Mike Bock

Electronic cigarettes that contain nicotine are more effective than e-cigarettes without nicotine in helping smokers quit, and smokers attempting to quit are able to achieve a 50% or greater reduction in smoking with the use of e-cigarettes containing nicotine.

About 9% of smokers who used e-cigarettes that contained nicotine were able to stop smoking at up to 1 year, compared with about 4% of smokers who used nicotine-free e-cigarettes, according to a small-scale data review published in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (2014 Dec. 16:CD010216 [doi:10.1002/14651858.CD010216.pub2]).

©timur1970/Fotolia.com

“There is evidence from the pooled results of two trials that electronic cigarettes with nicotine, compared with [e-cigarettes without nicotine], helped smokers to stop smoking long-term; they also increased the number of people who did not quit altogether to halve cigarette consumption,” wrote Dr. Hayden McRobbie of the Wolfson Institute of Preventive Medicine, Queen Mary University of London, and his colleagues.

Of the smokers included in the review who were not able to quit conventional cigarettes, 36% who used e-cigarettes with nicotine reported reducing the number of conventional cigarettes consumed by about half, compared with 28% of users who were given e-cigarettes without nicotine.

A team of researchers from New Zealand and the United Kingdom reviewed data from two trials of 662 current smokers to evaluate the efficacy of e-cigarettes use for helping smokers achieve long-term abstinence.

E-cigarettes are electronic vaporizing devices that heat a liquid, usually consisting of propylene glycol and glycerol and often containing nicotine, into an aerosol for inhalation.

There is little clinical information on the amount of nicotine typically ingested from an e-cigarette, as the devices typically are not regulated by government health agencies. No serious adverse effects related to e-cigarette use were reported from either of the studies.

Although this is the first meta-analysis on e-cigarette use and the effects on smoking cessation, the authors said that more data are needed for it to become clinically useful.

“Given the variety of electronic cigarette products on the market and the product evolution, future studies need to select electronic cigarettes with good nicotine delivery that are representative of the best current standard in terms of reliability and user satisfaction,” Dr. McRobbie and his associates wrote.

In addition, data were limited by the small number of trials and the small sample of participants from the studies. Also, there were few biochemical data on the participants or the sensorimotor effects of using electronic cigarettes.

“Data are also needed on the proportions of smokers who successfully quit smoking with the help of [e-cigarettes] and who continue to use [e-cigarettes] long-term and the proportion who eventually become nicotine-free,” the authors concluded.

Dr. Hayden McRobbie has undertaken educational sessions sponsored by Pfizer and Johnson & Johnson. Dr. Chris Bullen and Dr. McRobbie were also investigators on a study of e-cigarettes from an e-cigarette manufacturer (Ruyan Group) funded by the University of Auckland (New Zealand). Dr. Peter Hajek has provided consultancy to GSK, Pfizer, and Johnson & Johnson.

[email protected]

Electronic cigarettes that contain nicotine are more effective than e-cigarettes without nicotine in helping smokers quit, and smokers attempting to quit are able to achieve a 50% or greater reduction in smoking with the use of e-cigarettes containing nicotine.

About 9% of smokers who used e-cigarettes that contained nicotine were able to stop smoking at up to 1 year, compared with about 4% of smokers who used nicotine-free e-cigarettes, according to a small-scale data review published in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (2014 Dec. 16:CD010216 [doi:10.1002/14651858.CD010216.pub2]).

©timur1970/Fotolia.com

“There is evidence from the pooled results of two trials that electronic cigarettes with nicotine, compared with [e-cigarettes without nicotine], helped smokers to stop smoking long-term; they also increased the number of people who did not quit altogether to halve cigarette consumption,” wrote Dr. Hayden McRobbie of the Wolfson Institute of Preventive Medicine, Queen Mary University of London, and his colleagues.

Of the smokers included in the review who were not able to quit conventional cigarettes, 36% who used e-cigarettes with nicotine reported reducing the number of conventional cigarettes consumed by about half, compared with 28% of users who were given e-cigarettes without nicotine.

A team of researchers from New Zealand and the United Kingdom reviewed data from two trials of 662 current smokers to evaluate the efficacy of e-cigarettes use for helping smokers achieve long-term abstinence.

E-cigarettes are electronic vaporizing devices that heat a liquid, usually consisting of propylene glycol and glycerol and often containing nicotine, into an aerosol for inhalation.

There is little clinical information on the amount of nicotine typically ingested from an e-cigarette, as the devices typically are not regulated by government health agencies. No serious adverse effects related to e-cigarette use were reported from either of the studies.

Although this is the first meta-analysis on e-cigarette use and the effects on smoking cessation, the authors said that more data are needed for it to become clinically useful.

“Given the variety of electronic cigarette products on the market and the product evolution, future studies need to select electronic cigarettes with good nicotine delivery that are representative of the best current standard in terms of reliability and user satisfaction,” Dr. McRobbie and his associates wrote.

In addition, data were limited by the small number of trials and the small sample of participants from the studies. Also, there were few biochemical data on the participants or the sensorimotor effects of using electronic cigarettes.

“Data are also needed on the proportions of smokers who successfully quit smoking with the help of [e-cigarettes] and who continue to use [e-cigarettes] long-term and the proportion who eventually become nicotine-free,” the authors concluded.

Dr. Hayden McRobbie has undertaken educational sessions sponsored by Pfizer and Johnson & Johnson. Dr. Chris Bullen and Dr. McRobbie were also investigators on a study of e-cigarettes from an e-cigarette manufacturer (Ruyan Group) funded by the University of Auckland (New Zealand). Dr. Peter Hajek has provided consultancy to GSK, Pfizer, and Johnson & Johnson.

[email protected]

Electronic cigarettes that contain nicotine are more effective than e-cigarettes without nicotine in helping smokers quit, and smokers attempting to quit are able to achieve a 50% or greater reduction in smoking with the use of e-cigarettes containing nicotine.

About 9% of smokers who used e-cigarettes that contained nicotine were able to stop smoking at up to 1 year, compared with about 4% of smokers who used nicotine-free e-cigarettes, according to a small-scale data review published in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (2014 Dec. 16:CD010216 [doi:10.1002/14651858.CD010216.pub2]).

©timur1970/Fotolia.com

“There is evidence from the pooled results of two trials that electronic cigarettes with nicotine, compared with [e-cigarettes without nicotine], helped smokers to stop smoking long-term; they also increased the number of people who did not quit altogether to halve cigarette consumption,” wrote Dr. Hayden McRobbie of the Wolfson Institute of Preventive Medicine, Queen Mary University of London, and his colleagues.

Of the smokers included in the review who were not able to quit conventional cigarettes, 36% who used e-cigarettes with nicotine reported reducing the number of conventional cigarettes consumed by about half, compared with 28% of users who were given e-cigarettes without nicotine.

A team of researchers from New Zealand and the United Kingdom reviewed data from two trials of 662 current smokers to evaluate the efficacy of e-cigarettes use for helping smokers achieve long-term abstinence.

