A mixed methods study exploring requests for unproven COVID therapies such as ivermectin and healthcare distrust in the rural South.

The COVID-19 pandemic has led to contentious discourse regarding unproven COVID-19 therapies (UCTs),(e.g. ivermectin). Despite recommendations against it, ivermectin remains, in some areas, highly demanded. The goal of this study is to understand patient and provider perspectives about UCTs (e.g., ivermectin) and how responses to requests for UCTs impact healthcare distrust. This mixed methods observational study was conducted in a rural healthcare system in the Southern United States. Adults (n = 26) with a history of COVID-19 or clinicians (n = 8) from the same system were interviewed using questionnaires assessing healthcare distrust and qualitatively interviewed exploring perceptions about UCTs. Patient themes were: 1) Importance of anecdotal stories for decision-making; 2) Use of haphazard approaches to 'research'; 3) Strong distrust of government and healthcare organizations; 4) Inherent trust in local healthcare; 5) Decision-making as weighing pros/cons; and 6) Feeling a right to try medications. High survey medians indicated high distrust with differences of 8.5 points for those who requested/used ivermectin versus those who did not (p = 0.027). Clinician themes were: 1) Frustration when patients trust social media over clinicians; 2) Acceptance of community beliefs about UCTs; 3) Distrust originating outside of the healthcare system; 4) Feeling torn about prescribing UCTs to build trust; and 5) Variable educational strategies. When clinicians are perceived as aligned with government, this may void patients' trust of clinicians. Clinicians should leverage trust in local healthcare and distance themselves from distrusted information sources. Ethical questions arise regarding appropriateness of acquiescing to patient requests for ivermectin for building trust.

Use of a new ALS specific respiratory questionnaire: the ARES score.

Objective: To develop an ALS respiratory symptom scale (ARES) and evaluate how ARES compares to Medical Research Council Modified Dyspnea Scale (MRC), Borg dyspnea scale, and respiratory subscores from ALSFRS-R (ALSFRS-Resp) in detecting respiratory symptoms, correlation with pulmonary function and ALSFRS-R, and deterioration of pulmonary function and ALSFRS-R over time.Methods: The ARES scale consists of 9 questions addressing dyspnea during activities and 3 questions addressing symptoms of worsening pulmonary function. 153 subjects with ALS completed MRC, Borg, ALSFRS-R, and ARES questionnaires at baseline, 16, 32, and 48 weeks, and spirometry at baseline. 73 of these subjects had spirometry, maximum inspiratory (MIP) and expiratory pressures (MEP), nasal inspiratory pressure (SNIP), and maximum voluntary ventilation (MVV) measured at each visit. Sensitivity of each scale and correlations between symptom scores, pulmonary function, and ALSFRS-R were evaluated at baseline and over the study duration.Results and conclusions: ARES was more sensitive than MRC, Borg and ALSFRS-Resp scales at baseline and for detecting changes at 16 and 32 weeks. ARES and ALSFRS-Resp correlated significantly with vital capacity at baseline, but Borg and MRC did not. Only ALSFRS-Resp correlated with respiratory pressures. Changes in ALSFRS-Resp and ARES both correlated with vital capacity decline; however, changes in ARES had superior correlation with respiratory pressure decline. Comparisons between telephone and in-person administration of ARES met criteria for satisfactory test-retest correlation in different settings one week apart. These findings suggest that the ARES may be more useful in monitoring symptom progression in ALS than other available scales.

Economic Impact of Coverage Expansion for Non-invasive Prenatal Testing Through a Performance-Based Risk-Sharing Agreement.

BACKGROUND: Harvard Pilgrim Health Care expanded coverage for non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) to include all pregnant, single-gestation women aged < 35 years, through a performance-based risk-sharing (PBRS) agreement with Illumina to offset costs from coverage expansion. NIPT analyzes cell-free DNA fragments from a maternal blood sample to screen for fetal aneuploidies and is considered a more accurate screening method than conventional serum biochemical screening and nuchal translucency ultrasound-based approaches. OBJECTIVE: This study assessed the impact of NIPT coverage expansion on prenatal screening strategies and payer expenditures. METHODS: This was a real-world comparison of utilization and expenditures of prenatal screening and diagnostic testing in pregnant women aged < 35 years pre- (1 March 2016-28 February 2018) and post- (1 March 2018-30 September 2019) coverage expansion. Incidence rate ratios (IRRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated to compare changes in utilization of conventional and NIPT-based prenatal screening methods. Change in per member per month (PMPM) expenditures in $US year 2020 were assessed post-coverage expansion using a budget impact model. RESULTS: A total of 5041 and 4109 distinct pregnancies were identified in pre- and post-coverage expansion periods, respectively. Mean ± standard deviation maternal age was consistent between pre- and post-coverage expansion periods (30.35 ± 3.35 and 30.33 ± 3.28, respectively). Screening orders for conventional methods decreased, with an adjusted IRR in the post-expansion period of 0.87 (95% CI 0.85-0.90) times the rate in the pre-expansion period; orders for NIPT increased, with an adjusted IRR in the post-expansion period of 1.41 (95% CI 1.32-1.51) times the rate in the pre-expansion period. Invasive diagnostic testing was low at baseline (1.0%) and did not change post-coverage expansion. The change in PMPM is estimated at $US0.026 post-coverage expansion. CONCLUSION: The PBRS agreement to expand NIPT coverage for women aged < 35 years was associated with an increase in NIPT utilization, decreases in conventional screening methods, and a modest increase in PMPM expenditures.

