Search

Background Acute lung injury is a common cause of morbidity and mortality following pulmonary or systemic infections. Surfactant protein-D is a member of the collectin family of proteins, which play important roles in innate host defense of the lung. In this study, the effect of exogenous recombinant human SP-D (rhSP-D) on protection of the adult mouse lung from lipopolysaccharide (LPS)-induced and lipoteichoic acid (LTA)-induced injury was assessed. Methods The effect of rhSP-D on LPS-induced and LTA-induced lung inflammation and injury was assessed with and without exogenous pulmonary surfactant in Sftpd +/+ and Sftpd −/− mice. A total of 204 mice (6 mice per group) were used for the present study. Results: Sftpd −/− mice were more susceptible to intratracheal LPS than were Sftpd +/+ mice. rhSP-D decreased neutrophilic infiltrates induced by LPS and LTA in the lungs of both Sftpd +/+ and Sftpd −/− mice. The addition of exogenous pulmonary surfactant to rhSP-D further decreased LPS-induced and LTA-induced pulmonary inflammation in Sftpd −/− and Sftpd +/+ mice. Conclusions Intratracheal rhSP-D inhibited inflammation induced by intratracheal LPS and LTA instillation in the lung. The antiinflammatory effects of rhSP-D were enhanced by the addition of pulmonary surfactant, providing a potential therapy for the treatment of lung inflammation.

OBJECTIVE Patients with diabetes may experience high burden of treatment (BOT), including treatment-related effects and self-care demands. We examined whether patients with type 2 diabetes and their clinicians discuss BOT, the characteristics of their discussions, and their attempts to address BOT during visits. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS Two coders independently reviewed videos of 46 primary care visits obtained during a practice-based trial and identified utterances concerning BOT, classifying them by topic and by whether BOT was addressed (i.e., whether statements emerged aimed at alleviating BOT). RESULTS Of the 46 visits, 43 (93.5%) contained BOT discussions. Both coders identified 83 discussions: 12 involving monitoring, 28 treatment administration, 19 access, and 24 treatment effects. BOT was unambiguously addressed only 30% of the time. CONCLUSIONS BOT discussions usually arise during visits but rarely beget problem-solving efforts. These discussions represent missed opportunities for reducing treatment-related disruptions in the lives of patients with diabetes, which may affect adherence and well-being.

Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) is a well-known risk factor for venous thromboembolism (VTE). Existing guidelines for thromboprophylaxis in hospitalized patients do not extend to other clinical scenarios that may also be associated with VTE risk. Our aim was to estimate the fraction of VTE events in patients with IBD that could be prevented.A retrospective analysis assessed all patients with IBD diagnosed with VTE at a single academic medical center from 2002 to 2012. Confirmed cases were analyzed for VTE risk factors, inpatient status, the use of deep venous thrombosis prophylaxis, and when applicable the reason for omission of prophylaxis. IBD VTE cases were compared with age- and sex-matched non-IBD VTE controls with regards to risk factors and potential opportunities for VTE prevention.There were 204 patients with IBD (108 ulcerative colitis, 96 Crohn's disease) diagnosed with VTE (110 deep venous thrombosis, 66 pulmonary embolism, 27 intra-abdominal thromboses, and 1 other). One-third of the VTE events occurred in hospitalized patients. Two-third of the medical inpatients and 44% of surgical inpatients who developed VTE did not receive prophylaxis. Importantly, 129 VTE events occurred in outpatients. The proportion of outpatients hospitalized within 4 weeks of developing venous thrombosis was higher in patients with IBD than non-IBD controls (33% versus 15%, P = 0.0003). One-third (36%) of patients were experiencing ambulatory disease flares at the time of VTE diagnosis.A substantial portion of VTE events in patients with IBD occurred in clinical scenarios is not routinely recommended for thromboprophylaxis. Further investigation of primary prophylaxis for patients with IBD in high-risk outpatients may be warranted.

Background Despite access to effective, safe, and affordable treatment for osteoporosis, at-risk women may choose not to start bisphosphonate therapy. Understanding the reasons women give for rejecting a clinician's offer of treatment during consultations and how clinician's react to these reasons may help clinicians develop more effective strategies for fracture prevention and medication adherence. Methods We conducted a videographic evaluation of encounters in the Osteoporosis Choice randomized trial of a decision aid about bisphosphonates vs. usual primary care. Eligible videos involved consultations with women with an estimated 10-year fragility fracture risk >20% who verbalized at least one reason to not take bisphosphonates. Two reviewers independently reviewed eligible videos and verbatim transcripts, classifying patient views about bisphosphonate use, clinicians reponse to those views, and patient adherence at 6 months post visit. Results Eighteen video recordings (12 with decision aid) were eligible for analyses. We identified 37 reasons for and against bisphosphonate therapy. Eleven patients rejected treatment, offering 9 (average of 2 per patient) unique reasons against initiating bisphosphonates (most common: side effects 39% and distrust of medications in general 33%). When physicians conceded to patient views the outcome was no bisphosphonate use. Adherence to choices at 6 months was 100%. Conclusions The expression of patient preferences is sometimes unfavorable to bisphosphonates treatment even among well-informed patients at high risk for osteoporotic fractures. At 6 months, patients who expressed concerns about these medicines behaved consistently with the decision made during the visit.