E-cigarettes are electronic vaporizing devices that heat a liquid, usually consisting of propylene glycol and glycerol and often containing nicotine, into an aerosol for inhalation.

There is little clinical information on the amount of nicotine typically ingested from an e-cigarette, as the devices typically are not regulated by government health agencies. No serious adverse effects related to e-cigarette use were reported from either of the studies.

Although this is the first meta-analysis on e-cigarette use and the effects on smoking cessation, the authors said that more data are needed for it to become clinically useful.

“Given the variety of electronic cigarette products on the market and the product evolution, future studies need to select electronic cigarettes with good nicotine delivery that are representative of the best current standard in terms of reliability and user satisfaction,” Dr. McRobbie and his associates wrote.

In addition, data were limited by the small number of trials and the small sample of participants from the studies. Also, there were few biochemical data on the participants or the sensorimotor effects of using electronic cigarettes.

“Data are also needed on the proportions of smokers who successfully quit smoking with the help of [e-cigarettes] and who continue to use [e-cigarettes] long-term and the proportion who eventually become nicotine-free,” the authors concluded.

Dr. Hayden McRobbie has undertaken educational sessions sponsored by Pfizer and Johnson & Johnson. Dr. Chris Bullen and Dr. McRobbie were also investigators on a study of e-cigarettes from an e-cigarette manufacturer (Ruyan Group) funded by the University of Auckland (New Zealand). Dr. Peter Hajek has provided consultancy to GSK, Pfizer, and Johnson & Johnson.

[email protected]

Excess body weight could lower “healthy life-years” by as much as 19 years, in addition to reducing life expectancy in certain demographics by as much as 8 years, new research published in Lancet Diabetes & Endocrinology suggests.

“The pattern is clear: The more an individual weighs and the younger their age, the greater the effect of excess weight on health,” wrote Dr. Steven A. Grover and his coinvestigators at the Research Institute of the McGill University Health Centre, Montreal.

They created a disease-simulation model, and by using data from 3,992 non-Hispanic white participants in the National Health and Nutrition and Examination Survey (NHANES) during 2003-2010, they estimated the annual risk of diabetes, cardiovascular disease, and mortality. They compared people with an ideal body mass index of 18.5 up to 25 kg/m² against overweight people with BMI of 25 up to 30 kg/m², obese participants with a BMI of 30 up to 35 kg/m², and very obese persons with a BMI of 35 kg/m² and higher. Health life-years lost was defined as years free of cardiovascular disease (CVD) and diabetes.

Depending on their age and sex, overweight individuals were estimated to lose 0-3 years of life expectancy, obese individuals could lose 1-6 years of life expectancy, and very obese individuals were estimated to lose 1-8 years. Younger adults with high body fat were generally at a greater risk for developing health problems than those who developed obesity later in life (Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol. 2014: [doi:10.1016/S2213-8587 (14)70229-3]) .The years of life lost for obese men ranged from 0.8 years in those aged 60-79 years to 5.9 years in those aged 20-39 years. Years lost for very obese men ranged from 0.9 years to 8.4 years, respectively. Years of life lost for very obese women females were similar, with 0.9 years lost for those aged 60-79 years and 6.1 years lost for those aged 20-39 years.

As expected, the negative health effects of excess body weight were greatest in patients with extreme obesity, with very obese males at the greatest risk for developing type 2 diabetes and obesity-associated CVD. The researchers further noted that morbidity (healthy life-years lost) can reduce quality of life nearly two to four times as much as the number of years of life lost.

These results might help health professionals to more actively encourage weight loss in their overweight and obese patients, and also provide such patients with additional motivation to adhere to healthier lifestyles, Dr. Grover said.

The study was funded by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research. Dr. Grover is a consultant to Merck, Roche, AstraZeneca, and Amgen. Several coinvestigators have ties to pharmaceutical companies.

Excess body weight could lower “healthy life-years” by as much as 19 years, in addition to reducing life expectancy in certain demographics by as much as 8 years, new research published in Lancet Diabetes & Endocrinology suggests.

“The pattern is clear: The more an individual weighs and the younger their age, the greater the effect of excess weight on health,” wrote Dr. Steven A. Grover and his coinvestigators at the Research Institute of the McGill University Health Centre, Montreal.

They created a disease-simulation model, and by using data from 3,992 non-Hispanic white participants in the National Health and Nutrition and Examination Survey (NHANES) during 2003-2010, they estimated the annual risk of diabetes, cardiovascular disease, and mortality. They compared people with an ideal body mass index of 18.5 up to 25 kg/m² against overweight people with BMI of 25 up to 30 kg/m², obese participants with a BMI of 30 up to 35 kg/m², and very obese persons with a BMI of 35 kg/m² and higher. Health life-years lost was defined as years free of cardiovascular disease (CVD) and diabetes.

Depending on their age and sex, overweight individuals were estimated to lose 0-3 years of life expectancy, obese individuals could lose 1-6 years of life expectancy, and very obese individuals were estimated to lose 1-8 years. Younger adults with high body fat were generally at a greater risk for developing health problems than those who developed obesity later in life (Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol. 2014: [doi:10.1016/S2213-8587 (14)70229-3]) .The years of life lost for obese men ranged from 0.8 years in those aged 60-79 years to 5.9 years in those aged 20-39 years. Years lost for very obese men ranged from 0.9 years to 8.4 years, respectively. Years of life lost for very obese women females were similar, with 0.9 years lost for those aged 60-79 years and 6.1 years lost for those aged 20-39 years.

As expected, the negative health effects of excess body weight were greatest in patients with extreme obesity, with very obese males at the greatest risk for developing type 2 diabetes and obesity-associated CVD. The researchers further noted that morbidity (healthy life-years lost) can reduce quality of life nearly two to four times as much as the number of years of life lost.

These results might help health professionals to more actively encourage weight loss in their overweight and obese patients, and also provide such patients with additional motivation to adhere to healthier lifestyles, Dr. Grover said.

The study was funded by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research. Dr. Grover is a consultant to Merck, Roche, AstraZeneca, and Amgen. Several coinvestigators have ties to pharmaceutical companies.

Excess body weight could lower “healthy life-years” by as much as 19 years, in addition to reducing life expectancy in certain demographics by as much as 8 years, new research published in Lancet Diabetes & Endocrinology suggests.

“The pattern is clear: The more an individual weighs and the younger their age, the greater the effect of excess weight on health,” wrote Dr. Steven A. Grover and his coinvestigators at the Research Institute of the McGill University Health Centre, Montreal.

They created a disease-simulation model, and by using data from 3,992 non-Hispanic white participants in the National Health and Nutrition and Examination Survey (NHANES) during 2003-2010, they estimated the annual risk of diabetes, cardiovascular disease, and mortality. They compared people with an ideal body mass index of 18.5 up to 25 kg/m² against overweight people with BMI of 25 up to 30 kg/m², obese participants with a BMI of 30 up to 35 kg/m², and very obese persons with a BMI of 35 kg/m² and higher. Health life-years lost was defined as years free of cardiovascular disease (CVD) and diabetes.