Use of Ivermectin Is Associated With Lower Mortality in Hospitalized Patients With Coronavirus Disease 2019: The Ivermectin in COVID Nineteen Study.

BACKGROUND: Ivermectin was shown to inhibit severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 replication in vitro, which has led to off-label use, but clinical efficacy has not been described previously. RESEARCH QUESTION: Does ivermectin benefit hospitalized coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients? STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Charts of consecutive patients hospitalized at four Broward Health hospitals in Florida with confirmed COVID-19 between March 15 and May 11, 2020, treated with or without ivermectin were reviewed. Hospital ivermectin dosing guidelines were provided, but treatment decisions were at the treating physician's discretion. The primary outcome was all-cause in-hospital mortality. Secondary outcomes included mortality in patients with severe pulmonary involvement, extubation rates for mechanically ventilated patients, and length of stay. Severe pulmonary involvement was defined as need for Fio2 ≥ 50%, noninvasive ventilation, or invasive ventilation at study entry. Logistic regression and propensity score matching were used to adjust for confounders. RESULTS: Two hundred eighty patients, 173 treated with ivermectin and 107 without ivermectin, were reviewed. Most patients in both groups also received hydroxychloroquine, azithromycin, or both. Univariate analysis showed lower mortality in the ivermectin group (15.0% vs 25.2%; OR, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.29-0.96; P = .03). Mortality also was lower among ivermectin-treated patients with severe pulmonary involvement (38.8% vs 80.7%; OR, 0.15; 95% CI, 0.05-0.47; P = .001). No significant differences were found in extubation rates (36.1% vs 15.4%; OR, 3.11; 95% CI, 0.88-11.00; P = .07) or length of stay. After multivariate adjustment for confounders and mortality risks, the mortality difference remained significant (OR, 0.27; 95% CI, 0.09-0.80; P = .03). One hundred ninety-six patients were included in the propensity-matched cohort. Mortality was significantly lower in the ivermectin group (13.3% vs 24.5%; OR, 0.47; 95% CI, 0.22-0.99; P < .05), an 11.2% (95% CI, 0.38%-22.1%) absolute risk reduction, with a number needed to treat of 8.9 (95% CI, 4.5-263). INTERPRETATION: Ivermectin treatment was associated with lower mortality during treatment of COVID-19, especially in patients with severe pulmonary involvement. Randomized controlled trials are needed to confirm these findings.

Low quality of dying and death in patients with septic shock as perceived by nurses and resident physicians.

Septic shock is a disease with both high prevalence and mortality. Few studies have evaluated the quality of dying and death (QODD) in patients with septic shock. The authors compared the QODD of patients who died of septic shock versus other causes. They prospectively collected QODD surveys from nurses and residents caring for 196 patients who died in the medical intensive care unit (ICU) at an urban, university hospital. Patients were included in the analysis if either a nurse or resident returned a survey. Chart review established cause of death. The authors compared total QODD scores (on a scale of 0-100) and a single-item score (QODD-1; on a scale of 0-10) of patients who died of septic shock versus other causes. Survey response rates were 59% (n = 155) for residents and 49% (n = 129) for nurses. Nurses rated patients as having lower total QODD and QODD-1 scores for septic (Δ 7.5 points, p = 0.03, and 0.9 points, p = 0.05, respectively). Residents rated septic patients with lower QODD-1 scores than nonseptic patients (Δ 0.8 points, p = 0.03). This study shows that nurses rate patients with septic shock as having lower QODD than patients dying of other causes. These findings are important for clinicians who counsel families of patients dying of septic shock.

Cardiopulmonary Response to Videogaming: Slaying Monsters Using Motion Sensor Versus Joystick Devices.

