Implementing a digital rare disease case-finding tool in UK primary care: a qualitative study of health professionals' experience.

BACKGROUND: Rare diseases affect millions of people globally, with a lifetime incidence of 1 in 17. They are complex, multisystem, severe disease, and patients experience a diagnostic delay averaging 5.6 years with associated misdiagnoses, inappropriate treatments, and anxiety. MendelScan is a digital case-finding tool that uses structured primary care data to identify patients at risk of being affected by one of a series of rare diseases. This qualitative study explored primary healthcare professionals' experiences of implementing this technology. AIM: To develop an understanding of primary healthcare professionals' experiences of implementing MendelScan with a focus on their perception of the technology and its implementation, challenges and opportunities. METHOD: A qualitative appraisal of implementing MendelScan using descriptive analysis of surveys and semi-structured interviews with professionals. RESULTS: A total of 11 professionals from the two project areas participated. Participants included GPs, nurses, a genetic counsellor, and healthcare managers.Participants reported that they received adequate support, the project increased confidence in integrating genetics in primary care, and that it may improve inequity in rare disease diagnosis. Professionals' reservations were related to knowledge, time commitments, primary care pressures, contacting patients, data sharing and confidentiality, and overcoming clinical resistance in sharing data with a non-NHS external body. CONCLUSION: This study provides a valuable insight into the experiences of primary care professionals using a novel tool to identify rare diseases. The potential of this tool is promising with benefits for skill development. Large-scale implementation faces challenges related to primary care capacity, data, and funding.

Inappropriate Shocks and Power Delivery Using Adult Automatic External Defibrillator Pads in a Pediatric Patient.

ABSTRACT: The use of automatic external defibrillators (AEDs) during pulseless resuscitations is considered safe and reliable, and was established as part of the guidelines in out-of-hospital events. Based on extensive studies, the use of the standard AED is now indicated in every age group with a preference of pediatric pad application for small children and babies. If unavailable, adult pads are recommended. We report a case of 2 inappropriate AED shocks that were delivered to a neonate during a pulseless resuscitation after application of adult pads. The 3.6-kg patient received 2 shocks, over 200 J each, for sinus bradycardia that was not detected by the device. Although treated inappropriately with high voltage, no cardiac or skin sequelae were detected, and the patient had normal cardiac and neurological development later on.

Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials of atosiban versus nifedipine for inhibition of preterm labor.

BACKGROUND: Two tocolytic drugs-atosiban and nifedipine-are currently used for first-line treatment of preterm labor (PTL). OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy and safety of atosiban with nifedipine for PTL treatment. SEARCH STRATEGY: In May 2017, we searched PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Clinical Trials with search terms including "nifedipine", "atosiban", and "preterm labor". SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomized controlled trials of women with PTL. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Data were extracted for study design, patient characteristics, risk of bias domains, and study outcomes. A random-effects model was used to generate pooled risk ratios (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). RESULTS: We included seven studies that enrolled 992 patients. There was no significant difference between atosiban and nifedipine for pregnancy prolongation of 48 hours or more regarding efficacy (RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.92-1.22; P=0.440) or effectiveness (0.93, 0.84-1.03; P=0.177). Pregnancy prolongation for 7 days or more also did not differ between groups for efficacy (RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.89-1.21; P=0.656) or effectiveness (0.91, 0.79-1.05; P=0.177). Atosiban-however-was associated with fewer maternal side-effects than nifedipine. CONCLUSION: Atosiban resulted in fewer maternal side-effects than nifedipine, with no difference in pregnancy prolongation. PROSPERO registration: CRD42018090223.

Molecular characterization of Borrelia persica, the agent of tick borne relapsing fever in Israel and the Palestinian Authority.

The identification of the Tick Borne Relapsing Fever (TBRF) agent in Israel and the Palestinian Authority relies on the morphology and the association of Borrelia persica with its vector Ornithodoros tholozani. Molecular based data on B. persica are very scarce as the organism is still non-cultivable. In this study, we were able to sequence three complete 16S rRNA genes, 12 partial flaB genes, 18 partial glpQ genes, 16 rrs-ileT intergenic spacers (IGS) from nine ticks and ten human blood samples originating from the West Bank and Israel. In one sample we sequenced 7231 contiguous base pairs that covered completely the region from the 5'end of the 16S rRNA gene to the 5'end of the 23S rRNA gene comprising the whole 16S rRNA (rrs), and the following genes: Ala tRNA (alaT), Ile tRNA (ileT), adenylosuccinate lyase (purB), adenylosuccinate synthetase (purA), methylpurine-DNA glycosylase (mag), hypoxanthine-guanine phosphoribosyltransferase (hpt), an hydrolase (HAD superfamily) and a 135 bp 5' fragment of the 23S rRNA (rrlA) genes. Phylogenic sequence analysis defined all the Borrelia isolates from O. tholozani and from human TBRF cases in Israel and the West Bank as B. persica that clustered between the African and the New World TBRF species. Gene organization of the intergenic spacer between the 16S rRNA and the 23S rRNA was similar to that of other TBRF Borrelia species and different from the Lyme disease Borrelia species. Variants of B. persica were found among the different genes of the different isolates even in the same sampling area.