Depending on their age and sex, overweight individuals were estimated to lose 0-3 years of life expectancy, obese individuals could lose 1-6 years of life expectancy, and very obese individuals were estimated to lose 1-8 years. Younger adults with high body fat were generally at a greater risk for developing health problems than those who developed obesity later in life (Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol. 2014: [doi:10.1016/S2213-8587 (14)70229-3]) .The years of life lost for obese men ranged from 0.8 years in those aged 60-79 years to 5.9 years in those aged 20-39 years. Years lost for very obese men ranged from 0.9 years to 8.4 years, respectively. Years of life lost for very obese women females were similar, with 0.9 years lost for those aged 60-79 years and 6.1 years lost for those aged 20-39 years.

As expected, the negative health effects of excess body weight were greatest in patients with extreme obesity, with very obese males at the greatest risk for developing type 2 diabetes and obesity-associated CVD. The researchers further noted that morbidity (healthy life-years lost) can reduce quality of life nearly two to four times as much as the number of years of life lost.

These results might help health professionals to more actively encourage weight loss in their overweight and obese patients, and also provide such patients with additional motivation to adhere to healthier lifestyles, Dr. Grover said.

The study was funded by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research. Dr. Grover is a consultant to Merck, Roche, AstraZeneca, and Amgen. Several coinvestigators have ties to pharmaceutical companies.

Excess body weight could lower “healthy life-years” by as much as 19 years, in addition to reducing life expectancy in certain demographics by as much as 8 years, new research published in Lancet Diabetes & Endocrinology suggests.

“The pattern is clear: The more an individual weighs and the younger their age, the greater the effect of excess weight on health,” wrote Dr. Steven A. Grover and his coinvestigators at the Research Institute of the McGill University Health Centre, Montreal.

They created a disease-simulation model, and by using data from 3,992 non-Hispanic white participants in the National Health and Nutrition and Examination Survey (NHANES) during 2003-2010, they estimated the annual risk of diabetes, cardiovascular disease, and mortality. They compared people with an ideal body mass index of 18.5 up to 25 kg/m² against overweight people with BMI of 25 up to 30 kg/m², obese participants with a BMI of 30 up to 35 kg/m², and very obese persons with a BMI of 35 kg/m² and higher. Health life-years lost was defined as years free of cardiovascular disease (CVD) and diabetes.

Courtesy Bill Branson/National Cancer Institute

Depending on their age and sex, overweight individuals were estimated to lose 0-3 years of life expectancy, obese individuals could lose 1-6 years of life expectancy, and very obese individuals were estimated to lose 1-8 years. Younger adults with high body fat were generally at a greater risk for developing health problems than those who developed obesity later in life (Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol. 2014: [doi:10.1016/S2213-8587 (14)70229-3]) .The years of life lost for obese men ranged from 0.8 years in those aged 60-79 years to 5.9 years in those aged 20-39 years. Years lost for very obese men ranged from 0.9 years to 8.4 years, respectively. Years of life lost for very obese women females were similar, with 0.9 years lost for those aged 60-79 years and 6.1 years lost for those aged 20-39 years.

As expected, the negative health effects of excess body weight were greatest in patients with extreme obesity, with very obese males at the greatest risk for developing type 2 diabetes and obesity-associated CVD. The researchers further noted that morbidity (healthy life-years lost) can reduce quality of life nearly two to four times as much as the number of years of life lost.

These results might help health professionals to more actively encourage weight loss in their overweight and obese patients, and also provide such patients with additional motivation to adhere to healthier lifestyles, Dr. Grover said.

The study was funded by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research. Dr. Grover is a consultant to Merck, Roche, AstraZeneca, and Amgen. Several coinvestigators have ties to pharmaceutical companies.

[email protected]

Excess body weight could lower “healthy life-years” by as much as 19 years, in addition to reducing life expectancy in certain demographics by as much as 8 years, new research published in Lancet Diabetes & Endocrinology suggests.

“The pattern is clear: The more an individual weighs and the younger their age, the greater the effect of excess weight on health,” wrote Dr. Steven A. Grover and his coinvestigators at the Research Institute of the McGill University Health Centre, Montreal.

They created a disease-simulation model, and by using data from 3,992 non-Hispanic white participants in the National Health and Nutrition and Examination Survey (NHANES) during 2003-2010, they estimated the annual risk of diabetes, cardiovascular disease, and mortality. They compared people with an ideal body mass index of 18.5 up to 25 kg/m² against overweight people with BMI of 25 up to 30 kg/m², obese participants with a BMI of 30 up to 35 kg/m², and very obese persons with a BMI of 35 kg/m² and higher. Health life-years lost was defined as years free of cardiovascular disease (CVD) and diabetes.

Courtesy Bill Branson/National Cancer Institute

Depending on their age and sex, overweight individuals were estimated to lose 0-3 years of life expectancy, obese individuals could lose 1-6 years of life expectancy, and very obese individuals were estimated to lose 1-8 years. Younger adults with high body fat were generally at a greater risk for developing health problems than those who developed obesity later in life (Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol. 2014: [doi:10.1016/S2213-8587 (14)70229-3]) .The years of life lost for obese men ranged from 0.8 years in those aged 60-79 years to 5.9 years in those aged 20-39 years. Years lost for very obese men ranged from 0.9 years to 8.4 years, respectively. Years of life lost for very obese women females were similar, with 0.9 years lost for those aged 60-79 years and 6.1 years lost for those aged 20-39 years.

As expected, the negative health effects of excess body weight were greatest in patients with extreme obesity, with very obese males at the greatest risk for developing type 2 diabetes and obesity-associated CVD. The researchers further noted that morbidity (healthy life-years lost) can reduce quality of life nearly two to four times as much as the number of years of life lost.

These results might help health professionals to more actively encourage weight loss in their overweight and obese patients, and also provide such patients with additional motivation to adhere to healthier lifestyles, Dr. Grover said.

The study was funded by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research. Dr. Grover is a consultant to Merck, Roche, AstraZeneca, and Amgen. Several coinvestigators have ties to pharmaceutical companies.

[email protected]

Excess body weight could lower “healthy life-years” by as much as 19 years, in addition to reducing life expectancy in certain demographics by as much as 8 years, new research published in Lancet Diabetes & Endocrinology suggests.

“The pattern is clear: The more an individual weighs and the younger their age, the greater the effect of excess weight on health,” wrote Dr. Steven A. Grover and his coinvestigators at the Research Institute of the McGill University Health Centre, Montreal.

They created a disease-simulation model, and by using data from 3,992 non-Hispanic white participants in the National Health and Nutrition and Examination Survey (NHANES) during 2003-2010, they estimated the annual risk of diabetes, cardiovascular disease, and mortality. They compared people with an ideal body mass index of 18.5 up to 25 kg/m² against overweight people with BMI of 25 up to 30 kg/m², obese participants with a BMI of 30 up to 35 kg/m², and very obese persons with a BMI of 35 kg/m² and higher. Health life-years lost was defined as years free of cardiovascular disease (CVD) and diabetes.

