Search

The lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (LGBTQ+) adolescent population experiences health disparities due to barriers to care, including lack of access to culturally competent health care providers. The purpose of this quality improvement project was to increase access to culturally competent care through continuing education, a physical makeover of clinic space, and a social marketing campaign. The impact of the project on the number of LGBTQ+ adolescent patients at the clinic and the rate of documentation of sexual orientation and gender identity data was evaluated via a chart audit. Changes in nurses' and health care providers' knowledge as a result of the continuing education were evaluated with a pretest and a posttest. The number of LGBTQ+ patients and provider knowledge increased following the continuing education. Sexual orientation and gender identity data were documented during 87.5% of visits. The participants' knowledge increased by 4.7% following the continuing education. Further, five physical changes to the clinic were completed and a social marketing campaign was launched. This quality improvement project demonstrates that continuing education can be an effective way to increase cultural competence for the care of LGBTQ+ individuals. [ J Contin Educ Nurs . 2022;53(8):348–354.]

BackgroundACEi/ARB medications have been hypothesized to have potential benefit in COVID-19. Despite concern for increased ACE-2 expression in some animal models, preclinical and observational-retrospective and uncontrolled trials suggested possible benefit. Two RCTs of the ARB losartan from University of Minnesota showed no benefit yet safety signals for losartan in outpatient and hospitalized COVID-19 patients. COVID MED, started early in the pandemic, also assessed losartan in a RCT in hospitalized patients with COVID-19.MethodsCOVID MED was a double-blinded, placebo-controlled, multicenter, platform randomized clinical trial (RCT). Hospitalized COVID-19 patients were randomized to receive standard care and hydroxychloroquine, lopinavir/ritonavir, losartan, or placebo. Hydroxychloroquine and lopinavir/ritonavir arms were discontinued after RCTs showed no benefit. We report data from the losartan arm compared to combined (lopinavir-ritonavir and placebo) and prespecified placebo-only controls. The primary endpoint, the mean COVID-19 Ordinal Severity Score (COSS) slope of change, was compared with the Student’s t-test. Slow enrollment prompted early termination.ResultsOf 448 screened patients, 15 (3.5%) were randomized/enrolled, 9 to receive losartan and 6 to receive control (lopinavir/ritonavir [N=2], placebo [N=4]); 1 patient who withdrew prior to study drug was excluded yielding 14 patients for analysis (losartan [N=9] vs. control [N=5] [lopinavir/ritonavir [N=2], placebo [N=3]]). Most baseline parameters were balanced. Treatment with losartan was not associated with a difference in mean COSS slope of change in comparison with combined control (p=0.4) or placebo-only control (p=0.05) (trend favoring placebo). 60-day mortality and overall AE and SAE rates were numerically but not significantly higher with losartan.ConclusionsIn this small blinded RCT in hospitalized COVID-19 patients, losartan did not improve outcome vs. control comparisons and was associated with adverse safety signals.

This retrospective study used data obtained from medical records of 530 stranded free-ranging harbor (Phoca vitulina), grey (Halichoerus grypus), harp (Pagophilus groenlandicus), and hooded seals (Cystophora cristata) presented to the Marine Mammal Stranding Center in Brigantine, New Jersey from January 1998 through December 2016. The objective was to identify hematological and plasma biochemical parameters of seals at time of presentation that were associated with successful rehabilitation and with duration of hospitalization using univariate and multivariate logistic regressions. At presentation, animals that subsequently survived rehabilitation had greater alkaline phosphatase activity and absolute lymphocyte and total calcium concentrations and lower blood urea nitrogen, sodium, chloride, phosphorus, and total bilirubin concentrations and lower aspartate aminotransferase and alanine aminotransferase activities than animals that eventually died or were euthanized while under care. Results suggest that young, actively growing animals are more likely to survive rehabilitation and that bloodwork consistent with dehydration, systemic disease, and exhaustion are negative prognostic indicators. These results provide prognostic indicators that may aid clinical decision-making for seals presented for rehabilitation.

This paper compared the consistency of the Environment Stress(ES) model and the Potential Risk Assessment Model (PARK model, which was developed based on a Korean mariner risk perception) for the Busan adjacent waterway. Evaluation of accuracy and comparison of these two models have been made by Vessel Traffic Service (VTS) officers in the Busan VTS Centre. The assessment results of Busan waterway show that the PARK model is more consistent than the ES model as follows. (1) The difference between assessment results applying ES model and PARK model with risk degree of VTSOs were 34% and 5% respectively in six typical traffic situations. (2) The assessment using PARK model is more suitable and identical with the VTSOs opinion in his or her duty time.

