Taking Class Seriously

This article critically analyzes the human rights perspective upon what has emerged as one of the most significant socioeconomic and political challenges confronting many millions of people residing within high-income, liberal-democratic societies: rising poverty and socioeconomic inequality. This article argues that international and domestic human rights law and the social and political imaginaries of the wider human rights community largely fail to adequately diagnose and effectively respond to poverty and inequality within high-income, liberal-democratic societies. As a political and ethical doctrine founded upon a normative commitment to social justice, human rights should be taking the lead in efforts to condemn, understand, and develop responses to the poverty and inequality which blight the lives of many millions of people within many of the world's most affluent and, allegedly, most "liberal” societies. Human rights law has historically not done so. We, as a community, have not done so. This article offers a specific explanation for this continuing failure, by focusing upon the absence of any concerted recognition of or engagement with social class as it contributes to and compounds our exposure to poverty and inequality. Human rights remain largely blind to the many ways in which social class is intricately connected to poverty and inequality. The human rights community within high-income, liberal-democratic societies characteristically fails to take class seriously. Building upon previous writing in this area, this article explains why class is rarely recognized or engaged with by the human rights community. This article also sets out the basis for how we might begin the task of overcoming this highly damaging class blindness, to set the stage for what the author asserts as an urgent need if human rights is to provide the kind of political and ethical leadership required to effectively engage with poverty and inequality in affluent societies: the degentrification of human rights.

CEPP: Canadian Extracorporeal Life Support (ECLS) Protocol Project.

Background: Extracorporeal life support (ECLS) is associated with high morbidity and mortality. Complications and mortality are higher at lower-volume centres. Most Canadian ECLS institutions are low-volume centres. Protocols offer one way to share best practices among institutions to improve outcomes. Whether Canadian centres have ECLS protocols, and whether these protocols are comprehensive and homogenous across centres, is unknown. Methods: Purposeful sampling with mixed methods was used. A Delphi panel defined key elements relevant to the ECLS process. Documentation used in the delivery of ECLS services was requested from programs. Institutional protocols were assessed using deductive coding to determine the presence of key elements. Results: A total of 37 key elements spanning 5 domains (referral, initiation, maintenance, termination, and administration) were identified. Documentation from 13 institutions across 10 provinces was obtained. Institutions with heart or lung transplantation programs had more-complete documentation than did non-transplantation programs. Only 5 key elements were present in at least 50% of protocols (anticoagulation strategy, ventilation strategy, defined referral process, selection criteria, weaning process), and variation was seen in how institutions approached each of these elements. Conclusions: The completeness of ECLS protocols varies across Canada. Programs describe variable approaches to key elements. This variability might represent a lack of evidence or consensus in these areas and creates the opportunity for collaboration among institutions to share protocols and best practice. The key-element framework provides a common language that programs can use to develop ECLS programs, initiate quality-improvement projects, and identify research agendas.

Introduction: L'assistance cardiorespiratoire extracorporelle (ACRE) est associée à des taux élevés de morbidité et de mortalité. Les taux de complications et de mortalité sont plus élevés dans les centres à volume plus faible. La plupart des établissements qui offrent l'ACRE au Canada sont des centres à volume faible. Les protocoles constituent un moyen de partager des pratiques exemplaires entre les établissements afin d'améliorer les résultats. On ignore si les centres du Canada ont des protocoles d'ACRE, et si ces protocoles sont exhaustifs et homogènes dans tous les centres. Méthodes: Nous avons utilisé un échantillonnage dirigé par méthodes mixtes. Le panel Delphi a défini les éléments fondamentaux pertinents au processus d'ACRE. La documentation utilisée pour la prestation de services d'ACRE a été demandée aux programmes. Nous avons évalué les protocoles des établissements au moyen du processus inductif de codification pour déterminer la présence d'éléments fondamentaux. Résultats: Nous avons relevé un total de 37 éléments fondamentaux couvrant cinq domaines (aiguillage, amorce, maintien, cessation et administration). La documentation provenait de 13 établissements de 10 provinces. Les établissements qui ont des programmes de transplantation cardiaque ou pulmonaire avaient une documentation plus complète que les programmes sans transplantation. Seuls cinq éléments fondamentaux étaient présents dans au moins 50 % des protocoles (stratégie d'anticoagulation, stratégie de ventilation, processus défini d'aiguillage, critères de sélection, processus de sevrage), et une variation était observée dans la façon dont les établissements considéraient chacun de ces éléments. Conclusions: Au Canada, l'exhaustivité des protocoles d'ACRE varie. Les programmes décrivent la variabilité des approches des éléments fondamentaux. Cette variabilité qui pourrait représenter le manque de données probantes ou de consensus dans ces domaines ouvre la voie à la collaboration des établissements au partage des protocoles et des pratiques exemplaires. Le cadre des éléments fondamentaux contribue à offrir un langage commun que peuvent utiliser les programmes pour élaborer des programmes d'ACRE, amorcer des projets d'amélioration de la qualité et établir des programmes de recherche.

