User login
Nearly 50% of patients with dementia experience falls
, suggests new research that also identifies multiple risk factors for these falls.
In a study of more than 5,500 participants, 45.5% of those with dementia experienced one or more falls, compared with 30.9% of their peers without dementia.
Vision impairment and living with a spouse were among the strongest predictors of future fall risk among participants living with dementia. Interestingly, high neighborhood social deprivation, which is reflected by such things as income and education, was associated with lower odds of falling.
Overall, the results highlight the need for a multidisciplinary approach to preventing falls among elderly individuals with dementia, said lead author Safiyyah M. Okoye, PhD, assistant professor, College of Nursing and Health Professions, Drexel University, Philadelphia.
“We need to consider different dimensions and figure out how we can try to go beyond the clinic in our interactions,” she said.
Dr. Okoye noted that in addition to reviewing medications that may contribute to falls and screening for vision problems, clinicians might also consider resources to improve the home environment and ensure that families have appropriate caregiving.
The findings were published online in Alzheimer’s and Dementia: The Journal of the Alzheimer’s Association.
No ‘silver bullet’
Every year, falls cause millions of injuries in older adults, and those with dementia are especially vulnerable. This population has twice the risk of falling and up to three times the risk of incurring serious fall-related injuries, such as fractures, the researchers noted.
Falls are a leading cause of hospitalization among those with dementia. Previous evidence has shown that persons with dementia are more likely to experience negative health consequences, such as delirium, while in hospital, compared with those without dementia. Even minor fall-related injuries are associated with the patient’s being discharged to a nursing home rather than returning home.
Dr. Okoye stressed that many factors contribute to falls, including health status; function, such as the ability to walk and balance; medications; home environment; and activity level.
“There are multidimensional aspects, and we can’t just find one silver bullet to address falls. It should be addressed comprehensively,” she said.
Existing studies “overwhelmingly” focus on factors related to health and function that could be addressed in the doctor’s office or with a referral, rather than on environmental and social factors, Dr. Okoye noted.
And even though the risk of falling is high among community-dwelling seniors with dementia, very few studies have addressed the risk of falls among these adults, she added.
The new analysis included a nationally representative sample of 5,581 community-dwelling adults who participated in both the 2015 and 2016 National Health and Aging Trends Study (NHATS). The NHATS is a population-based survey of health and disability trends and trajectories among Americans aged 65 years and older.
During interviews, participants were asked, personally or by proxy, about falls during the previous 12 months. Having fallen at baseline was evaluated as a possible predictor of falls in the subsequent 12 months.
To determine probable dementia, researchers asked whether a doctor had ever told the participants that they had dementia or Alzheimer’s disease. They also used a dementia screening questionnaire and neuropsychological tests of memory, orientation, and executive function.
Of the total sample, most (n = 5,093) did not have dementia.
Physical environmental factors that were assessed included conditions at home, such as clutter, tripping hazards, and structural issues, as well as neighborhood social and economic deprivation – such as income, education levels, and employment status.
Fall rates and counterintuitive findings
Results showed that significantly more of those with dementia than without experienced one or more falls (45.5% vs. 30.9%; P < .001).
In addition, a history of falling was significantly associated with subsequent falls among those with dementia (odds ratio, 6.20; 95% confidence interval, 3.81-10.09), as was vision impairment (OR, 2.22; 95% CI, 1.12-4.40) and living with a spouse versus alone (OR, 2.43; 95% CI, 1.09-5.43).
A possible explanation for higher fall risk among those living with a partner is that those living alone usually have better functioning, the investigators noted. Also, live-in partners tend to be of a similar age as the person with dementia and may have challenges of their own.
Interestingly, high neighborhood social deprivation was associated with lower odds of falling (OR, 0.55 for the highest deprivation scores; 95% CI, 0.31-0.98), a finding Dr. Okoye said was “counterintuitive.”
This result could be related to the social environment, she noted. “Maybe there are more people around in the house, more people with eyes on the person, or more people in the community who know the person. Despite the low economic resources, there could be social resources there,” she said.
The new findings underscore the idea that falling is a multidimensional phenomenon among older adults with dementia as well as those without dementia, Dr. Okoye noted.
Doctors can play a role in reducing falls among patients with dementia by asking about falls, possibly eliminating medications that are associated with risk of falling, and screening for and correcting vision and hearing impairments, she suggested.
They may also help determine household hazards for a patient, such as clutter and poor lighting, and ensure that these are addressed, Dr. Okoye added.
No surprise
Commenting on the study, David S. Knopman, MD, a clinical neurologist at Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minn., said the finding that visual impairment and a prior history of falling are predictive of subsequent falls “comes as no surprise.”
Dr. Knopman, whose research focuses on late-life cognitive disorders, was not involved with the current study.
Risk reduction is “of course” a key management goal, he said. “Vigilance and optimizing the patient’s living space to reduce fall risks are the major strategies,” he added.
Dr. Knopman reiterated that falls among those with dementia are associated with higher mortality and often lead to loss of the capacity to live outside of an institution.
The study was supported by the National Institute on Aging. The investigators and Dr. Knopman report no relevant financial relationships.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
, suggests new research that also identifies multiple risk factors for these falls.
In a study of more than 5,500 participants, 45.5% of those with dementia experienced one or more falls, compared with 30.9% of their peers without dementia.
Vision impairment and living with a spouse were among the strongest predictors of future fall risk among participants living with dementia. Interestingly, high neighborhood social deprivation, which is reflected by such things as income and education, was associated with lower odds of falling.
Overall, the results highlight the need for a multidisciplinary approach to preventing falls among elderly individuals with dementia, said lead author Safiyyah M. Okoye, PhD, assistant professor, College of Nursing and Health Professions, Drexel University, Philadelphia.
“We need to consider different dimensions and figure out how we can try to go beyond the clinic in our interactions,” she said.
Dr. Okoye noted that in addition to reviewing medications that may contribute to falls and screening for vision problems, clinicians might also consider resources to improve the home environment and ensure that families have appropriate caregiving.
The findings were published online in Alzheimer’s and Dementia: The Journal of the Alzheimer’s Association.
No ‘silver bullet’
Every year, falls cause millions of injuries in older adults, and those with dementia are especially vulnerable. This population has twice the risk of falling and up to three times the risk of incurring serious fall-related injuries, such as fractures, the researchers noted.
Falls are a leading cause of hospitalization among those with dementia. Previous evidence has shown that persons with dementia are more likely to experience negative health consequences, such as delirium, while in hospital, compared with those without dementia. Even minor fall-related injuries are associated with the patient’s being discharged to a nursing home rather than returning home.
Dr. Okoye stressed that many factors contribute to falls, including health status; function, such as the ability to walk and balance; medications; home environment; and activity level.
“There are multidimensional aspects, and we can’t just find one silver bullet to address falls. It should be addressed comprehensively,” she said.
Existing studies “overwhelmingly” focus on factors related to health and function that could be addressed in the doctor’s office or with a referral, rather than on environmental and social factors, Dr. Okoye noted.
And even though the risk of falling is high among community-dwelling seniors with dementia, very few studies have addressed the risk of falls among these adults, she added.
The new analysis included a nationally representative sample of 5,581 community-dwelling adults who participated in both the 2015 and 2016 National Health and Aging Trends Study (NHATS). The NHATS is a population-based survey of health and disability trends and trajectories among Americans aged 65 years and older.
During interviews, participants were asked, personally or by proxy, about falls during the previous 12 months. Having fallen at baseline was evaluated as a possible predictor of falls in the subsequent 12 months.
To determine probable dementia, researchers asked whether a doctor had ever told the participants that they had dementia or Alzheimer’s disease. They also used a dementia screening questionnaire and neuropsychological tests of memory, orientation, and executive function.
Of the total sample, most (n = 5,093) did not have dementia.
Physical environmental factors that were assessed included conditions at home, such as clutter, tripping hazards, and structural issues, as well as neighborhood social and economic deprivation – such as income, education levels, and employment status.
Fall rates and counterintuitive findings
Results showed that significantly more of those with dementia than without experienced one or more falls (45.5% vs. 30.9%; P < .001).
In addition, a history of falling was significantly associated with subsequent falls among those with dementia (odds ratio, 6.20; 95% confidence interval, 3.81-10.09), as was vision impairment (OR, 2.22; 95% CI, 1.12-4.40) and living with a spouse versus alone (OR, 2.43; 95% CI, 1.09-5.43).
A possible explanation for higher fall risk among those living with a partner is that those living alone usually have better functioning, the investigators noted. Also, live-in partners tend to be of a similar age as the person with dementia and may have challenges of their own.
Interestingly, high neighborhood social deprivation was associated with lower odds of falling (OR, 0.55 for the highest deprivation scores; 95% CI, 0.31-0.98), a finding Dr. Okoye said was “counterintuitive.”
This result could be related to the social environment, she noted. “Maybe there are more people around in the house, more people with eyes on the person, or more people in the community who know the person. Despite the low economic resources, there could be social resources there,” she said.
The new findings underscore the idea that falling is a multidimensional phenomenon among older adults with dementia as well as those without dementia, Dr. Okoye noted.
Doctors can play a role in reducing falls among patients with dementia by asking about falls, possibly eliminating medications that are associated with risk of falling, and screening for and correcting vision and hearing impairments, she suggested.
They may also help determine household hazards for a patient, such as clutter and poor lighting, and ensure that these are addressed, Dr. Okoye added.
No surprise
Commenting on the study, David S. Knopman, MD, a clinical neurologist at Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minn., said the finding that visual impairment and a prior history of falling are predictive of subsequent falls “comes as no surprise.”
Dr. Knopman, whose research focuses on late-life cognitive disorders, was not involved with the current study.
Risk reduction is “of course” a key management goal, he said. “Vigilance and optimizing the patient’s living space to reduce fall risks are the major strategies,” he added.
Dr. Knopman reiterated that falls among those with dementia are associated with higher mortality and often lead to loss of the capacity to live outside of an institution.
The study was supported by the National Institute on Aging. The investigators and Dr. Knopman report no relevant financial relationships.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
, suggests new research that also identifies multiple risk factors for these falls.
In a study of more than 5,500 participants, 45.5% of those with dementia experienced one or more falls, compared with 30.9% of their peers without dementia.
Vision impairment and living with a spouse were among the strongest predictors of future fall risk among participants living with dementia. Interestingly, high neighborhood social deprivation, which is reflected by such things as income and education, was associated with lower odds of falling.
Overall, the results highlight the need for a multidisciplinary approach to preventing falls among elderly individuals with dementia, said lead author Safiyyah M. Okoye, PhD, assistant professor, College of Nursing and Health Professions, Drexel University, Philadelphia.
“We need to consider different dimensions and figure out how we can try to go beyond the clinic in our interactions,” she said.
Dr. Okoye noted that in addition to reviewing medications that may contribute to falls and screening for vision problems, clinicians might also consider resources to improve the home environment and ensure that families have appropriate caregiving.
