The Influence of COVID-19 on Utilization of Epidural Procedures in Managing Chronic Spinal Pain in the Medicare Population.

STUDY DESIGN: A retrospective cohort study of utilization patterns and variables of epidural injections in the fee-for-service (FFS) Medicare population. OBJECTIVES: To update the utilization of epidural injections in managing chronic pain in the FFS Medicare population, from 2000 to 2020, and assess the impact of COVID-19. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: The analysis of the utilization of interventional techniques also showed an annual decrease of 2.5% per 100,000 FFS Medicare enrollees from 2009 to 2018, contrasting to an annual increase of 7.3% from 2000 to 2009. The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic has not been assessed. METHODS: This analysis was performed by utilizing master data from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, physician/supplier procedure summary from 2000 to 2020. The analysis was performed by the assessment of utilization patterns using guidance from Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology. RESULTS: Epidural procedures declined at a rate of 19% per 100,000 Medicare enrollees in the FFS Medicare population in the United States from 2019 to 2020, with an annual decline of 3% from 2010 to 2019. From 2000 to 2010, there was an annual increase of 8.3%. This analysis showed a decline in all categories of epidural procedures from 2019 to 2020. The major impact of COVID-19, with closures taking effect from April 1, 2020, through December 31, 2020, will be steeper and rather dramatic compared with April 1 to December 31, 2019. However, monthly data from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services is not available as of now. Overall declines from 2010 to 2019 showed a decrease for cervical and thoracic transforaminal injections with an annual decrease of 5.6%, followed by lumbar interlaminar and caudal epidural injections of 4.9%, followed by 1.8% for lumbar/sacral transforaminal epidurals, and 0.9% for cervical and thoracic interlaminar epidurals. CONCLUSION: Declining utilization of epidural injections in all categories was exacerbated to a decrease of 19% from 2019 to 2020, related, in part, to the COVID-19 pandemic. This followed declining patterns of epidural procedures of 3% overall annually from 2010 to 2019.

Proton Pump Inhibitors, Kidney Damage, and Mortality: An Updated Narrative Review.

Since their approval by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in 1989, proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) have become one of the most highly utilized drugs in the United States, assuming a position as one of the top 10 most prescribed medications in the country. The purpose of PPIs is to limit the amount of gastric acid secreted by the parietal cells via irreversible inhibition of the H+/K+-ATPase pump, therefore maintaining an elevated gastric acid pH of greater than 4 for 15-21 h. Even though PPIs have many clinical uses, they are not without their adverse effects, mimicking achlorhydria. Besides electrolyte abnormalities and vitamin deficiencies, long-term use of PPIs has been linked to acute interstitial nephritis, bone fractures, poor COVID-19 infection outcomes, pneumonia, and possibly an increase in all-cause mortality. The causality between PPI use and increased mortality and disease risk can be questioned since most studies are observational. Confounding variables can greatly affect an observational study and explain the wide-ranging associations with the use of PPIs. Patients on PPIs are generally older, obese, sicker with a higher number of baseline morbidities, and on more medications than the compared PPI non-users. These findings suggest that PPI users are at a higher risk of mortality and complications based on pre-existing conditions. This narrative review aims to update readers on the concerning effects that proton pump inhibitor use can have on patients and give providers a resource to create informed decisions on appropriate PPI use.

Mental Health in Urologic Oncology.

This article is a systematic review of mental health in urologic oncology patients with prostate cancer (PCa), bladder cancer (BC), renal cell carcinoma (RCC), testicular cancer (TC), or penile cancer (PeCa). For all pathologies, a focus on increasing quality of life post-treatment demonstrated a positive impact in reducing Mental Health Illness (MHI) prevalence. Cancer specific mental health care may be given to patients to reduce suicide risk in BC patients and sexual identify and masculinity counseling may improve mental health for TC or PeCa patients. In order to better accommodate patient's mental health needs when undergoing GU cancer treatment, we recommend incorporation of mental health metrics such as questionnaires to assess early treatment of MHI, a greater emphasis on psychosocial support with the patient's loved ones, peers, and healthcare team, alongside advising healthy habits such as exercise which has been shown to drastically reduce MHI incidence across all pathologies. We hope that these measures conducted by urologists and oncologists, alongside possible coordination with psychiatrists and psychologists for psychotherapy, psychopharmacology, and neuro-stimulation treatment modems may be helpful in the long term to reduce MHI incidence in urology oncology patients. Given the higher incidence of MHI in oncology patients and in the patient population after the Covid-19 pandemic, MHI awareness in the sphere of urologic oncologic treatment continues to be crucial when creating a collaborative treatment platform for patients.

