Give Me A Boost: A Child Passenger Safety Educational Intervention.

BACKGROUND: Motor vehicle crashes (MVCs) are a leading cause of morbidity and mortality among children, yet belt-positioning booster seats remain underutilized. This study analyzed the impact of a provider-oriented child passenger safety (CPS) educational intervention on pediatric resident confidence, knowledge, and counseling behavior in the primary care setting. METHODS: Pre- and post-educational intervention cross- sectional surveys were distributed to pediatric residents focusing on confidence, knowledge, barriers to, and frequency of CPS discussions. RESULTS: Pre-intervention, only 16% (95% CI: 6.2-32%) of respondents reported confidence in their knowledge of the American Academy of Pediatrics' (AAP) booster seat recommendations. Post-intervention frequency of CPS discussion, confidence and knowledge in all measured aspects increased. CONCLUSIONS: While pediatric residents are well positioned for CPS counseling, they lack adequate baseline knowledge of CPS recommendations, particularly for booster seats. Brief educational interventions can increase and maintain provider knowledge and confidence in counseling families on appropriate child car safety seats.

Ethics of Implementing US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendations for Childhood Obesity.

Childhood obesity represents a serious and growing concern for the United States. Its negative consequences for health and well-being can be far-reaching, devastating, and intergenerational. In 2017, the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) issued a grade B recommendation for screening children and adolescents for obesity and offering or referring to comprehensive, intensive behavioral interventions as indicated. However, many communities in the United States have limited access to such interventions. The USPSTF's mission is to review and grade research evidence for clinical preventive services and does not include cost or population-based operationalization and implementation logistics considerations for its recommendations. Yet implementing recommendations without considering cost and operationalization may lead to equity and access challenges. These are essential considerations, but oversight of the implementation of these recommendations is not standardized or assigned to any one agency or organization. As such, a central ethical feature inherent to the implementation of USPSTF recommendations calls for stakeholder collaborations to take on the next step beyond the establishment of evidence-based recommendations: to ensure the ethical application of such guidelines across diverse populations. Furthermore, the screening-intervention relationship inherent to this USPSTF recommendation raises ethical concerns regarding US societal norms surrounding obesity, particularly when contrasted against other screening-intervention modalities. More efforts, such as increased incentives or expansion of clinical services in low-resource areas, should be taken to facilitate this recommended intervention by expanding access to childhood obesity interventions to fulfill ethical responsibilities to equity and to ensure the right to open futures for children.

Poor Sustained Virological Response in a Multicenter Real-Life Cohort of Chronic Hepatitis C Patients Treated with Pegylated Interferon and Ribavirin plus Telaprevir or Boceprevir.

BACKGROUND: There are limited data analyzing the effectiveness of boceprevir (BOC) or telaprevir (TVR) in combination with pegylated interferon (PEG-IFN) plus ribavirin (RBV) in a real-life patient cohort. AIMS: In clinical trials, patients with chronic hepatitis C (CHC) treated with BOC or TVR plus PEG-IFN and RBV achieved sustained virological response (SVR) rates of 70 %. However, it is not clear whether similar results can be realized in routine practice. Our goal is to examine SVR rates of these triple regimens for CHC in a multicenter real-life patient cohort. METHODS: We retrospectively studied 200 consecutive CHC genotype 1 patients who were initiated on PEG-IFN, RBV, and either TVR (n = 113) or BOC (n = 87) from July 2011 to February 2014 at two US academic liver clinics, a Veterans Affairs liver clinic and a community gastroenterology clinic. RESULTS: Both BOC and TVR treatment groups were similar in regard to comorbidities, BMI, and HCV RNA levels. BOC patients were more likely to have cirrhosis than TVR patients (47 vs. 24 %, P = 0.001). SVR rates were low in both cohorts (40 % for BOC, 53 % for TVR, P = 0.05). On multivariate logistic regression, treatment adherence by the "80/80/80 rule," diagnosis of cirrhosis, and use of erythropoietin were statistically significant predictors for SVR. Of these, treatment adherence was the strongest predictor (OR 4.43, 95 % CI 2.8-6.06, P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: SVR was much lower in a real-life patient cohort than in clinical trials (53 % for TVR and 40 % for BOC, compared to 66-75 % in clinical trials).

New triple therapy for chronic hepatitis C: real life clinical experience in a community setting.

Recent advances in treatment of chronic hepatitis C virus have improved significantly due to the introduction of two new protease inhibitors-telaprevir and boceprevir. In combination with the previous standard of care, peginterferon and ribavirin, telaprevir and boceprevir have demonstrated improved sustained virologic response rates for HCV genotype 1 patients by approximately 30%. The purpose of this study was to assess the validity of large clinical trial data with respect to efficacy and side effects in a community setting in Honolulu, Hawai'i. This retrospective study was performed by reviewing the charts of 59 chronic HCV patients who were started on triple therapy from July 1, 2011 to July 7, 2012. Sustained virologic response was attained by 73% of patients treated with telaprevir and 46% of patients treated with boceprevir respectively. Our clinical experience with telaprevir demonstrates that SVR rates are compatible with published literature values. Rates of SVR in our cohort were also similar to those reported in cirrhotic patients - about 50%. Due to small number of patients treated with a boceprevir-based regimen, it is difficult to compare our experience with pivotal trial experience. The side effect profiles for the two protease inhibitors were similar to the literature values except for more rectal irritation and a higher incidence and severity of anemia on telaprevir therapy in the clinical setting. While not intended to be conclusive, our study demonstrates that clinical trial data are largely compatible with the outcomes obtained in our community setting.