It was 1970. I was in my second year of medical school. I had been up half the night preparing for a history and physical on a patient with aortic stenosis. When I arrived at the bedside, he refused to talk to me or allow me to examine him. He requested a “White doctor” instead. I can remember the hurt and embarrassment as if it were yesterday.

Coming from the Deep South, I was very familiar with racial bias, but I did not expect it at that level and in that environment. From that point on, I was anxious at each patient encounter, concerned that this might happen again. And it did several times during my residency and fellowship.

The Occupational Safety and Health Administration defines workplace violence as “any act or threat of physical violence, harassment, intimidation, or other threatening disruptive behavior that occurs at the work site. It ranges from threats and verbal abuse to physical assaults.”

There is considerable media focus on incidents of physical violence against health care workers, but when patients, their families, or visitors openly display bias and request a different doctor, nurse, or technician for nonmedical reasons, the impact is profound. This is extremely hurtful to a professional who has worked long and hard to acquire skills and expertise. And, while speech may not constitute violence in the strictest sense of the word, there is growing evidence that it can be physically harmful through its effect on the nervous system, even if no physical contact is involved.

Incidents of bias occur regularly and are clearly on the rise. In most cases the request for a different health care worker is granted to honor the rights of the patient. The healthcare worker is left alone and emotionally wounded; the healthcare institutions are complicit.

This bias is mostly racial but can also be based on religion, sexual orientation, age, disability, body size, accent, or gender.

An entire issue of the American Medical Association Journal of Ethics was devoted to this topic. From recognizing that there are limits to what clinicians should be expected to tolerate when patients’ preferences express unjust bias, the issue also explored where those limits should be placed, why, and who is obliged to enforce them.

The newly adopted Mass General Patient Code of Conduct is evidence that health care systems are beginning to recognize this problem and that such behavior will not be tolerated.

But having a zero-tolerance policy is not enough. We must have procedures in place to discourage and mitigate the impact of patient bias.

A clear definition of what constitutes a bias incident is essential. All team members must be made aware of the procedures for reporting such incidents and the chain of command for escalation. Reporting should be encouraged, and resources must be made available to impacted team members. Surveillance, monitoring, and review are also essential as is clarification on when patient preferences should be honored.

The Mayo Clinic 5 Step Plan is an excellent example of a protocol to deal with patient bias against health care workers and is based on a thoughtful analysis of what constitutes an unreasonable request for a different clinician. I’m pleased to report that my health care system (Inova Health) is developing a similar protocol.

The health care setting should be a bias-free zone for both patients and health care workers. I have been a strong advocate of patients’ rights and worked hard to guard against bias and eliminate disparities in care, but health care workers have rights as well.

We should expect to be treated with respect.

The views expressed by the author are those of the author alone and do not represent the views of the Inova Health System. Dr. Francis is a cardiologist at Inova Heart and Vascular Institute, McLean, Va. He disclosed no conflicts of interest.

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

It was 1970. I was in my second year of medical school. I had been up half the night preparing for a history and physical on a patient with aortic stenosis. When I arrived at the bedside, he refused to talk to me or allow me to examine him. He requested a “White doctor” instead. I can remember the hurt and embarrassment as if it were yesterday.

Coming from the Deep South, I was very familiar with racial bias, but I did not expect it at that level and in that environment. From that point on, I was anxious at each patient encounter, concerned that this might happen again. And it did several times during my residency and fellowship.

The Occupational Safety and Health Administration defines workplace violence as “any act or threat of physical violence, harassment, intimidation, or other threatening disruptive behavior that occurs at the work site. It ranges from threats and verbal abuse to physical assaults.”

There is considerable media focus on incidents of physical violence against health care workers, but when patients, their families, or visitors openly display bias and request a different doctor, nurse, or technician for nonmedical reasons, the impact is profound. This is extremely hurtful to a professional who has worked long and hard to acquire skills and expertise. And, while speech may not constitute violence in the strictest sense of the word, there is growing evidence that it can be physically harmful through its effect on the nervous system, even if no physical contact is involved.

Incidents of bias occur regularly and are clearly on the rise. In most cases the request for a different health care worker is granted to honor the rights of the patient. The healthcare worker is left alone and emotionally wounded; the healthcare institutions are complicit.

This bias is mostly racial but can also be based on religion, sexual orientation, age, disability, body size, accent, or gender.

An entire issue of the American Medical Association Journal of Ethics was devoted to this topic. From recognizing that there are limits to what clinicians should be expected to tolerate when patients’ preferences express unjust bias, the issue also explored where those limits should be placed, why, and who is obliged to enforce them.

The newly adopted Mass General Patient Code of Conduct is evidence that health care systems are beginning to recognize this problem and that such behavior will not be tolerated.

But having a zero-tolerance policy is not enough. We must have procedures in place to discourage and mitigate the impact of patient bias.

A clear definition of what constitutes a bias incident is essential. All team members must be made aware of the procedures for reporting such incidents and the chain of command for escalation. Reporting should be encouraged, and resources must be made available to impacted team members. Surveillance, monitoring, and review are also essential as is clarification on when patient preferences should be honored.

The Mayo Clinic 5 Step Plan is an excellent example of a protocol to deal with patient bias against health care workers and is based on a thoughtful analysis of what constitutes an unreasonable request for a different clinician. I’m pleased to report that my health care system (Inova Health) is developing a similar protocol.

The health care setting should be a bias-free zone for both patients and health care workers. I have been a strong advocate of patients’ rights and worked hard to guard against bias and eliminate disparities in care, but health care workers have rights as well.

We should expect to be treated with respect.

The views expressed by the author are those of the author alone and do not represent the views of the Inova Health System. Dr. Francis is a cardiologist at Inova Heart and Vascular Institute, McLean, Va. He disclosed no conflicts of interest.

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

It was 1970. I was in my second year of medical school. I had been up half the night preparing for a history and physical on a patient with aortic stenosis. When I arrived at the bedside, he refused to talk to me or allow me to examine him. He requested a “White doctor” instead. I can remember the hurt and embarrassment as if it were yesterday.

Coming from the Deep South, I was very familiar with racial bias, but I did not expect it at that level and in that environment. From that point on, I was anxious at each patient encounter, concerned that this might happen again. And it did several times during my residency and fellowship.

The Occupational Safety and Health Administration defines workplace violence as “any act or threat of physical violence, harassment, intimidation, or other threatening disruptive behavior that occurs at the work site. It ranges from threats and verbal abuse to physical assaults.”

There is considerable media focus on incidents of physical violence against health care workers, but when patients, their families, or visitors openly display bias and request a different doctor, nurse, or technician for nonmedical reasons, the impact is profound. This is extremely hurtful to a professional who has worked long and hard to acquire skills and expertise. And, while speech may not constitute violence in the strictest sense of the word, there is growing evidence that it can be physically harmful through its effect on the nervous system, even if no physical contact is involved.

Incidents of bias occur regularly and are clearly on the rise. In most cases the request for a different health care worker is granted to honor the rights of the patient. The healthcare worker is left alone and emotionally wounded; the healthcare institutions are complicit.

This bias is mostly racial but can also be based on religion, sexual orientation, age, disability, body size, accent, or gender.

An entire issue of the American Medical Association Journal of Ethics was devoted to this topic. From recognizing that there are limits to what clinicians should be expected to tolerate when patients’ preferences express unjust bias, the issue also explored where those limits should be placed, why, and who is obliged to enforce them.

The newly adopted Mass General Patient Code of Conduct is evidence that health care systems are beginning to recognize this problem and that such behavior will not be tolerated.

But having a zero-tolerance policy is not enough. We must have procedures in place to discourage and mitigate the impact of patient bias.

A clear definition of what constitutes a bias incident is essential. All team members must be made aware of the procedures for reporting such incidents and the chain of command for escalation. Reporting should be encouraged, and resources must be made available to impacted team members. Surveillance, monitoring, and review are also essential as is clarification on when patient preferences should be honored.

The Mayo Clinic 5 Step Plan is an excellent example of a protocol to deal with patient bias against health care workers and is based on a thoughtful analysis of what constitutes an unreasonable request for a different clinician. I’m pleased to report that my health care system (Inova Health) is developing a similar protocol.

The health care setting should be a bias-free zone for both patients and health care workers. I have been a strong advocate of patients’ rights and worked hard to guard against bias and eliminate disparities in care, but health care workers have rights as well.

We should expect to be treated with respect.

The views expressed by the author are those of the author alone and do not represent the views of the Inova Health System. Dr. Francis is a cardiologist at Inova Heart and Vascular Institute, McLean, Va. He disclosed no conflicts of interest.

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

A new California law ensures that doctors found to have engaged in sexual misconduct with patients will never again practice medicine in the state.

It’s the latest example of states taking doctor sexual misconduct more seriously after longstanding criticism that medical boards have been too lenient.

The law, which takes effect in January 2023, requires the state’s medical board to permanently revoke these doctors’ licenses instead of allowing them to petition the board for reinstatement after 3 years.

“Physician licenses should not be reinstated after egregious sexual misconduct with patients. The doctor-patient relationship has to remain sacrosanct and trusted,” said Peter Yellowlees, MD, a professor of psychiatry at the University of California, Davis.

Although the vast majority of the nation’s estimated 1 million doctors don’t sexually abuse patients, the problem is a national one.

The Federation of State Medical Boards defines sexual misconduct as the exploitation of the physician-patient relationship in a sexual way. The exploitation may be verbal or physical and can occur in person or virtually.

The FSMB conducted a 2-year review of how medical boards handled cases of sexual misconduct, issuing a report in 2020 that contained 38 recommended actions.

Four states in addition to California have enacted laws that incorporate some FSMB recommendations. These include revoking doctors’ licenses after a single egregious act of sexual misconduct (including sexual assault), regardless of whether the physician was charged or convicted; increased reporting by hospitals and doctors of sexual misconduct; and training of physicians to recognize and report sexual misconduct.

The four state laws are:

• Georgia’s HB 458. It was signed into law in May 2021, and it authorizes the medical board to revoke or suspend a license if a physician is found guilty of sexually assaulting a patient in a criminal case. Doctors are required to report other doctors who have sexually abused patients and to take continuing medical education (CME) units on sexual misconduct.
• Florida’s SB 1934. This legislation was signed into law in June 2021, and it bars physicians charged with serious crimes such as sexual assault, sexual misconduct against patients, or possession of child pornography from seeing patients until those charges are resolved by the legal system.
• West Virginia’s SB 603. Signed into law in March 2022 it prohibits the medical board from issuing a license to a physician who engaged in sexual activity or misconduct with a patient whose license was revoked in another state or was involved in other violations.
• Tennessee HB 1045. It was signed into law in May 2021, and authorizes the medical board, upon learning of an indictment against a physician for a controlled substance violation or sexual offense, to immediately suspend the doctor’s ability to prescribe controlled substances until the doctor’s case is resolved.

A published study identified a total of 1,721 reports of physician sexual misconduct that were submitted to the National Practitioner Data Bank between 2000 and 2019. The annual incidence of sexual misconduct reports averaged 10.8 per 100,000 U.S. physician licensees, said the researchers.

In a groundbreaking 2016 investigation, the Atlanta Journal-Constitution reviewed thousands of documents and found more than 2,400 doctors whose sexual misconduct cases clearly involved patients since 1999.
 

Physician sexual misconduct is likely underreported

The actual incidence of physician-patient sexual misconduct is likely higher as a result of underreporting, according to the researchers.

Because a substantial power differential exists between patients and their physicians, the researchers noted, it follows that patient victims, like other sexual assault victims, may be unwilling or unable to report the incident in question.

Many violations involving physician sexual misconduct of patients never came to the attention of state regulators, according to the Journal-Constitution investigation. Reporting showed that hospitals, clinics, and fellow doctors fail to report sexual misconduct to regulators, despite laws in most states requiring them to do so.
 

Media investigations highlight medical board shortcomings

Public pressure on the California Medical Board increased after the Los Angeles Times investigated what happened to doctors who surrendered or had their licenses revoked after being reported for sexual abuse with patients. The Times revealed in 2021 that the board reinstated 10 of 17 doctors who petitioned for reinstatement.

They include Esmail Nadjmabadi, MD, of Bakersfield, Calif., who had sexually abused six female patients, including one in her mid-teens. The Times reported that, in 2009, he pleaded no contest to a criminal charge that he sexually exploited two or more women and surrendered his medical license the following year.

Five years later, Dr. Nadjmabadi petitioned the medical board to be reinstated and the board approved his request.

The California board has also reinstated several doctors who underwent sex offender rehabilitation. Board members rely heavily on a doctor’s evidence of rehabilitation, usually with the testimony of therapists hired by the doctor, and no input from the patients who were harmed, according to the Times’ investigation.

High-profile sexual misconduct or abuse cases involving Larry Nassar, MD, and Robert Anderson, MD, in Michigan; Richard Strauss, MD, in Ohio; and Ricardo Cruciani, MD, in New York, added to the mounting criticism that medical boards were too lenient in their handling of complaints of sexual misconduct.
 

Another state tackles sexual misconduct

Ohio’s medical board created an administrative rule stating that licensed physicians have a legal and ethical duty to report colleagues for sexual misconduct with patients and to complete a 1-hour CME training. Failure to report sexual misconduct complaints can lead to a doctor being permanently stripped of his license.

This happened to Robert S. Geiger, MD, in 2016 after not reporting his colleague James Bressi, MD, to the medical board after receiving complaints that Dr. Bressi was sexually abusing female patients at their pain clinic.

Dr. Bressi was convicted of sexual misconduct with a patient, stripped of his medical license, and sentenced to 59 days in prison. 

“I think all of these reforms are a step in the right direction and will help to deter doctors from committing sexual misconduct to some extent,” said California activist Marian Hollingsworth, cofounder of the Patient Safety League.

But there’s room for improvement, she said, since “most states fall short in not requiring medical boards to notify law enforcement when they get a complaint of doctor sexual misconduct so the public can be aware of it.”

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

A new California law ensures that doctors found to have engaged in sexual misconduct with patients will never again practice medicine in the state.

It’s the latest example of states taking doctor sexual misconduct more seriously after longstanding criticism that medical boards have been too lenient.

The law, which takes effect in January 2023, requires the state’s medical board to permanently revoke these doctors’ licenses instead of allowing them to petition the board for reinstatement after 3 years.

“Physician licenses should not be reinstated after egregious sexual misconduct with patients. The doctor-patient relationship has to remain sacrosanct and trusted,” said Peter Yellowlees, MD, a professor of psychiatry at the University of California, Davis.

Although the vast majority of the nation’s estimated 1 million doctors don’t sexually abuse patients, the problem is a national one.

The Federation of State Medical Boards defines sexual misconduct as the exploitation of the physician-patient relationship in a sexual way. The exploitation may be verbal or physical and can occur in person or virtually.

The FSMB conducted a 2-year review of how medical boards handled cases of sexual misconduct, issuing a report in 2020 that contained 38 recommended actions.

Four states in addition to California have enacted laws that incorporate some FSMB recommendations. These include revoking doctors’ licenses after a single egregious act of sexual misconduct (including sexual assault), regardless of whether the physician was charged or convicted; increased reporting by hospitals and doctors of sexual misconduct; and training of physicians to recognize and report sexual misconduct.

The four state laws are:

• Georgia’s HB 458. It was signed into law in May 2021, and it authorizes the medical board to revoke or suspend a license if a physician is found guilty of sexually assaulting a patient in a criminal case. Doctors are required to report other doctors who have sexually abused patients and to take continuing medical education (CME) units on sexual misconduct.
• Florida’s SB 1934. This legislation was signed into law in June 2021, and it bars physicians charged with serious crimes such as sexual assault, sexual misconduct against patients, or possession of child pornography from seeing patients until those charges are resolved by the legal system.
• West Virginia’s SB 603. Signed into law in March 2022 it prohibits the medical board from issuing a license to a physician who engaged in sexual activity or misconduct with a patient whose license was revoked in another state or was involved in other violations.
• Tennessee HB 1045. It was signed into law in May 2021, and authorizes the medical board, upon learning of an indictment against a physician for a controlled substance violation or sexual offense, to immediately suspend the doctor’s ability to prescribe controlled substances until the doctor’s case is resolved.

A published study identified a total of 1,721 reports of physician sexual misconduct that were submitted to the National Practitioner Data Bank between 2000 and 2019. The annual incidence of sexual misconduct reports averaged 10.8 per 100,000 U.S. physician licensees, said the researchers.