Mental Health in Non-Oncologic Urology Patients.

This article is a literature review of mental health concerns in non-oncologic urology patients. Pathologies represented in this review include Peyronie's Disease (PD), erectile dysfunction (ED), urinary incontinence and urinary tract infections (UTI), infertility, benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH), kidney stones, and urinary retention. While there has been great interventional focus as of late for urogenitary malignancies (i.e. prostate cancer awareness with the Movember campaign), literature studies and intervention focused on non-oncologic urology patients has been limited. As such, we conducted a review on urology patients with non-oncologic pathologies as an effort to increase clinician awareness of mental health concerns among such patients, increase the comfort level for clinician communication on socially sensitive topics surrounding pathologies, and review ongoing interventions conducted within these pathologies. We outlined different ongoing Mental Health Illness (MHI) needs and treatments for various pathologies. Patients with non-cancerous urologic pathologies had lower quality of life and higher incidence of MHI than the general population. As such, in line with the American Urological Association recommendations, psychological and social support from peers, therapists, and healthcare providers further prove to be crucial for some subpopulations. The review also yielded pathology specific interventions such as group therapy for ED patients. Given the higher incidence of MHI in the patient population after the Covid-19 pandemic, MHI awareness in the sphere of non-oncologic urology treatment continues to be crucial when creating a collaborative treatment platform for patients.

Tocilizumab for Severe COVID-19 Infection and Multisystem Inflammatory Syndrome in Adults and Children.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) rapidly emerged as a global pandemic, placing imminent stress and burden on healthcare resources and workers worldwide. Many patients who present with a severe COVID-19 infection are at high risk of developing severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), leading to a vast number of patients requiring mechanical ventilation and a high mortality rate. Similar to Middle East respiratory syndrome, COVID-19 demonstrates an initial viral replication phase that manifests as a variety of symptoms typically flu-like in nature, followed by a profound inflammatory response leading to rapid production of cytokines and uncontrolled inflammation. There have also been many cases of COVID-19 in pediatric patients presenting with elevated inflammatory markers and multisystem involvement labeled as a multisystem inflammatory syndrome (MIS-C) by the world health organization (WHO). The recent treatment of systemic inflammatory response to COVID-19 targets the secondary phase involving cytokine release syndrome. The detrimental effects of IL-6 can be profound and elevated levels are associated with a higher mortality rate and mechanical ventilation. Tocilizumab is an IL-6 inhibitor most widely investigated to target cytokine storm syndrome. Since June 2021, the FDA enacted an emergency use authorization for tocilizumab in the treatment of COVID-19. Several clinical trials have investigated tocilizumab combined with corticosteroids for treating severe ARDS associated with COVID-19. An increasing amount of evidence suggests that targeting the cytokine storm syndrome related to COVID-19 can lead to improved outcomes, especially in those patients requiring mechanical ventilation and with a critical illness. Additional studies are warranted to further look at the positive effects of tocilizumab in the COVID-19 population while additionally defining possible adverse effects.

Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Utilization Patterns of Facet Joint Interventions in Managing Spinal Pain in a Medicare Population.