Courtesy Bill Branson/National Cancer Institute

Depending on their age and sex, overweight individuals were estimated to lose 0-3 years of life expectancy, obese individuals could lose 1-6 years of life expectancy, and very obese individuals were estimated to lose 1-8 years. Younger adults with high body fat were generally at a greater risk for developing health problems than those who developed obesity later in life (Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol. 2014: [doi:10.1016/S2213-8587 (14)70229-3]) .The years of life lost for obese men ranged from 0.8 years in those aged 60-79 years to 5.9 years in those aged 20-39 years. Years lost for very obese men ranged from 0.9 years to 8.4 years, respectively. Years of life lost for very obese women females were similar, with 0.9 years lost for those aged 60-79 years and 6.1 years lost for those aged 20-39 years.

As expected, the negative health effects of excess body weight were greatest in patients with extreme obesity, with very obese males at the greatest risk for developing type 2 diabetes and obesity-associated CVD. The researchers further noted that morbidity (healthy life-years lost) can reduce quality of life nearly two to four times as much as the number of years of life lost.

These results might help health professionals to more actively encourage weight loss in their overweight and obese patients, and also provide such patients with additional motivation to adhere to healthier lifestyles, Dr. Grover said.

The study was funded by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research. Dr. Grover is a consultant to Merck, Roche, AstraZeneca, and Amgen. Several coinvestigators have ties to pharmaceutical companies.

[email protected]

Although cigarette use among middle and high school students continues to decrease, overall tobacco use is still high, with 22.9% of high school students currently using tobacco products in 2013, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reported.

Overall, 46% of high school students reported ever using a tobacco product, and 31.4% reported ever trying two or more tobacco products, according to data from the National Youth Tobacco Survey, published online Nov. 14 (MMWR 2014;63:1021-6).

In 2013, 22.9% of high school students reported current use of a tobacco product; in 2012, 23.3% of high school students reported current tobacco use, and 24.3% used a tobacco product in 2011.

© agmit/istockphoto.com

Combustible tobacco products were the most popular form of tobacco ingestion among current and former users, as 9 out of 10 high school students reporting using them. Cigarettes were the most regularly used tobacco products at 12.7%, followed by cigars (11.9%), smokeless tobacco (5.7%), hookah (5.2%), e-cigarettes (4.5%), and pipes (4.1%).

The study’s authors, led by CDC epidemiologist René A. Arrazola, noted that the data could be influenced by self-reporting bias. The National Youth Tobacco Survey is a school-based, self-administered questionnaire.

Of 250 schools selected for the 2013 National Youth Tobacco Survey, 187 (75%) participated, with a sample of 18,406 (91%) among 20,301 eligible students; the overall response rate was 68%.

The increasing number of teens using e-cigarettes could be cause for concern, because there are few data on the long-term impact of e-cigarette use. However, the 2014 Surgeon General’s report found that adolescent nicotine use can have adverse effects on brain development, whatever the source, the authors noted.

“Considering how trends in tobacco product use and tobacco marketing change, rigorous surveillance of all available forms of tobacco use by youths, particularly use of emerging products such as e-cigarettes, is essential,” they said.

Among middle school students, 17.7% had ever used tobacco. Middle school students were more likely to smoke cigars instead of cigarettes, with 3.1% reporting current use of cigars, and 2.9% reporting current use of cigarettes; 1.1% reported recently using e-cigarettes.

In terms of ethnic demographics, cigarettes were the most prevalent tobacco product used by white and Hispanic high school students (14.0% and 13.4%), although cigars were close behind (11.4% and 12.1%). Overall cigar use among high schoolers decreased but still remains relatively high; it was 11.9% in 2013, compared with 12.6% in 2012.

Cigar use among black high school students was nearly 50% higher than cigarette use (14.7 % vs. 9.0 %), and more than twice as high as cigarette use (4.5% vs 1.7%) among black middle school students.

[email protected]

Although cigarette use among middle and high school students continues to decrease, overall tobacco use is still high, with 22.9% of high school students currently using tobacco products in 2013, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reported.

Overall, 46% of high school students reported ever using a tobacco product, and 31.4% reported ever trying two or more tobacco products, according to data from the National Youth Tobacco Survey, published online Nov. 14 (MMWR 2014;63:1021-6).

In 2013, 22.9% of high school students reported current use of a tobacco product; in 2012, 23.3% of high school students reported current tobacco use, and 24.3% used a tobacco product in 2011.

© agmit/istockphoto.com

Combustible tobacco products were the most popular form of tobacco ingestion among current and former users, as 9 out of 10 high school students reporting using them. Cigarettes were the most regularly used tobacco products at 12.7%, followed by cigars (11.9%), smokeless tobacco (5.7%), hookah (5.2%), e-cigarettes (4.5%), and pipes (4.1%).

The study’s authors, led by CDC epidemiologist René A. Arrazola, noted that the data could be influenced by self-reporting bias. The National Youth Tobacco Survey is a school-based, self-administered questionnaire.

Of 250 schools selected for the 2013 National Youth Tobacco Survey, 187 (75%) participated, with a sample of 18,406 (91%) among 20,301 eligible students; the overall response rate was 68%.

The increasing number of teens using e-cigarettes could be cause for concern, because there are few data on the long-term impact of e-cigarette use. However, the 2014 Surgeon General’s report found that adolescent nicotine use can have adverse effects on brain development, whatever the source, the authors noted.

“Considering how trends in tobacco product use and tobacco marketing change, rigorous surveillance of all available forms of tobacco use by youths, particularly use of emerging products such as e-cigarettes, is essential,” they said.

Among middle school students, 17.7% had ever used tobacco. Middle school students were more likely to smoke cigars instead of cigarettes, with 3.1% reporting current use of cigars, and 2.9% reporting current use of cigarettes; 1.1% reported recently using e-cigarettes.

In terms of ethnic demographics, cigarettes were the most prevalent tobacco product used by white and Hispanic high school students (14.0% and 13.4%), although cigars were close behind (11.4% and 12.1%). Overall cigar use among high schoolers decreased but still remains relatively high; it was 11.9% in 2013, compared with 12.6% in 2012.

Cigar use among black high school students was nearly 50% higher than cigarette use (14.7 % vs. 9.0 %), and more than twice as high as cigarette use (4.5% vs 1.7%) among black middle school students.

[email protected]

Although cigarette use among middle and high school students continues to decrease, overall tobacco use is still high, with 22.9% of high school students currently using tobacco products in 2013, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reported.

Overall, 46% of high school students reported ever using a tobacco product, and 31.4% reported ever trying two or more tobacco products, according to data from the National Youth Tobacco Survey, published online Nov. 14 (MMWR 2014;63:1021-6).

