy.

Cyclic vomiting syndrome, which is characterized by severe discrete episodes of nausea, vomiting, and lethargy, is a fairly common, disabling, predominately childhood condition. Approximately 25% of cases have coexisting neuromuscular disease manifestations (cyclic vomiting syndrome plus). To determine whether patients with cyclic vomiting syndrome and neuromuscular disease represent a distinct subentity within cyclic vomiting syndrome, a clinical interview was conducted regarding 80 randomly ascertained sufferers of cyclic vomiting syndrome from a disease association database. Cyclic vomiting syndrome plus and "cyclic vomiting syndrome minus," herein defined as the presence of at least two and zero neuromuscular disease manifestations, were present in 23 and 44 subjects, respectively. Neuromuscular disease manifestations, including cognitive disorders, skeletal myopathy, cranial nerve dysfunction, and seizure disorders, were found to statistically cluster together among the same subjects. In addition, subjects with cyclic vomiting syndrome with neuromuscular disease had an earlier age at onset for vomiting episodes and a three- to eightfold statistically increased prevalence for certain dysautonomia-related (migraine, chronic fatigue, neurovascular dystrophy) and constitutional (growth retardation and birth defects) disorders. However, subjects with cyclic vomiting syndrome with and without neuromuscular disease were equally likely to have a sibling affected with neuromuscular disease manifestations. We conclude that cyclic vomiting syndrome plus, although likely not genetically distinct from cyclic vomiting syndrome minus, represents a distinct phenotypic entity that predicts an earlier onset of disease and increased comorbidity with a distinct list of medical conditions, possibly owing to a higher degree of mitochondrial dysfunction.

The objective of this study was to determine the rate of patent ductus arteriosus (PDA) closure in premature infants using an adjustable indomethacin (INDO) dosing strategy, based on a second-dose peak plasma INDO level. We conducted a retrospective review of the medical records of premature infants that were treated with INDO for a PDA, had a second dose peak plasma NDO levels, and followed predetermined guidelines for INDO dosing adjustments, over a 4-year period (1995 to 1998). Of 103 infants treated with the adjustable INDO dosing strategy, 66 (64%) achieved PDA closure whereas 37 (36%) did not. No differences in the second-dose peak plasma INDO levels (830 +/- 339 versus 702 +/- 381 ng/mL), day of life treatment was started (4 +/- 3 versus 4 +/- 2 days), or the number of doses of INDO received (4 +/- 1 versus 5 +/- 2 dose) were observed between responders and nonresponders. However, fourth-dose peak plasma INDO levels, which were available from 38 of 66 (57%) of the responders and 20 of 37 (54%) of the nonresponders, were lower in nonresponders (1553 +/- 413 versus 1829 +/- 609 ng/mL, p < 0.05). Patient demographics, including birth weight and gestational age, were similar between these groups. Using an adjustable INDO dosing strategy, based on a second-dose peak plasma INDO level and estimated plasma levels, PDA closure rates of 64% can be achieved. Although a clear relationship between INDO plasma levels and PDA closure was evident form this study, the rate of PDA closure in our study was lower than has been observed in studies with serial plasma INDO level monitoring.

Hospitals may not support programs that improve the quality of care delivered to heart failure patients because these programs lower readmission rates and empty beds, and therefore further diminish already-declining revenues. A conflict between the highest quality of care and financial solvency does not serve the interests of patients, physicians, hospitals, or payers. In principle, resolution of this conflict is simple: reimbursement systems should reward higher quality care. In practice, resolving the conflict is not simple. A recent roundtable discussion sponsored by the Heart Failure Society of America identified 4 major challenges to the design and implementation of reimbursement schemes that promote higher quality care for heart failure: defining quality, accounting for differences in disease severity, crafting novel payment mechanisms, and overcoming professional parochialism. This article describes each of these challenges in turn.

Inner-city children have high rates of asthma. Exposures to particles, including allergens, may cause or exacerbate asthma symptoms. As part of an epidemiologic study of inner-city children with asthma, continuous (10-min average) measurements of particle concentrations were made for 2-week periods in 294 homes drawn from seven cities. Measurements were made using an optical scattering device that is most sensitive to fine particles. The concentrations recorded by these devices were corrected to agree with colocated outdoor gravimetric PM2.5 monitors. Indoor concentrations in the homes averaged 27.7 (standard deviation = 35.9) micro g/m3, compared with concurrent outdoor concentrations of 13.6 (7.5) micro g/m3. A multivariate model indicated that outdoor particles penetrated indoors with an efficiency of 0.48 and were therefore responsible for only 25% of the mean indoor concentration. The major indoor source was smoking, which elevated indoor concentrations by 37 micro g/m3 in the 101 homes with smokers. Other significant sources included frying, smoky cooking events, use of incense, and apartment housing, although the increases due to these events ranged only from 3 to 6 micro g/m3. The 10-min averaging time allowed calculation of an average diurnal variation, showing large increases in the evening due to smoking and smaller increases at meal times due to cooking. Most of the observed variance in indoor concentrations was day to day, with roughly similar contributions to the variance from visit to visit and home to home within a city and only a small contribution made by variance among cities. The small variation among cities and the similarity across cities of the observed indoor air particle distributions suggest that sources of indoor concentrations do not vary considerably from one city to the next, and thus that simple models can predict indoor air concentrations in cities having only outdoor measurements.

The Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality and its predecessor organizations-collectively referred to here as AHRQ-have a productive history of funding research and development in the field of medical informatics, with grant investments since 1968 totaling $107 million. Many computerized interventions that are commonplace today, such as drug interaction alerts, had their genesis in early AHRQ initiatives. This review provides a historical perspective on AHRQ investment in medical informatics research. It shows that grants provided by AHRQ resulted in achievements that include advancing automation in the clinical laboratory and radiology, assisting in technology development (computer languages, software, and hardware), evaluating the effectiveness of computer-based medical information systems, facilitating the evolution of computer-aided decision making, promoting computer-initiated quality assurance programs, backing the formation and application of comprehensive data banks, enhancing the management of specific conditions such as HIV infection, and supporting health data coding and standards initiatives. Other federal agencies and private organizations have also supported research in medical informatics, some earlier and to a greater degree than AHRQ. The results and relative roles of these related efforts are beyond the scope of this review.

Heart failure is emerging as a major component of the public health problem of cardiovascular disease as we move into the twenty-first century. Current statistics indicate 4.9 million US citizens are afflicted with direct treatment costs estimated to be $18.8 billion per year. These figures are expected to worsen substantially as the prevalence of heart failure continues to increase. Epidemiologic studies also point to important increases in morbidity and have identified risk factors that aid in prognosis and that may contribute to our mechanistic understanding of heart failure pathophysiology. In addition, epidemiologic results indicate that many patients with mild-to-moderate clinical heart failure are still at substantial risk for morbidity and mortality during follow-up periods of only a few years. These data highlight the importance of enhancing physician and public awareness of heart failure. New methods of molecular epidemiology will point toward better and earlier detection of this common and frequently fatal condition.

Despite awareness of the importance of nutrition as part of medical student's education, numerous barriers exist to incorporating nutrition education into the medical school curriculum. Chief among such barriers is that most medical schools do not have faculty trained specifically in nutrition. A curriculum is needed that can deliver comprehensive nutrition information that is consistent across medical schools. One way to deliver this information is to use computer-assisted instruction (CAI). To meet the different needs of medical schools and provide a consistent base of nutrition information, we developed a series of interactive, multimedia educational programs (Nutrition in Medicine) that teach the basic principles of nutritional science and apply those principles in a case-oriented approach. Curriculum content is derived from the American Society for Clinical Nutrition consensus guidelines. These modules offer the advantages of accessibility, self-paced study, interactivity, immediate feedback, and tracking of student performance. Modules are distributed free to all US medical schools. Preliminary data from surveys gathered by our team at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill indicate that 73 US medical schools use, or are planning to use, these modules; more schools are currently evaluating the programs. Successful implementation of CAI requires easy program access, faculty training, adequate technical support, and faculty commitment to the programs as a valuable resource. CAI fails when the program is just placed in the library and students are told to use it when they can find the time.

Background: The optimal management of an acute exacerbation of chronic heart failure (CHF) is uncertain. There is little randomized evidence available to support the various treatment strategies for patients hospitalized with an exacerbation of CHF. Inotropic agents may produce beneficial hemodynamic effects, and although they are currently used in these patients, their effect on clinical response and impact on clinical outcome is unclear. We present a unique and simple study designed to determine whether a treatment strategy for CHF exacerbations that includes an intravenous agent with inotropic properties can reduce hospital length of stay and lead to improved patient outcome., Methods: The OPTIME CHF (Outcomes of a Prospective Trial of Intravenous Milrinone for Exacerbations of Chronic Heart Failure) trial is an ongoing multicenter, randomized, placebo-controlled trial of a treatment strategy for patients with acute exacerbations of CHF. The design of this study provides a novel approach to the evaluation of treatment strategies in the care of this population. The OPTIME CHF design uses early initiation of intravenous milrinone as both an adjunct to the best the medical therapy and to facilitate optimal dosing of standard oral therapy for heart failure. Patients with known systolic heart failure requiring hospital admission for a CHF exacerbation are randomly assigned within 48 hours of admission to receive a 48-hour infusion of either intravenous milrinone or placebo. The primary end point of this design is a reduction in the total hospital days for cardiovascular events within 60 days after therapy. Enrollment of 1000 patients began July 7, 1997, at 80 US centers and is projected to conclude in late 1999.

This paper chronicles the birth of lesbian-feminist publishing in the 1970s, a significant but often overlooked chapter of American alternative publishing history, and one that would help create the circumstances supporting a flourishing lesbian and gay literature in the 1980s and 1990s. Between 1968 and 1973, over 500 feminist and lesbian publications appeared across the country, and what would become an organized network of independent women's bookstores began to appear. In 1976, a group of feminist trades-women-printers, booksellers, and others-would meet in the first of a series of Women in Print conferences that would give a name to the fledgling alternative press movement. Fueled by the energy of the women's movement, lesbians were instrumental actors in a variety of feminist publishing enterprises that, taken together, constituted a unique brand of print activism that illuminated and revised categories of identity; empowered individuals to overcome social isolation and discrimination; and informed nascent lesbian and feminist communities about strategies of resistance.