Because most men with erectile dysfunction have underlying vascular disease, it is important to update the cardiovascular safety profile of medications used in the treatment of erectile dysfunction. This retrospective analysis evaluated serious cardiovascular treatment-emergent adverse events (CVTEAEs) reported in 36 clinical trials of tadalafil, a phosphodiesterase-5 inhibitor used for the treatment of erectile dysfunction. A serious CVTEAE was defined as myocardial infarction, cardiovascular death, or cerebrovascular death. In the 36 trials, 12,487 men (mean age 55 years) with erectile dysfunction received tadalafil, with 5,771 patient-years (PYs) of exposure, and 2,047 men (mean age 56 years) received placebo, with 460 PYs of exposure. Tadalafil 2 to 50 mg was taken as needed, 3 times/week, or once a day. Co-morbidities at baseline included hypertension (31%), diabetes (21%), hyperlipidemia (17%), and coronary artery disease (5%). Across all trials, the incidence rate of serious CVTEAEs was 0.40/100 PYs in tadalafil-treated patients and 0.43/100 PYs in placebo-treated patients. In patients taking tadalafil as needed, 3 times/week, or once a day, the incidence rates of serious CVTEAEs ranged from 0.17 to 0.54/100 PYs across placebo-controlled and open-label trials. In conclusion, the incidence rates of serious CVTEAEs were comparable among men with erectile dysfunction taking tadalafil as needed, 3 times/week, or once a day, and these rates were also comparable with those in placebo-treated patients. In this clinical trial population of men with erectile dysfunction, tadalafil was not associated with an increased risk for serious cardiovascular adverse events.

OBJECTIVES To determine if baseline characteristics, treatment efficacy, psychosocial outcomes or tolerability were associated with patient preference for sildenafil citrate (sildenafil) or tadalafil for treating erectile dysfunction (ED) in men naive to phosphodiesterase 5 inhibitor therapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS In an open-label, crossover study of sildenafil (25, 50 or 100 mg) and tadalafil (10 or 20 mg), dosed as needed, after a 4-week baseline assessment, 367 men with ED were randomly assigned to sildenafil followed by tadalafil or vice versa (8-week dose optimization and 4-week assessment phase for each treatment period). Patients completing both periods chose which treatment they preferred for an 8-week extension phase. Bivariate logistic regression and stepwise logistic regression were used to determine if any baseline characteristics or post-baseline measurements were associated with the patients’ treatment preference. Baseline variables examined were age, race, ED aetiology/duration, body mass index, smoking status, alcohol consumption, vital signs, comorbid medical conditions, and baseline scores for the International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF) domains, Psychological and Interpersonal Relationship Scales (PAIRS) domains, and Sexual Encounter Profile (SEP) diary questions. Post-baseline variables examined were therapy sequence, dosage, and differences in IIEF and PAIRS domains, SEP scores, in number/timing of sexual attempts and in the severity of side-effects (overall patient perception). RESULTS Of 291 patients completing both treatments and indicating a preference, 85 (29%) preferred sildenafil and 206 (71%) preferred tadalafil. Variables were individually analysed using bivariate analysis; one baseline characteristic (presence/absence of hyperlipidaemia) and 13 post-baseline measurements were significantly associated with the patients’ treatment preference. Variables were analysed as a group using stepwise logistic regression; a set of six post-baseline factors was identified as significantly associated with patient preference. Dosage choice, reductions in the PAIRS time concerns domain, IIEF intercourse satisfaction domain improvements, smaller side-effect severity scores, more sexual attempts, and increased SEP4 scores (satisfaction with erection hardness) during the tadalafil or sildenafil treatment periods were all significantly associated with preference for tadalafil or sildenafil. CONCLUSIONS We identified no baseline characteristics that prospectively distinguish patients who will prefer tadalafil or sildenafil. Patient differences in time concerns, dosage choice, intercourse satisfaction, treatment tolerability, number of sexual attempts and satisfaction with erection hardness were the set of factors most significantly associated with treatment preference, and the preference observed for tadalafil (71%) or sildenafil (29%) might be substantially accounted for by differences in these factors during the tadalafil and sildenafil treatment periods.

To investigate the efficacy and safety of tadalafil, a phosphodiesterase type 5 inhibitor, in Japanese men with erectile dysfunction (ED).This multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, 12-week study enrolled 343 Japanese men with ED. The men were stratified into those with mild, moderate, or severe ED and then randomly assigned 1:1:1:1 to placebo and 5 mg, 10 mg, and 20 mg tadalafil. Co-primary outcomes were the International Index of Erectile Function erectile function domain score, the percentage of "yes" responses to the Sexual Encounter Profile Diary Questions 2 and 3, and tolerability. Secondary outcomes included the International Index of Erectile Function intercourse satisfaction and overall satisfaction domain scores and the percentage of "yes" responses to a global assessment question.The least square mean change from baseline was 7.5, 9.1, and 9.4 for 5, 10, and 20 mg tadalafil versus 2.1 for placebo for the International Index of Erectile Function erectile function domain; 28.5, 36.0, and 36.5 for 5, 10, and 20 mg tadalafil versus 8.6 for placebo for Sexual Encounter Profile question 2; and 34.3, 47.3, and 50.8 for 5, 10, and 20 mg tadalafil versus 12.3 for placebo for Sexual Encounter Profile question 3, respectively (P0.001 for all doses and all measures). Patients taking tadalafil had significantly greater changes from baseline for the intercourse satisfaction and overall satisfaction domains compared with patients taking placebo (P0.001). Also, 76.5%, 81.4%, and 83.7% of patients taking 5, 10, and 20 mg tadalafil, respectively, reported improved erections (global assessment question) versus 31.4% of patients taking placebo (P0.001). Most (98%) treatment-emergent adverse events were mild or moderate in severity. One patient (tadalafil 5 mg) discontinued because of an adverse event (ureteral calculus). Of the 343 patients, 302 (88%) completed the study. No deaths were reported.All doses of tadalafil studied were efficacious and well tolerated in Japanese men with ED.