The findings were published online in Alzheimer’s and Dementia: The Journal of the Alzheimer’s Association.
No ‘silver bullet’
Every year, falls cause millions of injuries in older adults, and those with dementia are especially vulnerable. This population has twice the risk of falling and up to three times the risk of incurring serious fall-related injuries, such as fractures, the researchers noted.
Falls are a leading cause of hospitalization among those with dementia. Previous evidence has shown that persons with dementia are more likely to experience negative health consequences, such as delirium, while in hospital, compared with those without dementia. Even minor fall-related injuries are associated with the patient’s being discharged to a nursing home rather than returning home.
Dr. Okoye stressed that many factors contribute to falls, including health status; function, such as the ability to walk and balance; medications; home environment; and activity level.
“There are multidimensional aspects, and we can’t just find one silver bullet to address falls. It should be addressed comprehensively,” she said.
Existing studies “overwhelmingly” focus on factors related to health and function that could be addressed in the doctor’s office or with a referral, rather than on environmental and social factors, Dr. Okoye noted.
And even though the risk of falling is high among community-dwelling seniors with dementia, very few studies have addressed the risk of falls among these adults, she added.
The new analysis included a nationally representative sample of 5,581 community-dwelling adults who participated in both the 2015 and 2016 National Health and Aging Trends Study (NHATS). The NHATS is a population-based survey of health and disability trends and trajectories among Americans aged 65 years and older.
During interviews, participants were asked, personally or by proxy, about falls during the previous 12 months. Having fallen at baseline was evaluated as a possible predictor of falls in the subsequent 12 months.
To determine probable dementia, researchers asked whether a doctor had ever told the participants that they had dementia or Alzheimer’s disease. They also used a dementia screening questionnaire and neuropsychological tests of memory, orientation, and executive function.
Of the total sample, most (n = 5,093) did not have dementia.
Physical environmental factors that were assessed included conditions at home, such as clutter, tripping hazards, and structural issues, as well as neighborhood social and economic deprivation – such as income, education levels, and employment status.
Fall rates and counterintuitive findings
Results showed that significantly more of those with dementia than without experienced one or more falls (45.5% vs. 30.9%; P < .001).
In addition, a history of falling was significantly associated with subsequent falls among those with dementia (odds ratio, 6.20; 95% confidence interval, 3.81-10.09), as was vision impairment (OR, 2.22; 95% CI, 1.12-4.40) and living with a spouse versus alone (OR, 2.43; 95% CI, 1.09-5.43).
A possible explanation for higher fall risk among those living with a partner is that those living alone usually have better functioning, the investigators noted. Also, live-in partners tend to be of a similar age as the person with dementia and may have challenges of their own.
Interestingly, high neighborhood social deprivation was associated with lower odds of falling (OR, 0.55 for the highest deprivation scores; 95% CI, 0.31-0.98), a finding Dr. Okoye said was “counterintuitive.”
This result could be related to the social environment, she noted. “Maybe there are more people around in the house, more people with eyes on the person, or more people in the community who know the person. Despite the low economic resources, there could be social resources there,” she said.
The new findings underscore the idea that falling is a multidimensional phenomenon among older adults with dementia as well as those without dementia, Dr. Okoye noted.
Doctors can play a role in reducing falls among patients with dementia by asking about falls, possibly eliminating medications that are associated with risk of falling, and screening for and correcting vision and hearing impairments, she suggested.
They may also help determine household hazards for a patient, such as clutter and poor lighting, and ensure that these are addressed, Dr. Okoye added.
No surprise
Commenting on the study, David S. Knopman, MD, a clinical neurologist at Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minn., said the finding that visual impairment and a prior history of falling are predictive of subsequent falls “comes as no surprise.”
Dr. Knopman, whose research focuses on late-life cognitive disorders, was not involved with the current study.
Risk reduction is “of course” a key management goal, he said. “Vigilance and optimizing the patient’s living space to reduce fall risks are the major strategies,” he added.
Dr. Knopman reiterated that falls among those with dementia are associated with higher mortality and often lead to loss of the capacity to live outside of an institution.
The study was supported by the National Institute on Aging. The investigators and Dr. Knopman report no relevant financial relationships.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
FROM ALZHEIMER’S AND DEMENTIA
Ecopipam reduces Tourette’s tics without common side effects in phase 2 trial
Ecopipam, in development for Tourette syndrome in children and adolescents, has shown in a randomized, controlled trial that, compared with placebo, it reduced tics and reduced the risk for some of the common side effects of other treatments, including weight gain.
Findings of the multicenter, double-blind, trial funded by the drug maker, Emalex Biosciences, were published online in Pediatrics. The trial was conducted at 68 sites in the United States, Canada, Germany, France, and Poland between May 2019 and September 2021.
Donald L. Gilbert, MD, MS, with the division of neurology at Cincinnati Children’s Hospital, and colleagues noted that all Food and Drug Administration–approved medications for Tourette syndrome are antipsychotics. The medications carry a risk of weight gain, electrocardiogram abnormalities, metabolic changes, and drug-induced movement disorders.
First-in-class medication ecopipam, targets the D1 dopamine receptor, while currently approved medications block the D2 receptor. It “may be a safe and effective treatment of Tourette syndrome with advantages over other currently approved therapeutic agents,” the authors wrote.
The study included 153 individuals at least 6 years old up to age 18 with a baseline Yale Global Tic Severity Score Total Tic Score of at least 20.
They were randomly assigned 1:1 to ecopipam or placebo.
Significant reduction in tic severity
Researchers saw a 30% reduction in the tic severity score from baseline to week 12 for the ecopipam group compared with the placebo group.
The data showed a least-squares mean difference of 3.44 (95% confidence interval [CI], 6.09-0.79, P = .01). Researchers also saw improvement in Clinical Global Impression of Tourette Syndrome Severity in the ecopipam group (P = .03).
Sara Pawlowski, MD, division chief for primary care mental health integration at University of Vermont Health Network and assistant professor of psychiatry, University of Vermont, Burlington, said in an interview that several things should be considered with this research.
One is that, though the results show a reduction in tics, the study lasted only 12 weeks and “tics can last a lifetime,” she noted.
“They also can ebb and flow with major life events, stressors, and various other variables. So, I wonder how the effects of improvement can be teased out from the natural ebb and flow of the condition in a 3-month window, which is a snapshot into the course of a known relapsing, remitting, lifetime, and chronically variable condition,” she said.
Headaches, insomnia among side effects
Weight gain was larger in the placebo group than in the ecopipam group: 17.1% in the ecopipam group and 20.3% of those who got a placebo had a weight gain of more than 7% over the study period.
The most common side effects of the study drug were headache (15.8%), insomnia (14.5%), fatigue (7.9%), and somnolence (7.9%).
A limitation of the study was lack of racial and ethnic diversity, as 93.5% of those in the placebo group and 86.8% in the ecopipam group were White.
Guidelines in North America and Europe agree that behavioral treatments should be the first-line therapy.
Dr. Pawlowski said that although effective medications are needed, she urges focusing on better access to nonmedication treatments “that work for children and adolescents” as children who start taking the medications early may take them for the rest of their lives.
Also, while the research didn’t find weight gain in the ecopipam group, the side effects they did find in the group, including headache and insomnia, “do impact a child’s life,” she noted.
“We also can’t be reassured that over the course of chronic treatment there wouldn’t be movement disorders or metabolic disorders that emerge. Those are side effects or disorders that can emerge surreptitiously over time, and more time than 12 weeks,” she said.
The study was funded by Emalex Biosciences. Dr. Gilbert has received consulting fees from Biogen and PTC therapeutics. Study coauthors disclosed ties with Emalex, Alkermes, and Paragon Biosciences. Dr. Pawlowski reports no relevant financial relationships.
Ecopipam, in development for Tourette syndrome in children and adolescents, has shown in a randomized, controlled trial that, compared with placebo, it reduced tics and reduced the risk for some of the common side effects of other treatments, including weight gain.
Findings of the multicenter, double-blind, trial funded by the drug maker, Emalex Biosciences, were published online in Pediatrics. The trial was conducted at 68 sites in the United States, Canada, Germany, France, and Poland between May 2019 and September 2021.
Donald L. Gilbert, MD, MS, with the division of neurology at Cincinnati Children’s Hospital, and colleagues noted that all Food and Drug Administration–approved medications for Tourette syndrome are antipsychotics. The medications carry a risk of weight gain, electrocardiogram abnormalities, metabolic changes, and drug-induced movement disorders.
First-in-class medication ecopipam, targets the D1 dopamine receptor, while currently approved medications block the D2 receptor. It “may be a safe and effective treatment of Tourette syndrome with advantages over other currently approved therapeutic agents,” the authors wrote.
The study included 153 individuals at least 6 years old up to age 18 with a baseline Yale Global Tic Severity Score Total Tic Score of at least 20.
They were randomly assigned 1:1 to ecopipam or placebo.
Significant reduction in tic severity
Researchers saw a 30% reduction in the tic severity score from baseline to week 12 for the ecopipam group compared with the placebo group.
The data showed a least-squares mean difference of 3.44 (95% confidence interval [CI], 6.09-0.79, P = .01). Researchers also saw improvement in Clinical Global Impression of Tourette Syndrome Severity in the ecopipam group (P = .03).
Sara Pawlowski, MD, division chief for primary care mental health integration at University of Vermont Health Network and assistant professor of psychiatry, University of Vermont, Burlington, said in an interview that several things should be considered with this research.
One is that, though the results show a reduction in tics, the study lasted only 12 weeks and “tics can last a lifetime,” she noted.
“They also can ebb and flow with major life events, stressors, and various other variables. So, I wonder how the effects of improvement can be teased out from the natural ebb and flow of the condition in a 3-month window, which is a snapshot into the course of a known relapsing, remitting, lifetime, and chronically variable condition,” she said.
Headaches, insomnia among side effects
Weight gain was larger in the placebo group than in the ecopipam group: 17.1% in the ecopipam group and 20.3% of those who got a placebo had a weight gain of more than 7% over the study period.
The most common side effects of the study drug were headache (15.8%), insomnia (14.5%), fatigue (7.9%), and somnolence (7.9%).
A limitation of the study was lack of racial and ethnic diversity, as 93.5% of those in the placebo group and 86.8% in the ecopipam group were White.
Guidelines in North America and Europe agree that behavioral treatments should be the first-line therapy.
Dr. Pawlowski said that although effective medications are needed, she urges focusing on better access to nonmedication treatments “that work for children and adolescents” as children who start taking the medications early may take them for the rest of their lives.
Also, while the research didn’t find weight gain in the ecopipam group, the side effects they did find in the group, including headache and insomnia, “do impact a child’s life,” she noted.