In a groundbreaking 2016 investigation, the Atlanta Journal-Constitution reviewed thousands of documents and found more than 2,400 doctors whose sexual misconduct cases clearly involved patients since 1999.
 

Physician sexual misconduct is likely underreported

The actual incidence of physician-patient sexual misconduct is likely higher as a result of underreporting, according to the researchers.

Because a substantial power differential exists between patients and their physicians, the researchers noted, it follows that patient victims, like other sexual assault victims, may be unwilling or unable to report the incident in question.

Many violations involving physician sexual misconduct of patients never came to the attention of state regulators, according to the Journal-Constitution investigation. Reporting showed that hospitals, clinics, and fellow doctors fail to report sexual misconduct to regulators, despite laws in most states requiring them to do so.
 

Media investigations highlight medical board shortcomings

Public pressure on the California Medical Board increased after the Los Angeles Times investigated what happened to doctors who surrendered or had their licenses revoked after being reported for sexual abuse with patients. The Times revealed in 2021 that the board reinstated 10 of 17 doctors who petitioned for reinstatement.

They include Esmail Nadjmabadi, MD, of Bakersfield, Calif., who had sexually abused six female patients, including one in her mid-teens. The Times reported that, in 2009, he pleaded no contest to a criminal charge that he sexually exploited two or more women and surrendered his medical license the following year.

Five years later, Dr. Nadjmabadi petitioned the medical board to be reinstated and the board approved his request.

The California board has also reinstated several doctors who underwent sex offender rehabilitation. Board members rely heavily on a doctor’s evidence of rehabilitation, usually with the testimony of therapists hired by the doctor, and no input from the patients who were harmed, according to the Times’ investigation.

High-profile sexual misconduct or abuse cases involving Larry Nassar, MD, and Robert Anderson, MD, in Michigan; Richard Strauss, MD, in Ohio; and Ricardo Cruciani, MD, in New York, added to the mounting criticism that medical boards were too lenient in their handling of complaints of sexual misconduct.
 

Another state tackles sexual misconduct

Ohio’s medical board created an administrative rule stating that licensed physicians have a legal and ethical duty to report colleagues for sexual misconduct with patients and to complete a 1-hour CME training. Failure to report sexual misconduct complaints can lead to a doctor being permanently stripped of his license.

This happened to Robert S. Geiger, MD, in 2016 after not reporting his colleague James Bressi, MD, to the medical board after receiving complaints that Dr. Bressi was sexually abusing female patients at their pain clinic.

Dr. Bressi was convicted of sexual misconduct with a patient, stripped of his medical license, and sentenced to 59 days in prison. 

“I think all of these reforms are a step in the right direction and will help to deter doctors from committing sexual misconduct to some extent,” said California activist Marian Hollingsworth, cofounder of the Patient Safety League.

But there’s room for improvement, she said, since “most states fall short in not requiring medical boards to notify law enforcement when they get a complaint of doctor sexual misconduct so the public can be aware of it.”

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

A new California law ensures that doctors found to have engaged in sexual misconduct with patients will never again practice medicine in the state.

It’s the latest example of states taking doctor sexual misconduct more seriously after longstanding criticism that medical boards have been too lenient.

The law, which takes effect in January 2023, requires the state’s medical board to permanently revoke these doctors’ licenses instead of allowing them to petition the board for reinstatement after 3 years.

“Physician licenses should not be reinstated after egregious sexual misconduct with patients. The doctor-patient relationship has to remain sacrosanct and trusted,” said Peter Yellowlees, MD, a professor of psychiatry at the University of California, Davis.

Although the vast majority of the nation’s estimated 1 million doctors don’t sexually abuse patients, the problem is a national one.

The Federation of State Medical Boards defines sexual misconduct as the exploitation of the physician-patient relationship in a sexual way. The exploitation may be verbal or physical and can occur in person or virtually.

The FSMB conducted a 2-year review of how medical boards handled cases of sexual misconduct, issuing a report in 2020 that contained 38 recommended actions.

Four states in addition to California have enacted laws that incorporate some FSMB recommendations. These include revoking doctors’ licenses after a single egregious act of sexual misconduct (including sexual assault), regardless of whether the physician was charged or convicted; increased reporting by hospitals and doctors of sexual misconduct; and training of physicians to recognize and report sexual misconduct.

The four state laws are:

• Georgia’s HB 458. It was signed into law in May 2021, and it authorizes the medical board to revoke or suspend a license if a physician is found guilty of sexually assaulting a patient in a criminal case. Doctors are required to report other doctors who have sexually abused patients and to take continuing medical education (CME) units on sexual misconduct.
• Florida’s SB 1934. This legislation was signed into law in June 2021, and it bars physicians charged with serious crimes such as sexual assault, sexual misconduct against patients, or possession of child pornography from seeing patients until those charges are resolved by the legal system.
• West Virginia’s SB 603. Signed into law in March 2022 it prohibits the medical board from issuing a license to a physician who engaged in sexual activity or misconduct with a patient whose license was revoked in another state or was involved in other violations.
• Tennessee HB 1045. It was signed into law in May 2021, and authorizes the medical board, upon learning of an indictment against a physician for a controlled substance violation or sexual offense, to immediately suspend the doctor’s ability to prescribe controlled substances until the doctor’s case is resolved.

A published study identified a total of 1,721 reports of physician sexual misconduct that were submitted to the National Practitioner Data Bank between 2000 and 2019. The annual incidence of sexual misconduct reports averaged 10.8 per 100,000 U.S. physician licensees, said the researchers.

In a groundbreaking 2016 investigation, the Atlanta Journal-Constitution reviewed thousands of documents and found more than 2,400 doctors whose sexual misconduct cases clearly involved patients since 1999.
 

Physician sexual misconduct is likely underreported

The actual incidence of physician-patient sexual misconduct is likely higher as a result of underreporting, according to the researchers.

Because a substantial power differential exists between patients and their physicians, the researchers noted, it follows that patient victims, like other sexual assault victims, may be unwilling or unable to report the incident in question.

Many violations involving physician sexual misconduct of patients never came to the attention of state regulators, according to the Journal-Constitution investigation. Reporting showed that hospitals, clinics, and fellow doctors fail to report sexual misconduct to regulators, despite laws in most states requiring them to do so.
 

Media investigations highlight medical board shortcomings

Public pressure on the California Medical Board increased after the Los Angeles Times investigated what happened to doctors who surrendered or had their licenses revoked after being reported for sexual abuse with patients. The Times revealed in 2021 that the board reinstated 10 of 17 doctors who petitioned for reinstatement.

They include Esmail Nadjmabadi, MD, of Bakersfield, Calif., who had sexually abused six female patients, including one in her mid-teens. The Times reported that, in 2009, he pleaded no contest to a criminal charge that he sexually exploited two or more women and surrendered his medical license the following year.

Five years later, Dr. Nadjmabadi petitioned the medical board to be reinstated and the board approved his request.

The California board has also reinstated several doctors who underwent sex offender rehabilitation. Board members rely heavily on a doctor’s evidence of rehabilitation, usually with the testimony of therapists hired by the doctor, and no input from the patients who were harmed, according to the Times’ investigation.

High-profile sexual misconduct or abuse cases involving Larry Nassar, MD, and Robert Anderson, MD, in Michigan; Richard Strauss, MD, in Ohio; and Ricardo Cruciani, MD, in New York, added to the mounting criticism that medical boards were too lenient in their handling of complaints of sexual misconduct.
 

Another state tackles sexual misconduct

Ohio’s medical board created an administrative rule stating that licensed physicians have a legal and ethical duty to report colleagues for sexual misconduct with patients and to complete a 1-hour CME training. Failure to report sexual misconduct complaints can lead to a doctor being permanently stripped of his license.

This happened to Robert S. Geiger, MD, in 2016 after not reporting his colleague James Bressi, MD, to the medical board after receiving complaints that Dr. Bressi was sexually abusing female patients at their pain clinic.

Dr. Bressi was convicted of sexual misconduct with a patient, stripped of his medical license, and sentenced to 59 days in prison. 

“I think all of these reforms are a step in the right direction and will help to deter doctors from committing sexual misconduct to some extent,” said California activist Marian Hollingsworth, cofounder of the Patient Safety League.

But there’s room for improvement, she said, since “most states fall short in not requiring medical boards to notify law enforcement when they get a complaint of doctor sexual misconduct so the public can be aware of it.”

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

A new study reports that slowly lowering weights builds and strengthens muscles almost as well as lifting and lowering them, as you would do with a typical rep.

That means, for example, that you could use two hands to lift a dumbbell, then one hand to slowly lower it, while sacrificing little in the way of results. Focusing on the lowering – or the “eccentric” contraction – can lead to a more efficient gym session, Japanese researchers say.

In the study, published in the European Journal of Applied Physiology, researchers divided people into three groups of 14 for a 5-week, twice-weekly comparison.

One group performed dumbbell curls from full extension to about one-quarter of the way up, for 2 seconds up and 2 seconds down, in three sets of 10 reps. Another 14 people performed only the lift portion of the movement (a researcher helped them reset the weight after each rep), and another 14 did only the lowering part of the move.

The group that both lifted and lowered the weights increased the maximum force they could produce on a lift by 18% and increased the thickness of the biceps muscle by 11%.

The people who only lowered the weights nearly matched that, increasing their maximum force by 14% and muscle size by 10%. The lifting-only group increased their max force by 11%, while muscle size increase was insignificant. 

Your muscle fibers work two ways. When you lift a dumbbell from a straight arm up to your shoulder, your biceps muscle is using a “concentric” contraction. As you lower that dumbbell back down, the biceps muscle is working to put the brakes on the descent – that’s called an “eccentric” contraction. 

The lifting-plus-lowering group saw the biggest gains because they were pretty much doing twice the number of reps. The lowering-only group made similar improvements in strength and muscle with only half the work. 

Study author Masatoshi Nakamura, PhD, a professor at Nishikyushu University, Japan, believes that eccentric muscle contractions produce greater neurological adaptations in the spine and brain than concentric contractions. In other words, your nerves learn to send more of the “pull harder” signal to your muscles. 

At the same time, the spring action of a large protein called “titin” in the muscle fibers produces greater force during eccentric contractions while using less energy, and more titin could account for the increase in muscle size, which is called hypertrophy. 

“Titin in the muscle fibers could be the best explanation for muscle hypertrophy,” Dr. Nakamura says. “However, we believe that other factors, such as neurological adaptations, also play a large role in increasing muscle strength.”

The short range of motion used in the dumbbell curls was an important factor. A study, published in the Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, found that a partial range-of-motion triceps exercise produced greater muscle growth than full range-of-motion movements. 

Although the people in this newest study only performed dumbbell curls, “we think the effect is similar in other muscles,” Dr. Nakamura says.

Your muscles are much stronger when lowering than they are lifting, so Dr. Nakamura suggests choosing a heavy weight to perform single-arm dumbbell curls. Use both arms to raise the dumbbell into the 50-degree position, then lower it over a 2-second count. For two-handed bent- or straight-bar curls, you can ask a spotter to help you lift the weights into position between slow lowering moves. 

You can also try the same trick with leg curl or leg extension exercise machines, using two legs to lift the weight and allowing one leg to lower it.

In the near future, your gym might contain more equipment that was designed specifically around lowering movements.

“Other machines that can emphasize eccentric contraction are gradually being developed,” Dr. Nakamura says.

A version of this article first appeared on WebMD.com.

A new study reports that slowly lowering weights builds and strengthens muscles almost as well as lifting and lowering them, as you would do with a typical rep.

That means, for example, that you could use two hands to lift a dumbbell, then one hand to slowly lower it, while sacrificing little in the way of results. Focusing on the lowering – or the “eccentric” contraction – can lead to a more efficient gym session, Japanese researchers say.

In the study, published in the European Journal of Applied Physiology, researchers divided people into three groups of 14 for a 5-week, twice-weekly comparison.

One group performed dumbbell curls from full extension to about one-quarter of the way up, for 2 seconds up and 2 seconds down, in three sets of 10 reps. Another 14 people performed only the lift portion of the movement (a researcher helped them reset the weight after each rep), and another 14 did only the lowering part of the move.

The group that both lifted and lowered the weights increased the maximum force they could produce on a lift by 18% and increased the thickness of the biceps muscle by 11%.

The people who only lowered the weights nearly matched that, increasing their maximum force by 14% and muscle size by 10%. The lifting-only group increased their max force by 11%, while muscle size increase was insignificant. 

Your muscle fibers work two ways. When you lift a dumbbell from a straight arm up to your shoulder, your biceps muscle is using a “concentric” contraction. As you lower that dumbbell back down, the biceps muscle is working to put the brakes on the descent – that’s called an “eccentric” contraction. 

The lifting-plus-lowering group saw the biggest gains because they were pretty much doing twice the number of reps. The lowering-only group made similar improvements in strength and muscle with only half the work. 

Study author Masatoshi Nakamura, PhD, a professor at Nishikyushu University, Japan, believes that eccentric muscle contractions produce greater neurological adaptations in the spine and brain than concentric contractions. In other words, your nerves learn to send more of the “pull harder” signal to your muscles. 

At the same time, the spring action of a large protein called “titin” in the muscle fibers produces greater force during eccentric contractions while using less energy, and more titin could account for the increase in muscle size, which is called hypertrophy. 

“Titin in the muscle fibers could be the best explanation for muscle hypertrophy,” Dr. Nakamura says. “However, we believe that other factors, such as neurological adaptations, also play a large role in increasing muscle strength.”

The short range of motion used in the dumbbell curls was an important factor. A study, published in the Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, found that a partial range-of-motion triceps exercise produced greater muscle growth than full range-of-motion movements. 

Although the people in this newest study only performed dumbbell curls, “we think the effect is similar in other muscles,” Dr. Nakamura says.

Your muscles are much stronger when lowering than they are lifting, so Dr. Nakamura suggests choosing a heavy weight to perform single-arm dumbbell curls. Use both arms to raise the dumbbell into the 50-degree position, then lower it over a 2-second count. For two-handed bent- or straight-bar curls, you can ask a spotter to help you lift the weights into position between slow lowering moves. 

You can also try the same trick with leg curl or leg extension exercise machines, using two legs to lift the weight and allowing one leg to lower it.

In the near future, your gym might contain more equipment that was designed specifically around lowering movements.

“Other machines that can emphasize eccentric contraction are gradually being developed,” Dr. Nakamura says.

A version of this article first appeared on WebMD.com.

A new study reports that slowly lowering weights builds and strengthens muscles almost as well as lifting and lowering them, as you would do with a typical rep.

That means, for example, that you could use two hands to lift a dumbbell, then one hand to slowly lower it, while sacrificing little in the way of results. Focusing on the lowering – or the “eccentric” contraction – can lead to a more efficient gym session, Japanese researchers say.

In the study, published in the European Journal of Applied Physiology, researchers divided people into three groups of 14 for a 5-week, twice-weekly comparison.

One group performed dumbbell curls from full extension to about one-quarter of the way up, for 2 seconds up and 2 seconds down, in three sets of 10 reps. Another 14 people performed only the lift portion of the movement (a researcher helped them reset the weight after each rep), and another 14 did only the lowering part of the move.

The group that both lifted and lowered the weights increased the maximum force they could produce on a lift by 18% and increased the thickness of the biceps muscle by 11%.

The people who only lowered the weights nearly matched that, increasing their maximum force by 14% and muscle size by 10%. The lifting-only group increased their max force by 11%, while muscle size increase was insignificant. 

Your muscle fibers work two ways. When you lift a dumbbell from a straight arm up to your shoulder, your biceps muscle is using a “concentric” contraction. As you lower that dumbbell back down, the biceps muscle is working to put the brakes on the descent – that’s called an “eccentric” contraction. 

The lifting-plus-lowering group saw the biggest gains because they were pretty much doing twice the number of reps. The lowering-only group made similar improvements in strength and muscle with only half the work. 

Study author Masatoshi Nakamura, PhD, a professor at Nishikyushu University, Japan, believes that eccentric muscle contractions produce greater neurological adaptations in the spine and brain than concentric contractions. In other words, your nerves learn to send more of the “pull harder” signal to your muscles. 

At the same time, the spring action of a large protein called “titin” in the muscle fibers produces greater force during eccentric contractions while using less energy, and more titin could account for the increase in muscle size, which is called hypertrophy. 