INTRODUCTION: The COVID-19 pandemic resulted in major disruptions in all aspects of human life including a decline of medical services utilized during 2020. An analysis of the impact of COVID-19 pandemic showed an 18.7% reduction in utilization patterns of interventional techniques in managing chronic pain in the Medicare population from 2019 to 2020. However, specific changes in utilization patterns of facet joint interventions have not been studied. Thus, we sought to assess the utilization patterns including an update of facet joint interventions from 2018 to 2020, with analysis of the impact of COVID-19 pandemic in managing chronic spinal pain utilizing facet joint interventions in the fee-for-service Medicare population of the United States. METHODS: The present investigation was designed to assess utilization patterns and variables of facet joint interventions, in managing chronic spinal pain from 2010 to 2020 in the fee-for-service (FFS) Medicare population in the United States (US), and how the COVID-19 pandemic impacted these utilization patterns. Data for the analysis were obtained from the master database from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) physician/supplier procedure summary from 2000 to 2020. RESULTS: Results of this analysis showed significant impact of COVID-19 with overall decrease of 18.5% of all facet joint interventions per 100,000 Medicare population compared to 20.2 and 20.5% decrease for lumbar and cervical facet joint injections, 15 and 13.1% decrease per 100,000 Medicare population of lumbosacral and cervicothoracic facet joint neurolysis procedures. The results are significant in that comparative analysis from 2000 to 2010 and 2010 to 2019 showing an annual increase of 14.4 vs. 2.2%, illustrating a decelerating pattern. There were also significant growth patterns noted with decreases in facet joint injections and nerve blocks compared to facet joint neurolytic procedures. CONCLUSIONS: This analysis shows a significant effect of COVID-19 producing an overall decrease in utilization of facet joint interventions relative to pre-COVID data. Further, the analysis demonstrates continued deceleration of utilization patterns of facet joint interventions compared to the periods of 2000-2010 and 2010-2019.

Pain Management and Telemedicine: A Look at the COVID Experience and Beyond.

COVID-19 caused a drastic change in clinical medicine around the globe. In the United States, telemedicine was rapidly adopted on a wide scale to minimize direct patient interaction and to reduce the spread of the COVID-19 virus. Telemedicine also went hand in hand with the rapid movement of working remotely. This has provided several challenges to chronic pain management clinics along with other subspecialties. Telemedicine has also opened opportunities for providing valuable care for patients with significant barriers to healthcare professionals. Given the benefits and downfalls of telemedicine, it is ultimately up to the provider who has an established patient-physician relationship and best understands the patient's limitations and healthcare needs who can best determine which patient population telemedicine is appropriate for and how frequently it can be utilized for each individual patient.

Mental Health in Urologic Oncology

This article is a systematic review of mental health in urologic oncology patients with prostate cancer (PCa), bladder cancer (BC), renal cell carcinoma (RCC), testicular cancer (TC), or penile cancer (PeCa). For all pathologies, a focus on increasing quality of life post-treatment demonstrated a positive impact in reducing Mental Health Illness (MHI) prevalence. Cancer specific mental health care may be given to patients to reduce suicide risk in BC patients and sexual identify and masculinity counseling may improve mental health for TC or PeCa patients. In order to better accommodate patient’s mental health needs when undergoing GU cancer treatment, we recommend incorporation of mental health metrics such as questionnaires to assess early treatment of MHI, a greater emphasis on psychosocial support with the patient’s loved ones, peers, and healthcare team, alongside advising healthy habits such as exercise which has been shown to drastically reduce MHI incidence across all pathologies. We hope that these measures conducted by urologists and oncologists, alongside possible coordination with psychiatrists and psychologists for psychotherapy, psychopharmacology, and neuro-stimulation treatment modems may be helpful in the long term to reduce MHI incidence in urology oncology patients. Given the higher incidence of MHI in oncology patients and in the patient population after the Covid-19 pandemic, MHI awareness in the sphere of urologic oncologic treatment continues to be crucial when creating a collaborative treatment platform for patients.

Impact Of COVID-19 Pandemic and Updated Utilization Patterns of Sacroiliac Joint Injections from 2000 to 2020 in The Fee-For-Service (FFS) Medicare Population.