“We also can’t be reassured that over the course of chronic treatment there wouldn’t be movement disorders or metabolic disorders that emerge. Those are side effects or disorders that can emerge surreptitiously over time, and more time than 12 weeks,” she said.
The study was funded by Emalex Biosciences. Dr. Gilbert has received consulting fees from Biogen and PTC therapeutics. Study coauthors disclosed ties with Emalex, Alkermes, and Paragon Biosciences. Dr. Pawlowski reports no relevant financial relationships.
Ecopipam, in development for Tourette syndrome in children and adolescents, has shown in a randomized, controlled trial that, compared with placebo, it reduced tics and reduced the risk for some of the common side effects of other treatments, including weight gain.
Findings of the multicenter, double-blind, trial funded by the drug maker, Emalex Biosciences, were published online in Pediatrics. The trial was conducted at 68 sites in the United States, Canada, Germany, France, and Poland between May 2019 and September 2021.
Donald L. Gilbert, MD, MS, with the division of neurology at Cincinnati Children’s Hospital, and colleagues noted that all Food and Drug Administration–approved medications for Tourette syndrome are antipsychotics. The medications carry a risk of weight gain, electrocardiogram abnormalities, metabolic changes, and drug-induced movement disorders.
First-in-class medication ecopipam, targets the D1 dopamine receptor, while currently approved medications block the D2 receptor. It “may be a safe and effective treatment of Tourette syndrome with advantages over other currently approved therapeutic agents,” the authors wrote.
The study included 153 individuals at least 6 years old up to age 18 with a baseline Yale Global Tic Severity Score Total Tic Score of at least 20.
They were randomly assigned 1:1 to ecopipam or placebo.
Significant reduction in tic severity
Researchers saw a 30% reduction in the tic severity score from baseline to week 12 for the ecopipam group compared with the placebo group.
The data showed a least-squares mean difference of 3.44 (95% confidence interval [CI], 6.09-0.79, P = .01). Researchers also saw improvement in Clinical Global Impression of Tourette Syndrome Severity in the ecopipam group (P = .03).
Sara Pawlowski, MD, division chief for primary care mental health integration at University of Vermont Health Network and assistant professor of psychiatry, University of Vermont, Burlington, said in an interview that several things should be considered with this research.
One is that, though the results show a reduction in tics, the study lasted only 12 weeks and “tics can last a lifetime,” she noted.
“They also can ebb and flow with major life events, stressors, and various other variables. So, I wonder how the effects of improvement can be teased out from the natural ebb and flow of the condition in a 3-month window, which is a snapshot into the course of a known relapsing, remitting, lifetime, and chronically variable condition,” she said.
Headaches, insomnia among side effects
Weight gain was larger in the placebo group than in the ecopipam group: 17.1% in the ecopipam group and 20.3% of those who got a placebo had a weight gain of more than 7% over the study period.
The most common side effects of the study drug were headache (15.8%), insomnia (14.5%), fatigue (7.9%), and somnolence (7.9%).
A limitation of the study was lack of racial and ethnic diversity, as 93.5% of those in the placebo group and 86.8% in the ecopipam group were White.
Guidelines in North America and Europe agree that behavioral treatments should be the first-line therapy.
Dr. Pawlowski said that although effective medications are needed, she urges focusing on better access to nonmedication treatments “that work for children and adolescents” as children who start taking the medications early may take them for the rest of their lives.
Also, while the research didn’t find weight gain in the ecopipam group, the side effects they did find in the group, including headache and insomnia, “do impact a child’s life,” she noted.
“We also can’t be reassured that over the course of chronic treatment there wouldn’t be movement disorders or metabolic disorders that emerge. Those are side effects or disorders that can emerge surreptitiously over time, and more time than 12 weeks,” she said.
The study was funded by Emalex Biosciences. Dr. Gilbert has received consulting fees from Biogen and PTC therapeutics. Study coauthors disclosed ties with Emalex, Alkermes, and Paragon Biosciences. Dr. Pawlowski reports no relevant financial relationships.
FROM PEDIATRICS
Hearing loss strongly tied to increased dementia risk
, new national data show. Investigators also found that even mild hearing loss was associated with increased dementia risk, although it was not statistically significant, and that hearing aid use was tied to a 32% decrease in dementia prevalence.
“Every 10-decibel increase in hearing loss was associated with 16% greater prevalence of dementia, such that prevalence of dementia in older adults with moderate or greater hearing loss was 61% higher than prevalence in those with normal hearing,” said lead investigator Alison Huang, PhD, senior research associate in epidemiology at Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health and core faculty in the Cochlear Center for Hearing and Public Health, Baltimore.
The findings were published online in JAMA.
Dose dependent effect
For their study, researchers analyzed data on 2,413 community-dwelling participants in the National Health and Aging Trends Study, a nationally representative, continuous panel study of U.S. Medicare beneficiaries aged 65 and older.
Data from the study was collected during in-home interviews, setting it apart from previous work that relied on data collected in a clinical setting, Dr. Huang said.
“This study was able to capture more vulnerable populations, such as the oldest old and older adults with disabilities, typically excluded from prior epidemiologic studies of the hearing loss–dementia association that use clinic-based data collection, which only captures people who have the ability and means to get to clinics,” Dr. Huang said.
Weighted hearing loss prevalence was 36.7% for mild and 29.8% for moderate to severe hearing loss, and weighted prevalence of dementia was 10.3%.
Those with moderate to severe hearing loss were 61% more likely to have dementia than were those with normal hearing (prevalence ratio, 1.61; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.09-2.38).
Dementia prevalence increased with increasing severity of hearing loss: Normal hearing: 6.19% (95% CI, 4.31-8.80); mild hearing loss: 8.93% (95% CI, 6.99-11.34); moderate to severe hearing loss: 16.52% (95% CI, 13.81-19.64). But only moderate to severe hearing loss showed a statistically significant association with dementia (P = .02).
Dementia prevalence increased 16% per 10-decibel increase in hearing loss (prevalence ratio 1.16; P < .001).
Among the 853 individuals in the study with moderate to severe hearing loss, those who used hearing aids (n = 414) had a 32% lower risk of dementia compared with those who didn’t use assisted devices (prevalence ratio, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.47-1.00). Similar data were published in JAMA Neurology, suggesting that hearing aids reduce dementia risk.
“With this study, we were able to refine our understanding of the strength of the hearing loss–dementia association in a study more representative of older adults in the United States,” said Dr. Huang.
Robust association
Commenting on the findings, Justin S. Golub, MD, associate professor in the department of otolaryngology–head and neck surgery at Columbia University, New York, said the study supports earlier research and suggests a “robust” association between hearing loss and dementia.
“The particular advantage of this study was that it was high quality and nationally representative,” Dr. Golub said. “It is also among a smaller set of studies that have shown hearing aid use to be associated with lower risk of dementia.”
Although not statistically significant, researchers did find increasing prevalence of dementia among people with only mild hearing loss, and clinicians should take note, said Dr. Golub, who was not involved with this study.
“We would expect the relationship between mild hearing loss and dementia to be weaker than severe hearing loss and dementia and, as a result, it might take more participants to show an association among the mild group,” Dr. Golub said.
“Even though this particular study did not specifically find a relationship between mild hearing loss and dementia, I would still recommend people to start treating their hearing loss when it is early,” Dr. Golub added.
The study was funded by the National Institute on Aging. Dr. Golub reports no relevant financial relationships. Full disclosures for study authors are included in the original article.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
, new national data show. Investigators also found that even mild hearing loss was associated with increased dementia risk, although it was not statistically significant, and that hearing aid use was tied to a 32% decrease in dementia prevalence.
“Every 10-decibel increase in hearing loss was associated with 16% greater prevalence of dementia, such that prevalence of dementia in older adults with moderate or greater hearing loss was 61% higher than prevalence in those with normal hearing,” said lead investigator Alison Huang, PhD, senior research associate in epidemiology at Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health and core faculty in the Cochlear Center for Hearing and Public Health, Baltimore.
The findings were published online in JAMA.
Dose dependent effect
For their study, researchers analyzed data on 2,413 community-dwelling participants in the National Health and Aging Trends Study, a nationally representative, continuous panel study of U.S. Medicare beneficiaries aged 65 and older.
Data from the study was collected during in-home interviews, setting it apart from previous work that relied on data collected in a clinical setting, Dr. Huang said.
“This study was able to capture more vulnerable populations, such as the oldest old and older adults with disabilities, typically excluded from prior epidemiologic studies of the hearing loss–dementia association that use clinic-based data collection, which only captures people who have the ability and means to get to clinics,” Dr. Huang said.
Weighted hearing loss prevalence was 36.7% for mild and 29.8% for moderate to severe hearing loss, and weighted prevalence of dementia was 10.3%.
Those with moderate to severe hearing loss were 61% more likely to have dementia than were those with normal hearing (prevalence ratio, 1.61; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.09-2.38).
Dementia prevalence increased with increasing severity of hearing loss: Normal hearing: 6.19% (95% CI, 4.31-8.80); mild hearing loss: 8.93% (95% CI, 6.99-11.34); moderate to severe hearing loss: 16.52% (95% CI, 13.81-19.64). But only moderate to severe hearing loss showed a statistically significant association with dementia (P = .02).
Dementia prevalence increased 16% per 10-decibel increase in hearing loss (prevalence ratio 1.16; P < .001).
Among the 853 individuals in the study with moderate to severe hearing loss, those who used hearing aids (n = 414) had a 32% lower risk of dementia compared with those who didn’t use assisted devices (prevalence ratio, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.47-1.00). Similar data were published in JAMA Neurology, suggesting that hearing aids reduce dementia risk.
“With this study, we were able to refine our understanding of the strength of the hearing loss–dementia association in a study more representative of older adults in the United States,” said Dr. Huang.
Robust association
Commenting on the findings, Justin S. Golub, MD, associate professor in the department of otolaryngology–head and neck surgery at Columbia University, New York, said the study supports earlier research and suggests a “robust” association between hearing loss and dementia.
“The particular advantage of this study was that it was high quality and nationally representative,” Dr. Golub said. “It is also among a smaller set of studies that have shown hearing aid use to be associated with lower risk of dementia.”
Although not statistically significant, researchers did find increasing prevalence of dementia among people with only mild hearing loss, and clinicians should take note, said Dr. Golub, who was not involved with this study.
“We would expect the relationship between mild hearing loss and dementia to be weaker than severe hearing loss and dementia and, as a result, it might take more participants to show an association among the mild group,” Dr. Golub said.
“Even though this particular study did not specifically find a relationship between mild hearing loss and dementia, I would still recommend people to start treating their hearing loss when it is early,” Dr. Golub added.
The study was funded by the National Institute on Aging. Dr. Golub reports no relevant financial relationships. Full disclosures for study authors are included in the original article.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
, new national data show. Investigators also found that even mild hearing loss was associated with increased dementia risk, although it was not statistically significant, and that hearing aid use was tied to a 32% decrease in dementia prevalence.