In 2013, 22.9% of high school students reported current use of a tobacco product; in 2012, 23.3% of high school students reported current tobacco use, and 24.3% used a tobacco product in 2011.

© agmit/istockphoto.com

Combustible tobacco products were the most popular form of tobacco ingestion among current and former users, as 9 out of 10 high school students reporting using them. Cigarettes were the most regularly used tobacco products at 12.7%, followed by cigars (11.9%), smokeless tobacco (5.7%), hookah (5.2%), e-cigarettes (4.5%), and pipes (4.1%).

The study’s authors, led by CDC epidemiologist René A. Arrazola, noted that the data could be influenced by self-reporting bias. The National Youth Tobacco Survey is a school-based, self-administered questionnaire.

Of 250 schools selected for the 2013 National Youth Tobacco Survey, 187 (75%) participated, with a sample of 18,406 (91%) among 20,301 eligible students; the overall response rate was 68%.

The increasing number of teens using e-cigarettes could be cause for concern, because there are few data on the long-term impact of e-cigarette use. However, the 2014 Surgeon General’s report found that adolescent nicotine use can have adverse effects on brain development, whatever the source, the authors noted.

“Considering how trends in tobacco product use and tobacco marketing change, rigorous surveillance of all available forms of tobacco use by youths, particularly use of emerging products such as e-cigarettes, is essential,” they said.

Among middle school students, 17.7% had ever used tobacco. Middle school students were more likely to smoke cigars instead of cigarettes, with 3.1% reporting current use of cigars, and 2.9% reporting current use of cigarettes; 1.1% reported recently using e-cigarettes.

In terms of ethnic demographics, cigarettes were the most prevalent tobacco product used by white and Hispanic high school students (14.0% and 13.4%), although cigars were close behind (11.4% and 12.1%). Overall cigar use among high schoolers decreased but still remains relatively high; it was 11.9% in 2013, compared with 12.6% in 2012.

Cigar use among black high school students was nearly 50% higher than cigarette use (14.7 % vs. 9.0 %), and more than twice as high as cigarette use (4.5% vs 1.7%) among black middle school students.

[email protected]

Meditation, yoga, and relaxation with imagery can be recommended as evidence-based supportive care options during breast cancer treatment, according to a data review published in the Journal of the National Cancer Institute Monographs.

A review of randomized controlled clinical trials has provided researchers with strong evidence that certain behavioral therapies for mood improvement, depression, and anxiety can be useful as supportive care in women receiving standard breast cancer treatment (J. Natl. Cancer Inst. Monogr. 2014;50:346-58).

To determine which therapies had an effect during breast cancer treatment, the researchers organized a review of randomized controlled trials designed to assess the safety and effectiveness of more than 80 different intervention/modality combinations.

The investigators, led by Heather Greenlee, Ph.D., used a set of nine biomedical publication databases to find 203 randomized controlled clinical trials among breast cancer patients that tested complementary therapies together with standard cancer care – defined as surgery, chemotherapy, radiation therapy, and hormonal therapy.

A modified version of the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force grading system was used to develop and evaluate the effectiveness of the therapies, which were ranked into A, B, C, D, and H grades based on their evidence of benefit.

‘A’ grades were given to meditation, yoga, and relaxation with imagery, which were associated with mood improvement in the context of depression and anxiety during treatment for breast cancer. Music therapy was given a B grade for stress reduction.

C grades were assigned to 32 treatments that had weaker evidence of benefit, and 138 therapies were deemed to have insufficient evidence to form recommendations. Nine therapies were given a D grade, meaning they did not appear to have any effect on cancer treatment.

Only one intervention was given an H grade, meaning it was identified as potentially harmful: acetyl-L-carnitine, used for the prevention of taxane-induced neuropathy,was found to increase neuropathy.

Though the recommended therapies will not work for everyone, the guidelines should at least help clinicians and patients create a dialogue about treatment options, regardless of what the patient ultimately chooses, wrote Dr. Greenlee of Columbia University’s Mailman School of Public Health, together with colleagues at the Herbert Irving Comprehensive Cancer Center, the M.D. Anderson Cancer Center, the University of Michigan, the Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, and other U.S. and Canadian institutions.

Although A and B grade treatments will be recommended by the Society for Integrative Oncology as secondary therapies for breast cancer patients, the authors stressed that more research will be needed to identify and improve newer therapy options for breast cancer patients.

“Given the limited number of Grade A and Grade B recommendations, clinicians should engage patients in shared decision making using evidence-based projected benefits and harms that reflect patient values and preferences, as well as acknowledge their clinical prognosis,” the researchers wrote.

The authors had no relevant financial conflicts of interest to disclose.

[email protected]

Meditation, yoga, and relaxation with imagery can be recommended as evidence-based supportive care options during breast cancer treatment, according to a data review published in the Journal of the National Cancer Institute Monographs.

A review of randomized controlled clinical trials has provided researchers with strong evidence that certain behavioral therapies for mood improvement, depression, and anxiety can be useful as supportive care in women receiving standard breast cancer treatment (J. Natl. Cancer Inst. Monogr. 2014;50:346-58).

To determine which therapies had an effect during breast cancer treatment, the researchers organized a review of randomized controlled trials designed to assess the safety and effectiveness of more than 80 different intervention/modality combinations.

The investigators, led by Heather Greenlee, Ph.D., used a set of nine biomedical publication databases to find 203 randomized controlled clinical trials among breast cancer patients that tested complementary therapies together with standard cancer care – defined as surgery, chemotherapy, radiation therapy, and hormonal therapy.

A modified version of the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force grading system was used to develop and evaluate the effectiveness of the therapies, which were ranked into A, B, C, D, and H grades based on their evidence of benefit.

‘A’ grades were given to meditation, yoga, and relaxation with imagery, which were associated with mood improvement in the context of depression and anxiety during treatment for breast cancer. Music therapy was given a B grade for stress reduction.

C grades were assigned to 32 treatments that had weaker evidence of benefit, and 138 therapies were deemed to have insufficient evidence to form recommendations. Nine therapies were given a D grade, meaning they did not appear to have any effect on cancer treatment.

Only one intervention was given an H grade, meaning it was identified as potentially harmful: acetyl-L-carnitine, used for the prevention of taxane-induced neuropathy,was found to increase neuropathy.

Though the recommended therapies will not work for everyone, the guidelines should at least help clinicians and patients create a dialogue about treatment options, regardless of what the patient ultimately chooses, wrote Dr. Greenlee of Columbia University’s Mailman School of Public Health, together with colleagues at the Herbert Irving Comprehensive Cancer Center, the M.D. Anderson Cancer Center, the University of Michigan, the Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, and other U.S. and Canadian institutions.

Although A and B grade treatments will be recommended by the Society for Integrative Oncology as secondary therapies for breast cancer patients, the authors stressed that more research will be needed to identify and improve newer therapy options for breast cancer patients.

“Given the limited number of Grade A and Grade B recommendations, clinicians should engage patients in shared decision making using evidence-based projected benefits and harms that reflect patient values and preferences, as well as acknowledge their clinical prognosis,” the researchers wrote.

