Hepatitis C care cascade among persons born 1945-1965: 3 medical centers.

OBJECTIVES: Effective screening, diagnosis, and treatment are needed to reduce chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection-associated morbidity and mortality. In order to successfully increase HCV treatment, it is necessary to identify and understand gaps in linkage of antibody-positive patients with newly identified HCV to subsequent HCV RNA testing, clinical evaluation, and treatment. STUDY DESIGN: To estimate attainment of HCV care cascade steps among antibody-positive patients with newly identified HCV, we conducted chart reviews of patients with a new positive HCV antibody test at 3 academic medical centers participating in the Birth-Cohort Evaluation to Advance Screening and Testing of Hepatitis C (BEST-C) study. METHODS: We tracked receipt of RNA testing, clinical evaluation, treatment initiation, and treatment completion among individuals born between 1945 and 1965 who were newly diagnosed as HCV antibody-positive between December 2012 and October 2015 at 3 BEST-C centers, predominantly from the participating medical centers' primary care practices and emergency departments. RESULTS: Of the 130 HCV-seropositive individuals identified, 118 (91%) had an RNA or genotype test, 75 (58%) were RNA-positive, 73 (56%) were linked to care, 22 (17% overall; 29% among RNA-positive) started treatment, and 21 (16%; 28% among RNA-positive) completed treatment. CONCLUSIONS: This analysis showed that although linkage to care was largely successful in the target birth cohort, the largest gap in the HCV care cascade was seen in initiating treatment. Greater emphasis on linking patients to clinical evaluation and treatment is necessary in order to achieve the public health benefits promised by birth-cohort testing.

Hepatitis C virus testing for case identification in persons born during 1945-1965: Results from three randomized controlled trials.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and US Preventive Services Task Force recommend one-time hepatitis C virus (HCV) testing for persons born during 1945-1965 (birth cohort). However, few studies estimate the effect of birth cohort (BC) testing implementation on HCV diagnoses in primary care settings. We aimed to determine the probability of identifying HCV infections in primary care using targeted BC testing compared with usual care at three academic medical centers. From December 2012 to March 2014, each center compared one of three distinct interventions with usual care using an independently designed randomized controlled trial. Across centers, BC patients with no clinical documentation of previous HCV testing or diagnosis were randomly assigned to receive a one-time offering of HCV antibody (anti-HCV) testing via one of three independent implementation strategies (repeated-mailing outreach, electronic medical record-integrated provider best practice alert [BPA], and direct patient solicitation) or assigned to receive usual care. We estimated model-adjusted risk ratios (aRR) of anti-HCV-positive (anti-HCV+) identification using BC testing versus usual care. In the repeated mailing trial, 8992 patients (intervention, n = 2993; control, n = 5999) were included in the analysis. The intervention was eight times as likely to identify anti-HCV+ patients compared with controls (aRR, 8.0; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.8-23.0; adjusted probabilities: intervention, 0.27%; control, 0.03%). In the BPA trial, data from 14,475 patients (BC, n = 8928; control, n = 5,547) were analyzed. The intervention was 2.6 times as likely to identify anti-HCV+ patients versus controls (aRR, 2.6; 95% CI, 1.1-6.4; adjusted probabilities: intervention, 0.29%; control, 0.11%). In the patient-solicitation trial, 8873 patients (BC, n = 4307; control, n = 4566) were analyzed. The intervention was five times as likely to identify anti-HCV+ patients compared with controls (aRR, 5.3; 95% CI, 2.3-12.3; adjusted probabilities: intervention, 0.68%; control, 0.11%). Conclusion: BC testing was effective in identifying previously undiagnosed HCV infections in primary care settings. (Hepatology 2018;67:524-533).

Magnets applied to acupuncture points as therapy - a literature review.

OBJECTIVES: To summarise the acu-magnet therapy literature and determine if the evidence justifies further investigation of acu-magnet therapy for specific clinical indications. METHODS: Using various search strategies, a professional librarian searched six electronic databases (PubMed, AMED, ScienceDirect College Edition, China Academic Journals, Acubriefs, and the in-house Journal Article Index maintained by the Oregon College of Oriental Medicine Library). English and Chinese language human studies with all study designs and for all clinical indications were included. Excluded were experimental and animal studies, electroacupuncture and transcranial magnetic stimulation. Data were extracted on clinical indication, study design, number, age and gender of subjects, magnetic devices used, acu-magnet dosing regimens (acu-point site of magnet application and frequency and duration of treatment), control devices and control groups, outcomes, and adverse events. RESULTS: Three hundred and eight citations were retrieved and 50 studies met our inclusion criteria. We were able to obtain and translate (when necessary) 42 studies. The language of 31 studies was English and 11 studies were in Chinese. The 42 studies reported on 32 different clinical conditions in 6453 patients from 19862007. A variety of magnetic devices, dosing regimens and control devices were used. Thirty seven of 42 studies (88%) reported therapeutic benefit. The only adverse events reported were exacerbation of hot flushes and skin irritation from adhesives. CONCLUSIONS: Based on this literature review we believe further investigation of acu-magnet therapy is warranted particularly for the management of diabetes and insomnia. The overall poor quality of the controlled trials precludes any evidence based treatment recommendations at this time.