“Every 10-decibel increase in hearing loss was associated with 16% greater prevalence of dementia, such that prevalence of dementia in older adults with moderate or greater hearing loss was 61% higher than prevalence in those with normal hearing,” said lead investigator Alison Huang, PhD, senior research associate in epidemiology at Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health and core faculty in the Cochlear Center for Hearing and Public Health, Baltimore.
The findings were published online in JAMA.
Dose dependent effect
For their study, researchers analyzed data on 2,413 community-dwelling participants in the National Health and Aging Trends Study, a nationally representative, continuous panel study of U.S. Medicare beneficiaries aged 65 and older.
Data from the study was collected during in-home interviews, setting it apart from previous work that relied on data collected in a clinical setting, Dr. Huang said.
“This study was able to capture more vulnerable populations, such as the oldest old and older adults with disabilities, typically excluded from prior epidemiologic studies of the hearing loss–dementia association that use clinic-based data collection, which only captures people who have the ability and means to get to clinics,” Dr. Huang said.
Weighted hearing loss prevalence was 36.7% for mild and 29.8% for moderate to severe hearing loss, and weighted prevalence of dementia was 10.3%.
Those with moderate to severe hearing loss were 61% more likely to have dementia than were those with normal hearing (prevalence ratio, 1.61; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.09-2.38).
Dementia prevalence increased with increasing severity of hearing loss: Normal hearing: 6.19% (95% CI, 4.31-8.80); mild hearing loss: 8.93% (95% CI, 6.99-11.34); moderate to severe hearing loss: 16.52% (95% CI, 13.81-19.64). But only moderate to severe hearing loss showed a statistically significant association with dementia (P = .02).
Dementia prevalence increased 16% per 10-decibel increase in hearing loss (prevalence ratio 1.16; P < .001).
Among the 853 individuals in the study with moderate to severe hearing loss, those who used hearing aids (n = 414) had a 32% lower risk of dementia compared with those who didn’t use assisted devices (prevalence ratio, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.47-1.00). Similar data were published in JAMA Neurology, suggesting that hearing aids reduce dementia risk.
“With this study, we were able to refine our understanding of the strength of the hearing loss–dementia association in a study more representative of older adults in the United States,” said Dr. Huang.
Robust association
Commenting on the findings, Justin S. Golub, MD, associate professor in the department of otolaryngology–head and neck surgery at Columbia University, New York, said the study supports earlier research and suggests a “robust” association between hearing loss and dementia.
“The particular advantage of this study was that it was high quality and nationally representative,” Dr. Golub said. “It is also among a smaller set of studies that have shown hearing aid use to be associated with lower risk of dementia.”
Although not statistically significant, researchers did find increasing prevalence of dementia among people with only mild hearing loss, and clinicians should take note, said Dr. Golub, who was not involved with this study.
“We would expect the relationship between mild hearing loss and dementia to be weaker than severe hearing loss and dementia and, as a result, it might take more participants to show an association among the mild group,” Dr. Golub said.
“Even though this particular study did not specifically find a relationship between mild hearing loss and dementia, I would still recommend people to start treating their hearing loss when it is early,” Dr. Golub added.
The study was funded by the National Institute on Aging. Dr. Golub reports no relevant financial relationships. Full disclosures for study authors are included in the original article.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
Can 6 minutes of intense cycling put the brakes on Alzheimer’s?
new research suggests.
In a small study of healthy adults, 6 minutes of high-intensity cycling increased circulating levels of brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF) to a significantly greater extent than prolonged light cycling or fasting.
However, the data do not suggest that 6 minutes of high-intensity exercise “wards off dementia,” cautioned lead investigator Travis Gibbons, MSc, PhD candidate in environmental physiology at the University of Otago (New Zealand), Dunedin, and now postdoctoral fellow at the University of British Columbia – Okanagan, Kelowna.
“Like all science, this is just a small piece that supports a potential mechanistic role for how exercise might improve brain health,” Dr. Gibbons told this news organization.
The findings were published online in the Journal of Physiology.
Targeting BDNF
Both intermittent fasting and exercise have previously been shown to have potent neuroprotective effects; and an acute upregulation of BDNF appears to be a common mechanistic link.
To tease apart the influence of fasting and exercise on BDNF production, Dr. Gibbons and colleagues studied 12 aerobically fit, healthy men (n = 6) and women (n = 6) aged 20-40 years.
In a study that employed a repeated-measures crossover design, they assessed circulating BDNF levels after a 20-hour fast, prolonged (90-min) light cycling, short (6-min) high-intensity cycling, and combined fasting and exercise.
Six minutes of high-intensity exercise appeared to be the most efficient way to increase BDNF.
Fasting for 20 hours led to a ninefold increase in ketone body delivery to the brain but had no effect on any metric of BDNF in peripheral circulation at rest or during exercise.
Six minutes of high-intensity exercise increased every metric of circulating BDNF four to five times more than prolonged low-intensity exercise.
In addition, the increase in plasma-derived BDNF correlated with a sixfold increase in circulating lactate irrespective of feeding or fasting state.
Lactate delivery?
“My leading theory is that, during and following intense exercise, lactate produced by muscles is delivered and consumed by the brain,” Dr. Gibbons noted.
“It takes high-intensity exercise to provoke this ‘cerebral substrate switch’ from glucose to lactate. Critically, this cerebral substrate switch has been shown to contribute to the early processes that upregulate BDNF production in the brain,” he said.
However, “Whether this translates to ‘warding off dementia’ is not clear,” Dr. Gibbons added.
The study also suggests that increases in plasma volume and platelet concentration appear to play a role in concentrating BDNF in the circulation during exercise.
The investigators note that BDNF and other neurotrophic-based pharmaceutical therapies have shown “great promise” in slowing and even arresting neurodegenerative processes in animals, but attempts to harness the protective power of BDNF in human neurodegeneration have thus far failed.
“Whether episodically upregulating BDNF production with intense exercise is an effective strategy to curb age-related cognitive decline in humans is unknown, but animal models indicate that it is and that BDNF plays a primary role,” the researchers write.
Funding for the study was provided by the Healthcare Otago Charitable Trust. The investigators have reported no relevant financial relationships.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
new research suggests.
In a small study of healthy adults, 6 minutes of high-intensity cycling increased circulating levels of brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF) to a significantly greater extent than prolonged light cycling or fasting.
However, the data do not suggest that 6 minutes of high-intensity exercise “wards off dementia,” cautioned lead investigator Travis Gibbons, MSc, PhD candidate in environmental physiology at the University of Otago (New Zealand), Dunedin, and now postdoctoral fellow at the University of British Columbia – Okanagan, Kelowna.
“Like all science, this is just a small piece that supports a potential mechanistic role for how exercise might improve brain health,” Dr. Gibbons told this news organization.
The findings were published online in the Journal of Physiology.
Targeting BDNF
Both intermittent fasting and exercise have previously been shown to have potent neuroprotective effects; and an acute upregulation of BDNF appears to be a common mechanistic link.
To tease apart the influence of fasting and exercise on BDNF production, Dr. Gibbons and colleagues studied 12 aerobically fit, healthy men (n = 6) and women (n = 6) aged 20-40 years.
In a study that employed a repeated-measures crossover design, they assessed circulating BDNF levels after a 20-hour fast, prolonged (90-min) light cycling, short (6-min) high-intensity cycling, and combined fasting and exercise.
Six minutes of high-intensity exercise appeared to be the most efficient way to increase BDNF.
Fasting for 20 hours led to a ninefold increase in ketone body delivery to the brain but had no effect on any metric of BDNF in peripheral circulation at rest or during exercise.
Six minutes of high-intensity exercise increased every metric of circulating BDNF four to five times more than prolonged low-intensity exercise.
In addition, the increase in plasma-derived BDNF correlated with a sixfold increase in circulating lactate irrespective of feeding or fasting state.
Lactate delivery?
“My leading theory is that, during and following intense exercise, lactate produced by muscles is delivered and consumed by the brain,” Dr. Gibbons noted.
“It takes high-intensity exercise to provoke this ‘cerebral substrate switch’ from glucose to lactate. Critically, this cerebral substrate switch has been shown to contribute to the early processes that upregulate BDNF production in the brain,” he said.
However, “Whether this translates to ‘warding off dementia’ is not clear,” Dr. Gibbons added.
The study also suggests that increases in plasma volume and platelet concentration appear to play a role in concentrating BDNF in the circulation during exercise.
The investigators note that BDNF and other neurotrophic-based pharmaceutical therapies have shown “great promise” in slowing and even arresting neurodegenerative processes in animals, but attempts to harness the protective power of BDNF in human neurodegeneration have thus far failed.
“Whether episodically upregulating BDNF production with intense exercise is an effective strategy to curb age-related cognitive decline in humans is unknown, but animal models indicate that it is and that BDNF plays a primary role,” the researchers write.
Funding for the study was provided by the Healthcare Otago Charitable Trust. The investigators have reported no relevant financial relationships.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
new research suggests.
In a small study of healthy adults, 6 minutes of high-intensity cycling increased circulating levels of brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF) to a significantly greater extent than prolonged light cycling or fasting.
However, the data do not suggest that 6 minutes of high-intensity exercise “wards off dementia,” cautioned lead investigator Travis Gibbons, MSc, PhD candidate in environmental physiology at the University of Otago (New Zealand), Dunedin, and now postdoctoral fellow at the University of British Columbia – Okanagan, Kelowna.
“Like all science, this is just a small piece that supports a potential mechanistic role for how exercise might improve brain health,” Dr. Gibbons told this news organization.
The findings were published online in the Journal of Physiology.
Targeting BDNF
Both intermittent fasting and exercise have previously been shown to have potent neuroprotective effects; and an acute upregulation of BDNF appears to be a common mechanistic link.
To tease apart the influence of fasting and exercise on BDNF production, Dr. Gibbons and colleagues studied 12 aerobically fit, healthy men (n = 6) and women (n = 6) aged 20-40 years.
In a study that employed a repeated-measures crossover design, they assessed circulating BDNF levels after a 20-hour fast, prolonged (90-min) light cycling, short (6-min) high-intensity cycling, and combined fasting and exercise.
Six minutes of high-intensity exercise appeared to be the most efficient way to increase BDNF.
Fasting for 20 hours led to a ninefold increase in ketone body delivery to the brain but had no effect on any metric of BDNF in peripheral circulation at rest or during exercise.
Six minutes of high-intensity exercise increased every metric of circulating BDNF four to five times more than prolonged low-intensity exercise.
In addition, the increase in plasma-derived BDNF correlated with a sixfold increase in circulating lactate irrespective of feeding or fasting state.
Lactate delivery?
“My leading theory is that, during and following intense exercise, lactate produced by muscles is delivered and consumed by the brain,” Dr. Gibbons noted.