The authors had no relevant financial conflicts of interest to disclose.

[email protected]

Meditation, yoga, and relaxation with imagery can be recommended as evidence-based supportive care options during breast cancer treatment, according to a data review published in the Journal of the National Cancer Institute Monographs.

A review of randomized controlled clinical trials has provided researchers with strong evidence that certain behavioral therapies for mood improvement, depression, and anxiety can be useful as supportive care in women receiving standard breast cancer treatment (J. Natl. Cancer Inst. Monogr. 2014;50:346-58).

To determine which therapies had an effect during breast cancer treatment, the researchers organized a review of randomized controlled trials designed to assess the safety and effectiveness of more than 80 different intervention/modality combinations.

The investigators, led by Heather Greenlee, Ph.D., used a set of nine biomedical publication databases to find 203 randomized controlled clinical trials among breast cancer patients that tested complementary therapies together with standard cancer care – defined as surgery, chemotherapy, radiation therapy, and hormonal therapy.

A modified version of the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force grading system was used to develop and evaluate the effectiveness of the therapies, which were ranked into A, B, C, D, and H grades based on their evidence of benefit.

‘A’ grades were given to meditation, yoga, and relaxation with imagery, which were associated with mood improvement in the context of depression and anxiety during treatment for breast cancer. Music therapy was given a B grade for stress reduction.

C grades were assigned to 32 treatments that had weaker evidence of benefit, and 138 therapies were deemed to have insufficient evidence to form recommendations. Nine therapies were given a D grade, meaning they did not appear to have any effect on cancer treatment.

Only one intervention was given an H grade, meaning it was identified as potentially harmful: acetyl-L-carnitine, used for the prevention of taxane-induced neuropathy,was found to increase neuropathy.

Though the recommended therapies will not work for everyone, the guidelines should at least help clinicians and patients create a dialogue about treatment options, regardless of what the patient ultimately chooses, wrote Dr. Greenlee of Columbia University’s Mailman School of Public Health, together with colleagues at the Herbert Irving Comprehensive Cancer Center, the M.D. Anderson Cancer Center, the University of Michigan, the Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, and other U.S. and Canadian institutions.

Although A and B grade treatments will be recommended by the Society for Integrative Oncology as secondary therapies for breast cancer patients, the authors stressed that more research will be needed to identify and improve newer therapy options for breast cancer patients.

“Given the limited number of Grade A and Grade B recommendations, clinicians should engage patients in shared decision making using evidence-based projected benefits and harms that reflect patient values and preferences, as well as acknowledge their clinical prognosis,” the researchers wrote.

The authors had no relevant financial conflicts of interest to disclose.

[email protected]

Current use of cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitors was associated with an increase in 30-day mortality after ischemic stroke in a population-based cohort study published Nov. 5 in Neurology.

Since the association between COX-2 inhibitors and ischemic stroke mortality was associated only with current use and not former use, the researchers, led by Dr. Morten Schmidt of Aarhus (Denmark) University Hospital, believe that alternative treatment options – such as nonselective NSAIDs, which did not have an impact on overall mortality after ischemic stroke – may be more suitable for treating potential ischemic stroke patients, such as those with atrial fibrillation and a high CHA₂DS₂-VASc score.

Denise Fulton/Frontline Medical News

If the association is truly causal, it constitutes a strong argument for increasing the efforts to ensure that patients with a high predicted risk of arterial thromboembolism are not prescribed COX-2 inhibitors when alternative treatment options are available,” Dr. Schmidt and his associates wrote.

In order to determine whether COX-2 inhibitors influenced 30-day mortality at the time of hospitalization for stroke, the researchers examined records of 100,243 people hospitalized for a first-time stroke in Denmark during 2004-2012 and deaths within 1 month after the stroke (Neurology 2014 Nov. 5 [doi:10.1212/WNL.0000000000001024]).

The hazard ratio for ischemic stroke was 1.19 (95% confidence interval, 1.02-1.38) for current users of COX-2 inhibitors, while current users of nonselective NSAIDs had an HR of 1.00 (95% CI, 0.87-1.15), compared with nonusers.

The COX-2 inhibitors in the study included diclofenac, etodolac, nabumeton, and meloxicam, as well as coxibs including celecoxib and rofecoxib. The nonselective NSAIDs in the study were ibuprofen, naproxen, ketoprofen, dexibuprofen, piroxicam, tolfenamic acid, and indomethacin.

Though the researchers acknowledged more studies are needed to truly examine the effects of COX-2 inhibitors on stroke mortality, they hypothesized that the increased mortality rate may be caused by COX-2 inhibition interfering with the pathophysiologic response to a stroke, or unwanted effects from the thromboembolic properties of COX-2 inhibitors.

“Our study adds to the increasing body of evidence concerning the vascular risk and prognostic impact associated with use of COX-2 inhibitors,” Dr. Schmidt and his associates wrote.

The study was funded by several Danish research foundations and the Program for Clinical Research Infrastructure, which was established by the Lundbeck Foundation and the Novo Nordisk Foundation. The authors reported no relevant disclosures.

[email protected]

Current use of cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitors was associated with an increase in 30-day mortality after ischemic stroke in a population-based cohort study published Nov. 5 in Neurology.

Since the association between COX-2 inhibitors and ischemic stroke mortality was associated only with current use and not former use, the researchers, led by Dr. Morten Schmidt of Aarhus (Denmark) University Hospital, believe that alternative treatment options – such as nonselective NSAIDs, which did not have an impact on overall mortality after ischemic stroke – may be more suitable for treating potential ischemic stroke patients, such as those with atrial fibrillation and a high CHA₂DS₂-VASc score.

Denise Fulton/Frontline Medical News

If the association is truly causal, it constitutes a strong argument for increasing the efforts to ensure that patients with a high predicted risk of arterial thromboembolism are not prescribed COX-2 inhibitors when alternative treatment options are available,” Dr. Schmidt and his associates wrote.

In order to determine whether COX-2 inhibitors influenced 30-day mortality at the time of hospitalization for stroke, the researchers examined records of 100,243 people hospitalized for a first-time stroke in Denmark during 2004-2012 and deaths within 1 month after the stroke (Neurology 2014 Nov. 5 [doi:10.1212/WNL.0000000000001024]).

The hazard ratio for ischemic stroke was 1.19 (95% confidence interval, 1.02-1.38) for current users of COX-2 inhibitors, while current users of nonselective NSAIDs had an HR of 1.00 (95% CI, 0.87-1.15), compared with nonusers.

The COX-2 inhibitors in the study included diclofenac, etodolac, nabumeton, and meloxicam, as well as coxibs including celecoxib and rofecoxib. The nonselective NSAIDs in the study were ibuprofen, naproxen, ketoprofen, dexibuprofen, piroxicam, tolfenamic acid, and indomethacin.