BACKGROUND: Among the multiple causes of low back and lower extremity pain, sacroiliac joint pain has shown to be prevalent in 10% to 25% of patients with persistent axial low back pain without disc herniation, discogenic pain, or radiculitis. Over the years, multiple Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes have evolved with the inclusion of intraarticular injections, nerve blocks, and radiofrequency neurotomy, in addition to percutaneous sacroiliac joint fusions. Previous assessments of utilization patterns of sacroiliac joint interventions only included sacroiliac joint intraarticular injections, since the data was not available prior to the introduction of new codes. A recent assessment revealed an increase of 11.3%, and an annual increase of 1.2% per 100,000 Medicare population from 2009 to 2018, showing a decline in growth patterns. During the past 2 years, the COVID-19 pandemic has also had significant effects on the utilization patterns of sacroiliac joint interventions. STUDY DESIGN: The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic and analysis of growth patterns of sacroiliac joint interventions (intraarticular injections, nerve blocks, radiofrequency neurotomy, arthrodesis and fusion) was evaluated from 2010 to 2019 and 2010 to 2020, with a comparative analysis from 2019 to 2020 to assess the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic. OBJECTIVES: To update utilization patterns of sacroiliac joint interventions with assessment of the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) Physician/Supplier Procedure Summary (PSPS) Master dataset was utilized in the present analysis. RESULTS: The results of this evaluation demonstrated a significant impact of the COVID-19 pandemic with a 19.2% decrease of utilization of sacroiliac joint intraarticular injections from 2019 to 2020. There was a 23.3% increase in sacroiliac joint arthrodesis and a 5.3% decrease for sacroiliac joint fusions with small numbers from 2019 to 2020. However, data was not available for sacroiliac joint nerve blocks and sacroiliac joint radiofrequency neurotomy as these codes were incorporated in 2020. Overall, from 2010 to 2019, sacroiliac joint intraarticular injections showed an annual increase of 0.9% per 100,000 Medicare population. Sacroiliac joint arthrodesis and fusion showed an annual increase from 2010 to 2020 per 100,000 Medicare population of 29% for arthrodesis and 13.3% for fusion. LIMITATIONS: Limitations of this study include a lack of inclusion of Medicare Advantage patients constituting approximately 30% to 40% of the overall Medicare population. As with all claims-based data analyses, this study is retrospective and thus potentially limited by bias. Finally, patients who are non-Medicare are not part of the dataset. CONCLUSIONS: The study shows the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic with a significant decrease of intraarticular injections of 19.2% from 2019 to 2020 per 100,000 Medicare population. These decreases of intraarticular injections are accompanied by a 5.3% decrease of fusion, but a 23.3% increase of arthrodesis from 2019 to 2020 per 100,000 Medicare population. Overall, the results showed an annual increase of 0.9% per 100,000 Medicare population for intraarticular injections, a 35.4% annual increase for sacroiliac joint arthrodesis and an increase of 15.5% for sacroiliac joint fusion from 2010 to 2019.

COVID-19 Pandemic Reduced Utilization Of Interventional Techniques 18.7% In Managing Chronic Pain In The Medicare Population In 2020: Analysis Of Utilization Data From 2000 To 2020.

BACKGROUND: Multiple publications have shown the significant impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on US healthcare and increasing costs over the recent years in managing low back and neck pain as well as other musculoskeletal disorders. The COVID-19 pandemic has affected many modalities of treatments, including those related to chronic pain management, including both interventional techniques and opioids. While there have not been assessments of utilization of interventional techniques specific to the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, previous analysis published with data from 2000 to 2018 demonstrated a decline in utilization of interventional techniques from 2009 to 2018 of 6.7%, with an annual decline of 0.8% per 100,000 fee-for-service (FFS) in the Medicare population. During that same time, the Medicare population has grown by 3% annually. OBJECTIVES: The objectives of this analysis include an evaluation of the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, as well as an updated assessment of the utilization of interventional techniques in managing chronic pain in the Medicare population from 2010 to 2019, 2010 to 2020, and 2019 to 2020 in the FFS Medicare population of the United States. STUDY DESIGN: Utilization patterns and variables of interventional techniques with the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic in managing chronic pain were assessed from 2000 to 2020 in the FFS Medicare population of the United States. METHODS: The data for the analysis was obtained from the master database from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) physician/supplier procedure summary from 2000 to 2020. RESULTS: The results of the present investigation revealed an 18.7% decrease in utilization of all interventional techniques per 100,000 Medicare beneficiaries from 2019 to 2020, with a 19% decrease for epidural and adhesiolysis procedures, a 17.5% decrease for facet joint interventions and sacroiliac joint blocks, and a 25.4% decrease for disc procedures and other types of nerve blocks. The results differed from 2000 to 2010 with an annualized increase of 10.2% per 100,000 Medicare population compared to an annualized decrease of 0.4% from 2010 to 2019, and a 2.5% decrease from 2010 to 2020 for all interventional techniques. For epidural and adhesiolysis procedures decreases were more significant and annualized at 3.1% from 2010 to 2019, increasing the decline to 4.8% from 2010 to 2020. For facet joint interventions and sacroiliac joint blocks, the reversal of growth patterns was observed but maintained at an annualized rate increase of 2.1% from 2010 to 2019, which changed to a decrease of 0.01% from 2010 to 2020. Disc procedures and other types of nerve blocks showed similar patterns as epidurals with an 0.8% annualized reduction from 2010 to 2019, which was further reduced to 3.6% from 2010 to 2020 due to COVID-19. LIMITATIONS: Data for the COVID-19 pandemic impact were available only for 2019 and 2020 and only the FFS Medicare population was utilized; utilization patterns in Medicare Advantage Plans, which constitutes almost 40% of the Medicare enrollment in 2020 were not available. Moreover, this analysis shares the limitations present in all retrospective reviews of claims based datasets. CONCLUSION: The decline driven by the COVID-19 pandemic was 18.7% from 2019 to 2020. Overall decline in utilization in interventional techniques from 2010 to 2020 was 22.0% per 100,000 Medicare population, with an annual diminution of 2.5%, despite an increase in the population rate of 3.3% annualized (38.9% overall) and Medicare enrollees of 33.4% and 2.9% annually.