“Titin in the muscle fibers could be the best explanation for muscle hypertrophy,” Dr. Nakamura says. “However, we believe that other factors, such as neurological adaptations, also play a large role in increasing muscle strength.”

The short range of motion used in the dumbbell curls was an important factor. A study, published in the Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, found that a partial range-of-motion triceps exercise produced greater muscle growth than full range-of-motion movements. 

Although the people in this newest study only performed dumbbell curls, “we think the effect is similar in other muscles,” Dr. Nakamura says.

Your muscles are much stronger when lowering than they are lifting, so Dr. Nakamura suggests choosing a heavy weight to perform single-arm dumbbell curls. Use both arms to raise the dumbbell into the 50-degree position, then lower it over a 2-second count. For two-handed bent- or straight-bar curls, you can ask a spotter to help you lift the weights into position between slow lowering moves. 

You can also try the same trick with leg curl or leg extension exercise machines, using two legs to lift the weight and allowing one leg to lower it.

In the near future, your gym might contain more equipment that was designed specifically around lowering movements.

“Other machines that can emphasize eccentric contraction are gradually being developed,” Dr. Nakamura says.

A version of this article first appeared on WebMD.com.

The Endocrine Society has issued an updated clinical practice guideline on the prevention and management of hypoglycemia in patients with diabetes who are at high risk, addressing the wide variety of treatment advances, such as insulin pumps and continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) systems, that have appeared since the publication of the society’s last guideline on hypoglycemia, in 2009.

“CGM and insulin pumps have been much more commonly used in the last decade among people with diabetes, including children, and there are new forms of glucagon available,” said Anthony L. McCall, MD, PhD, chair of the panel that wrote the guideline.

“We had to update our guideline to match these developments in the diabetes field,” noted Dr. McCall, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, in a press statement.

The new guideline, developed by a multidisciplinary panel of clinical experts and published in the Journal of Clinical Endocrinology and Metabolism, addresses 10 key clinical questions regarding current issues relevant to hypoglycemia prevention and treatment in adult or pediatric patients with either type 1 or type 2 diabetes in the outpatient or inpatient setting.
 

Key guideline recommendations

The recommendations are based on factors including critical outcomes, implementation feasibility, and patient preferences.

Key guideline recommendations that are considered “strong,” based on evidence, include:

• The use of CGM rather than self-monitoring of blood glucose by fingerstick for patients with type 1 diabetes receiving multiple daily injections. The panel underscored that “comprehensive patient education on how to use and troubleshoot CGM devices and interpret these data is critically important for maximum benefit and successful outcomes.”

The use of a structured program for patient education versus unstructured advice for adult and pediatric outpatients with type 1 diabetes or type 2 diabetes receiving insulin therapy.

• Structured education on how to avoid repeated hypoglycemia is critical, and this education should be performed by experienced diabetes clinicians,” the panel asserts. “Moreover, insurance coverage for education should be available for all insulin-using patients.”
• The use of glucagon preparations that do not have to be reconstituted, as opposed to those that do (that is, available as a powder and diluent) in the treatment of outpatients with severe hypoglycemia.

Guideline recommendations that received conditional recommendations include: 

• Use of real-time CGM and algorithm-driven insulin pumps in people with type 1 diabetes.
• Use of CGM for outpatients with type 2 diabetes at high risk for hypoglycemia.
• Use of long-acting and rapid-acting insulin analogs for patients at high risk for hypoglycemia.

Noting that there is “moderate-certainty” evidence for severe hypoglycemia reduction as an outcome in those using long-acting analog insulins versus human neutral protamine Hagedorn (NPH) insulin, the panel cautions that “most studies of long-acting analog insulins do not assess for significant adverse effects, including cardiovascular outcomes, and that many studies were designed to demonstrate noninferiority of analog insulin, compared with human NPH insulin.”

• Initiation of and continuation of CGM for select inpatient populations at high risk for hypoglycemia.

Hypoglycemia: One of top three preventable adverse drug reactions

The updated guidelines are especially important considering the common incidence of hypoglycemia, which the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services has determined to be one of the top 3 preventable adverse drug reactions, the panel says.

They note that between January 2007 and December 2011, emergency department visits for therapy-associated hypoglycemia among Medicare beneficiaries resulted in more than $600 million in spending.

Meanwhile, many people with type 1 or 2 diabetes may not experience or recognize the symptoms of hypoglycemia, which, in severe cases, can lead to unconsciousness or seizures, in addition to affecting quality of life, social life, work productivity, and ability to drive safely.

The key to accurate diagnosis of those patients is assessment of the three levels of hypoglycemia, described in a 2018 consensus statement:

• Level 1: Glucose less than 70 mg/dL (3.9 mmol/L) and greater than or equal to 54 mg/dL (3.0 mmol/L). This level of hypoglycemia should alert patients that they may need to ingest carbohydrate to prevent progressive hypoglycemia.
• Level 2: Glucose less than 54 mg/dL (3.0 mmol/L). This level of hypoglycemia is associated with increased risk for cognitive dysfunction and mortality.
• Level 3: A severe event characterized by altered mental and/or physical status requiring assistance. This level of hypoglycemia is life-threatening and requires emergent treatment, typically with glucagon.

Ultimately, “new technology and medications will help reduce hypoglycemia, and [clinicians] can better treat patients now with new, easier glucagons,” Dr. McCall told this news organization.

“People with diabetes, their caregivers, and diabetes specialists will all benefit from our guideline with a better understanding of best practices and interventions,” the panel notes.
 

Disparities still exist in access to insulin pumps

Separately, new research shows that while use of insulin pumps to manage type 1 diabetes has grown over 20 years, there has been no improvement in racial, ethnic, and socioeconomic disparities in their use in the United States. The findings are reported in Diabetes Technology & Therapeutics.

Using data from the SEARCH for Diabetes Youth Study across four time periods between 2001 and 2019, the researchers show that by the end of the period studied, insulin pump use was 67% among non-Hispanic White people, 41% among Hispanic people, 29% among Black people, and 46% among other racial and ethnic groups.

In addition, 70% of people with bachelor’s degrees or higher used the pumps, compared with 56% among those with some college, 40% among holders of high school degrees, and 18% among those with no high school education. By income level, 74% of those with household incomes of $75,000 or more, 66% with $50,000-$74,999, 51% with $25,000-$49,999, and 41% with less than $25,000 used the pumps.

“Diabetes technology has numerous benefits for patients with type 1 diabetes, but the problem is that there is a huge divide in who actually has access to these technologies,” said study lead Estelle Everett, MD, assistant professor of medicine in the division of endocrinology, diabetes & metabolism at the University of California, Los Angeles.

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

The Endocrine Society has issued an updated clinical practice guideline on the prevention and management of hypoglycemia in patients with diabetes who are at high risk, addressing the wide variety of treatment advances, such as insulin pumps and continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) systems, that have appeared since the publication of the society’s last guideline on hypoglycemia, in 2009.

“CGM and insulin pumps have been much more commonly used in the last decade among people with diabetes, including children, and there are new forms of glucagon available,” said Anthony L. McCall, MD, PhD, chair of the panel that wrote the guideline.

“We had to update our guideline to match these developments in the diabetes field,” noted Dr. McCall, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, in a press statement.

The new guideline, developed by a multidisciplinary panel of clinical experts and published in the Journal of Clinical Endocrinology and Metabolism, addresses 10 key clinical questions regarding current issues relevant to hypoglycemia prevention and treatment in adult or pediatric patients with either type 1 or type 2 diabetes in the outpatient or inpatient setting.
 

Key guideline recommendations

The recommendations are based on factors including critical outcomes, implementation feasibility, and patient preferences.

Key guideline recommendations that are considered “strong,” based on evidence, include:

• The use of CGM rather than self-monitoring of blood glucose by fingerstick for patients with type 1 diabetes receiving multiple daily injections. The panel underscored that “comprehensive patient education on how to use and troubleshoot CGM devices and interpret these data is critically important for maximum benefit and successful outcomes.”

The use of a structured program for patient education versus unstructured advice for adult and pediatric outpatients with type 1 diabetes or type 2 diabetes receiving insulin therapy.

• Structured education on how to avoid repeated hypoglycemia is critical, and this education should be performed by experienced diabetes clinicians,” the panel asserts. “Moreover, insurance coverage for education should be available for all insulin-using patients.”
• The use of glucagon preparations that do not have to be reconstituted, as opposed to those that do (that is, available as a powder and diluent) in the treatment of outpatients with severe hypoglycemia.

Guideline recommendations that received conditional recommendations include: 

• Use of real-time CGM and algorithm-driven insulin pumps in people with type 1 diabetes.
• Use of CGM for outpatients with type 2 diabetes at high risk for hypoglycemia.
• Use of long-acting and rapid-acting insulin analogs for patients at high risk for hypoglycemia.

Noting that there is “moderate-certainty” evidence for severe hypoglycemia reduction as an outcome in those using long-acting analog insulins versus human neutral protamine Hagedorn (NPH) insulin, the panel cautions that “most studies of long-acting analog insulins do not assess for significant adverse effects, including cardiovascular outcomes, and that many studies were designed to demonstrate noninferiority of analog insulin, compared with human NPH insulin.”

• Initiation of and continuation of CGM for select inpatient populations at high risk for hypoglycemia.

Hypoglycemia: One of top three preventable adverse drug reactions

The updated guidelines are especially important considering the common incidence of hypoglycemia, which the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services has determined to be one of the top 3 preventable adverse drug reactions, the panel says.

They note that between January 2007 and December 2011, emergency department visits for therapy-associated hypoglycemia among Medicare beneficiaries resulted in more than $600 million in spending.

Meanwhile, many people with type 1 or 2 diabetes may not experience or recognize the symptoms of hypoglycemia, which, in severe cases, can lead to unconsciousness or seizures, in addition to affecting quality of life, social life, work productivity, and ability to drive safely.

The key to accurate diagnosis of those patients is assessment of the three levels of hypoglycemia, described in a 2018 consensus statement:

• Level 1: Glucose less than 70 mg/dL (3.9 mmol/L) and greater than or equal to 54 mg/dL (3.0 mmol/L). This level of hypoglycemia should alert patients that they may need to ingest carbohydrate to prevent progressive hypoglycemia.
• Level 2: Glucose less than 54 mg/dL (3.0 mmol/L). This level of hypoglycemia is associated with increased risk for cognitive dysfunction and mortality.
• Level 3: A severe event characterized by altered mental and/or physical status requiring assistance. This level of hypoglycemia is life-threatening and requires emergent treatment, typically with glucagon.

Ultimately, “new technology and medications will help reduce hypoglycemia, and [clinicians] can better treat patients now with new, easier glucagons,” Dr. McCall told this news organization.

“People with diabetes, their caregivers, and diabetes specialists will all benefit from our guideline with a better understanding of best practices and interventions,” the panel notes.
 

Disparities still exist in access to insulin pumps

Separately, new research shows that while use of insulin pumps to manage type 1 diabetes has grown over 20 years, there has been no improvement in racial, ethnic, and socioeconomic disparities in their use in the United States. The findings are reported in Diabetes Technology & Therapeutics.

Using data from the SEARCH for Diabetes Youth Study across four time periods between 2001 and 2019, the researchers show that by the end of the period studied, insulin pump use was 67% among non-Hispanic White people, 41% among Hispanic people, 29% among Black people, and 46% among other racial and ethnic groups.

In addition, 70% of people with bachelor’s degrees or higher used the pumps, compared with 56% among those with some college, 40% among holders of high school degrees, and 18% among those with no high school education. By income level, 74% of those with household incomes of $75,000 or more, 66% with $50,000-$74,999, 51% with $25,000-$49,999, and 41% with less than $25,000 used the pumps.

“Diabetes technology has numerous benefits for patients with type 1 diabetes, but the problem is that there is a huge divide in who actually has access to these technologies,” said study lead Estelle Everett, MD, assistant professor of medicine in the division of endocrinology, diabetes & metabolism at the University of California, Los Angeles.

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

The Endocrine Society has issued an updated clinical practice guideline on the prevention and management of hypoglycemia in patients with diabetes who are at high risk, addressing the wide variety of treatment advances, such as insulin pumps and continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) systems, that have appeared since the publication of the society’s last guideline on hypoglycemia, in 2009.

“CGM and insulin pumps have been much more commonly used in the last decade among people with diabetes, including children, and there are new forms of glucagon available,” said Anthony L. McCall, MD, PhD, chair of the panel that wrote the guideline.

“We had to update our guideline to match these developments in the diabetes field,” noted Dr. McCall, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, in a press statement.

The new guideline, developed by a multidisciplinary panel of clinical experts and published in the Journal of Clinical Endocrinology and Metabolism, addresses 10 key clinical questions regarding current issues relevant to hypoglycemia prevention and treatment in adult or pediatric patients with either type 1 or type 2 diabetes in the outpatient or inpatient setting.
 

Key guideline recommendations

The recommendations are based on factors including critical outcomes, implementation feasibility, and patient preferences.

Key guideline recommendations that are considered “strong,” based on evidence, include:

• The use of CGM rather than self-monitoring of blood glucose by fingerstick for patients with type 1 diabetes receiving multiple daily injections. The panel underscored that “comprehensive patient education on how to use and troubleshoot CGM devices and interpret these data is critically important for maximum benefit and successful outcomes.”

The use of a structured program for patient education versus unstructured advice for adult and pediatric outpatients with type 1 diabetes or type 2 diabetes receiving insulin therapy.

• Structured education on how to avoid repeated hypoglycemia is critical, and this education should be performed by experienced diabetes clinicians,” the panel asserts. “Moreover, insurance coverage for education should be available for all insulin-using patients.”
• The use of glucagon preparations that do not have to be reconstituted, as opposed to those that do (that is, available as a powder and diluent) in the treatment of outpatients with severe hypoglycemia.

Guideline recommendations that received conditional recommendations include: 

• Use of real-time CGM and algorithm-driven insulin pumps in people with type 1 diabetes.
• Use of CGM for outpatients with type 2 diabetes at high risk for hypoglycemia.
• Use of long-acting and rapid-acting insulin analogs for patients at high risk for hypoglycemia.

Noting that there is “moderate-certainty” evidence for severe hypoglycemia reduction as an outcome in those using long-acting analog insulins versus human neutral protamine Hagedorn (NPH) insulin, the panel cautions that “most studies of long-acting analog insulins do not assess for significant adverse effects, including cardiovascular outcomes, and that many studies were designed to demonstrate noninferiority of analog insulin, compared with human NPH insulin.”

• Initiation of and continuation of CGM for select inpatient populations at high risk for hypoglycemia.

Hypoglycemia: One of top three preventable adverse drug reactions

The updated guidelines are especially important considering the common incidence of hypoglycemia, which the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services has determined to be one of the top 3 preventable adverse drug reactions, the panel says.

They note that between January 2007 and December 2011, emergency department visits for therapy-associated hypoglycemia among Medicare beneficiaries resulted in more than $600 million in spending.

Meanwhile, many people with type 1 or 2 diabetes may not experience or recognize the symptoms of hypoglycemia, which, in severe cases, can lead to unconsciousness or seizures, in addition to affecting quality of life, social life, work productivity, and ability to drive safely.

The key to accurate diagnosis of those patients is assessment of the three levels of hypoglycemia, described in a 2018 consensus statement:

• Level 1: Glucose less than 70 mg/dL (3.9 mmol/L) and greater than or equal to 54 mg/dL (3.0 mmol/L). This level of hypoglycemia should alert patients that they may need to ingest carbohydrate to prevent progressive hypoglycemia.
• Level 2: Glucose less than 54 mg/dL (3.0 mmol/L). This level of hypoglycemia is associated with increased risk for cognitive dysfunction and mortality.
• Level 3: A severe event characterized by altered mental and/or physical status requiring assistance. This level of hypoglycemia is life-threatening and requires emergent treatment, typically with glucagon.

Ultimately, “new technology and medications will help reduce hypoglycemia, and [clinicians] can better treat patients now with new, easier glucagons,” Dr. McCall told this news organization.

“People with diabetes, their caregivers, and diabetes specialists will all benefit from our guideline with a better understanding of best practices and interventions,” the panel notes.
 

Disparities still exist in access to insulin pumps

Separately, new research shows that while use of insulin pumps to manage type 1 diabetes has grown over 20 years, there has been no improvement in racial, ethnic, and socioeconomic disparities in their use in the United States. The findings are reported in Diabetes Technology & Therapeutics.

