Buprenorphine X-waiver exemption - beyond the basics for the obstetrical provider.

Buprenorphine is 1 of 3 medications approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for the treatment of opioid use disorder, and practitioners must obtain a federal waiver to prescribe buprenorphine. Until recently, physicians and advanced practice clinicians were required to complete 8 and 24 hours of training, respectively, before applying for this waiver and to provide psychosocial services when prescribing buprenorphine to ≤30 patients. The US Department of Health and Human Services announced in April 2021 that eligible providers would be exempt from the educational requirement for certification, making the waiver more accessible for those intending to prescribe to ≤30 patients. Here, we reviewed the historic background to the exemption and provided practical guidelines to practitioners caring for obstetrical patients with opioid use disorder who are considering applying for the waiver for the first time. Because the educational requirements will no longer be required for X-waiver application, we reviewed fundamental topics and challenging scenarios that are often reviewed in certification courses.

Retrospective Review on the Safety and Efficacy of Direct Oral Anticoagulants Compared With Warfarin in Patients With Cirrhosis.

PURPOSE: Patients with cirrhosis needing anticoagulation therapy have historically been prescribed warfarin. New retrospective research has concluded that in patients with cirrhosis direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) have similar or lower bleeding rates compared with that of warfarin. This study compares the safety and efficacy of DOACs with that of warfarin in patients with cirrhosis. METHODS: A retrospective chart review was conducted in adult patients with cirrhosis taking either apixaban, dabigatran, edoxaban, rivaroxaban, or warfarin. Exclusion criteria consisted of patients prescribed triple antithrombotic therapy (dual antiplatelet therapy plus an anticoagulant) and indications other than nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) and venous thromboembolism (VTE). The primary endpoint was all-cause bleeding, and the secondary endpoints were failed efficacy and major bleeding as defined by the International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis in 2005. Failed efficacy was a combination endpoint including the development of VTE, stroke, myocardial infarction and/or death. Patient data were collected from the Computerized Patient Record System from October 31, 2014 to October 31, 2018. RESULTS: The study included 42 patients in the DOAC group and 37 patients in the warfarin group. Baseline characteristics were not significantly different between groups except for the Child-Turcotte-Pugh score, Model for End-Stage Liver Disease score, international normalized ratio, and number of days on anticoagulation therapy. The rate of all-cause bleeding in the DOAC group was 16.7% (n = 7) vs 21.6% (n = 8) in the warfarin group (P = .7). The rate of major bleeding in the DOAC group was 2.4% (n = 1) vs 5.4% (n = 2) in the warfarin group (P = .6). The rate of failed efficacy in the DOAC group was 7.1% (n = 3) compared with 8.1% (n = 3) in the warfarin group (P = .9). Subgroup analysis of allcause bleeding did not identify any significant trends between groups. CONCLUSIONS: There were no statistically significant differences identified between the rates of all-cause bleeding, major bleeding, and failed efficacy between the DOACs and warfarin groups. DOACs may be a safe alternative to warfarin in patients with cirrhosis requiring anticoagulation for NVAF or VTE, but large randomized trials are required to confirm these results.

Pain Education With Therapeutic Exercise in Chronic Nonspecific Low Back Pain Rehabilitation: A Critically Appraised Topic.

Clinical Scenario: Low back pain is widely prevalent in the general population as well as in athletes. Therapeutic exercise is a low-risk and effective treatment option for chronic pain that can be utilized by all rehabilitation clinicians. However, therapeutic exercise alone does not address the psychosocial aspects that are associated with chronic low back pain. Pain education is the umbrella term utilized to encompass any type of education to the patient about their chronic pain. Therapeutic exercise in combination with pain education may allow for more well-rounded and effective treatment for patients with chronic nonspecific low back pain (NS-LBP). Clinical Question: Does pain education combined with therapeutic exercise, compared with therapeutic exercise alone, improve patient pain in adults with chronic NS-LBP over a 2- to 3-month treatment period? Summary of Key Findings: A thorough literature review yielded 8 studies potentially relevant to the clinical question, and 3 studies that met the inclusion criteria were included. The 3 studies included reports that exercise therapy reduced symptoms. Two of the 3 included studies support the claim that exercise therapy reduces the symptoms of chronic NS-LBP when combined with pain education, whereas one study found no difference between pain education with therapeutic exercise. Clinical Bottom Line: There is moderate evidence to support the use of pain education along with therapeutic exercise when attempting to reduce symptoms of pain and disability in patients with chronic NS-LBP. Educational interventions should be created to educate patients about the foundation of pain, and pain education should be implemented as a part of the clinician's strategy for the rehabilitation of patients with chronic NS-LBP. Strength of Recommendation: Grade B evidence exists to support the use of patient education with therapeutic exercise for decreasing pain in patients with chronic NS-LBP.

All things considered, my risk for diabetes is medium: A risk personalization process of familial risk for type 2 diabetes.

BACKGROUND: A positive family history of type 2 diabetes (T2D) has been associated with risk awareness and risk-reducing behaviours among the unaffected relatives. Yet, little is known about how people with a positive family history for diabetes develop and manage their personal sense of risk. OBJECTIVE: To characterize two key concepts, salience and vulnerability, within the familial risk perception (FRP) model among unaffected individuals, at increased familial risk for T2D. DESIGN: We conducted a mixed method study. Descriptions of salience and vulnerability were collected through semi-structured interviews. Participant's perception of self-reported risk factors (family history, age, race/ethnicity, medical history, weight and exercise) was measured using the Perceived Risk Factors for T2D Tool and was compared to a clinical evaluation of the same risk factors. RESULTS: We identified two components of salience: (a) concern for developing T2D and (b) risk awareness triggers, and two features of vulnerability: (a) statement of risk and (b) risk assessment devices. Although few participants (26%) were concordant between their perceived and clinical overall T2D risk, concordance for individual risk factors was higher, ranging from 42% (medical history) to 90% (family history). DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: Both familial and non-familial events lead people to contemplate their T2D risk, even among people who have a positive family history. Participants often downplayed their overall risk and underestimated their overall risk compared to a clinical risk assessment of the same self-reported risk factors. Clinicians could leverage key components of the FRP process as way to engage patients in risk reduction strategies earlier.