Addiction and COVID: Issues, Challenges, and New Telehealth Approaches

In recent decades, the United States has seen a substantial increase in the number of people diagnosed with substance use disorder (SUD). Both SUDs and COVID-19 separately have had, and continue to have, a widespread impact on our society. While they are two distinct entities, they are intricately related and have been shown to influence one another. Lockdown mandates intended to enhance public safety produced unintended consequences for people with SUDs by decreasing access to treatment and disrupting their current care. Telehealth could offer a solution to this disruption as its utilization expands the provider's reach and increases access to treatment in underserved populations, including those with SUDs. The use of telemedicine seems to result in higher rates of patient satisfaction, compliance, and treatment retention rates while maintaining the need for social distancing. Even when pandemic restrictions resolve, telehealth can continue to provide invaluable benefits to individuals with addiction, particularly those in rural America. In summary, ongoing research regarding telehealth delivery and the expansion of telehealth is a byproduct of the pandemic and can advance the American healthcare system beyond the days of COVID-19. This manuscript will review studies regarding the use of telehealth in SUD with the hope that further research within and beyond the COVID-19 pandemic will lead to the increased use of telehealth by those involved in and those receiving care for SUDs.

The Impact of COVID-19 on Interventional Pain Management Practices is Significant and Long-Lasting: An Interventional Pain Management Physician Survey

BACKGROUND: As with many others in the house of medicine, the COVID-19 pandemic has adversely impacted the practice of interventional pain management. This in part relates to various state health authority or medical board restrictions with reductions in patient volume for evaluations, follow-ups, and procedures. Of course, the pandemic continues to persist which is in turn leading to longer-lasting effects. Our previous survey was performed in March 2020. At that time, there was a national lockdown in the United States with COVID-19 disease qualifying as a pandemic by the World Health Organization (WHO). The pandemic caused by COVID-19 disease continues to have far-reaching implications on how we deliver routine care to patients and its effect on patient care, economic aspects, and health of interventional pain management providers. OBJECTIVE: To assess the current and expected future impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on interventional pain management practices in a physician survey. The study was performed based on performance in 2021 compared to the 2019 pre-COVID era. METHODS: The American Society of Interventional Pain Physicians (ASIPP) administered a 16-question survey to their members by contacting them via a commercially available online marketing company platform. The survey was completed on www.constantcontact.com. RESULTS: The results showed that 88% of the providers experienced a reduction in income and a similar number expect decreases over the next 12 months. A large proportion of respondents (73.3%) reported a reduction in revenue of 11%-25%. In contrast, another 21.5% reported a revenue decline of 26%-50%, and 29% reported 11%-25% increase in expenses. Overall, new patient volume decreased 11%-25% based on the response from almost 63%, whereas almost 9% reported a decline of 26%-50%. In contrast, established patient volume declined 1%-10% as reported by 64% of the respondents, compared to an 11%-25% decrease by a small proportion of 14%. All interventional procedures showed significant decreases across the board, with 69% of the respondents reporting a decline in-office procedures, 64% in ambulatory surgery center (ASC) procedures, and 57% in hospital outpatient department (HOPD) procedures, ranging from 11%-25%. LIMITATIONS: The survey included a relatively small number of member physicians which could introduce sampling error. Consequently, it may not be generalizable for other specialties or even to pain medicine. CONCLUSION: The COVID-19 pandemic has put interventional pain practices throughout the United States under considerable financial and psychological stress. This study seeks to quantify the extent of economic loss and other challenges resultant from the pandemic. Almost 99% reported a decrease in revenues in the last 12 months, with 86% reporting an expected reduction in the next 12 months and 49% reporting an increase in expenses. Declines have been reported in all sectors with new patients, office procedures, ASC, and HOPD procedures, except for established patient visits, which have shown minor declines compared to other domains. Understanding the issues facing interventional pain management physicians facilitates the development of strategies to actively manage provider practice/well-being, and to minimize risk to personnel to keep patients safe.