Using data from the SEARCH for Diabetes Youth Study across four time periods between 2001 and 2019, the researchers show that by the end of the period studied, insulin pump use was 67% among non-Hispanic White people, 41% among Hispanic people, 29% among Black people, and 46% among other racial and ethnic groups.

In addition, 70% of people with bachelor’s degrees or higher used the pumps, compared with 56% among those with some college, 40% among holders of high school degrees, and 18% among those with no high school education. By income level, 74% of those with household incomes of $75,000 or more, 66% with $50,000-$74,999, 51% with $25,000-$49,999, and 41% with less than $25,000 used the pumps.

“Diabetes technology has numerous benefits for patients with type 1 diabetes, but the problem is that there is a huge divide in who actually has access to these technologies,” said study lead Estelle Everett, MD, assistant professor of medicine in the division of endocrinology, diabetes & metabolism at the University of California, Los Angeles.

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

Multidrug-resistant gram-negative infections (MDRGNIs) are an emerging and deadly threat worldwide. Some of these infections are now resistant to nearly all antibiotics, and very few treatment options exist. Some of the remaining antibiotics for these MDRGNIs can cause acute kidney injury and have other toxic effects and can worsen antibiotic resistance. When deciding which drugs to use, clinicians need to juggle the possible lethality of the infection with the dangers of its treatment.

Samuel Windham, MD, and Marin H. Kollef, MD, authors of a recent article in Current Opinion in Infectious Diseases, express this urgency. They offer recommendations based on current guidelines and recently published research for treating MDRGNIs with some of the newer antibiotics.

Dr. Kollef, professor of pulmonary and critical care medicine at Washington University in St. Louis, said in an email, “Our recommendations differ in that they offer an approach that is based on disease severity, local resistance prevalence in MDRGNIs, and patient risk factors for infection with MDRGNIs. For patients with severe infection and risk factors for infection with MDRGNIs, we suggest empiric coverage for MDRGNIs until susceptibility data are available or based on rapid molecular testing. Selection of antibiotic therapy would be based on which MDRGNIs predominate locally.”

In their article, the authors discuss how to best utilize the newer antibiotics of ceftazidime-avibactam (CZA), cefiderocol, ceftolozane-tazobactam (C/T), meropenem-vaborbactam (MVB), imipenem-relebactam (I-R), aztreonam-avibactam (ATM-AVI), eravacycline, and plazomicin.
 

The scope of the problem

Bacterial infections are deadly and are becoming less treatable. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reported in 2022 that the COVID-19 pandemic has reversed years of decreases in health care–associated infections. Much of the increase has been caused by multidrug-resistant organisms.

In November 2022, authors of an article published in The Lancet estimated worldwide deaths from 33 bacterial genera across 11 infectious syndromes. They found that these infections were the second leading cause of death worldwide in 2019 (ischemic heart disease was the first). Furthermore, they discovered that 54.9% of these deaths were attributable to just five pathogens – Staphylococcus aureus, Escherichia coli, Streptococcus pneumoniae, Klebsiella pneumoniae, and Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Three of those five bacterial species – E. coli, K. pneumoniae, and P. aeruginosa – are gram-negative and are highly prone to drug resistance.

The CDC classified each of those three pathogens as an “urgent threat” in its 2019 Antibiotic Resistance Threats in the United States report. Of particular concern are gram-negative infections that have become resistant to carbapenems, a heavy-hitting class of antibiotics.

Regarding organisms that cause MDRGNIs, the major groups of concern are those that produce compounds that destroy antibiotics such as extended-spectrum beta-lactamases, AmpC beta-lactamases, and the carbapenemases known as serine-beta-lactamases (OXA, KPC, and CTX-M) and metallo-beta-lactamases (NDM, VIM, and IMP). Carbapenem-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa and carbapenem-resistant Acinetobacter baumanii also produce carbapenemases, rendering them invulnerable to carbapenem antibiotics.

Traditionally, a common alternative used for carbapenem-resistant infections has been colistin, an older and very toxic antibiotic. The authors cite recent research demonstrating that CZA yields significantly better outcomes with regard to patient mortality and acute kidney injury than colistin and that CZA plus aztreonam can even decrease mortality and length of hospital stay for patients who have bloodstream infections with metallo-beta-lactamase-producing Enterobacterales, which are some of the hardest infections to treat.

“CZA has been demonstrated to have excellent activity against MDR Pseudomonas aeruginosa and KPC Enterobacterales. It should be the preferred agent for use, compared with colistin, for the treatment of carbapenem-resistant gram-negative bacteria susceptible to CZA. Moreover, CZA combined with aztreonam has been shown to be an effective treatment for metallo-beta-lactamase MDRGNIs,” Dr. Kollef said.
 

Four key recommendations for treating MDRGNIs

The authors base their recommendations, in addition to the recent studies they cite concerning CZA, upon two major guidelines on the treatment of MDRGNIs: the European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases’ Guidelines for the Treatment of Infections Caused by Multidrug-Resistant Gram-Negative Bacilli, and the Infectious Diseases Society of America’s (IDSA’s) Guidance on the Treatment of Antimicrobial Resistant Gram-Negative Infections (multiple documents, found here and here).

Dr. Windham and Dr. Kollef present a table showing the spectrum of activity of the newer antibiotics, as well as an algorithm for decision-making. They summarize their treatment recommendations, which are based upon the bacterial infection cultures or on historical risk (previous infection or colonization history). They encourage empiric treatment if there is an increased risk of death or the presence of shock. By pathogen, they recommend the following:

• For carbapenem-resistant Enterobacterales, clinicians should treat patients with cefiderocol, ceftazidime-avibactam, imipenem-cilastatin-relabactam, or meropenem-vaborbactam. 
• For carbapenem-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa, clinicians should treat patients with cefiderocol, ceftazidime-avibactam, imipenem-cilastatin-relabactam, or ceftolozane-tazobactam. 
• For carbapenem-resistant Acinetobacter baumanii, clinicians should treat patients with a cefiderocol backbone with or without the addition of plazomicin, eravacycline, or other older antibacterials. 
• For metallo-beta-lactamase-producing organisms, clinicians should treat patients with cefiderocol, ceftazidime-avibactam, aztreonam, imipenem-cilastatin-relabactam, aztreonam, or aztreonam-avibactam. The authors acknowledge that evidence is limited on treating these infections.

“In general, ceftazidime-avibactam works pretty well in patients with MDRGNIs, and there is no evidence that any of the other new agents is conclusively better in treatment responses. CZA and ceftolozane-tazobactam were the first of the new antibiotics active against highly MDRGN to get approved, and they have been most widely used,” Cornelius “Neil” J. Clancy, MD, chief of the Infectious Diseases Section at the VA Pittsburgh Health Care System, explained. Dr. Clancy was not involved in the Windham-Kollef review article.

“As such, it is not surprising that resistance has emerged and that it has been reported more commonly than for some other agents. The issue of resistance will be considered again as IDSA puts together their update,” Dr. Clancy said.

“The IDSA guidelines are regularly updated. The next updated iteration will be online in early 2023,” said Dr. Clancy, who is also affiliated with IDSA. “Clinical and resistance data that have appeared since the last update in 2022 will be considered as the guidance is put together.”

In general, Dr. Kollef also recommends using a facility’s antibiogram. “They are useful in determining which MDRGN’s predominate locally,” he said.

Dr. Kollef is a consultant for Pfizer, Merck, and Shionogi. Dr. Clancy has received research funding from Merck and from the National Institutes of Health.

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

Multidrug-resistant gram-negative infections (MDRGNIs) are an emerging and deadly threat worldwide. Some of these infections are now resistant to nearly all antibiotics, and very few treatment options exist. Some of the remaining antibiotics for these MDRGNIs can cause acute kidney injury and have other toxic effects and can worsen antibiotic resistance. When deciding which drugs to use, clinicians need to juggle the possible lethality of the infection with the dangers of its treatment.

Samuel Windham, MD, and Marin H. Kollef, MD, authors of a recent article in Current Opinion in Infectious Diseases, express this urgency. They offer recommendations based on current guidelines and recently published research for treating MDRGNIs with some of the newer antibiotics.

Dr. Kollef, professor of pulmonary and critical care medicine at Washington University in St. Louis, said in an email, “Our recommendations differ in that they offer an approach that is based on disease severity, local resistance prevalence in MDRGNIs, and patient risk factors for infection with MDRGNIs. For patients with severe infection and risk factors for infection with MDRGNIs, we suggest empiric coverage for MDRGNIs until susceptibility data are available or based on rapid molecular testing. Selection of antibiotic therapy would be based on which MDRGNIs predominate locally.”

In their article, the authors discuss how to best utilize the newer antibiotics of ceftazidime-avibactam (CZA), cefiderocol, ceftolozane-tazobactam (C/T), meropenem-vaborbactam (MVB), imipenem-relebactam (I-R), aztreonam-avibactam (ATM-AVI), eravacycline, and plazomicin.
 

The scope of the problem

Bacterial infections are deadly and are becoming less treatable. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reported in 2022 that the COVID-19 pandemic has reversed years of decreases in health care–associated infections. Much of the increase has been caused by multidrug-resistant organisms.

In November 2022, authors of an article published in The Lancet estimated worldwide deaths from 33 bacterial genera across 11 infectious syndromes. They found that these infections were the second leading cause of death worldwide in 2019 (ischemic heart disease was the first). Furthermore, they discovered that 54.9% of these deaths were attributable to just five pathogens – Staphylococcus aureus, Escherichia coli, Streptococcus pneumoniae, Klebsiella pneumoniae, and Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Three of those five bacterial species – E. coli, K. pneumoniae, and P. aeruginosa – are gram-negative and are highly prone to drug resistance.

The CDC classified each of those three pathogens as an “urgent threat” in its 2019 Antibiotic Resistance Threats in the United States report. Of particular concern are gram-negative infections that have become resistant to carbapenems, a heavy-hitting class of antibiotics.

Regarding organisms that cause MDRGNIs, the major groups of concern are those that produce compounds that destroy antibiotics such as extended-spectrum beta-lactamases, AmpC beta-lactamases, and the carbapenemases known as serine-beta-lactamases (OXA, KPC, and CTX-M) and metallo-beta-lactamases (NDM, VIM, and IMP). Carbapenem-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa and carbapenem-resistant Acinetobacter baumanii also produce carbapenemases, rendering them invulnerable to carbapenem antibiotics.

Traditionally, a common alternative used for carbapenem-resistant infections has been colistin, an older and very toxic antibiotic. The authors cite recent research demonstrating that CZA yields significantly better outcomes with regard to patient mortality and acute kidney injury than colistin and that CZA plus aztreonam can even decrease mortality and length of hospital stay for patients who have bloodstream infections with metallo-beta-lactamase-producing Enterobacterales, which are some of the hardest infections to treat.

“CZA has been demonstrated to have excellent activity against MDR Pseudomonas aeruginosa and KPC Enterobacterales. It should be the preferred agent for use, compared with colistin, for the treatment of carbapenem-resistant gram-negative bacteria susceptible to CZA. Moreover, CZA combined with aztreonam has been shown to be an effective treatment for metallo-beta-lactamase MDRGNIs,” Dr. Kollef said.
 

Four key recommendations for treating MDRGNIs

The authors base their recommendations, in addition to the recent studies they cite concerning CZA, upon two major guidelines on the treatment of MDRGNIs: the European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases’ Guidelines for the Treatment of Infections Caused by Multidrug-Resistant Gram-Negative Bacilli, and the Infectious Diseases Society of America’s (IDSA’s) Guidance on the Treatment of Antimicrobial Resistant Gram-Negative Infections (multiple documents, found here and here).

Dr. Windham and Dr. Kollef present a table showing the spectrum of activity of the newer antibiotics, as well as an algorithm for decision-making. They summarize their treatment recommendations, which are based upon the bacterial infection cultures or on historical risk (previous infection or colonization history). They encourage empiric treatment if there is an increased risk of death or the presence of shock. By pathogen, they recommend the following:

• For carbapenem-resistant Enterobacterales, clinicians should treat patients with cefiderocol, ceftazidime-avibactam, imipenem-cilastatin-relabactam, or meropenem-vaborbactam. 
• For carbapenem-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa, clinicians should treat patients with cefiderocol, ceftazidime-avibactam, imipenem-cilastatin-relabactam, or ceftolozane-tazobactam. 
• For carbapenem-resistant Acinetobacter baumanii, clinicians should treat patients with a cefiderocol backbone with or without the addition of plazomicin, eravacycline, or other older antibacterials. 
• For metallo-beta-lactamase-producing organisms, clinicians should treat patients with cefiderocol, ceftazidime-avibactam, aztreonam, imipenem-cilastatin-relabactam, aztreonam, or aztreonam-avibactam. The authors acknowledge that evidence is limited on treating these infections.

“In general, ceftazidime-avibactam works pretty well in patients with MDRGNIs, and there is no evidence that any of the other new agents is conclusively better in treatment responses. CZA and ceftolozane-tazobactam were the first of the new antibiotics active against highly MDRGN to get approved, and they have been most widely used,” Cornelius “Neil” J. Clancy, MD, chief of the Infectious Diseases Section at the VA Pittsburgh Health Care System, explained. Dr. Clancy was not involved in the Windham-Kollef review article.

“As such, it is not surprising that resistance has emerged and that it has been reported more commonly than for some other agents. The issue of resistance will be considered again as IDSA puts together their update,” Dr. Clancy said.

“The IDSA guidelines are regularly updated. The next updated iteration will be online in early 2023,” said Dr. Clancy, who is also affiliated with IDSA. “Clinical and resistance data that have appeared since the last update in 2022 will be considered as the guidance is put together.”

In general, Dr. Kollef also recommends using a facility’s antibiogram. “They are useful in determining which MDRGN’s predominate locally,” he said.

Dr. Kollef is a consultant for Pfizer, Merck, and Shionogi. Dr. Clancy has received research funding from Merck and from the National Institutes of Health.

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

Multidrug-resistant gram-negative infections (MDRGNIs) are an emerging and deadly threat worldwide. Some of these infections are now resistant to nearly all antibiotics, and very few treatment options exist. Some of the remaining antibiotics for these MDRGNIs can cause acute kidney injury and have other toxic effects and can worsen antibiotic resistance. When deciding which drugs to use, clinicians need to juggle the possible lethality of the infection with the dangers of its treatment.

Samuel Windham, MD, and Marin H. Kollef, MD, authors of a recent article in Current Opinion in Infectious Diseases, express this urgency. They offer recommendations based on current guidelines and recently published research for treating MDRGNIs with some of the newer antibiotics.

Dr. Kollef, professor of pulmonary and critical care medicine at Washington University in St. Louis, said in an email, “Our recommendations differ in that they offer an approach that is based on disease severity, local resistance prevalence in MDRGNIs, and patient risk factors for infection with MDRGNIs. For patients with severe infection and risk factors for infection with MDRGNIs, we suggest empiric coverage for MDRGNIs until susceptibility data are available or based on rapid molecular testing. Selection of antibiotic therapy would be based on which MDRGNIs predominate locally.”

In their article, the authors discuss how to best utilize the newer antibiotics of ceftazidime-avibactam (CZA), cefiderocol, ceftolozane-tazobactam (C/T), meropenem-vaborbactam (MVB), imipenem-relebactam (I-R), aztreonam-avibactam (ATM-AVI), eravacycline, and plazomicin.
 

The scope of the problem

Bacterial infections are deadly and are becoming less treatable. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reported in 2022 that the COVID-19 pandemic has reversed years of decreases in health care–associated infections. Much of the increase has been caused by multidrug-resistant organisms.

In November 2022, authors of an article published in The Lancet estimated worldwide deaths from 33 bacterial genera across 11 infectious syndromes. They found that these infections were the second leading cause of death worldwide in 2019 (ischemic heart disease was the first). Furthermore, they discovered that 54.9% of these deaths were attributable to just five pathogens – Staphylococcus aureus, Escherichia coli, Streptococcus pneumoniae, Klebsiella pneumoniae, and Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Three of those five bacterial species – E. coli, K. pneumoniae, and P. aeruginosa – are gram-negative and are highly prone to drug resistance.

The CDC classified each of those three pathogens as an “urgent threat” in its 2019 Antibiotic Resistance Threats in the United States report. Of particular concern are gram-negative infections that have become resistant to carbapenems, a heavy-hitting class of antibiotics.