OBJECTIVE: Replacing physical activity with videogaming has been implicated in causing obesity. Studies have shown that using motion-sensing controllers with activity-promoting videogames expends energy comparable to aerobic exercise; however, effects of motion-sensing controllers have not been examined with traditional (non-exercise-promoting) videogames. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We measured indirect calorimetry and heart rate in 14 subjects during rest and traditional videogaming using motion sensor and joystick controllers. RESULTS: Energy expenditure was higher while subjects were playing with the motion sensor (1.30±0.32 kcal/kg/hour) than with the joystick (1.07±0.26 kcal/kg/hour; P<0.01) or resting (0.91±0.24 kcal/kg/hour; P<0.01). Oxygen consumption during videogaming averaged 15.7 percent of predicted maximum for the motion sensor and 11.8 percent of maximum for the joystick. Minute ventilation was higher playing with the motion sensor (10.7±3.5 L/minute) than with the joystick (8.6±1.8 L/minute; P<0.02) or resting (6.7±1.4 L/minute; P<0.001), predominantly because of higher respiratory rates (15.2±4.3 versus 20.3±2.8 versus 20.4±4.2 beats/minute for resting, the joystick, and the motion sensor, respectively; P<0.001); tidal volume did not change significantly. Peak heart rate during gaming was 16.4 percent higher than resting (78.0±12.0) for joystick (90.1±15.0; P=0.002) and 17.4 percent higher for the motion sensor (91.6±14.1; P=0.002); mean heart rate did not differ significantly. CONCLUSIONS: Playing with a motion sensor burned significantly more calories than with a joystick, but the energy expended was modest. With both consoles, the increased respiratory rate without increasing tidal volume and the increased peak heart rate without increasing mean heart rate are consistent with psychological stimulation from videogaming, rather than a result of exercise. We conclude that using a motion sensor with traditional videogames does not provide adequate energy expenditure to provide cardiovascular conditioning.

Hospitalizations for asthma in an urban population: 1995-1999.

BACKGROUND: Asthma hospitalizations occur commonly. Many are preventable if asthma is well controlled. Medications and demographic factors affect asthma hospitalization rates. Recent studies suggest that inhaled long-acting beta-agonists (LABAs) may heighten risk of serious asthma exacerbation, particularly in African Americans. OBJECTIVES: To further our understanding of the greater asthma morbidity associated with African American race and to investigate possible risk associated with LABAs. METHODS: In an ecologic analysis, asthma hospitalization rates in individuals aged 5 to 64 years were determined for Philadelphia zip codes in period 1 (1995-1997) and period 2 (1997-1999) and were studied for associations with asthma drug prescription rates, demographic factors, and numbers and types of asthma care providers. RESULTS: Higher hospitalization rates were found in African Americans vs Caucasians (45.7 vs 7.6 per 10,000) and in 5- to 17-year-olds vs 18- to 34- and 35- to 64-year-olds (30.4 vs 11.9 and 13.7 per 10,000). Hospitalizations were correlated directly with prescriptions for inhaled short-acting beta-agonists (SABAs) in periods 1 (r(s) = 0.61) and 2 (r(s) = 0.60) and inversely with LABA prescriptions in periods 1 (r(s) = -0.56) and 2 (r(s) = -0.66). Higher SABA prescription rates were also correlated with greater proportions of African Americans per zip code in periods 1 (r(s) = 0.58) and 2 (r(s) = 0.53). At all poverty levels, African Americans had higher hospitalization rates than Caucasians. Asthma hospitalization was significantly associated with poverty area residence (relative risk [RR], 2.29) and with African American race (RR, 4.31) and age (RR, 1.15) as individual-level variables (P < .001, Poisson regression). CONCLUSIONS: These data do not support the contention that LABA exposure is a major cause of asthma morbidity. Risk of asthma hospitalization is strongly associated with being African American.

Reproduction and pregnancy in transplant recipients: current practices.

Many transplant physicians are faced with questions from their patients about the safety and long-term consequences of pregnancy following transplantation. To better understand how pregnancies are managed and to clarify the outcome of pregnancy after transplantation, a survey questionnaire was developed and mailed to all medical and surgical directors of transplant centers throughout the United States; responses were obtained from 59.1% of the transplant centers. Although many opinions were collected, most respondents conceded that their opinions were based on personal experience rather than evidence-based. The underutilization of existing information was revealing and highlighted a need for an evidence-based approach to care of the pregnant transplant recipient and her offspring. The survey results, reported in this article, led to formation of a consensus conference to determine the optimal approach to pregnant transplant recipients and to define what is currently known and unknown about reproduction and transplantation.

Standard equations are not accurate in assessing resting energy expenditure in patients with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the utility of standard equations for calculating caloric requirements in patients with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS). BACKGROUND: Malnutrition substantially increases the risk of death in ALS. Weight loss can be stabilized and survival prolonged with early gastrostomy feeding. However the use of standard nutrition equations has not been validated in this population. We therefore compared measured caloric expenditure to 2 predictive equations in patients with varying stages of ALS. METHODS: Thirty-four patients were studied. Caloric expenditure and respiratory quotient (R) were measured using indirect calorimetry. Results were compared with the Harris-Benedict equation. RESULTS: The prediction error for the Harris-Benedict equation was 18.6 + 14.9%. Limits of agreement showed this equation could overestimate caloric expenditure by 591 kcal/d and underestimate requirements by 677 kcal/d. R was >0.86 in 11 patients, suggesting overfeeding, and <0.8 in 15 patients, suggesting underfeeding. The difference between predicted and measured caloric expenditure did not correlate with disease severity, disease duration, or body mass index. Mechanically ventilated patients had higher than predicted energy expenditure. CONCLUSIONS: We found that standard equations used to calculate energy expenditure were not valid for patients with ALS. Moreover, the majority of our patients were either overfed or underfed. As underfeeding can cause diaphragm impairment, and overfeeding can increase ventilatory load, indirect calorimetry should be considered in ALS patients to determine optimal caloric requirement.