Fourth Wave of Opioid (Illicit Drug) Overdose Deaths and Diminishing Access to Prescription Opioids and Interventional Techniques: Cause and Effect

BACKGROUND: In the midst of the COVID-19 pandemic, data has shown that age-adjusted overdose death rates involving synthetic opioids, psychostimulants, cocaine, and heroin have been increasing, including prescription opioid deaths, which were declining, but, recently, reversing the trends. Contrary to widely held perceptions, the problem of misuse, abuse, and diversion of prescription opioids has been the least of all the factors in recent years. Consequently, it is important to properly distinguish between the role of illicit and prescription opioids in the current opioid crisis. Multiple efforts have been based on consensus on administrative policies for certain harm reduction strategies for individuals actively using illicit drugs and reducing opioid prescriptions leading to curbing of medically needed opioids, which have been ineffective. While there is no denial that prescription opioids can be misused, abused, and diverted, the policies have oversimplified the issue by curbing prescription opioids and the pendulum has swung too far in the direction of severely limiting prescription opioids, without acknowledgement that opioids have legitimate uses for persons suffering from chronic pain. Similar to the opioid crisis, interventional pain management procedures have been affected by various policies being applied to reduce overuse, abuse, and finally utilization. Medical policies have been becoming more restrictive with reduction of access to certain procedures, with the pendulum swinging too far in the direction of limiting interventional techniques. Recent utilization assessments have shown a consistent decline for most interventional techniques, with a 18.7% decrease from 2019 to 2020. The causes for these dynamic changes are multifactorial likely including the misapplication of the 2016 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) guidelines for prescribing opioids for chronic pain, the relative ease of access to illicit synthetic opioids and more recently issues related to the COVID-19 pandemic. In addition, recent publications have shown association of dose tapering with overdose or mental health crisis among patients prescribed long-term opioids. These findings are leading to the hypothesis that federal guidelines may inadvertently be contributing to an increase in overall opioid deaths and diminished access to interventional techniques. Together, these have resulted in a fourth wave of the opioid epidemic. METHODS: A narrative review. RESULTS: The fourth wave results from a confluence of multiple factors, including misapplication of CDC guidelines, the increased availability of illicit drugs, the COVID-19 pandemic, and policies reducing access to interventional procedures. The CDC guidelines and subsequent regulatory atmosphere have led to aggressive tapering up to and including, at times, the overall reduction or stoppage of opioid prescriptions. Forced tapering has been linked to an increase of 69% for overdoses and 130% for mental health crisis. The data thus suggests that the diminution in access to opioid prescriptions may be occurring simultaneously with an increase in illicit narcotic use. Combined with CDC guidelines, the curbing of opioid prescriptions to medically needed individuals, among non-opioid treatments, interventional techniques have been affected with declining utilization rates and medical policies reducing access to such modalities. CONCLUSION: The opioid overdose waves over the past three decades have resulted from different etiologies. Wave one was associated with prescription opioid overdose deaths and wave two with the rise in heroin and overdose deaths from 1999 to 2013. Wave three was associated with a rise in synthetic opioid overdose deaths. Sadly, wave four continues to escalate with increasing number of deaths as a confluence of factors including the CDC guidelines, the COVID pandemic, increased availability of illicit synthetic opioids and the reduction of access to interventional techniques, which leads patients to seek remedies on their own.