Regarding organisms that cause MDRGNIs, the major groups of concern are those that produce compounds that destroy antibiotics such as extended-spectrum beta-lactamases, AmpC beta-lactamases, and the carbapenemases known as serine-beta-lactamases (OXA, KPC, and CTX-M) and metallo-beta-lactamases (NDM, VIM, and IMP). Carbapenem-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa and carbapenem-resistant Acinetobacter baumanii also produce carbapenemases, rendering them invulnerable to carbapenem antibiotics.

Traditionally, a common alternative used for carbapenem-resistant infections has been colistin, an older and very toxic antibiotic. The authors cite recent research demonstrating that CZA yields significantly better outcomes with regard to patient mortality and acute kidney injury than colistin and that CZA plus aztreonam can even decrease mortality and length of hospital stay for patients who have bloodstream infections with metallo-beta-lactamase-producing Enterobacterales, which are some of the hardest infections to treat.

“CZA has been demonstrated to have excellent activity against MDR Pseudomonas aeruginosa and KPC Enterobacterales. It should be the preferred agent for use, compared with colistin, for the treatment of carbapenem-resistant gram-negative bacteria susceptible to CZA. Moreover, CZA combined with aztreonam has been shown to be an effective treatment for metallo-beta-lactamase MDRGNIs,” Dr. Kollef said.
 

Four key recommendations for treating MDRGNIs

The authors base their recommendations, in addition to the recent studies they cite concerning CZA, upon two major guidelines on the treatment of MDRGNIs: the European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases’ Guidelines for the Treatment of Infections Caused by Multidrug-Resistant Gram-Negative Bacilli, and the Infectious Diseases Society of America’s (IDSA’s) Guidance on the Treatment of Antimicrobial Resistant Gram-Negative Infections (multiple documents, found here and here).

Dr. Windham and Dr. Kollef present a table showing the spectrum of activity of the newer antibiotics, as well as an algorithm for decision-making. They summarize their treatment recommendations, which are based upon the bacterial infection cultures or on historical risk (previous infection or colonization history). They encourage empiric treatment if there is an increased risk of death or the presence of shock. By pathogen, they recommend the following:

• For carbapenem-resistant Enterobacterales, clinicians should treat patients with cefiderocol, ceftazidime-avibactam, imipenem-cilastatin-relabactam, or meropenem-vaborbactam. 
• For carbapenem-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa, clinicians should treat patients with cefiderocol, ceftazidime-avibactam, imipenem-cilastatin-relabactam, or ceftolozane-tazobactam. 
• For carbapenem-resistant Acinetobacter baumanii, clinicians should treat patients with a cefiderocol backbone with or without the addition of plazomicin, eravacycline, or other older antibacterials. 
• For metallo-beta-lactamase-producing organisms, clinicians should treat patients with cefiderocol, ceftazidime-avibactam, aztreonam, imipenem-cilastatin-relabactam, aztreonam, or aztreonam-avibactam. The authors acknowledge that evidence is limited on treating these infections.

“In general, ceftazidime-avibactam works pretty well in patients with MDRGNIs, and there is no evidence that any of the other new agents is conclusively better in treatment responses. CZA and ceftolozane-tazobactam were the first of the new antibiotics active against highly MDRGN to get approved, and they have been most widely used,” Cornelius “Neil” J. Clancy, MD, chief of the Infectious Diseases Section at the VA Pittsburgh Health Care System, explained. Dr. Clancy was not involved in the Windham-Kollef review article.

“As such, it is not surprising that resistance has emerged and that it has been reported more commonly than for some other agents. The issue of resistance will be considered again as IDSA puts together their update,” Dr. Clancy said.

“The IDSA guidelines are regularly updated. The next updated iteration will be online in early 2023,” said Dr. Clancy, who is also affiliated with IDSA. “Clinical and resistance data that have appeared since the last update in 2022 will be considered as the guidance is put together.”

In general, Dr. Kollef also recommends using a facility’s antibiogram. “They are useful in determining which MDRGN’s predominate locally,” he said.

Dr. Kollef is a consultant for Pfizer, Merck, and Shionogi. Dr. Clancy has received research funding from Merck and from the National Institutes of Health.

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

A maternal or parental history of atopic dermatitis (AD) or asthma is associated with an increased risk of AD in offspring in the first 2 years of life, an analysis of a large birth cohort found.

“The prevalence of AD in children has increased dramatically in recent years, and most studies reporting the impact of parental atopic history on AD are based on older data,” wrote the study authors, led by Cathal O’Connor, MD. “Given the recent interest in early intervention to prevent AD and other allergic diseases, enhanced early identification of infants at risk of AD is increasingly important.”

The detailed analysis of AD risk associated with parental atopy in early life “may help to risk stratify infants to optimize early interventions for prevention or early treatment of AD,” they wrote.

LucaLorenzelli/Thinkstock

The study was published in Pediatric Dermatology.

For the analysis, Dr. O’Connor of the department of pediatrics and child health at University College Cork (Ireland) and colleagues conducted a secondary analysis of the Cork Babies After Scope: Evaluating the Longitudinal Impact Using Neurological and Nutritional Endpoints (BASELINE) Birth Cohort Study.

The study recruited 2,183 healthy first-born babies between August 2009 and October 2011 to examine the effects of environmental factors during pregnancy and infancy on childhood health and development. Skin barrier assessments were performed at birth, 2 months, 6 months, 12 months, and 24 months using a validated open chamber system to measure transepidermal water loss.

Parental atopy was self-reported at 2 months. Parents were asked at 2 months if the infant had an “itchy rash on the face or in the folds of the arms or legs,” as a screening question for AD. Experienced health care personnel used UK Working Party criteria to diagnose AD at 6, 12, and 24 months.

Complete data on AD status was available for 1,505 children in the cohort. Dr. O’Connor and colleagues calculated an overall AD prevalence of 18.6% at 6 months, 15.2% at 12 months, and 16.5% at 24 months.

Overall prevalence of AD was highest at 6 months. The study showed a similar or slightly higher impact of paternal atopy on offspring AD development, compared to maternal atopy.

Multivariable logistic regression analysis revealed that the odds of AD were 1.57 at 6 months and 1.66 at 12 months for maternal AD; 1.90 at 6 months and 1.85 at 24 months for paternal AD; 1.76 at 6 months and 1.75 at 12 months for maternal asthma; and 1.70 at 6 months, 1.86 at 12 months, and 1.99 at 24 months for paternal asthma.

“Parental allergic rhinitis was not associated with AD in offspring in the first 2 years, except for maternal rhinitis at 24 months [an adjusted odds ratio of 1.79],” the authors wrote. “The genetic predisposition to allergic rhinitis, given the key role of aeroallergen sensitization in its pathogenesis, may not be associated with early onset AD, but may have a greater impact in later onset or persistent AD.”

The authors acknowledged certain limitations of the study, including the fact that it was a secondary data analysis, and that parental AD, asthma, and rhinitis were self-reported, “which may reduce reliability and may contribute to the differences seen between the impact of maternal and paternal reported atopy on offspring,” they wrote. “Data on siblings were not captured, as participants in the study were first-born children. Filaggrin mutational analysis was not performed, which would have provided richer detail.”

A maternal or parental history of atopic dermatitis (AD) or asthma is associated with an increased risk of AD in offspring in the first 2 years of life, an analysis of a large birth cohort found.

“The prevalence of AD in children has increased dramatically in recent years, and most studies reporting the impact of parental atopic history on AD are based on older data,” wrote the study authors, led by Cathal O’Connor, MD. “Given the recent interest in early intervention to prevent AD and other allergic diseases, enhanced early identification of infants at risk of AD is increasingly important.”

The detailed analysis of AD risk associated with parental atopy in early life “may help to risk stratify infants to optimize early interventions for prevention or early treatment of AD,” they wrote.

LucaLorenzelli/Thinkstock

The study was published in Pediatric Dermatology.

For the analysis, Dr. O’Connor of the department of pediatrics and child health at University College Cork (Ireland) and colleagues conducted a secondary analysis of the Cork Babies After Scope: Evaluating the Longitudinal Impact Using Neurological and Nutritional Endpoints (BASELINE) Birth Cohort Study.

The study recruited 2,183 healthy first-born babies between August 2009 and October 2011 to examine the effects of environmental factors during pregnancy and infancy on childhood health and development. Skin barrier assessments were performed at birth, 2 months, 6 months, 12 months, and 24 months using a validated open chamber system to measure transepidermal water loss.

Parental atopy was self-reported at 2 months. Parents were asked at 2 months if the infant had an “itchy rash on the face or in the folds of the arms or legs,” as a screening question for AD. Experienced health care personnel used UK Working Party criteria to diagnose AD at 6, 12, and 24 months.

Complete data on AD status was available for 1,505 children in the cohort. Dr. O’Connor and colleagues calculated an overall AD prevalence of 18.6% at 6 months, 15.2% at 12 months, and 16.5% at 24 months.

Overall prevalence of AD was highest at 6 months. The study showed a similar or slightly higher impact of paternal atopy on offspring AD development, compared to maternal atopy.

Multivariable logistic regression analysis revealed that the odds of AD were 1.57 at 6 months and 1.66 at 12 months for maternal AD; 1.90 at 6 months and 1.85 at 24 months for paternal AD; 1.76 at 6 months and 1.75 at 12 months for maternal asthma; and 1.70 at 6 months, 1.86 at 12 months, and 1.99 at 24 months for paternal asthma.

“Parental allergic rhinitis was not associated with AD in offspring in the first 2 years, except for maternal rhinitis at 24 months [an adjusted odds ratio of 1.79],” the authors wrote. “The genetic predisposition to allergic rhinitis, given the key role of aeroallergen sensitization in its pathogenesis, may not be associated with early onset AD, but may have a greater impact in later onset or persistent AD.”

The authors acknowledged certain limitations of the study, including the fact that it was a secondary data analysis, and that parental AD, asthma, and rhinitis were self-reported, “which may reduce reliability and may contribute to the differences seen between the impact of maternal and paternal reported atopy on offspring,” they wrote. “Data on siblings were not captured, as participants in the study were first-born children. Filaggrin mutational analysis was not performed, which would have provided richer detail.”

A maternal or parental history of atopic dermatitis (AD) or asthma is associated with an increased risk of AD in offspring in the first 2 years of life, an analysis of a large birth cohort found.

“The prevalence of AD in children has increased dramatically in recent years, and most studies reporting the impact of parental atopic history on AD are based on older data,” wrote the study authors, led by Cathal O’Connor, MD. “Given the recent interest in early intervention to prevent AD and other allergic diseases, enhanced early identification of infants at risk of AD is increasingly important.”

The detailed analysis of AD risk associated with parental atopy in early life “may help to risk stratify infants to optimize early interventions for prevention or early treatment of AD,” they wrote.

LucaLorenzelli/Thinkstock

The study was published in Pediatric Dermatology.

For the analysis, Dr. O’Connor of the department of pediatrics and child health at University College Cork (Ireland) and colleagues conducted a secondary analysis of the Cork Babies After Scope: Evaluating the Longitudinal Impact Using Neurological and Nutritional Endpoints (BASELINE) Birth Cohort Study.

The study recruited 2,183 healthy first-born babies between August 2009 and October 2011 to examine the effects of environmental factors during pregnancy and infancy on childhood health and development. Skin barrier assessments were performed at birth, 2 months, 6 months, 12 months, and 24 months using a validated open chamber system to measure transepidermal water loss.

Parental atopy was self-reported at 2 months. Parents were asked at 2 months if the infant had an “itchy rash on the face or in the folds of the arms or legs,” as a screening question for AD. Experienced health care personnel used UK Working Party criteria to diagnose AD at 6, 12, and 24 months.

Complete data on AD status was available for 1,505 children in the cohort. Dr. O’Connor and colleagues calculated an overall AD prevalence of 18.6% at 6 months, 15.2% at 12 months, and 16.5% at 24 months.

Overall prevalence of AD was highest at 6 months. The study showed a similar or slightly higher impact of paternal atopy on offspring AD development, compared to maternal atopy.

Multivariable logistic regression analysis revealed that the odds of AD were 1.57 at 6 months and 1.66 at 12 months for maternal AD; 1.90 at 6 months and 1.85 at 24 months for paternal AD; 1.76 at 6 months and 1.75 at 12 months for maternal asthma; and 1.70 at 6 months, 1.86 at 12 months, and 1.99 at 24 months for paternal asthma.

“Parental allergic rhinitis was not associated with AD in offspring in the first 2 years, except for maternal rhinitis at 24 months [an adjusted odds ratio of 1.79],” the authors wrote. “The genetic predisposition to allergic rhinitis, given the key role of aeroallergen sensitization in its pathogenesis, may not be associated with early onset AD, but may have a greater impact in later onset or persistent AD.”

The authors acknowledged certain limitations of the study, including the fact that it was a secondary data analysis, and that parental AD, asthma, and rhinitis were self-reported, “which may reduce reliability and may contribute to the differences seen between the impact of maternal and paternal reported atopy on offspring,” they wrote. “Data on siblings were not captured, as participants in the study were first-born children. Filaggrin mutational analysis was not performed, which would have provided richer detail.”

Poison control centers in the United States now receive more calls about adolescents abusing cannabis than alcohol or any other substance, according to a new study.

Many helpline calls about cannabis involve edible products, the researchers noted.

Over-the-counter medications – especially dextromethorphan-containing cough and cold medications and oral antihistamines, such as Benadryl – are other commonly abused substances.

But cannabis recently started topping the list.

“Since 2018, the most reported misused/abused substance involved exposure to marijuana,” according to the study, which was published online in Clinical Toxicology.  

Adrienne Hughes, MD, assistant professor of emergency medicine at Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, and colleagues analyzed calls to United States poison control centers between 2000 and 2020. They focused on 338,000 calls about intentional substance abuse or misuse, including for the purpose of getting high, in individuals aged 6-18 years.

The calls were made to 55 certified helplines for health professionals, public health agencies, and members of the public seeking guidance about exposures to various substances.
 

Cannabis vs. alcohol

In 2000, alcohol was the substance involved in the largest number of cases (1,318, or 9.8% of all calls). Between 2000 and 2013, cases of alcohol abuse exceeded the number of cannabis cases each year.

But that changed in 2014, when cannabis overtook alcohol.

Over the 20-year study period, calls about exposure to cannabis increased 245%, from 510 in 2000 to 1,761 in 2020.

Edibles played a key role.

“Edible marijuana preparations accounted for the highest increase in call rates, compared with all other forms of marijuana,” the researchers reported.

Edible products are “often marketed in ways that are attractive to young people, and they are considered more discrete and convenient,” Dr. Hughes said. But they can have “unpredictable” effects.

“Compared to smoking cannabis, which typically results in an immediate high, intoxication from edible forms usually takes several hours, which may lead some individuals to consume greater amounts and experience unexpected and unpredictable highs,” she said. 

For example, prior research has shown that edible cannabis consumption may lead to more acute psychiatric symptoms and cardiovascular events than does inhaled cannabis.

Trends in alcohol use may have held relatively steady, despite some minor declines in the poison center data, Dr. Hughes said.

“Anecdotally, there hasn’t been an obvious notable reduction in alcohol cases in the emergency department,” she said. “However, I wouldn’t expect a huge change given our data only found a slow mild decline in alcohol cases over the study period.”

The increase in cannabis-related calls coincides with more states legalizing or decriminalizing the drug for medical or recreational purposes. Currently, 21 states have approved recreational cannabis for adults who are at least 21 years old.
 

What are the risks?

Parents typically call a poison center about cannabis exposure after they see or suspect that their child has ingested loose cannabis leaves or edibles containing the substance, Dr. Hughes said.

“The poison center provides guidance to parents about whether or not their child can be watched at home or requires referral to a health care facility,” she said. “While marijuana carries a low risk for severe toxicity, it can be inebriating to the point of poor judgment, risk of falls or other injury, and occasionally a panic reaction in the novice user and unsuspecting children who accidentally ingest these products.”

Intentional misuse or abuse tends to occur in older children and teens.

Nonprescription drugs have a high potential for abuse because they are legal and may be perceived as safe, Dr. Hughes said.

If a child has a history of misusing or abusing substances or if a parent is worried that their child is at high risk for this behavior, they should consider securing medicines in a lock box, she advised.

That applies to cannabis too.

“I would recommend that parents also consider locking up their cannabis products,” she said.

The National Poison Data System relies on voluntary reporting, and the data are not expected to represent the actual number of intentional misuse and abuse exposures, the researchers noted.