“It takes high-intensity exercise to provoke this ‘cerebral substrate switch’ from glucose to lactate. Critically, this cerebral substrate switch has been shown to contribute to the early processes that upregulate BDNF production in the brain,” he said.
However, “Whether this translates to ‘warding off dementia’ is not clear,” Dr. Gibbons added.
The study also suggests that increases in plasma volume and platelet concentration appear to play a role in concentrating BDNF in the circulation during exercise.
The investigators note that BDNF and other neurotrophic-based pharmaceutical therapies have shown “great promise” in slowing and even arresting neurodegenerative processes in animals, but attempts to harness the protective power of BDNF in human neurodegeneration have thus far failed.
“Whether episodically upregulating BDNF production with intense exercise is an effective strategy to curb age-related cognitive decline in humans is unknown, but animal models indicate that it is and that BDNF plays a primary role,” the researchers write.
Funding for the study was provided by the Healthcare Otago Charitable Trust. The investigators have reported no relevant financial relationships.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
FROM THE JOURNAL OF PHYSIOLOGY
Singer is paralyzed after delay in care; hospital must pay
Delay in treatment will cost hospital millions
according to a report on WFAA.com, among other news sites.
On March 21, 2019, Judy “Jessie” Adams, then part of a singing-songwriting duo with her husband, Richard, went to Premier Interventional Pain Management, in Flower Mound, Tex., prior to the couple’s drive to Ohio for a funeral. At Premier, Jesse received an epidural steroid injection (ESI) that she hoped would ease her back pain during the long drive.
Instead, the injection ended up increasing her pain.
“He [the pain physician] gave me the shot, but I couldn’t feel my legs. They were tingling, but I couldn’t feel them,” Mrs. Adams explained. “The pain was so bad in my back.” In their suit, Adams and her husband alleged that the doctor had probably “nicked a blood vessel during the ESI procedure, causing Jessie to hemorrhage.” (The couple’s suit against the doctor was settled prior to trial.)
Mrs. Adams remained under observation at the pain facility for about 1½ hours, at which point she was taken by ambulance to nearby Texas Health Presbyterian Hospital. There, in the emergency department, staff ordered a “STAT MRI” in preparation for an emergency laminectomy.
For reasons that remain murky, the MRI wasn’t performed for 1 hour and 37 minutes. The emergency laminectomy itself wasn’t started until more than 5 hours after Adams had been admitted to the ED. This was a direct violation of hospital protocol, which required that emergency surgeries be performed within 1 hour of admittance in the first available surgical suite. (At trial, Mrs. Adams’s attorneys from Lyons & Simmons offered evidence that a suite became available 49 minutes after Adams had arrived at the ED.)
During the wait, Mrs. Adams continued to experience excruciating pain. “I kept screaming: ‘Help me,’ ” she recalled. At trial, her attorneys argued that the hospital’s delay in addressing her spinal emergency led directly to her current paralysis, which keeps her confined to a wheelchair and renders her incontinent.
The hospital disagreed. In court, it maintained that Mrs. Adams was already paralyzed when she arrived at the ED and that there was no delay in care.
The jury saw things differently, however. Siding with the plaintiffs, it awarded Mrs. Adams and her husband $10.1 million, including $500,000 for Mr. Adams’s loss of future earnings and $1 million for his “loss of consortium” with his wife.
Their music career now effectively over, Mr. Adams spends most of his time taking care of Mrs. Adams.
“Music was our lifeblood for so many years, and he can’t do it anymore,” Mrs. Adams said. “He goes upstairs to play his guitar and write, and suddenly I need him to come and cath me. I just feel like I’m going to wake up from this bad dream, but it’s the same routine.”
Two doctors are absolved in woman’s sudden death
In a 3-2 decision in December 2022, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court ruled that the state’s 2-year statute of limitations in wrongful-death cases applies even in cases in which plaintiffs fail to identify the cause of death in a timely manner, as a report in the Claims Journal indicates.
The decision stems from a lawsuit filed by Linda Reibenstein on behalf of her mother, Mary Ann Whitman, who died in late April 2010 from a ruptured aortic aneurysm.
On April 12, 2010, Ms. Whitman visited Patrick D. Conaboy, MD, a Scranton family physician, complaining of a persistent cough, fever, and lower-back pain. Following an initial examination, Dr. Conaboy ordered an aortic duplex ultrasound scan and a CT scan of the patient’s abdomen.
The ultrasound was performed by radiologist Charles Barax, MD, who reviewed both scans. He identified a “poorly visualized aortic aneurysm.” At this point, Dr. Conaboy referred Ms. Whitman to a vascular surgeon. But before this visit could take place, Whitman’s aneurysm ruptured, killing her. This was listed as the medical cause of death on the patient’s death certificate.
In April 2011, Ms. Reibenstein filed a claim against Dr. Barax, alleging that he had failed to gauge the severity of her mother’s condition. Ms. Reibenstein’s attorney wasn’t able to question Dr. Barax on the record until well after the state’s 2-year statute of limitations had elapsed. When he did testify, Dr. Barax explained that the scans’ image quality prevented him from determining whether Whitman’s aneurysm was rupturing or simply bleeding. Despite this, he insisted that he had warned Dr. Conaboy of the potential for Ms. Whitman’s aneurysm to rupture.
In March 2016, nearly 6 years after her mother’s death, Ms. Reibenstein filed a new lawsuit, this one against Dr. Conaboy, whom she alleged had failed to properly treat her mother’s condition. Dr. Conaboy, in turn, asked the court for summary judgment – that is, a judgment in his favor without a full trial – arguing that the state’s window for filing a wrongful-death claim had long since closed. For their part, Ms. Reibenstein and her attorney argued that the state’s 2-year statute of limitations didn’t start until the plaintiff had discovered the cause of her mother’s death.
Initially refusing to dismiss the case, a lower court reconsidered Dr. Conaboy’s motion for summary judgment and ruled that Ms. Reibenstein had failed to present any evidence of “affirmative misrepresentation or fraudulent concealment.” In other words, in the absence of any willful attempt on the part of the defendant to hide the legal cause of death, which includes “acts, omissions, or events having some causative connection with the death,” the statute of limitations remained in effect, and the defendant’s motion was thereby granted.
Continuing the legal seesaw, a state appeals court reversed the lower-court ruling. Noting that the Pennsylvania malpractice statute was ambiguous, the court argued that it should be interpreted in a way that protects plaintiffs who seek “fair compensation” but encounter willfully erected obstacles in pursuit of their claim.
Dr. Conaboy then took his case to the state’s highest court. In its majority decision, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court staked out a narrow definition of cause of death – one based on the death certificate – and ruled that only willful fraud in that document would constitute the necessary condition for halting the claim’s clock. Furthermore, the high court said, when lawmakers adopted the Medical Care Availability and Reduction of Error Act in 2002, they did so with no guarantee “that all of the information necessary to sustain a claim will be gathered in the limitations period.”
Similarly, the court ruled, “at some point the clock must run out, lest health care providers remain subject to liability exposure indefinitely, with the prospect of a trial marred by the death or diminished memory of material witnesses or the loss of critical evidence.”
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
Delay in treatment will cost hospital millions
according to a report on WFAA.com, among other news sites.
On March 21, 2019, Judy “Jessie” Adams, then part of a singing-songwriting duo with her husband, Richard, went to Premier Interventional Pain Management, in Flower Mound, Tex., prior to the couple’s drive to Ohio for a funeral. At Premier, Jesse received an epidural steroid injection (ESI) that she hoped would ease her back pain during the long drive.
Instead, the injection ended up increasing her pain.
“He [the pain physician] gave me the shot, but I couldn’t feel my legs. They were tingling, but I couldn’t feel them,” Mrs. Adams explained. “The pain was so bad in my back.” In their suit, Adams and her husband alleged that the doctor had probably “nicked a blood vessel during the ESI procedure, causing Jessie to hemorrhage.” (The couple’s suit against the doctor was settled prior to trial.)
Mrs. Adams remained under observation at the pain facility for about 1½ hours, at which point she was taken by ambulance to nearby Texas Health Presbyterian Hospital. There, in the emergency department, staff ordered a “STAT MRI” in preparation for an emergency laminectomy.
For reasons that remain murky, the MRI wasn’t performed for 1 hour and 37 minutes. The emergency laminectomy itself wasn’t started until more than 5 hours after Adams had been admitted to the ED. This was a direct violation of hospital protocol, which required that emergency surgeries be performed within 1 hour of admittance in the first available surgical suite. (At trial, Mrs. Adams’s attorneys from Lyons & Simmons offered evidence that a suite became available 49 minutes after Adams had arrived at the ED.)
During the wait, Mrs. Adams continued to experience excruciating pain. “I kept screaming: ‘Help me,’ ” she recalled. At trial, her attorneys argued that the hospital’s delay in addressing her spinal emergency led directly to her current paralysis, which keeps her confined to a wheelchair and renders her incontinent.
The hospital disagreed. In court, it maintained that Mrs. Adams was already paralyzed when she arrived at the ED and that there was no delay in care.
The jury saw things differently, however. Siding with the plaintiffs, it awarded Mrs. Adams and her husband $10.1 million, including $500,000 for Mr. Adams’s loss of future earnings and $1 million for his “loss of consortium” with his wife.
Their music career now effectively over, Mr. Adams spends most of his time taking care of Mrs. Adams.
“Music was our lifeblood for so many years, and he can’t do it anymore,” Mrs. Adams said. “He goes upstairs to play his guitar and write, and suddenly I need him to come and cath me. I just feel like I’m going to wake up from this bad dream, but it’s the same routine.”
Two doctors are absolved in woman’s sudden death
In a 3-2 decision in December 2022, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court ruled that the state’s 2-year statute of limitations in wrongful-death cases applies even in cases in which plaintiffs fail to identify the cause of death in a timely manner, as a report in the Claims Journal indicates.
The decision stems from a lawsuit filed by Linda Reibenstein on behalf of her mother, Mary Ann Whitman, who died in late April 2010 from a ruptured aortic aneurysm.
On April 12, 2010, Ms. Whitman visited Patrick D. Conaboy, MD, a Scranton family physician, complaining of a persistent cough, fever, and lower-back pain. Following an initial examination, Dr. Conaboy ordered an aortic duplex ultrasound scan and a CT scan of the patient’s abdomen.
The ultrasound was performed by radiologist Charles Barax, MD, who reviewed both scans. He identified a “poorly visualized aortic aneurysm.” At this point, Dr. Conaboy referred Ms. Whitman to a vascular surgeon. But before this visit could take place, Whitman’s aneurysm ruptured, killing her. This was listed as the medical cause of death on the patient’s death certificate.
In April 2011, Ms. Reibenstein filed a claim against Dr. Barax, alleging that he had failed to gauge the severity of her mother’s condition. Ms. Reibenstein’s attorney wasn’t able to question Dr. Barax on the record until well after the state’s 2-year statute of limitations had elapsed. When he did testify, Dr. Barax explained that the scans’ image quality prevented him from determining whether Whitman’s aneurysm was rupturing or simply bleeding. Despite this, he insisted that he had warned Dr. Conaboy of the potential for Ms. Whitman’s aneurysm to rupture.