Pharmacologic and Clinical Considerations of Nalmefene, a Long Duration Opioid Antagonist, in Opioid Overdose

Opioid use disorder is a well-established and growing problem in the United States. It is responsible for both psychosocial and physical damage to the affected individuals with a significant mortality rate. Given both the medical and non-medical consequences of this epidemic, it is important to understand the current treatments and approaches to opioid use disorder and acute opioid overdose. Naloxone is a competitive mu-opioid receptor antagonist that is used for the reversal of opioid intoxication. When given intravenously, naloxone has an onset of action of approximately 2 min with a duration of action of 60–90 min. Related to its empirical dosing and short duration of action, frequent monitoring of the patient is required so that the effects of opioid toxicity, namely respiratory depression, do not return to wreak havoc. Nalmefene is a pure opioid antagonist structurally similar to naltrexone that can serve as an alternative antidote for reversing respiratory depression associated with acute opioid overdose. Nalmefene is also known as 6-methylene naltrexone. Its main features of interest are its prolonged duration of action that surpasses most opioids and its ability to serve as an antidote for acute opioid overdose. This can be pivotal in reducing healthcare costs, increasing patient satisfaction, and redistributing the time that healthcare staff spend monitoring opioid overdose patients given naloxone.

Efficacy of Radiofrequency Neurotomy in Chronic Low Back Pain: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

PURPOSE: The objective of the systematic review and meta-analysis is to evaluate the efficacy of radiofrequency neurotomy as a therapeutic lumbar facet joint intervention. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Utilizing the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) checklist, a systematic review and meta-analysis was performed. A comprehensive literature search of multiple data sources from 1966 to September 2020 including manual searches of bibliography of known review articles was performed. The inclusion criteria were based on the selection of patients with chronic low back pain with diagnosis confirmed based on controlled diagnostic blocks and with the publication of at least 6 months of results of appropriate outcome parameters. Quality assessment of the trials was performed with Cochrane review criteria and interventional pain management techniques-quality appraisal of reliability and risk of bias assessment (IPM-QRB). The level of evidence of effectiveness is classified at five levels ranging from Level I to Level V. The primary outcome measure was a significant reduction in pain, eg, short term (up to 6 months) and long term (more than 6 months). The secondary outcome measure was an improvement in functional status. RESULTS: A total of 12 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) met the inclusion criteria for evaluating the efficacy of lumbar radiofrequency neurotomy. Radiofrequency neurotomy showed Level II evidence for efficacy for both the short term and long term. CONCLUSION: This systematic review of the assessment of the efficacy of radiofrequency neurotomy in managing chronic low back pain was based on the inclusion of 12 RCTs with a diagnostic block and at least 6 months of follow-up results that showed Level II evidence for both short-term and long-term improvement.

Biology of COVID-19 and related viruses: Epidemiology, signs, symptoms, diagnosis, and treatment.

Coronaviruses belong to the family Coronaviridae order Nidovirales and are known causes of respiratory and intestinal disease in various mammalian and avian species. Species of coronaviruses known to infect humans are referred to as human coronaviruses (HCoVs). While traditionally, HCoVs have been a significant cause of the common cold, more recently, emergent viruses, including severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) has caused a global pandemic. Here, we discuss coronavirus disease (COVID-19) biology, pathology, epidemiology, signs and symptoms, diagnosis, treatment, and recent clinical trials involving promising treatments.

COVID-19 and the Opioid Epidemic: Two Public Health Emergencies That Intersect With Chronic Pain.