Though the researchers acknowledged more studies are needed to truly examine the effects of COX-2 inhibitors on stroke mortality, they hypothesized that the increased mortality rate may be caused by COX-2 inhibition interfering with the pathophysiologic response to a stroke, or unwanted effects from the thromboembolic properties of COX-2 inhibitors.

“Our study adds to the increasing body of evidence concerning the vascular risk and prognostic impact associated with use of COX-2 inhibitors,” Dr. Schmidt and his associates wrote.

The study was funded by several Danish research foundations and the Program for Clinical Research Infrastructure, which was established by the Lundbeck Foundation and the Novo Nordisk Foundation. The authors reported no relevant disclosures.

[email protected]

Current use of cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitors was associated with an increase in 30-day mortality after ischemic stroke in a population-based cohort study published Nov. 5 in Neurology.

Since the association between COX-2 inhibitors and ischemic stroke mortality was associated only with current use and not former use, the researchers, led by Dr. Morten Schmidt of Aarhus (Denmark) University Hospital, believe that alternative treatment options – such as nonselective NSAIDs, which did not have an impact on overall mortality after ischemic stroke – may be more suitable for treating potential ischemic stroke patients, such as those with atrial fibrillation and a high CHA₂DS₂-VASc score.

Denise Fulton/Frontline Medical News

If the association is truly causal, it constitutes a strong argument for increasing the efforts to ensure that patients with a high predicted risk of arterial thromboembolism are not prescribed COX-2 inhibitors when alternative treatment options are available,” Dr. Schmidt and his associates wrote.

In order to determine whether COX-2 inhibitors influenced 30-day mortality at the time of hospitalization for stroke, the researchers examined records of 100,243 people hospitalized for a first-time stroke in Denmark during 2004-2012 and deaths within 1 month after the stroke (Neurology 2014 Nov. 5 [doi:10.1212/WNL.0000000000001024]).

The hazard ratio for ischemic stroke was 1.19 (95% confidence interval, 1.02-1.38) for current users of COX-2 inhibitors, while current users of nonselective NSAIDs had an HR of 1.00 (95% CI, 0.87-1.15), compared with nonusers.

The COX-2 inhibitors in the study included diclofenac, etodolac, nabumeton, and meloxicam, as well as coxibs including celecoxib and rofecoxib. The nonselective NSAIDs in the study were ibuprofen, naproxen, ketoprofen, dexibuprofen, piroxicam, tolfenamic acid, and indomethacin.

Though the researchers acknowledged more studies are needed to truly examine the effects of COX-2 inhibitors on stroke mortality, they hypothesized that the increased mortality rate may be caused by COX-2 inhibition interfering with the pathophysiologic response to a stroke, or unwanted effects from the thromboembolic properties of COX-2 inhibitors.

“Our study adds to the increasing body of evidence concerning the vascular risk and prognostic impact associated with use of COX-2 inhibitors,” Dr. Schmidt and his associates wrote.

The study was funded by several Danish research foundations and the Program for Clinical Research Infrastructure, which was established by the Lundbeck Foundation and the Novo Nordisk Foundation. The authors reported no relevant disclosures.

[email protected]

President Barack Obama cautioned against policies that could discourage health care workers from fighting Ebola abroad, noting that the American public should be careful about making policy decisions “that aren’t based on science and best practices.”

“We don’t just react based on our fears. We react on facts” and “judgment,” the president said in a press conference Wednesday.

He praised the efforts of health care workers in West Africa who are working to contain the disease, as well as the United States Agency for International Development’s Disaster Assistance Response Team (DART), with whom he will meet on Thursday. Mr. Obama will discuss with the team new monitoring guidance tailored to the individual needs of response workers; the guidelines were released yesterday by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.In his speech, Obama also tried to downplay the possibility of a large-scale outbreak on American soil, noting that Dallas nurses Amber Vinson and Nina Pham, the only two people known to have contracted Ebola in the United States, are now free of the virus. Both had provided care for Thomas Eric Duncan, who died of the disease Oct. 8. Of the additional seven people who were treated for Ebola in the United States, all have survived, he noted.

Although health care workers returning from West Africa will continue to be monitored, President Obama said the United States’ domestic policies should reflect the idea that the best way to protect Americans from Ebola is to stop the outbreak abroad.

“The truth is that we are going to have to stay vigilant here at home until we stop the epidemic at its source,” the president said.

Though some progress has been made in stopping the outbreak in West Africa – Nigeria and Senegal have recently declared themselves to be “Ebola free” – more work will have to be done overseas by Americans to ensure the virus will be eradicated.

“This disease can be contained, it will be defeated. Progress is possible,” but we have to keep working together, President Obama said.

[email protected]

President Barack Obama cautioned against policies that could discourage health care workers from fighting Ebola abroad, noting that the American public should be careful about making policy decisions “that aren’t based on science and best practices.”

“We don’t just react based on our fears. We react on facts” and “judgment,” the president said in a press conference Wednesday.

He praised the efforts of health care workers in West Africa who are working to contain the disease, as well as the United States Agency for International Development’s Disaster Assistance Response Team (DART), with whom he will meet on Thursday. Mr. Obama will discuss with the team new monitoring guidance tailored to the individual needs of response workers; the guidelines were released yesterday by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.In his speech, Obama also tried to downplay the possibility of a large-scale outbreak on American soil, noting that Dallas nurses Amber Vinson and Nina Pham, the only two people known to have contracted Ebola in the United States, are now free of the virus. Both had provided care for Thomas Eric Duncan, who died of the disease Oct. 8. Of the additional seven people who were treated for Ebola in the United States, all have survived, he noted.

Although health care workers returning from West Africa will continue to be monitored, President Obama said the United States’ domestic policies should reflect the idea that the best way to protect Americans from Ebola is to stop the outbreak abroad.

“The truth is that we are going to have to stay vigilant here at home until we stop the epidemic at its source,” the president said.

Though some progress has been made in stopping the outbreak in West Africa – Nigeria and Senegal have recently declared themselves to be “Ebola free” – more work will have to be done overseas by Americans to ensure the virus will be eradicated.

“This disease can be contained, it will be defeated. Progress is possible,” but we have to keep working together, President Obama said.

[email protected]

President Barack Obama cautioned against policies that could discourage health care workers from fighting Ebola abroad, noting that the American public should be careful about making policy decisions “that aren’t based on science and best practices.”

“We don’t just react based on our fears. We react on facts” and “judgment,” the president said in a press conference Wednesday.

He praised the efforts of health care workers in West Africa who are working to contain the disease, as well as the United States Agency for International Development’s Disaster Assistance Response Team (DART), with whom he will meet on Thursday. Mr. Obama will discuss with the team new monitoring guidance tailored to the individual needs of response workers; the guidelines were released yesterday by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.In his speech, Obama also tried to downplay the possibility of a large-scale outbreak on American soil, noting that Dallas nurses Amber Vinson and Nina Pham, the only two people known to have contracted Ebola in the United States, are now free of the virus. Both had provided care for Thomas Eric Duncan, who died of the disease Oct. 8. Of the additional seven people who were treated for Ebola in the United States, all have survived, he noted.