In March 2016, nearly 6 years after her mother’s death, Ms. Reibenstein filed a new lawsuit, this one against Dr. Conaboy, whom she alleged had failed to properly treat her mother’s condition. Dr. Conaboy, in turn, asked the court for summary judgment – that is, a judgment in his favor without a full trial – arguing that the state’s window for filing a wrongful-death claim had long since closed. For their part, Ms. Reibenstein and her attorney argued that the state’s 2-year statute of limitations didn’t start until the plaintiff had discovered the cause of her mother’s death.
Initially refusing to dismiss the case, a lower court reconsidered Dr. Conaboy’s motion for summary judgment and ruled that Ms. Reibenstein had failed to present any evidence of “affirmative misrepresentation or fraudulent concealment.” In other words, in the absence of any willful attempt on the part of the defendant to hide the legal cause of death, which includes “acts, omissions, or events having some causative connection with the death,” the statute of limitations remained in effect, and the defendant’s motion was thereby granted.
Continuing the legal seesaw, a state appeals court reversed the lower-court ruling. Noting that the Pennsylvania malpractice statute was ambiguous, the court argued that it should be interpreted in a way that protects plaintiffs who seek “fair compensation” but encounter willfully erected obstacles in pursuit of their claim.
Dr. Conaboy then took his case to the state’s highest court. In its majority decision, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court staked out a narrow definition of cause of death – one based on the death certificate – and ruled that only willful fraud in that document would constitute the necessary condition for halting the claim’s clock. Furthermore, the high court said, when lawmakers adopted the Medical Care Availability and Reduction of Error Act in 2002, they did so with no guarantee “that all of the information necessary to sustain a claim will be gathered in the limitations period.”
Similarly, the court ruled, “at some point the clock must run out, lest health care providers remain subject to liability exposure indefinitely, with the prospect of a trial marred by the death or diminished memory of material witnesses or the loss of critical evidence.”
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
Delay in treatment will cost hospital millions
according to a report on WFAA.com, among other news sites.
On March 21, 2019, Judy “Jessie” Adams, then part of a singing-songwriting duo with her husband, Richard, went to Premier Interventional Pain Management, in Flower Mound, Tex., prior to the couple’s drive to Ohio for a funeral. At Premier, Jesse received an epidural steroid injection (ESI) that she hoped would ease her back pain during the long drive.
Instead, the injection ended up increasing her pain.
“He [the pain physician] gave me the shot, but I couldn’t feel my legs. They were tingling, but I couldn’t feel them,” Mrs. Adams explained. “The pain was so bad in my back.” In their suit, Adams and her husband alleged that the doctor had probably “nicked a blood vessel during the ESI procedure, causing Jessie to hemorrhage.” (The couple’s suit against the doctor was settled prior to trial.)
Mrs. Adams remained under observation at the pain facility for about 1½ hours, at which point she was taken by ambulance to nearby Texas Health Presbyterian Hospital. There, in the emergency department, staff ordered a “STAT MRI” in preparation for an emergency laminectomy.
For reasons that remain murky, the MRI wasn’t performed for 1 hour and 37 minutes. The emergency laminectomy itself wasn’t started until more than 5 hours after Adams had been admitted to the ED. This was a direct violation of hospital protocol, which required that emergency surgeries be performed within 1 hour of admittance in the first available surgical suite. (At trial, Mrs. Adams’s attorneys from Lyons & Simmons offered evidence that a suite became available 49 minutes after Adams had arrived at the ED.)
During the wait, Mrs. Adams continued to experience excruciating pain. “I kept screaming: ‘Help me,’ ” she recalled. At trial, her attorneys argued that the hospital’s delay in addressing her spinal emergency led directly to her current paralysis, which keeps her confined to a wheelchair and renders her incontinent.
The hospital disagreed. In court, it maintained that Mrs. Adams was already paralyzed when she arrived at the ED and that there was no delay in care.
The jury saw things differently, however. Siding with the plaintiffs, it awarded Mrs. Adams and her husband $10.1 million, including $500,000 for Mr. Adams’s loss of future earnings and $1 million for his “loss of consortium” with his wife.
Their music career now effectively over, Mr. Adams spends most of his time taking care of Mrs. Adams.
“Music was our lifeblood for so many years, and he can’t do it anymore,” Mrs. Adams said. “He goes upstairs to play his guitar and write, and suddenly I need him to come and cath me. I just feel like I’m going to wake up from this bad dream, but it’s the same routine.”
Two doctors are absolved in woman’s sudden death
In a 3-2 decision in December 2022, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court ruled that the state’s 2-year statute of limitations in wrongful-death cases applies even in cases in which plaintiffs fail to identify the cause of death in a timely manner, as a report in the Claims Journal indicates.
The decision stems from a lawsuit filed by Linda Reibenstein on behalf of her mother, Mary Ann Whitman, who died in late April 2010 from a ruptured aortic aneurysm.
On April 12, 2010, Ms. Whitman visited Patrick D. Conaboy, MD, a Scranton family physician, complaining of a persistent cough, fever, and lower-back pain. Following an initial examination, Dr. Conaboy ordered an aortic duplex ultrasound scan and a CT scan of the patient’s abdomen.
The ultrasound was performed by radiologist Charles Barax, MD, who reviewed both scans. He identified a “poorly visualized aortic aneurysm.” At this point, Dr. Conaboy referred Ms. Whitman to a vascular surgeon. But before this visit could take place, Whitman’s aneurysm ruptured, killing her. This was listed as the medical cause of death on the patient’s death certificate.
In April 2011, Ms. Reibenstein filed a claim against Dr. Barax, alleging that he had failed to gauge the severity of her mother’s condition. Ms. Reibenstein’s attorney wasn’t able to question Dr. Barax on the record until well after the state’s 2-year statute of limitations had elapsed. When he did testify, Dr. Barax explained that the scans’ image quality prevented him from determining whether Whitman’s aneurysm was rupturing or simply bleeding. Despite this, he insisted that he had warned Dr. Conaboy of the potential for Ms. Whitman’s aneurysm to rupture.
In March 2016, nearly 6 years after her mother’s death, Ms. Reibenstein filed a new lawsuit, this one against Dr. Conaboy, whom she alleged had failed to properly treat her mother’s condition. Dr. Conaboy, in turn, asked the court for summary judgment – that is, a judgment in his favor without a full trial – arguing that the state’s window for filing a wrongful-death claim had long since closed. For their part, Ms. Reibenstein and her attorney argued that the state’s 2-year statute of limitations didn’t start until the plaintiff had discovered the cause of her mother’s death.
Initially refusing to dismiss the case, a lower court reconsidered Dr. Conaboy’s motion for summary judgment and ruled that Ms. Reibenstein had failed to present any evidence of “affirmative misrepresentation or fraudulent concealment.” In other words, in the absence of any willful attempt on the part of the defendant to hide the legal cause of death, which includes “acts, omissions, or events having some causative connection with the death,” the statute of limitations remained in effect, and the defendant’s motion was thereby granted.
Continuing the legal seesaw, a state appeals court reversed the lower-court ruling. Noting that the Pennsylvania malpractice statute was ambiguous, the court argued that it should be interpreted in a way that protects plaintiffs who seek “fair compensation” but encounter willfully erected obstacles in pursuit of their claim.
Dr. Conaboy then took his case to the state’s highest court. In its majority decision, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court staked out a narrow definition of cause of death – one based on the death certificate – and ruled that only willful fraud in that document would constitute the necessary condition for halting the claim’s clock. Furthermore, the high court said, when lawmakers adopted the Medical Care Availability and Reduction of Error Act in 2002, they did so with no guarantee “that all of the information necessary to sustain a claim will be gathered in the limitations period.”
Similarly, the court ruled, “at some point the clock must run out, lest health care providers remain subject to liability exposure indefinitely, with the prospect of a trial marred by the death or diminished memory of material witnesses or the loss of critical evidence.”
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
Magnesium sulfate shown to reduce risk of cerebral palsy in premature babies
A program to increase the use of magnesium sulfate to reduce the risk of cerebral palsy is effective, say researchers. Giving magnesium sulfate to women at risk of premature birth can reduce the risk of a child having cerebral palsy by a third, and costs just £1 per dose.
However, the authors of the new observational study, published in Archives of Disease in Childhood – Fetal and Neonatal Edition, pointed out that in 2017 only around two-thirds (64%) of eligible women were being given magnesium sulfate in England, Scotland, and Wales, with “wide regional variations.”
To address this, in 2014 the PReCePT (Preventing Cerebral Palsy in Pre Term labor) quality improvement toolkit was developed by both parents and staff with the aim of supporting all maternity units in England to improve maternity staff awareness and increase the use of magnesium sulfate in mothers at risk of giving birth at 30 weeks’ gestation or under. PReCePT provided practical tools and training to support hospital staff to give magnesium sulfate to eligible mothers.
The pilot study in 2015, which involved five maternity units, found an increase in uptake from 21% to 88% associated with the PReCePT approach. Subsequently, in 2018, NHS England funded the National PReCePT Programme, which scaled up the intervention for national roll-out and provided the PReCePT quality toolkit – which includes preterm labor proforma, staff training presentations, parent information leaflet, posters for the unit, and a learning log – to each maternity unit.
Improvement ‘over and above’ expectation
For the first evaluation of a U.K. universally implemented national perinatal quality improvement program to increase administration of an evidence-based drug, researchers, led by University of Bristol, England, set out to evaluate the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the National PReCePT Programme in increasing use of magnesium sulfate in preterm births.
Using data from the U.K. National Neonatal Research Database for the year before and the year after PReCePT was implemented in maternity units in England, the researchers performed a before-and-after study that involved 137 maternity units within NHS England. Participants were babies born at 30 weeks’ gestation or under admitted to neonatal units in England, and the main outcome measure was magnesium sulfate uptake before and after the implementation of the National PReCePT Programme. In addition, implementation and lifetime costs were estimated.
During the first year, post implementation of the program, uptake increased by an average of 6.3 percentage points (to 83.1%) across all maternity units in England, which the authors explained was “over and above” the increase that would be expected over time as the practice spread organically. The researchers also found that after adjusting for variations in when maternity units started the program, the increase in use of magnesium sulfate was 9.5 percentage points. “By May 2020, on average 86.4% of eligible mothers were receiving magnesium sulfate,” they said.
Professor John Macleod, NIHR ARC West Director, professor in clinical epidemiology and primary care, University of Bristol, and principal investigator of the evaluation, said: “Our in-depth analysis has been able to demonstrate that the PReCePT program is both effective and cost-effective. The program has increased uptake of magnesium sulfate, which we know is a cost-effective medicine to prevent cerebral palsy, much more quickly than we could have otherwise expected.”