The COVID-19 pandemic has affected the entire world and catapulted the United States into one of the deepest recessions in history. While this pandemic rages, the opioid crisis worsens. During this period, the pandemic has resulted in the decimation of most conventional medical services, including those of chronic pain management, with the exception of virtual care and telehealth. Many chronic pain patients have been impacted in numerous ways, with increases in cardiovascular disease, mental health problems, cognitive dysfunction, and early death. The epidemic has also resulted in severe economic and physiological consequences for providers. Drug deaths in America, which fell for the first time in 25 years in 2018, rose to record numbers in 2019 and are continuing to climb, worsened by the coronavirus pandemic. The opioid epidemic was already resurfacing with a 5% increase in overall deaths from 2018; however, the preliminary data show that prescription opioid deaths continued to decline, while at the same time deaths due to fentanyl, methamphetamine, and cocaine climbed, with some reductions in heroin deaths. The health tracker data also showed that along with an almost 88% decline in elective surgeries, pain-related prescriptions declined 15.1%. Despite increases in telehealth, outpatient services declined and only began returning towards normal at an extremely slow pace, accompanied by reduced productivity and increased practice costs. This review, therefore, emphasizes the devastating consequences of concurrent epidemics on chronic pain management and the need to develop best practice efforts to preserve access to treatment for chronic pain.

Disinfectants In Interventional Practices.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: This review aims to provide relevant, aggregate information about a variety of disinfectants and antiseptics, along with potential utility and limitations. While not exhaustive, this review's goal is to add to the body of literature available on this topic and give interventional providers and practitioners an additional resource to consider when performing procedures. RECENT FINDINGS: In the current SARS-CoV2 epidemiological environment, infection control and costs associated with healthcare-associated infections (HAIs) are of paramount importance. Even before the onset of SARS-CoV2, HAIs affected nearly 2million patients a year in the USA and resulted in nearly 90,000 deaths, all of which resulted in a cost to hospitals ranging from US$28 billion to 45 billion. The onset SARS-CoV2, though not spread by an airborne route, has heightened infection control protocols in hospitals and, as such, cast a renewed focus on disinfectants and their utility across different settings and organisms. The aim of this review is to provide a comprehensive overview of disinfectants used in the inpatient setting.

Impact of COVID-19 infection on the cardiovascular system: An evidence-based analysis of risk factors and outcomes.

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), also known as COVID-19, emerged in late 2019 in Wuhan, China. The World Health Organization declared the virus a pandemic on March 11, 2020. Disease progression from COVID-19 infection has shown significant symptom manifestations within organ systems beyond the respiratory system. The literature has shown increasing evidence of cardiovascular involvement during disease course and an associated increase in mortality among infected patients. Although the understanding of this novel virus is continually evolving, it is currently proposed that the mechanism by which the SARS-CoV-2 virus contributes to cardiovascular manifestations involves the ACE2 transmembrane protein. The protein ACE2 is highly expressed in blood vessel pericytes, and infection can result in microvascular dysfunction and subsequent acute coronary syndromes. Complications involving the cardiovascular system include myocardial infarction, arrhythmias, shock, and heart failure. In this evidence-based review, we discuss risk factors of cardiovascular involvement in COVID-19 infection, pathophysiology of COVID-19-related cardiovascular infection, and injury, COVID-19 effects on the cardiovascular system and corresponding treatments, and hematologic effects of COVID-19 and COVID-19 in heart transplant patients. Clinicians managing COVID-19 patients should appreciate the potential cardiovascular effects related to the disease process.

COVID-19 impact on the renal system: Pathophysiology and clinical outcomes.

Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) causes many deleterious effects throughout the body. Prior studies show that the incidence of acute kidney injury in COVID-19 patients could be as high as 25%. There are also autopsy reports showing evidence of viral tropism to the renal system. In this regard, COVID-19 can damage the kidneys and increase a patient's risk of requiring dialysis. Available evidence suggests that renal involvement in COVID-19 infection is not uncommon, and there has been an increased incidence of chronic kidney disease related to the pandemic. In this literature analysis, we address COVID-19 and its effects on the renal system, including the pathophysiologic mechanisms. We also address current studies on the causes of injury to the renal system, the cause of kidney failure, its effect on mortality, the impact on dialysis patients, and the impact on renal transplant patients. COVID-19 disease may have unique features in individuals on chronic dialysis and kidney transplant recipients, requiring increased vigilance in limiting viral transmission in perioperative, in-patient, and dialysis center settings.