A Randomized Clinical Trial of Fecal Microbiota Transplant for Alcohol Use Disorder.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Alcohol use disorder (AUD) is associated with microbial alterations that worsen with cirrhosis. Fecal microbiota transplant (FMT) could be a promising approach. APPROACH AND RESULTS: In this phase 1, double-blind, randomized clinical trial, patients with AUD-related cirrhosis with problem drinking (AUDIT-10 > 8) were randomized 1:1 into receiving one placebo or FMT enema from a donor enriched in Lachnospiraceae and Ruminococcaceae. Six-month safety was the primary outcome. Alcohol craving questionnaire, alcohol consumption (urinary ethylglucuronide/creatinine), quality of life, cognition, serum IL-6 and lipopolysaccharide-binding protein, plasma/stool short-chain fatty acids (SCFAs), and stool microbiota were tested at baseline and day 15. A 6-month follow-up with serious adverse event (SAE) analysis was performed. Twenty patients with AUD-related cirrhosis (65 ± 6.4 years, all men, Model for End-Stage Liver Disease 8.9 ± 2.7) with similar demographics, cirrhosis, and AUD severity were included. Craving reduced significantly in 90% of FMT versus 30% in placebo at day 15 (P = 0.02) with lower urinary ethylglucuronide/creatinine (P = 0.03) and improved cognition and psychosocial quality of life. There was reduction in serum IL-6 and lipopolysaccharide-binding protein and increased butyrate/isobutyrate compared with baseline in FMT but not placebo. Microbial diversity increased with higher Ruminococcaceae and other SCFAs, producing taxa following FMT but not placebo, which were linked with SCFA levels. At 6 months, patients with any SAEs (8 vs. 2, P = 0.02), AUD-related SAEs (7 vs. 1, P = 0.02), and SAEs/patient (median [interquartile range], 1.5 [1.25] vs. 0 [0.25] in FMT, P = 0.02) were higher in placebo versus FMT. CONCLUSIONS: This phase 1 trial shows that FMT is safe and associated with short-term reduction in alcohol craving and consumption with favorable microbial changes versus placebo in patients with alcohol-associated cirrhosis with alcohol misuse. There was also a reduction in AUD-related events over 6 months in patients assigned to FMT.

Comparison of mortality risk in patients with cirrhosis and COVID-19 compared with patients with cirrhosis alone and COVID-19 alone: multicentre matched cohort.

OBJECTIVE: Comorbid conditions are associated with poor prognosis in COVID-19. Registry data show that patients with cirrhosis may be at high risk. However, outcome comparisons among patients with cirrhosis+COVID-19 versus patients with COVID-19 alone and cirrhosis alone are lacking. The aim of this study was to perform these comparisons. DESIGN: A multicentre study of inpatients with cirrhosis+COVID-19 compared with age/gender-matched patients with COVID-19 alone and cirrhosis alone was performed. COVID-19 and cirrhosis characteristics, development of organ failures and acute-on-chronic liver failure (ACLF) and mortality (inpatient death+hospice) were compared. RESULTS: 37 patients with cirrhosis+COVID-19 were matched with 108 patients with COVID-19 and 127 patients with cirrhosis from seven sites. Race/ethnicity were similar. Patients with cirrhosis+COVID-19 had higher mortality compared with patients with COVID-19 (30% vs 13%, p=0.03) but not between patients with cirrhosis+COVID-19 and patients with cirrhosis (30% vs 20%, p=0.16). Patients with cirrhosis+COVID-19 versus patients with COVID-19 alone had equivalent respiratory symptoms, chest findings and rates of intensive care unit transfer and ventilation. However, patients with cirrhosis+COVID-19 had worse Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI 6.5±3.1 vs 3.3±2.5, p<0.001), lower presenting GI symptoms and higher lactate. Patients with cirrhosis alone had higher cirrhosis-related complications, maximum model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) score and lower BiPAP/ventilation requirement compared with patients with cirrhosis+COVID-19, but CCI and ACLF rates were similar. In the entire group, CCI (OR 1.23, 95% CI 1.11 to 1.37, p<0.0001) was the only variable predictive of mortality on multivariable regression. CONCLUSIONS: In this multicentre North American contemporaneously enrolled study, age/gender-matched patients with cirrhosis+COVID-19 had similar mortality compared with patients with cirrhosis alone but higher than patients with COVID-19 alone. CCI was the only independent mortality predictor in the entire matched cohort.