Ketamine in the effective management of chronic pain, depression, and posttraumatic stress disorder for Veterans: A meta-analysis and systematic review.

Introduction: Ketamine has emerged as a promising treatment alternative for the management of chronic pain. Despite encouraging findings in civilian populations, and favourable results from trials examining its efficacy in military populations, there is still a dearth of information pointing to optimal specifications related to ketamine administration for pain, depression, and posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) in military populations. This meta-analysis and systematic review synthesised available evidence on the effectiveness, tolerability, and feasibility of ketamine in the management of chronic pain and mental health conditions in military populations. Methods: This review followed the Cochrane's Guide for systematic reviews of interventions and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) as frameworks for data collection and synthesis. Results: A total of 11 studies and 22 independent samples were retained for data analyses. Across samples, improvements in pain, depression, and PTSD outcomes were evident, with the use of ketamine leading to significant reductions, g = 1.76, SE = 0.19, 95% CI (1.39, 2.13), Z = 9.26, p <.001. These effect sizes were robust with moderate-to-large effects. In addition, the reductions in symptoms were observed in both active-duty and Veteran groups, and for different routes of ketamine administration, frequencies of ketamine administration, duration of ketamine treatments, dosage, study design, and allowance for concurrent treatments. Discussion: This review provides a preliminary synthesis of available evidence which suggests that ketamine may be a potential option for the treatment of depression, PTSD, and chronic pain in military populations. The viability of ketamine as an alternative treatment may be particularly impactful for those who are treatment resistant, experience chronic symptoms, and/or have exhausted conventional treatments. More research is warranted in order verify the findings presented in this review.

Preferred labels and language to discuss low-risk lesions that may be cancer precursors: A review.

OBJECTIVES: Patients diagnosed with low-risk lesions are confused about whether they have cancer, and experience similar anxiety to those with invasive cancer, which affects quality of life. Current labels for low-risk lesions were chosen by clinicians and lack meaning to patients. METHODS: We reviewed published research on preferred labels and language for low-risk lesions, and the rationale for those preferences. RESULTS: Of 6569 titles screened, we included 13 studies. Among healthy adults with cervix or prostate lesions, use of the term "cancer" rather than "nodule" or "lesion" resulted in greater anxiety, higher perceived disease severity, and selection of more invasive treatment. Physicians asked about removing "carcinoma" from thyroid lesion labels to reduce patient anxiety and discourage over-treatment did not support this change, instead preferring a term that included "neoplasm". CONCLUSIONS: This review revealed a startling paucity of research on preferences for low-risk lesion labels and language, and associated rationale. Future research is needed to understand how to improve communication about low-risk lesions. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: To reduce anxiety and improve the overall well-being of patients, it is crucial to gain a deeper understanding of how to improve patient-provider conversations regarding screen-detected lesions with a low risk of developing into invasive cancer.

Measuring moral distress and moral injury: A systematic review and content analysis of existing scales.

BACKGROUND: Moral distress (MD) and moral injury (MI) are related constructs describing the negative consequences of morally challenging stressors. Despite growing support for the clinical relevance of these constructs, ongoing challenges regarding measurement quality risk limiting research and clinical advances. This study summarizes the nature, quality, and utility of existing MD and MI scales, and provides recommendations for future use. METHOD: We identified psychometric studies describing the development or validation of MD or MI scales and extracted information on methodological and psychometric qualities. Content analyses identified specific outcomes measured by each scale. RESULTS: We reviewed 77 studies representing 42 unique scales. The quality of psychometric approaches varied greatly across studies, and most failed to examine convergent and divergent validity. Content analyses indicated most scales measure exposures to potential moral stressors and outcomes together, with relatively few measuring only exposures (n = 3) or outcomes (n = 7). Scales using the term MD typically assess general distress. Scales using the term MI typically assess several specific outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Results show how the terms MD and MI are applied in research. Several scales were identified as appropriate for research and clinical use. Recommendations for the application, development, and validation of MD and MI scales are provided.

Parental genome unification is highly error-prone in mammalian embryos.

Most human embryos are aneuploid. Aneuploidy frequently arises during the early mitotic divisions of the embryo, but its origin remains elusive. Human zygotes that cluster their nucleoli at the pronuclear interface are thought to be more likely to develop into healthy euploid embryos. Here, we show that the parental genomes cluster with nucleoli in each pronucleus within human and bovine zygotes, and clustering is required for the reliable unification of the parental genomes after fertilization. During migration of intact pronuclei, the parental genomes polarize toward each other in a process driven by centrosomes, dynein, microtubules, and nuclear pore complexes. The maternal and paternal chromosomes eventually cluster at the pronuclear interface, in direct proximity to each other, yet separated. Parental genome clustering ensures the rapid unification of the parental genomes on nuclear envelope breakdown. However, clustering often fails, leading to chromosome segregation errors and micronuclei, incompatible with healthy embryo development.