Poison control centers in the United States are available for consultation about patients with known or suspected cannabis ingestion or other suspected poisonings (1-800-222-1222).

The researchers had no disclosures.

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

Poison control centers in the United States now receive more calls about adolescents abusing cannabis than alcohol or any other substance, according to a new study.

Many helpline calls about cannabis involve edible products, the researchers noted.

Over-the-counter medications – especially dextromethorphan-containing cough and cold medications and oral antihistamines, such as Benadryl – are other commonly abused substances.

But cannabis recently started topping the list.

“Since 2018, the most reported misused/abused substance involved exposure to marijuana,” according to the study, which was published online in Clinical Toxicology.  

Adrienne Hughes, MD, assistant professor of emergency medicine at Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, and colleagues analyzed calls to United States poison control centers between 2000 and 2020. They focused on 338,000 calls about intentional substance abuse or misuse, including for the purpose of getting high, in individuals aged 6-18 years.

The calls were made to 55 certified helplines for health professionals, public health agencies, and members of the public seeking guidance about exposures to various substances.
 

Cannabis vs. alcohol

In 2000, alcohol was the substance involved in the largest number of cases (1,318, or 9.8% of all calls). Between 2000 and 2013, cases of alcohol abuse exceeded the number of cannabis cases each year.

But that changed in 2014, when cannabis overtook alcohol.

Over the 20-year study period, calls about exposure to cannabis increased 245%, from 510 in 2000 to 1,761 in 2020.

Edibles played a key role.

“Edible marijuana preparations accounted for the highest increase in call rates, compared with all other forms of marijuana,” the researchers reported.

Edible products are “often marketed in ways that are attractive to young people, and they are considered more discrete and convenient,” Dr. Hughes said. But they can have “unpredictable” effects.

“Compared to smoking cannabis, which typically results in an immediate high, intoxication from edible forms usually takes several hours, which may lead some individuals to consume greater amounts and experience unexpected and unpredictable highs,” she said. 

For example, prior research has shown that edible cannabis consumption may lead to more acute psychiatric symptoms and cardiovascular events than does inhaled cannabis.

Trends in alcohol use may have held relatively steady, despite some minor declines in the poison center data, Dr. Hughes said.

“Anecdotally, there hasn’t been an obvious notable reduction in alcohol cases in the emergency department,” she said. “However, I wouldn’t expect a huge change given our data only found a slow mild decline in alcohol cases over the study period.”

The increase in cannabis-related calls coincides with more states legalizing or decriminalizing the drug for medical or recreational purposes. Currently, 21 states have approved recreational cannabis for adults who are at least 21 years old.
 

What are the risks?

Parents typically call a poison center about cannabis exposure after they see or suspect that their child has ingested loose cannabis leaves or edibles containing the substance, Dr. Hughes said.

“The poison center provides guidance to parents about whether or not their child can be watched at home or requires referral to a health care facility,” she said. “While marijuana carries a low risk for severe toxicity, it can be inebriating to the point of poor judgment, risk of falls or other injury, and occasionally a panic reaction in the novice user and unsuspecting children who accidentally ingest these products.”

Intentional misuse or abuse tends to occur in older children and teens.

Nonprescription drugs have a high potential for abuse because they are legal and may be perceived as safe, Dr. Hughes said.

If a child has a history of misusing or abusing substances or if a parent is worried that their child is at high risk for this behavior, they should consider securing medicines in a lock box, she advised.

That applies to cannabis too.

“I would recommend that parents also consider locking up their cannabis products,” she said.

The National Poison Data System relies on voluntary reporting, and the data are not expected to represent the actual number of intentional misuse and abuse exposures, the researchers noted.

Poison control centers in the United States are available for consultation about patients with known or suspected cannabis ingestion or other suspected poisonings (1-800-222-1222).

The researchers had no disclosures.

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

Poison control centers in the United States now receive more calls about adolescents abusing cannabis than alcohol or any other substance, according to a new study.

Many helpline calls about cannabis involve edible products, the researchers noted.

Over-the-counter medications – especially dextromethorphan-containing cough and cold medications and oral antihistamines, such as Benadryl – are other commonly abused substances.

But cannabis recently started topping the list.

“Since 2018, the most reported misused/abused substance involved exposure to marijuana,” according to the study, which was published online in Clinical Toxicology.  

Adrienne Hughes, MD, assistant professor of emergency medicine at Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, and colleagues analyzed calls to United States poison control centers between 2000 and 2020. They focused on 338,000 calls about intentional substance abuse or misuse, including for the purpose of getting high, in individuals aged 6-18 years.

The calls were made to 55 certified helplines for health professionals, public health agencies, and members of the public seeking guidance about exposures to various substances.
 

Cannabis vs. alcohol

In 2000, alcohol was the substance involved in the largest number of cases (1,318, or 9.8% of all calls). Between 2000 and 2013, cases of alcohol abuse exceeded the number of cannabis cases each year.

But that changed in 2014, when cannabis overtook alcohol.

Over the 20-year study period, calls about exposure to cannabis increased 245%, from 510 in 2000 to 1,761 in 2020.

Edibles played a key role.

“Edible marijuana preparations accounted for the highest increase in call rates, compared with all other forms of marijuana,” the researchers reported.

Edible products are “often marketed in ways that are attractive to young people, and they are considered more discrete and convenient,” Dr. Hughes said. But they can have “unpredictable” effects.

“Compared to smoking cannabis, which typically results in an immediate high, intoxication from edible forms usually takes several hours, which may lead some individuals to consume greater amounts and experience unexpected and unpredictable highs,” she said. 

For example, prior research has shown that edible cannabis consumption may lead to more acute psychiatric symptoms and cardiovascular events than does inhaled cannabis.

Trends in alcohol use may have held relatively steady, despite some minor declines in the poison center data, Dr. Hughes said.

“Anecdotally, there hasn’t been an obvious notable reduction in alcohol cases in the emergency department,” she said. “However, I wouldn’t expect a huge change given our data only found a slow mild decline in alcohol cases over the study period.”

The increase in cannabis-related calls coincides with more states legalizing or decriminalizing the drug for medical or recreational purposes. Currently, 21 states have approved recreational cannabis for adults who are at least 21 years old.
 

What are the risks?

Parents typically call a poison center about cannabis exposure after they see or suspect that their child has ingested loose cannabis leaves or edibles containing the substance, Dr. Hughes said.

“The poison center provides guidance to parents about whether or not their child can be watched at home or requires referral to a health care facility,” she said. “While marijuana carries a low risk for severe toxicity, it can be inebriating to the point of poor judgment, risk of falls or other injury, and occasionally a panic reaction in the novice user and unsuspecting children who accidentally ingest these products.”

Intentional misuse or abuse tends to occur in older children and teens.

Nonprescription drugs have a high potential for abuse because they are legal and may be perceived as safe, Dr. Hughes said.

If a child has a history of misusing or abusing substances or if a parent is worried that their child is at high risk for this behavior, they should consider securing medicines in a lock box, she advised.

That applies to cannabis too.

“I would recommend that parents also consider locking up their cannabis products,” she said.

The National Poison Data System relies on voluntary reporting, and the data are not expected to represent the actual number of intentional misuse and abuse exposures, the researchers noted.

Poison control centers in the United States are available for consultation about patients with known or suspected cannabis ingestion or other suspected poisonings (1-800-222-1222).

The researchers had no disclosures.

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

The rate of postpartum hemorrhage for hospital deliveries in the United States increased significantly over a 20-year period, according to data from more than 76 million delivery hospitalizations from the National Inpatient Sample.

Postpartum hemorrhage remains the leading cause of maternal morbidity and mortality worldwide, and many clinical and patient-level risk factors appear to be on the rise, wrote Chiara M. Corbetta-Rastelli, MD, of the University of California, San Francisco, and colleagues.

Although practice changes have been introduced to reduce postpartum hemorrhage, recent trends in postpartum hemorrhage risk and outcomes in the context of such changes as hemorrhage safety bundles have not been examined, they said.

In a study published in Obstetrics & Gynecology, the researchers reviewed data from hospitalizations for females aged 15-54 years for deliveries between 2000 and 2019 using the National Inpatient Sample. They used a regression analysis to estimate average annual percentage changes (AAPC). Their objectives were to characterize trends and also to assess the association between risk factors and the occurrence of postpartum hemorrhage and related interventions. Demographics, clinical factors, and hospital characteristics were mainly similar between the group of patients with postpartum hemorrhage and those with no postpartum hemorrhage.

Approximately 3% (2.3 million) of 76.7 million hospitalizations for delivery were complicated by postpartum hemorrhage during the study period, and the annual rate increased from 2.7% to 4.3%.

Overall, 21.4% of individuals with delivery hospitalizations complicated by postpartum hemorrhage had one postpartum risk factor, and 1.4% had two or more risk factors. The number of individuals with at least one risk factor for postpartum hemorrhage increased significantly, from 18.6% to 26.9%, during the study period, with an annual percentage change of 1.9%.

Compared with deliveries in individuals without risk factors, individuals with one risk factor had slightly higher odds of postpartum hemorrhage (odds ratio, 1.14), but those with two or more risk factors were more than twice as likely to experience postpartum hemorrhage as those with no risk factors (OR, 2.31).

The researchers also examined the association of specific risk factors and interventions related to hemorrhage, notably blood transfusion and peripartum hysterectomy. Blood transfusions in individuals with postpartum hemorrhage increased from 5.4% to 16.7% between 2000 and 2011, (AAPC, 10.2%) then decreased from 16.7% to 12.6% from 2011 to 2019 (AAPC, –3.9%).

Peripartum hysterectomy in the study population increased from 1.4% to 2.4% from 2000 to 2009 (AAPC 5.0%), remained steady from 2009 to 2016, and then decreased from 2.1% to 0.9% from 2016 to 2019 (AAPC –27%).

Other risk factors associated with postpartum hemorrhage itself and with blood transfusion and hysterectomy in the setting of postpartum hemorrhage included prior cesarean delivery with placenta previa or accreta, placenta previa without prior cesarean delivery, and antepartum hemorrhage or placental abruption, the researchers noted.

“In addition to placental abnormalities, risk factors such as preeclampsia with severe features, polyhydramnios, and uterine leiomyomas demonstrated the highest rates of increase in our data,” they wrote in their discussion. These trends may lead to continuing increases in postpartum hemorrhage risk, which was not fully explained by the increase in risk factors seen in the current study, the researchers said.

The study findings were limited by several factors, including the use of billing codes that could lead to misclassification of diagnoses, as well as possible differences in the definition and coding for postpartum hemorrhage among hospitals, the researchers noted. Other limitations were the exclusion of cases of readmission for postpartum hemorrhage and lack of clinical details involving use of medications or nonoperative interventions, they said.

Notably, the study finding of stable to decreasing peripartum hysterectomy rates in hospitalized patients with postpartum hemorrhage conflicts with another recent study showing an increase in peripartum hysterectomy from 2009 to 2020, but this difference may reflect changes in billing, indications for hysterectomy, or study modeling, they said.

The current study was strengthened by the use of a large database to analyze population trends, a contemporary study period, and the inclusion of meaningful outcomes such as peripartum hysterectomy, the researchers wrote.

The shift in blood transfusion and peripartum hysterectomy may reflect the implementation of protocols to promote early intervention and identification of postpartum hemorrhage, they concluded.
 

Interventions can have an effect

“Hemorrhage remains a leading cause of maternal mortality in the United States and blood transfusion is the most common severe maternal morbidity,” Catherine M. Albright, MD, MS, associate professor of maternal-fetal medicine at the University of Washington, Seattle, said in an interview. “It is important to understand the current state, especially given that many hospitals have implemented policies and procedures to better identify and treat postpartum hemorrhage,” she said.

Dr. Albright said, “I was pleased to see that they did not just look at a diagnosis of postpartum hemorrhage but rather also looked at complications arising from postpartum hemorrhage, such as blood transfusion or hysterectomy.”

Postpartum hemorrhage is often a clinical diagnosis that uses estimated blood loss, a notoriously inaccurate measure, said Dr. Albright. “Additionally, the definitions of postpartum hemorrhage, as well as the ICD codes, changed during the time period of the study,” she noted. “These factors all could lead to both underreporting and overreporting of the true incidence of postpartum hemorrhage. Blood transfusion and hysterectomy are more objective outcomes and demonstrate true morbidity,” she said.

“Most of the risk factors that are listed in the article are not modifiable during that pregnancy,” said Dr. Albright. For example, a history of a prior cesarean or having a twin pregnancy is not something that can be changed, she said. “Many of the other risk factors or associated clinical factors, such as obesity, chronic hypertension, and pregestational diabetes, are modifiable, but before pregnancy. Universal and easy access to primary medical care prior to and between pregnancies may help to mitigate some of these factors,” she noted.

Looking ahead, “It would be helpful to ensure that these types of data are available at the state and hospital level; this will allow for local evaluation of programs that are in place to reduce postpartum hemorrhage risk and improve identification and treatment,” Dr. Albright said.

The study received no outside funding. Dr. Corbetta-Rastelli and Dr. Albright had no financial conflicts to disclose.

The rate of postpartum hemorrhage for hospital deliveries in the United States increased significantly over a 20-year period, according to data from more than 76 million delivery hospitalizations from the National Inpatient Sample.

Postpartum hemorrhage remains the leading cause of maternal morbidity and mortality worldwide, and many clinical and patient-level risk factors appear to be on the rise, wrote Chiara M. Corbetta-Rastelli, MD, of the University of California, San Francisco, and colleagues.

Although practice changes have been introduced to reduce postpartum hemorrhage, recent trends in postpartum hemorrhage risk and outcomes in the context of such changes as hemorrhage safety bundles have not been examined, they said.

In a study published in Obstetrics & Gynecology, the researchers reviewed data from hospitalizations for females aged 15-54 years for deliveries between 2000 and 2019 using the National Inpatient Sample. They used a regression analysis to estimate average annual percentage changes (AAPC). Their objectives were to characterize trends and also to assess the association between risk factors and the occurrence of postpartum hemorrhage and related interventions. Demographics, clinical factors, and hospital characteristics were mainly similar between the group of patients with postpartum hemorrhage and those with no postpartum hemorrhage.

Approximately 3% (2.3 million) of 76.7 million hospitalizations for delivery were complicated by postpartum hemorrhage during the study period, and the annual rate increased from 2.7% to 4.3%.

Overall, 21.4% of individuals with delivery hospitalizations complicated by postpartum hemorrhage had one postpartum risk factor, and 1.4% had two or more risk factors. The number of individuals with at least one risk factor for postpartum hemorrhage increased significantly, from 18.6% to 26.9%, during the study period, with an annual percentage change of 1.9%.

Compared with deliveries in individuals without risk factors, individuals with one risk factor had slightly higher odds of postpartum hemorrhage (odds ratio, 1.14), but those with two or more risk factors were more than twice as likely to experience postpartum hemorrhage as those with no risk factors (OR, 2.31).

The researchers also examined the association of specific risk factors and interventions related to hemorrhage, notably blood transfusion and peripartum hysterectomy. Blood transfusions in individuals with postpartum hemorrhage increased from 5.4% to 16.7% between 2000 and 2011, (AAPC, 10.2%) then decreased from 16.7% to 12.6% from 2011 to 2019 (AAPC, –3.9%).

Peripartum hysterectomy in the study population increased from 1.4% to 2.4% from 2000 to 2009 (AAPC 5.0%), remained steady from 2009 to 2016, and then decreased from 2.1% to 0.9% from 2016 to 2019 (AAPC –27%).

Other risk factors associated with postpartum hemorrhage itself and with blood transfusion and hysterectomy in the setting of postpartum hemorrhage included prior cesarean delivery with placenta previa or accreta, placenta previa without prior cesarean delivery, and antepartum hemorrhage or placental abruption, the researchers noted.

“In addition to placental abnormalities, risk factors such as preeclampsia with severe features, polyhydramnios, and uterine leiomyomas demonstrated the highest rates of increase in our data,” they wrote in their discussion. These trends may lead to continuing increases in postpartum hemorrhage risk, which was not fully explained by the increase in risk factors seen in the current study, the researchers said.

The study findings were limited by several factors, including the use of billing codes that could lead to misclassification of diagnoses, as well as possible differences in the definition and coding for postpartum hemorrhage among hospitals, the researchers noted. Other limitations were the exclusion of cases of readmission for postpartum hemorrhage and lack of clinical details involving use of medications or nonoperative interventions, they said.