Although health care workers returning from West Africa will continue to be monitored, President Obama said the United States’ domestic policies should reflect the idea that the best way to protect Americans from Ebola is to stop the outbreak abroad.

“The truth is that we are going to have to stay vigilant here at home until we stop the epidemic at its source,” the president said.

Though some progress has been made in stopping the outbreak in West Africa – Nigeria and Senegal have recently declared themselves to be “Ebola free” – more work will have to be done overseas by Americans to ensure the virus will be eradicated.

“This disease can be contained, it will be defeated. Progress is possible,” but we have to keep working together, President Obama said.

[email protected]

WASHINGTON – Length of stay seemed to have the greatest impact on contracting multidrug-resistant strains of gram-negative organisms, with risk maximizing at 10 days of hospitalization. Each day of hospitalization increased the likelihood of contracting an infection with a gram-negative, multidrug-resistant organism by 1%, with risk maximizing at 10 days of hospitalization, said John A. Bosso, Pharm.D.

Researchers led by Dr. Bosso, a professor in the College of Pharmacy at the Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, analyzed 949 incidents of documented gram-negative infection during 1998-2014. The study is the first to quantify the potential risk of contracting a multidrug-resistant infection based on length of stay.

We caught up with Dr. Bosso, who presented his findings at the annual Interscience Conference on Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy 2014, and asked how health care providers and clinicians can mitigate the risks to patient health. Dr. Bosso said clinicians should be sure to identify which patients are most likely to contract a serious infection, advise patients on the risks associated with long hospital stays, and encourage patients to do their part in getting out of the hospital as quickly as possible.

[email protected]

WASHINGTON – Length of stay seemed to have the greatest impact on contracting multidrug-resistant strains of gram-negative organisms, with risk maximizing at 10 days of hospitalization. Each day of hospitalization increased the likelihood of contracting an infection with a gram-negative, multidrug-resistant organism by 1%, with risk maximizing at 10 days of hospitalization, said John A. Bosso, Pharm.D.

Researchers led by Dr. Bosso, a professor in the College of Pharmacy at the Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, analyzed 949 incidents of documented gram-negative infection during 1998-2014. The study is the first to quantify the potential risk of contracting a multidrug-resistant infection based on length of stay.

We caught up with Dr. Bosso, who presented his findings at the annual Interscience Conference on Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy 2014, and asked how health care providers and clinicians can mitigate the risks to patient health. Dr. Bosso said clinicians should be sure to identify which patients are most likely to contract a serious infection, advise patients on the risks associated with long hospital stays, and encourage patients to do their part in getting out of the hospital as quickly as possible.

[email protected]

WASHINGTON – Length of stay seemed to have the greatest impact on contracting multidrug-resistant strains of gram-negative organisms, with risk maximizing at 10 days of hospitalization. Each day of hospitalization increased the likelihood of contracting an infection with a gram-negative, multidrug-resistant organism by 1%, with risk maximizing at 10 days of hospitalization, said John A. Bosso, Pharm.D.

Researchers led by Dr. Bosso, a professor in the College of Pharmacy at the Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, analyzed 949 incidents of documented gram-negative infection during 1998-2014. The study is the first to quantify the potential risk of contracting a multidrug-resistant infection based on length of stay.

We caught up with Dr. Bosso, who presented his findings at the annual Interscience Conference on Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy 2014, and asked how health care providers and clinicians can mitigate the risks to patient health. Dr. Bosso said clinicians should be sure to identify which patients are most likely to contract a serious infection, advise patients on the risks associated with long hospital stays, and encourage patients to do their part in getting out of the hospital as quickly as possible.

[email protected]

The rate of gestational diabetes in the United States is somewhere between 4.6% and 9.4%, according to investigators from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Researchers compared data from birth certificates collected from 16 states to data from the Pregnancy Risk Assessment Monitoring System (PRAMS) in 21 states. PRAMS is a CDC-led surveillance project that works with state health departments to collect population-based data on maternal experiences before, during, and after pregnancy.

In 2010, the prevalence of gestational diabetes mellitus was 4.6% as listed on birth certificates, 8.7% on the PRAMS scale, and 9.2% as reported on either the PRAMS scale or birth certificates. The percent agreement between the sources was 94.1%, wrote Carla L. DeSisto, M.P.H., and her associates at the CDC (Prev. Chronic Dis. 2014;11:130415[doi:10.5888/pcd11.130415]).

There was no significant difference in gestational diabetes prevalence between the two study periods examined – 8.1% in 2007-08 and 8.5% in 2009-10, according to an analysis of PRAMS data from 123,373 women. In both time periods, Utah had the lowest prevalence (5.7% and 5.6%, respectively) and Rhode Island had the highest (10.4% and 11.7%).

The rate of gestational diabetes in the United States is somewhere between 4.6% and 9.4%, according to investigators from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Researchers compared data from birth certificates collected from 16 states to data from the Pregnancy Risk Assessment Monitoring System (PRAMS) in 21 states. PRAMS is a CDC-led surveillance project that works with state health departments to collect population-based data on maternal experiences before, during, and after pregnancy.

In 2010, the prevalence of gestational diabetes mellitus was 4.6% as listed on birth certificates, 8.7% on the PRAMS scale, and 9.2% as reported on either the PRAMS scale or birth certificates. The percent agreement between the sources was 94.1%, wrote Carla L. DeSisto, M.P.H., and her associates at the CDC (Prev. Chronic Dis. 2014;11:130415[doi:10.5888/pcd11.130415]).

There was no significant difference in gestational diabetes prevalence between the two study periods examined – 8.1% in 2007-08 and 8.5% in 2009-10, according to an analysis of PRAMS data from 123,373 women. In both time periods, Utah had the lowest prevalence (5.7% and 5.6%, respectively) and Rhode Island had the highest (10.4% and 11.7%).

The rate of gestational diabetes in the United States is somewhere between 4.6% and 9.4%, according to investigators from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Researchers compared data from birth certificates collected from 16 states to data from the Pregnancy Risk Assessment Monitoring System (PRAMS) in 21 states. PRAMS is a CDC-led surveillance project that works with state health departments to collect population-based data on maternal experiences before, during, and after pregnancy.

In 2010, the prevalence of gestational diabetes mellitus was 4.6% as listed on birth certificates, 8.7% on the PRAMS scale, and 9.2% as reported on either the PRAMS scale or birth certificates. The percent agreement between the sources was 94.1%, wrote Carla L. DeSisto, M.P.H., and her associates at the CDC (Prev. Chronic Dis. 2014;11:130415[doi:10.5888/pcd11.130415]).

There was no significant difference in gestational diabetes prevalence between the two study periods examined – 8.1% in 2007-08 and 8.5% in 2009-10, according to an analysis of PRAMS data from 123,373 women. In both time periods, Utah had the lowest prevalence (5.7% and 5.6%, respectively) and Rhode Island had the highest (10.4% and 11.7%).