From a societal and lifetime perspective, the health gains and cost savings associated with the National PReCePT Programme generated a “net monetary benefit of £866 per preterm baby,” with the probability of the program being cost-effective being “greater than 95%,” the authors highlighted.
The researchers also estimated that the program’s first year could be associated with a lifetime saving to society of £3 million – which accounts for the costs of the program, of administering the treatment, of cerebral palsy to society over a lifetime, and the associated health gains of avoiding cases. “This is across all the extra babies the program helped get access to the treatment during the first year,” they said.
The authors highlighted that in the five pilot sites, the improved use of magnesium sulfate has been “sustained over the years” since PReCePT was implemented. As the program costs were mostly in the first year of implementation, longer-term national analysis may show that PReCePT is “even more cost-effective over a longer period,” they postulated.
Accelerate uptake
Uptake of new evidence or guidelines is often “slow” due to practical barriers, lack of knowledge, and need for behavior change, and can “take decades to become embedded” in perinatal clinical practice, expressed the authors, which in turn comes at a “high clinical and economic cost.”
Karen Luyt, professor in neonatal medicine, University of Bristol, said: “The PReCePT national quality improvement program demonstrates that a collaborative and coordinated perinatal implementation program supporting every hospital in England can accelerate the uptake of new evidence-based treatments into routine practice, enabling equitable health benefits to babies and ultimately reductions in lifetime societal costs.”
The authors said the PReCePT model “may serve as a blueprint for future interventions to improve perinatal care.”
Professor Lucy Chappell, chief executive officer of the National Institute for Health and Care Research, said: “This important study shows the impact of taking a promising intervention that had been shown to work in a research setting and scaling it up across the country. Giving magnesium sulfate to prevent cerebral palsy in premature babies is a simple, inexpensive intervention that can make such a difference to families and the health service.”
Prof. Macleod added: “We are pleased to have played a part in helping get this cheap yet effective treatment to more babies.”
This work was jointly funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research Applied Research Collaboration West and the AHSN Network funded by NHS England. The Health Foundation funded the health economics evaluation. The authors declare that the study management group has no competing financial, professional, or personal interests that might have influenced the study design or conduct.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape UK.
A program to increase the use of magnesium sulfate to reduce the risk of cerebral palsy is effective, say researchers. Giving magnesium sulfate to women at risk of premature birth can reduce the risk of a child having cerebral palsy by a third, and costs just £1 per dose.
However, the authors of the new observational study, published in Archives of Disease in Childhood – Fetal and Neonatal Edition, pointed out that in 2017 only around two-thirds (64%) of eligible women were being given magnesium sulfate in England, Scotland, and Wales, with “wide regional variations.”
To address this, in 2014 the PReCePT (Preventing Cerebral Palsy in Pre Term labor) quality improvement toolkit was developed by both parents and staff with the aim of supporting all maternity units in England to improve maternity staff awareness and increase the use of magnesium sulfate in mothers at risk of giving birth at 30 weeks’ gestation or under. PReCePT provided practical tools and training to support hospital staff to give magnesium sulfate to eligible mothers.
The pilot study in 2015, which involved five maternity units, found an increase in uptake from 21% to 88% associated with the PReCePT approach. Subsequently, in 2018, NHS England funded the National PReCePT Programme, which scaled up the intervention for national roll-out and provided the PReCePT quality toolkit – which includes preterm labor proforma, staff training presentations, parent information leaflet, posters for the unit, and a learning log – to each maternity unit.
Improvement ‘over and above’ expectation
For the first evaluation of a U.K. universally implemented national perinatal quality improvement program to increase administration of an evidence-based drug, researchers, led by University of Bristol, England, set out to evaluate the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the National PReCePT Programme in increasing use of magnesium sulfate in preterm births.
Using data from the U.K. National Neonatal Research Database for the year before and the year after PReCePT was implemented in maternity units in England, the researchers performed a before-and-after study that involved 137 maternity units within NHS England. Participants were babies born at 30 weeks’ gestation or under admitted to neonatal units in England, and the main outcome measure was magnesium sulfate uptake before and after the implementation of the National PReCePT Programme. In addition, implementation and lifetime costs were estimated.
During the first year, post implementation of the program, uptake increased by an average of 6.3 percentage points (to 83.1%) across all maternity units in England, which the authors explained was “over and above” the increase that would be expected over time as the practice spread organically. The researchers also found that after adjusting for variations in when maternity units started the program, the increase in use of magnesium sulfate was 9.5 percentage points. “By May 2020, on average 86.4% of eligible mothers were receiving magnesium sulfate,” they said.
Professor John Macleod, NIHR ARC West Director, professor in clinical epidemiology and primary care, University of Bristol, and principal investigator of the evaluation, said: “Our in-depth analysis has been able to demonstrate that the PReCePT program is both effective and cost-effective. The program has increased uptake of magnesium sulfate, which we know is a cost-effective medicine to prevent cerebral palsy, much more quickly than we could have otherwise expected.”
From a societal and lifetime perspective, the health gains and cost savings associated with the National PReCePT Programme generated a “net monetary benefit of £866 per preterm baby,” with the probability of the program being cost-effective being “greater than 95%,” the authors highlighted.
The researchers also estimated that the program’s first year could be associated with a lifetime saving to society of £3 million – which accounts for the costs of the program, of administering the treatment, of cerebral palsy to society over a lifetime, and the associated health gains of avoiding cases. “This is across all the extra babies the program helped get access to the treatment during the first year,” they said.
The authors highlighted that in the five pilot sites, the improved use of magnesium sulfate has been “sustained over the years” since PReCePT was implemented. As the program costs were mostly in the first year of implementation, longer-term national analysis may show that PReCePT is “even more cost-effective over a longer period,” they postulated.
Accelerate uptake
Uptake of new evidence or guidelines is often “slow” due to practical barriers, lack of knowledge, and need for behavior change, and can “take decades to become embedded” in perinatal clinical practice, expressed the authors, which in turn comes at a “high clinical and economic cost.”
Karen Luyt, professor in neonatal medicine, University of Bristol, said: “The PReCePT national quality improvement program demonstrates that a collaborative and coordinated perinatal implementation program supporting every hospital in England can accelerate the uptake of new evidence-based treatments into routine practice, enabling equitable health benefits to babies and ultimately reductions in lifetime societal costs.”
The authors said the PReCePT model “may serve as a blueprint for future interventions to improve perinatal care.”
Professor Lucy Chappell, chief executive officer of the National Institute for Health and Care Research, said: “This important study shows the impact of taking a promising intervention that had been shown to work in a research setting and scaling it up across the country. Giving magnesium sulfate to prevent cerebral palsy in premature babies is a simple, inexpensive intervention that can make such a difference to families and the health service.”
Prof. Macleod added: “We are pleased to have played a part in helping get this cheap yet effective treatment to more babies.”
This work was jointly funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research Applied Research Collaboration West and the AHSN Network funded by NHS England. The Health Foundation funded the health economics evaluation. The authors declare that the study management group has no competing financial, professional, or personal interests that might have influenced the study design or conduct.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape UK.
A program to increase the use of magnesium sulfate to reduce the risk of cerebral palsy is effective, say researchers. Giving magnesium sulfate to women at risk of premature birth can reduce the risk of a child having cerebral palsy by a third, and costs just £1 per dose.
However, the authors of the new observational study, published in Archives of Disease in Childhood – Fetal and Neonatal Edition, pointed out that in 2017 only around two-thirds (64%) of eligible women were being given magnesium sulfate in England, Scotland, and Wales, with “wide regional variations.”
To address this, in 2014 the PReCePT (Preventing Cerebral Palsy in Pre Term labor) quality improvement toolkit was developed by both parents and staff with the aim of supporting all maternity units in England to improve maternity staff awareness and increase the use of magnesium sulfate in mothers at risk of giving birth at 30 weeks’ gestation or under. PReCePT provided practical tools and training to support hospital staff to give magnesium sulfate to eligible mothers.
The pilot study in 2015, which involved five maternity units, found an increase in uptake from 21% to 88% associated with the PReCePT approach. Subsequently, in 2018, NHS England funded the National PReCePT Programme, which scaled up the intervention for national roll-out and provided the PReCePT quality toolkit – which includes preterm labor proforma, staff training presentations, parent information leaflet, posters for the unit, and a learning log – to each maternity unit.
Improvement ‘over and above’ expectation
For the first evaluation of a U.K. universally implemented national perinatal quality improvement program to increase administration of an evidence-based drug, researchers, led by University of Bristol, England, set out to evaluate the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the National PReCePT Programme in increasing use of magnesium sulfate in preterm births.
Using data from the U.K. National Neonatal Research Database for the year before and the year after PReCePT was implemented in maternity units in England, the researchers performed a before-and-after study that involved 137 maternity units within NHS England. Participants were babies born at 30 weeks’ gestation or under admitted to neonatal units in England, and the main outcome measure was magnesium sulfate uptake before and after the implementation of the National PReCePT Programme. In addition, implementation and lifetime costs were estimated.
During the first year, post implementation of the program, uptake increased by an average of 6.3 percentage points (to 83.1%) across all maternity units in England, which the authors explained was “over and above” the increase that would be expected over time as the practice spread organically. The researchers also found that after adjusting for variations in when maternity units started the program, the increase in use of magnesium sulfate was 9.5 percentage points. “By May 2020, on average 86.4% of eligible mothers were receiving magnesium sulfate,” they said.
Professor John Macleod, NIHR ARC West Director, professor in clinical epidemiology and primary care, University of Bristol, and principal investigator of the evaluation, said: “Our in-depth analysis has been able to demonstrate that the PReCePT program is both effective and cost-effective. The program has increased uptake of magnesium sulfate, which we know is a cost-effective medicine to prevent cerebral palsy, much more quickly than we could have otherwise expected.”
From a societal and lifetime perspective, the health gains and cost savings associated with the National PReCePT Programme generated a “net monetary benefit of £866 per preterm baby,” with the probability of the program being cost-effective being “greater than 95%,” the authors highlighted.
The researchers also estimated that the program’s first year could be associated with a lifetime saving to society of £3 million – which accounts for the costs of the program, of administering the treatment, of cerebral palsy to society over a lifetime, and the associated health gains of avoiding cases. “This is across all the extra babies the program helped get access to the treatment during the first year,” they said.
The authors highlighted that in the five pilot sites, the improved use of magnesium sulfate has been “sustained over the years” since PReCePT was implemented. As the program costs were mostly in the first year of implementation, longer-term national analysis may show that PReCePT is “even more cost-effective over a longer period,” they postulated.
Accelerate uptake
Uptake of new evidence or guidelines is often “slow” due to practical barriers, lack of knowledge, and need for behavior change, and can “take decades to become embedded” in perinatal clinical practice, expressed the authors, which in turn comes at a “high clinical and economic cost.”