Notably, the study finding of stable to decreasing peripartum hysterectomy rates in hospitalized patients with postpartum hemorrhage conflicts with another recent study showing an increase in peripartum hysterectomy from 2009 to 2020, but this difference may reflect changes in billing, indications for hysterectomy, or study modeling, they said.

The current study was strengthened by the use of a large database to analyze population trends, a contemporary study period, and the inclusion of meaningful outcomes such as peripartum hysterectomy, the researchers wrote.

The shift in blood transfusion and peripartum hysterectomy may reflect the implementation of protocols to promote early intervention and identification of postpartum hemorrhage, they concluded.
 

Interventions can have an effect

“Hemorrhage remains a leading cause of maternal mortality in the United States and blood transfusion is the most common severe maternal morbidity,” Catherine M. Albright, MD, MS, associate professor of maternal-fetal medicine at the University of Washington, Seattle, said in an interview. “It is important to understand the current state, especially given that many hospitals have implemented policies and procedures to better identify and treat postpartum hemorrhage,” she said.

Dr. Albright said, “I was pleased to see that they did not just look at a diagnosis of postpartum hemorrhage but rather also looked at complications arising from postpartum hemorrhage, such as blood transfusion or hysterectomy.”

Postpartum hemorrhage is often a clinical diagnosis that uses estimated blood loss, a notoriously inaccurate measure, said Dr. Albright. “Additionally, the definitions of postpartum hemorrhage, as well as the ICD codes, changed during the time period of the study,” she noted. “These factors all could lead to both underreporting and overreporting of the true incidence of postpartum hemorrhage. Blood transfusion and hysterectomy are more objective outcomes and demonstrate true morbidity,” she said.

“Most of the risk factors that are listed in the article are not modifiable during that pregnancy,” said Dr. Albright. For example, a history of a prior cesarean or having a twin pregnancy is not something that can be changed, she said. “Many of the other risk factors or associated clinical factors, such as obesity, chronic hypertension, and pregestational diabetes, are modifiable, but before pregnancy. Universal and easy access to primary medical care prior to and between pregnancies may help to mitigate some of these factors,” she noted.

Looking ahead, “It would be helpful to ensure that these types of data are available at the state and hospital level; this will allow for local evaluation of programs that are in place to reduce postpartum hemorrhage risk and improve identification and treatment,” Dr. Albright said.

The study received no outside funding. Dr. Corbetta-Rastelli and Dr. Albright had no financial conflicts to disclose.

The rate of postpartum hemorrhage for hospital deliveries in the United States increased significantly over a 20-year period, according to data from more than 76 million delivery hospitalizations from the National Inpatient Sample.

Postpartum hemorrhage remains the leading cause of maternal morbidity and mortality worldwide, and many clinical and patient-level risk factors appear to be on the rise, wrote Chiara M. Corbetta-Rastelli, MD, of the University of California, San Francisco, and colleagues.

Although practice changes have been introduced to reduce postpartum hemorrhage, recent trends in postpartum hemorrhage risk and outcomes in the context of such changes as hemorrhage safety bundles have not been examined, they said.

In a study published in Obstetrics & Gynecology, the researchers reviewed data from hospitalizations for females aged 15-54 years for deliveries between 2000 and 2019 using the National Inpatient Sample. They used a regression analysis to estimate average annual percentage changes (AAPC). Their objectives were to characterize trends and also to assess the association between risk factors and the occurrence of postpartum hemorrhage and related interventions. Demographics, clinical factors, and hospital characteristics were mainly similar between the group of patients with postpartum hemorrhage and those with no postpartum hemorrhage.

Approximately 3% (2.3 million) of 76.7 million hospitalizations for delivery were complicated by postpartum hemorrhage during the study period, and the annual rate increased from 2.7% to 4.3%.

Overall, 21.4% of individuals with delivery hospitalizations complicated by postpartum hemorrhage had one postpartum risk factor, and 1.4% had two or more risk factors. The number of individuals with at least one risk factor for postpartum hemorrhage increased significantly, from 18.6% to 26.9%, during the study period, with an annual percentage change of 1.9%.

Compared with deliveries in individuals without risk factors, individuals with one risk factor had slightly higher odds of postpartum hemorrhage (odds ratio, 1.14), but those with two or more risk factors were more than twice as likely to experience postpartum hemorrhage as those with no risk factors (OR, 2.31).

The researchers also examined the association of specific risk factors and interventions related to hemorrhage, notably blood transfusion and peripartum hysterectomy. Blood transfusions in individuals with postpartum hemorrhage increased from 5.4% to 16.7% between 2000 and 2011, (AAPC, 10.2%) then decreased from 16.7% to 12.6% from 2011 to 2019 (AAPC, –3.9%).

Peripartum hysterectomy in the study population increased from 1.4% to 2.4% from 2000 to 2009 (AAPC 5.0%), remained steady from 2009 to 2016, and then decreased from 2.1% to 0.9% from 2016 to 2019 (AAPC –27%).

Other risk factors associated with postpartum hemorrhage itself and with blood transfusion and hysterectomy in the setting of postpartum hemorrhage included prior cesarean delivery with placenta previa or accreta, placenta previa without prior cesarean delivery, and antepartum hemorrhage or placental abruption, the researchers noted.

“In addition to placental abnormalities, risk factors such as preeclampsia with severe features, polyhydramnios, and uterine leiomyomas demonstrated the highest rates of increase in our data,” they wrote in their discussion. These trends may lead to continuing increases in postpartum hemorrhage risk, which was not fully explained by the increase in risk factors seen in the current study, the researchers said.

The study findings were limited by several factors, including the use of billing codes that could lead to misclassification of diagnoses, as well as possible differences in the definition and coding for postpartum hemorrhage among hospitals, the researchers noted. Other limitations were the exclusion of cases of readmission for postpartum hemorrhage and lack of clinical details involving use of medications or nonoperative interventions, they said.

Notably, the study finding of stable to decreasing peripartum hysterectomy rates in hospitalized patients with postpartum hemorrhage conflicts with another recent study showing an increase in peripartum hysterectomy from 2009 to 2020, but this difference may reflect changes in billing, indications for hysterectomy, or study modeling, they said.

The current study was strengthened by the use of a large database to analyze population trends, a contemporary study period, and the inclusion of meaningful outcomes such as peripartum hysterectomy, the researchers wrote.

The shift in blood transfusion and peripartum hysterectomy may reflect the implementation of protocols to promote early intervention and identification of postpartum hemorrhage, they concluded.
 

Interventions can have an effect

“Hemorrhage remains a leading cause of maternal mortality in the United States and blood transfusion is the most common severe maternal morbidity,” Catherine M. Albright, MD, MS, associate professor of maternal-fetal medicine at the University of Washington, Seattle, said in an interview. “It is important to understand the current state, especially given that many hospitals have implemented policies and procedures to better identify and treat postpartum hemorrhage,” she said.

Dr. Albright said, “I was pleased to see that they did not just look at a diagnosis of postpartum hemorrhage but rather also looked at complications arising from postpartum hemorrhage, such as blood transfusion or hysterectomy.”

Postpartum hemorrhage is often a clinical diagnosis that uses estimated blood loss, a notoriously inaccurate measure, said Dr. Albright. “Additionally, the definitions of postpartum hemorrhage, as well as the ICD codes, changed during the time period of the study,” she noted. “These factors all could lead to both underreporting and overreporting of the true incidence of postpartum hemorrhage. Blood transfusion and hysterectomy are more objective outcomes and demonstrate true morbidity,” she said.

“Most of the risk factors that are listed in the article are not modifiable during that pregnancy,” said Dr. Albright. For example, a history of a prior cesarean or having a twin pregnancy is not something that can be changed, she said. “Many of the other risk factors or associated clinical factors, such as obesity, chronic hypertension, and pregestational diabetes, are modifiable, but before pregnancy. Universal and easy access to primary medical care prior to and between pregnancies may help to mitigate some of these factors,” she noted.

Looking ahead, “It would be helpful to ensure that these types of data are available at the state and hospital level; this will allow for local evaluation of programs that are in place to reduce postpartum hemorrhage risk and improve identification and treatment,” Dr. Albright said.

The study received no outside funding. Dr. Corbetta-Rastelli and Dr. Albright had no financial conflicts to disclose.

NASHVILLE, TENN. – Researchers have reported for the first time a process that may explain the progression of absence seizures that seems to provoke dysregulation of the insulating layer surrounding nerve fibers, perpetuating a cycle of increasing nerve damage and more frequent seizures later on.

“This study was the first to demonstrate that, at least in some forms of epilepsy, myelin plasticity is part of the maladaptive plasticity response that underlines epilepsy progression,” Juliet Knowles, MD, PhD, assistant professor at Stanford (Calif.) University, said in an interview. She reported the findings at the 2022 annual meeting of the American Epilepsy Society.

Dr. Knowles and colleagues made their discovery using laboratory mice. They used an imaging technique known as qMTI – quantitative magnetization transfer in conjunction with diffusion MRI – to map changes in myelin sheath thickness, or myelin plasticity, in major white matter tracks of the brain.

“Over the last decade we’ve come to understand that myelin, which is the insulating substance that coats the projections of brain cells or neurons, is more dynamic than we used to think,” she said. “In fact, throughout life,  myelin’s structure in some regions of the brain can be changed in response to neuro activity. It’s a newly appreciated form of brain plasticity.”

However, she said, myelin plasticity has mostly been studied in healthy brains; “We don’t know very much about what role myelin plasticity might play in disease states like epilepsy,” Dr. Knowles said. The study’s goal was to investigate myelin plasticity specifically in absence seizures.

“We hypothesized that maybe absence seizures prompt activity-dependent myelin plasticity, but that maybe seizure-induced myelin plasticity alters the way that brain networks act in a way that contributes to the disease process,” she said.
 

Maladaptive myelin plasticity

The researchers found that absence seizures were infrequent when they first started, but then they rapidly progressed. “Over a couple of weeks, they’ll go from having very few seizures to having many seizures per hour,” Dr. Knowles said.

Using qMTI, the researchers found increased myelin sheath thickness across the longitudinal extent of the anterior corpus callosum, but they found myelin sheath thickness unchanged in brain regions where absence seizures weren’t prominent.

They also found that genetically blocking activity-dependent myelination markedly decreased seizure progression and decreased ictal somatosensory electroencephalography (EEG) coherence. Conversely, blocking myelin plasticity had no effect on ictal EEG coherence between visual cortices connected by the posterior corpus callosum.  

The next step for the researchers is to develop MRI methods to use in human studies, Dr. Knowles said.

“We are working on developing an imaging approach in these same animal models that we hope we can use also to study in a detailed way white matter plasticity in humans with epilepsy and we’re also continuing our studies in animal models to try to identify ways to target maladaptive myelin plasticity, which ultimately we hope will inform treatment of people with epilepsy,” Dr. Knowles said.
 

Of mice and men

Although this study used mice, Chris Dulla, PhD, associate professor and director of the neuroscience graduate program at Tufts University in Boston, said the finding is “probably pretty transferable” to humans.

“This is the first study that really showed it,” he said of the link between myelin changes and seizure frequency. “I think people have suspected it, but that’s why this is kind of a big deal because this is one of the first studies to show it conclusively.”

He offered suggestions for validating the findings in humans. “The first thing would be to do imaging studies in people where you can examine to see if those white matter tracks are altered in a similar way in people with epilepsy,” he said. “I think now this study gives us good reason to undertake the work that it would take to ask that question and answer it in the human brain.”

Dr. Knowles and Dr. Dulla have no relevant relationships to disclose.

NASHVILLE, TENN. – Researchers have reported for the first time a process that may explain the progression of absence seizures that seems to provoke dysregulation of the insulating layer surrounding nerve fibers, perpetuating a cycle of increasing nerve damage and more frequent seizures later on.

“This study was the first to demonstrate that, at least in some forms of epilepsy, myelin plasticity is part of the maladaptive plasticity response that underlines epilepsy progression,” Juliet Knowles, MD, PhD, assistant professor at Stanford (Calif.) University, said in an interview. She reported the findings at the 2022 annual meeting of the American Epilepsy Society.

Dr. Knowles and colleagues made their discovery using laboratory mice. They used an imaging technique known as qMTI – quantitative magnetization transfer in conjunction with diffusion MRI – to map changes in myelin sheath thickness, or myelin plasticity, in major white matter tracks of the brain.

“Over the last decade we’ve come to understand that myelin, which is the insulating substance that coats the projections of brain cells or neurons, is more dynamic than we used to think,” she said. “In fact, throughout life,  myelin’s structure in some regions of the brain can be changed in response to neuro activity. It’s a newly appreciated form of brain plasticity.”

However, she said, myelin plasticity has mostly been studied in healthy brains; “We don’t know very much about what role myelin plasticity might play in disease states like epilepsy,” Dr. Knowles said. The study’s goal was to investigate myelin plasticity specifically in absence seizures.

“We hypothesized that maybe absence seizures prompt activity-dependent myelin plasticity, but that maybe seizure-induced myelin plasticity alters the way that brain networks act in a way that contributes to the disease process,” she said.
 

Maladaptive myelin plasticity

The researchers found that absence seizures were infrequent when they first started, but then they rapidly progressed. “Over a couple of weeks, they’ll go from having very few seizures to having many seizures per hour,” Dr. Knowles said.

Using qMTI, the researchers found increased myelin sheath thickness across the longitudinal extent of the anterior corpus callosum, but they found myelin sheath thickness unchanged in brain regions where absence seizures weren’t prominent.

They also found that genetically blocking activity-dependent myelination markedly decreased seizure progression and decreased ictal somatosensory electroencephalography (EEG) coherence. Conversely, blocking myelin plasticity had no effect on ictal EEG coherence between visual cortices connected by the posterior corpus callosum.  

The next step for the researchers is to develop MRI methods to use in human studies, Dr. Knowles said.

“We are working on developing an imaging approach in these same animal models that we hope we can use also to study in a detailed way white matter plasticity in humans with epilepsy and we’re also continuing our studies in animal models to try to identify ways to target maladaptive myelin plasticity, which ultimately we hope will inform treatment of people with epilepsy,” Dr. Knowles said.
 

Of mice and men

Although this study used mice, Chris Dulla, PhD, associate professor and director of the neuroscience graduate program at Tufts University in Boston, said the finding is “probably pretty transferable” to humans.

“This is the first study that really showed it,” he said of the link between myelin changes and seizure frequency. “I think people have suspected it, but that’s why this is kind of a big deal because this is one of the first studies to show it conclusively.”

He offered suggestions for validating the findings in humans. “The first thing would be to do imaging studies in people where you can examine to see if those white matter tracks are altered in a similar way in people with epilepsy,” he said. “I think now this study gives us good reason to undertake the work that it would take to ask that question and answer it in the human brain.”

Dr. Knowles and Dr. Dulla have no relevant relationships to disclose.

NASHVILLE, TENN. – Researchers have reported for the first time a process that may explain the progression of absence seizures that seems to provoke dysregulation of the insulating layer surrounding nerve fibers, perpetuating a cycle of increasing nerve damage and more frequent seizures later on.

“This study was the first to demonstrate that, at least in some forms of epilepsy, myelin plasticity is part of the maladaptive plasticity response that underlines epilepsy progression,” Juliet Knowles, MD, PhD, assistant professor at Stanford (Calif.) University, said in an interview. She reported the findings at the 2022 annual meeting of the American Epilepsy Society.

Dr. Knowles and colleagues made their discovery using laboratory mice. They used an imaging technique known as qMTI – quantitative magnetization transfer in conjunction with diffusion MRI – to map changes in myelin sheath thickness, or myelin plasticity, in major white matter tracks of the brain.

“Over the last decade we’ve come to understand that myelin, which is the insulating substance that coats the projections of brain cells or neurons, is more dynamic than we used to think,” she said. “In fact, throughout life,  myelin’s structure in some regions of the brain can be changed in response to neuro activity. It’s a newly appreciated form of brain plasticity.”

However, she said, myelin plasticity has mostly been studied in healthy brains; “We don’t know very much about what role myelin plasticity might play in disease states like epilepsy,” Dr. Knowles said. The study’s goal was to investigate myelin plasticity specifically in absence seizures.

“We hypothesized that maybe absence seizures prompt activity-dependent myelin plasticity, but that maybe seizure-induced myelin plasticity alters the way that brain networks act in a way that contributes to the disease process,” she said.
 

