A 2-Year Randomized Controlled Trial With Low-Dose B-Vitamin Supplementation Shows Benefits on Bone Mineral Density in Adults With Lower B12 Status.

Folate, vitamins B12, B6, and riboflavin are required for one-carbon metabolism and may affect bone health, but no previous randomized trial has investigated all four nutrients in this context. We investigated the effect of low-dose B-vitamins for 2 years on bone mineral density (BMD) in a dual-centered, 2-year randomized controlled trial (RCT) in adults aged ≥50 years. Eligible participants not consuming B-vitamin supplements or fortified foods >4 times weekly were randomized to receive daily either combined folic acid (200 µg), vitamin B12 (10 µg), vitamin B6 (10 mg), and riboflavin (5 mg), or "active" placebo, whereby both the intervention and placebo groups received vitamin D (10 µg). BMD was assessed before and after intervention using dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) scanning of the total hip, femoral neck, and lumbar spine (L1 to L4). Of 205 eligible participants randomized, 167 completed the trial in full. B-vitamin intervention resulted in increases in serum folate (p < 0.001), serum B12 (p < 0.001), and plasma pyridoxal-5-phosphate (p < 0.001) and decreases in functional biomarkers of B-vitamin status, erythrocyte glutathione reductase activation coefficient (p < 0.001), serum methylmalonic acid (MMA; p < 0.001), and serum total homocysteine (p < 0.001). B-vitamin intervention had no overall effect on BMD, which declined in both treatment groups by approximately 1% (ranging from -0.7% to -1.4%). However, in participants with lower baseline B12 status (serum B12 <246 pmol/L or MMA ≥0.22 µmol/L), B-vitamin intervention reduced the 2-year BMD decline versus placebo: adjusted mean (95% confidence interval [CI]) change of -0.003 (-0.008, 0.002) versus -0.015 (-0.021, -0.010) g/cm2 at the total hip and -0.004 (-0.010, 0.001) versus -0.013 (-0.018, -0.007) g/cm2 at the femoral neck. In conclusion, the findings indicate that although low-dose B-vitamin intervention for 2 years had no overall effect on BMD, improving B-vitamin status appears to have specific benefits for bone health in adults with lower B12 status. © 2022 The Authors. Journal of Bone and Mineral Research published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Society for Bone and Mineral Research (ASBMR).

Nurses', physicians' and radiographers' perceptions of the safety of a nurse prescribing of ionising radiation initiative: A cross-sectional survey.

BACKGROUND: A new initiative was introduced in Ireland following legislative changes that allowed nurses with special training to prescribe ionising radiation (X-ray) for the first time. A small number of studies on nurse prescribing of ionising radiation in other contexts have found it to be broadly as safe as ionising radiation prescribing by physicians. Sociological literature on perceptions of safety indicates that these tend to be shaped by the ideological position of the professional rather than based on objective evidence. OBJECTIVES: To describe, compare and analyse perceptions of the safety of a nurse prescribing of ionising radiation initiative across three occupational groups: nursing, radiography and medicine. DESIGN: A cross-sectional survey design. SETTINGS: Participants were drawn from a range of clinical settings in Ireland. PARTICIPANTS: Respondents were 167 health professionals comprised of 49 nurses, 91 radiographers, and 27 physicians out of a total of 300 who were invited to participate. Non-probability sampling was employed and the survey was targeted specifically at health professionals with a specific interest in, or involvement with, the development of the nurse prescribing of ionising radiation initiative in Ireland. METHODS: Comparisons of perspectives on the safety of nurse prescribing of ionising radiation across the three occupational groups captured by questionnaire were analysed using the Kruskal-Wallis H test. Pairwise post hoc tests were conducted using the Mann-Whitney U test. RESULTS: While the majority of respondents from all three groups perceived nurse prescribing of ionising radiation to be safe, the extent to which this view was held varied. A higher proportion of nurses was found to display confidence in the safety of nurse prescribing of ionising radiation compared to physicians and radiographers with differences between nurses' perceptions and those of the other two groups being statistically significant. CONCLUSION: That an occupational patterning emerged suggests that perceptions about safety and risk of nurse prescribing of ionising radiation are socially constructed according to the vantage point of the professional and may not reflect objective measures of safety. These findings need to be considered more broadly in the context of ideological barriers to expanding the role of nurses.