Maladaptive myelin plasticity

The researchers found that absence seizures were infrequent when they first started, but then they rapidly progressed. “Over a couple of weeks, they’ll go from having very few seizures to having many seizures per hour,” Dr. Knowles said.

Using qMTI, the researchers found increased myelin sheath thickness across the longitudinal extent of the anterior corpus callosum, but they found myelin sheath thickness unchanged in brain regions where absence seizures weren’t prominent.

They also found that genetically blocking activity-dependent myelination markedly decreased seizure progression and decreased ictal somatosensory electroencephalography (EEG) coherence. Conversely, blocking myelin plasticity had no effect on ictal EEG coherence between visual cortices connected by the posterior corpus callosum.  

The next step for the researchers is to develop MRI methods to use in human studies, Dr. Knowles said.

“We are working on developing an imaging approach in these same animal models that we hope we can use also to study in a detailed way white matter plasticity in humans with epilepsy and we’re also continuing our studies in animal models to try to identify ways to target maladaptive myelin plasticity, which ultimately we hope will inform treatment of people with epilepsy,” Dr. Knowles said.
 

Of mice and men

Although this study used mice, Chris Dulla, PhD, associate professor and director of the neuroscience graduate program at Tufts University in Boston, said the finding is “probably pretty transferable” to humans.

“This is the first study that really showed it,” he said of the link between myelin changes and seizure frequency. “I think people have suspected it, but that’s why this is kind of a big deal because this is one of the first studies to show it conclusively.”

He offered suggestions for validating the findings in humans. “The first thing would be to do imaging studies in people where you can examine to see if those white matter tracks are altered in a similar way in people with epilepsy,” he said. “I think now this study gives us good reason to undertake the work that it would take to ask that question and answer it in the human brain.”

Dr. Knowles and Dr. Dulla have no relevant relationships to disclose.

NASHVILLE, TENN. – Medicare and Medicaid spending on antiseizure medications has more than doubled over the past decade, but the number of overall prescriptions hasn’t increased nearly as much, pointing to a major shift to newer, costlier, brand-name drugs – a trend in spending that may not be sustainable, the lead author of a study of drug costs said.

The study, presented at the 2022 annual meeting of the American Epilepsy Society, evaluated claims data for prescriptions for common antiseizure medications in the Medicare Part D and Medicaid databases from 2012 to 2020. The study excluded gabapentin and pregabalin because they’re frequently prescribed for other indications in addition to epileptic seizures.

“We found that third-generation medications, even though they accounted for the smallest percentage of claims in 2020, took up the most astronomical portion of the money that was spent,” lead author Deepti Zutshi, MD, an associate professor of neurology at Wayne State University in Detroit, said in an interview.

The study found that Medicare Part D spending on antiseizure medications increased from $1.16 billion in 2012 to $2.68 billion in 2020. In Medicaid, spending followed a similar trend, increasing from $973 million in 2012 to $1.05 billion in 2020.
 

Analyzing Medicare/Medicaid claims data

The study categorized drugs two ways: by brand or generic; and by first, second, or third generation, Dr. Zutshi said. First-generation drugs include medications such as phenobarbital, phenytoin, valproate, and carbamazepine. Second-generation medications were released in the early 2000s and include  medications such as lamotrigine and levetiracetam. Examples of third-generation drugs include lacosamide, vigabatrin, clobazam, and perampanel.

Prescribers shifted significantly to third-generation treatments, Dr. Zutshi said. In Medicare Part D, the total spent on third-generation antiseizure medications went from $124 million in 2012 to $1.08 billion in 2020, representing a quadrupling in percentage of costs, from 10.7% to 40.4%. The total number of claims for third-generation antiseizure medications was 240,000 in 2012 (1.3%) and 1.1 million in 2020 (4.4%).

When looking at brand versus generic, the total spent on brand-name antiseizure medications increased nearly threefold from $546 million in 2012 to $1.62 million in 2020, with the share of all funding spent on brand-name antiseizure medications jumping from 46.8% to 60.2%. However, the proportion of total claims for branded antiseizure medications actually dropped, from 9.24% in 2012 to 6.62% in 2020.

Medicaid trends followed a similar pattern. Third-generation antiseizure medications accounted for 1.7% of total claims in 2012 and 6% in 2020. Spending on third-generation antiseizure medications grew nearly eight times: from $147 million, or 15.1% of funding spent on antiseizure medications, in 2012 to $1.15 billion in 2020, a 56.1% share of costs. The total spend of branded antiseizure medications in Medicaid was $605 million in 2012 and $1.46 billion in 2020 – a jump in the share of total spending from 62.2% to 71.3%. As in Medicare Part D, the percentage of total claims for branded antiseizure medications in Medicaid also dropped from 2012 to 2020, from 12.1% to 6.8%.
 

Why the substantial increase in spending?

“The reason we are prescribing these more expensive medications may be that the third-generation medications have better side-effect profiles, improved safety and outcomes in pregnancy, or that they have less drug interactions with other medications,” Dr. Zutshi said.

That’s desirable for older patients on Medicare who are more likely to have comorbidities and be on other medications, or women of child-bearing age on Medicaid, Dr. Zutshi said. “But I don’t think people realize what the cost is to Medicare and Medicaid,” she said, “so this was a bit of a shocking finding in our paper when we looked at this. I wasn’t expecting to see the substantial increase of spending focusing on just a few medications.”

Neurologists and other providers have to be more aware of individual patients’ needs as well as cost when prescribing branded or third-generation antiseizure medications, Dr. Zutshi said. “We have to do what’s best for all of our patients, but it has to be sustainable. If not,  we could start losing the ability to prescribe these medications in these vulnerable population groups, so we have to use them judiciously,” Dr. Zutshi said.
 

Controlling costs versus managing seizures

Timothy E. Welty, PharmD, a professor of pharmacy at Drake University in Des Moines, Iowa, noted some potential issues with the study’s methodology, namely that, while it excluded gabapentin and pregabalin, it did include other antiseizure medications that are used for other indications without accounting for them. Additionally, the pharmacy claims data the study used didn’t cross match with any diagnostic data.

Controlling drug costs is noteworthy, he said, but managing seizures is equally important. “You have to think not only in terms of preventing seizures and what impact that has on health care costs specifically, but what impact that has on overall costs to society,” Dr. Welty said. “Doing the best we  can to get their seizures under control as quickly as possible has great benefits for the patient outside of health care costs.”

He added, “We just really need to educate pharmacists and decision makers within third-party payers, be it Medicare, Medicaid, private insurance, whatever, on the advances that are being made in the use of seizure medications to treat epilepsy and stop seizures, but it’s a far broader issue than just how many dollars are we spending on seizure medication.”

Dr. Zutshi and Dr. Welty have no relevant disclosures to report.

NASHVILLE, TENN. – Medicare and Medicaid spending on antiseizure medications has more than doubled over the past decade, but the number of overall prescriptions hasn’t increased nearly as much, pointing to a major shift to newer, costlier, brand-name drugs – a trend in spending that may not be sustainable, the lead author of a study of drug costs said.

The study, presented at the 2022 annual meeting of the American Epilepsy Society, evaluated claims data for prescriptions for common antiseizure medications in the Medicare Part D and Medicaid databases from 2012 to 2020. The study excluded gabapentin and pregabalin because they’re frequently prescribed for other indications in addition to epileptic seizures.

“We found that third-generation medications, even though they accounted for the smallest percentage of claims in 2020, took up the most astronomical portion of the money that was spent,” lead author Deepti Zutshi, MD, an associate professor of neurology at Wayne State University in Detroit, said in an interview.

The study found that Medicare Part D spending on antiseizure medications increased from $1.16 billion in 2012 to $2.68 billion in 2020. In Medicaid, spending followed a similar trend, increasing from $973 million in 2012 to $1.05 billion in 2020.
 

Analyzing Medicare/Medicaid claims data

The study categorized drugs two ways: by brand or generic; and by first, second, or third generation, Dr. Zutshi said. First-generation drugs include medications such as phenobarbital, phenytoin, valproate, and carbamazepine. Second-generation medications were released in the early 2000s and include  medications such as lamotrigine and levetiracetam. Examples of third-generation drugs include lacosamide, vigabatrin, clobazam, and perampanel.

Prescribers shifted significantly to third-generation treatments, Dr. Zutshi said. In Medicare Part D, the total spent on third-generation antiseizure medications went from $124 million in 2012 to $1.08 billion in 2020, representing a quadrupling in percentage of costs, from 10.7% to 40.4%. The total number of claims for third-generation antiseizure medications was 240,000 in 2012 (1.3%) and 1.1 million in 2020 (4.4%).

When looking at brand versus generic, the total spent on brand-name antiseizure medications increased nearly threefold from $546 million in 2012 to $1.62 million in 2020, with the share of all funding spent on brand-name antiseizure medications jumping from 46.8% to 60.2%. However, the proportion of total claims for branded antiseizure medications actually dropped, from 9.24% in 2012 to 6.62% in 2020.

Medicaid trends followed a similar pattern. Third-generation antiseizure medications accounted for 1.7% of total claims in 2012 and 6% in 2020. Spending on third-generation antiseizure medications grew nearly eight times: from $147 million, or 15.1% of funding spent on antiseizure medications, in 2012 to $1.15 billion in 2020, a 56.1% share of costs. The total spend of branded antiseizure medications in Medicaid was $605 million in 2012 and $1.46 billion in 2020 – a jump in the share of total spending from 62.2% to 71.3%. As in Medicare Part D, the percentage of total claims for branded antiseizure medications in Medicaid also dropped from 2012 to 2020, from 12.1% to 6.8%.
 

Why the substantial increase in spending?

“The reason we are prescribing these more expensive medications may be that the third-generation medications have better side-effect profiles, improved safety and outcomes in pregnancy, or that they have less drug interactions with other medications,” Dr. Zutshi said.

That’s desirable for older patients on Medicare who are more likely to have comorbidities and be on other medications, or women of child-bearing age on Medicaid, Dr. Zutshi said. “But I don’t think people realize what the cost is to Medicare and Medicaid,” she said, “so this was a bit of a shocking finding in our paper when we looked at this. I wasn’t expecting to see the substantial increase of spending focusing on just a few medications.”

Neurologists and other providers have to be more aware of individual patients’ needs as well as cost when prescribing branded or third-generation antiseizure medications, Dr. Zutshi said. “We have to do what’s best for all of our patients, but it has to be sustainable. If not,  we could start losing the ability to prescribe these medications in these vulnerable population groups, so we have to use them judiciously,” Dr. Zutshi said.
 

Controlling costs versus managing seizures

Timothy E. Welty, PharmD, a professor of pharmacy at Drake University in Des Moines, Iowa, noted some potential issues with the study’s methodology, namely that, while it excluded gabapentin and pregabalin, it did include other antiseizure medications that are used for other indications without accounting for them. Additionally, the pharmacy claims data the study used didn’t cross match with any diagnostic data.

Controlling drug costs is noteworthy, he said, but managing seizures is equally important. “You have to think not only in terms of preventing seizures and what impact that has on health care costs specifically, but what impact that has on overall costs to society,” Dr. Welty said. “Doing the best we  can to get their seizures under control as quickly as possible has great benefits for the patient outside of health care costs.”

He added, “We just really need to educate pharmacists and decision makers within third-party payers, be it Medicare, Medicaid, private insurance, whatever, on the advances that are being made in the use of seizure medications to treat epilepsy and stop seizures, but it’s a far broader issue than just how many dollars are we spending on seizure medication.”

Dr. Zutshi and Dr. Welty have no relevant disclosures to report.

NASHVILLE, TENN. – Medicare and Medicaid spending on antiseizure medications has more than doubled over the past decade, but the number of overall prescriptions hasn’t increased nearly as much, pointing to a major shift to newer, costlier, brand-name drugs – a trend in spending that may not be sustainable, the lead author of a study of drug costs said.

The study, presented at the 2022 annual meeting of the American Epilepsy Society, evaluated claims data for prescriptions for common antiseizure medications in the Medicare Part D and Medicaid databases from 2012 to 2020. The study excluded gabapentin and pregabalin because they’re frequently prescribed for other indications in addition to epileptic seizures.

“We found that third-generation medications, even though they accounted for the smallest percentage of claims in 2020, took up the most astronomical portion of the money that was spent,” lead author Deepti Zutshi, MD, an associate professor of neurology at Wayne State University in Detroit, said in an interview.

The study found that Medicare Part D spending on antiseizure medications increased from $1.16 billion in 2012 to $2.68 billion in 2020. In Medicaid, spending followed a similar trend, increasing from $973 million in 2012 to $1.05 billion in 2020.
 

Analyzing Medicare/Medicaid claims data

The study categorized drugs two ways: by brand or generic; and by first, second, or third generation, Dr. Zutshi said. First-generation drugs include medications such as phenobarbital, phenytoin, valproate, and carbamazepine. Second-generation medications were released in the early 2000s and include  medications such as lamotrigine and levetiracetam. Examples of third-generation drugs include lacosamide, vigabatrin, clobazam, and perampanel.

Prescribers shifted significantly to third-generation treatments, Dr. Zutshi said. In Medicare Part D, the total spent on third-generation antiseizure medications went from $124 million in 2012 to $1.08 billion in 2020, representing a quadrupling in percentage of costs, from 10.7% to 40.4%. The total number of claims for third-generation antiseizure medications was 240,000 in 2012 (1.3%) and 1.1 million in 2020 (4.4%).

When looking at brand versus generic, the total spent on brand-name antiseizure medications increased nearly threefold from $546 million in 2012 to $1.62 million in 2020, with the share of all funding spent on brand-name antiseizure medications jumping from 46.8% to 60.2%. However, the proportion of total claims for branded antiseizure medications actually dropped, from 9.24% in 2012 to 6.62% in 2020.

Medicaid trends followed a similar pattern. Third-generation antiseizure medications accounted for 1.7% of total claims in 2012 and 6% in 2020. Spending on third-generation antiseizure medications grew nearly eight times: from $147 million, or 15.1% of funding spent on antiseizure medications, in 2012 to $1.15 billion in 2020, a 56.1% share of costs. The total spend of branded antiseizure medications in Medicaid was $605 million in 2012 and $1.46 billion in 2020 – a jump in the share of total spending from 62.2% to 71.3%. As in Medicare Part D, the percentage of total claims for branded antiseizure medications in Medicaid also dropped from 2012 to 2020, from 12.1% to 6.8%.
 

Why the substantial increase in spending?

“The reason we are prescribing these more expensive medications may be that the third-generation medications have better side-effect profiles, improved safety and outcomes in pregnancy, or that they have less drug interactions with other medications,” Dr. Zutshi said.

That’s desirable for older patients on Medicare who are more likely to have comorbidities and be on other medications, or women of child-bearing age on Medicaid, Dr. Zutshi said. “But I don’t think people realize what the cost is to Medicare and Medicaid,” she said, “so this was a bit of a shocking finding in our paper when we looked at this. I wasn’t expecting to see the substantial increase of spending focusing on just a few medications.”

Neurologists and other providers have to be more aware of individual patients’ needs as well as cost when prescribing branded or third-generation antiseizure medications, Dr. Zutshi said. “We have to do what’s best for all of our patients, but it has to be sustainable. If not,  we could start losing the ability to prescribe these medications in these vulnerable population groups, so we have to use them judiciously,” Dr. Zutshi said.
 

Controlling costs versus managing seizures

Timothy E. Welty, PharmD, a professor of pharmacy at Drake University in Des Moines, Iowa, noted some potential issues with the study’s methodology, namely that, while it excluded gabapentin and pregabalin, it did include other antiseizure medications that are used for other indications without accounting for them. Additionally, the pharmacy claims data the study used didn’t cross match with any diagnostic data.

Controlling drug costs is noteworthy, he said, but managing seizures is equally important. “You have to think not only in terms of preventing seizures and what impact that has on health care costs specifically, but what impact that has on overall costs to society,” Dr. Welty said. “Doing the best we  can to get their seizures under control as quickly as possible has great benefits for the patient outside of health care costs.”

He added, “We just really need to educate pharmacists and decision makers within third-party payers, be it Medicare, Medicaid, private insurance, whatever, on the advances that are being made in the use of seizure medications to treat epilepsy and stop seizures, but it’s a far broader issue than just how many dollars are we spending on seizure medication.”

Dr. Zutshi and Dr. Welty have no relevant disclosures to report.