Karen Luyt, professor in neonatal medicine, University of Bristol, said: “The PReCePT national quality improvement program demonstrates that a collaborative and coordinated perinatal implementation program supporting every hospital in England can accelerate the uptake of new evidence-based treatments into routine practice, enabling equitable health benefits to babies and ultimately reductions in lifetime societal costs.”
The authors said the PReCePT model “may serve as a blueprint for future interventions to improve perinatal care.”
Professor Lucy Chappell, chief executive officer of the National Institute for Health and Care Research, said: “This important study shows the impact of taking a promising intervention that had been shown to work in a research setting and scaling it up across the country. Giving magnesium sulfate to prevent cerebral palsy in premature babies is a simple, inexpensive intervention that can make such a difference to families and the health service.”
Prof. Macleod added: “We are pleased to have played a part in helping get this cheap yet effective treatment to more babies.”
This work was jointly funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research Applied Research Collaboration West and the AHSN Network funded by NHS England. The Health Foundation funded the health economics evaluation. The authors declare that the study management group has no competing financial, professional, or personal interests that might have influenced the study design or conduct.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape UK.
Postconcussion symptoms tied to high risk of depression
Results of a large meta-analysis that included 18 studies and more than 9,000 patients showed a fourfold higher risk of developing depressive symptoms in those with PPCS versus those without PPCS.
“In this meta-analysis, experiencing PPCS was associated with a higher risk of experiencing depressive symptoms,” write the investigators, led by Maude Lambert, PhD, of the School of Psychology, University of Ottawa, and Bloorview Research Institute, Toronto.
“There are several important clinical and health policy implications of the findings. Most notably, the development of strategies for effective prevention and earlier intervention to optimize mental health recovery following a concussion should be supported,” they add.
The study was published online in JAMA Network Open.
‘Important minority’
An “important minority” of 15%-30% of those with concussions continue to experience symptoms for months, or even years, following the injury, the investigators note.
Symptoms vary but can include headaches, fatigue, dizziness, cognitive difficulties, and emotional changes, which can “significantly impact an individual’s everyday functioning.”
The association between PPCS and mental health outcomes “has emerged as an area of interest” over the past decade, with multiple studies pointing to bidirectional associations between depressive symptoms and PPCS, the researchers note. Individuals with PPCS are at significantly higher risk of experiencing depressive symptoms, and depressive symptoms, in turn, predict more prolonged postconcussion recovery, they add.
The authors conducted a previous scoping review that showed individuals with PPCS had “greater mental health difficulties than individuals who recovered from concussion or healthy controls.”
But “quantitative summaries evaluating the magnitude and nature of the association between PPCS and mental health outcomes were not conducted,” so they decided to conduct a follow-up meta-analysis to corroborate the hypothesis that PPCS may be associated with depressive symptoms.
The researchers also wanted to “investigate potential moderators of that association and determine whether the association between depressive symptoms and PPCS differed based on age, sex, mental illness, history of concussion, and time since the injury.”
This could have “significant public health implications” as it represents an “important step” toward understanding the association between PPCS and mental health, paving the way for the “development of optimal postconcussion intervention strategies, targeting effective prevention and earlier intervention to enhance recovery trajectories, improve mental health, and promote well-being following concussion.”
To be included in the meta-analysis, a study had to focus on participants who had experienced a concussion, diagnosed by a health care professional, or as classified by diagnostic measures, and who experienced greater than or equal to 1 concussion symptom lasting greater than 4 weeks.
There was no explicit upper limit on duration, and individuals of all ages were eligible.
Depressive symptoms were defined as “an outcome that must be measured by a validated and standardized measure of depression.”
Biopsychosocial model
Of 580 reports assessed for eligibility, 18 were included in the meta-analysis, incorporating a total of 9,101 participants, with a median (range) sample size of 154 (48-4,462) participants and a mean (SD) participant age of 33.7 (14.4) years.
The mean length of time since the concussion was 21.3 (18.7) weeks. Of the participants, a mean of 36.1% (11.1%) had a history of greater than or equal to 2 concussions.
Close to three-quarters of the studies (72%) used a cross-sectional design, with most studies conducted in North America, and the remaining conducted in Europe, China, and New Zealand.
The researchers found a “significant positive association” between PPCS and postinjury depressive symptoms (odds ratio, 4.87; 95% confidence interval, 3.01-7.90; P < .001), “representing a large effect size.”
Funnel plot and Egger test analyses “suggested the presence of a publication bias.” However, even after accounting for publication bias, the effect size “of large magnitude” remained, the authors report (OR, 4.56; 95% CI, 2.82-7.37; P < .001).
No significant moderators were identified, “likely due to the small number of studies included,” they speculate.
They note that the current study “does not allow inference about the causal directionality of the association” between PPCS and postinjury depressive symptoms, so the question remains: Do PPCS induce depressive symptoms, or do depressive symptoms induce PPCS?”
Despite this unanswered question, the findings still have important clinical and public health implications, highlighting “the need for a greater understanding of the mechanisms of development and etiology of depressive symptoms postconcussion” and emphasizing “the necessary emergence for timely and effective treatment interventions for depressive symptoms to optimize the long-term prognosis of concussion,” the authors note.
They add that several research teams “have aimed to gain more insight into the etiology and underlying mechanisms of development and course of mental health difficulties in individuals who experience a concussion” and have arrived at a biopsychosocial framework, in light of “the myriad of contributing physiological, biological, and psychosocial factors.”
They recommend the establishment of “specialized multidisciplinary or interdisciplinary concussion care programs should include health care professionals with strong clinical foundations and training in mental health conditions.”
Speedy multidisciplinary care
Commenting on the research, Charles Tator, MD, PhD, professor of neurosurgery, University of Toronto, Division of Neurosurgery, Toronto Western Hospital, said the researchers “performed a thorough systematic review” showing “emphatically that depression occurs in this population.”
Dr. Tator, the director of the Canadian Concussion Centre, who was not involved with the current study, continued: “Nowadays clinical discoveries are validated through a progression of case reports, single-center retrospective cohort studies like ours, referenced by [Dr.] Lambert et al., and then confirmatory systematic reviews, each adding important layers of evidence.”
“This evaluative process has now endorsed the importance of early treatment of mental health symptoms in patients with persisting symptoms, which can include depression, anxiety, and PTSD,” he said.
He recommended that treatment should start with family physicians and nurse practitioners “but may require escalation to psychologists and social workers and then to psychiatrists who are often more skilled in medication selection.”
He encouraged “speedy multidisciplinary care,” noting that the possibility of suicide is worrisome.
No source of study funding was listed. A study coauthor, Shannon Scratch, PhD, has reported receiving funds from the Holland Bloorview Kids Rehabilitation Hospital Foundation (via the Holland Family Professorship in Acquired Brain Injury) during the conduct of this study. No other disclosures were reported. Dr. Tator has reported no relevant financial relationships.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
Results of a large meta-analysis that included 18 studies and more than 9,000 patients showed a fourfold higher risk of developing depressive symptoms in those with PPCS versus those without PPCS.
“In this meta-analysis, experiencing PPCS was associated with a higher risk of experiencing depressive symptoms,” write the investigators, led by Maude Lambert, PhD, of the School of Psychology, University of Ottawa, and Bloorview Research Institute, Toronto.
“There are several important clinical and health policy implications of the findings. Most notably, the development of strategies for effective prevention and earlier intervention to optimize mental health recovery following a concussion should be supported,” they add.
The study was published online in JAMA Network Open.
‘Important minority’
An “important minority” of 15%-30% of those with concussions continue to experience symptoms for months, or even years, following the injury, the investigators note.
Symptoms vary but can include headaches, fatigue, dizziness, cognitive difficulties, and emotional changes, which can “significantly impact an individual’s everyday functioning.”
The association between PPCS and mental health outcomes “has emerged as an area of interest” over the past decade, with multiple studies pointing to bidirectional associations between depressive symptoms and PPCS, the researchers note. Individuals with PPCS are at significantly higher risk of experiencing depressive symptoms, and depressive symptoms, in turn, predict more prolonged postconcussion recovery, they add.
The authors conducted a previous scoping review that showed individuals with PPCS had “greater mental health difficulties than individuals who recovered from concussion or healthy controls.”
But “quantitative summaries evaluating the magnitude and nature of the association between PPCS and mental health outcomes were not conducted,” so they decided to conduct a follow-up meta-analysis to corroborate the hypothesis that PPCS may be associated with depressive symptoms.
The researchers also wanted to “investigate potential moderators of that association and determine whether the association between depressive symptoms and PPCS differed based on age, sex, mental illness, history of concussion, and time since the injury.”
This could have “significant public health implications” as it represents an “important step” toward understanding the association between PPCS and mental health, paving the way for the “development of optimal postconcussion intervention strategies, targeting effective prevention and earlier intervention to enhance recovery trajectories, improve mental health, and promote well-being following concussion.”
To be included in the meta-analysis, a study had to focus on participants who had experienced a concussion, diagnosed by a health care professional, or as classified by diagnostic measures, and who experienced greater than or equal to 1 concussion symptom lasting greater than 4 weeks.
There was no explicit upper limit on duration, and individuals of all ages were eligible.
Depressive symptoms were defined as “an outcome that must be measured by a validated and standardized measure of depression.”
Biopsychosocial model
Of 580 reports assessed for eligibility, 18 were included in the meta-analysis, incorporating a total of 9,101 participants, with a median (range) sample size of 154 (48-4,462) participants and a mean (SD) participant age of 33.7 (14.4) years.
The mean length of time since the concussion was 21.3 (18.7) weeks. Of the participants, a mean of 36.1% (11.1%) had a history of greater than or equal to 2 concussions.
Close to three-quarters of the studies (72%) used a cross-sectional design, with most studies conducted in North America, and the remaining conducted in Europe, China, and New Zealand.
The researchers found a “significant positive association” between PPCS and postinjury depressive symptoms (odds ratio, 4.87; 95% confidence interval, 3.01-7.90; P < .001), “representing a large effect size.”
Funnel plot and Egger test analyses “suggested the presence of a publication bias.” However, even after accounting for publication bias, the effect size “of large magnitude” remained, the authors report (OR, 4.56; 95% CI, 2.82-7.37; P < .001).
No significant moderators were identified, “likely due to the small number of studies included,” they speculate.
They note that the current study “does not allow inference about the causal directionality of the association” between PPCS and postinjury depressive symptoms, so the question remains: Do PPCS induce depressive symptoms, or do depressive symptoms induce PPCS?”
Despite this unanswered question, the findings still have important clinical and public health implications, highlighting “the need for a greater understanding of the mechanisms of development and etiology of depressive symptoms postconcussion” and emphasizing “the necessary emergence for timely and effective treatment interventions for depressive symptoms to optimize the long-term prognosis of concussion,” the authors note.
They add that several research teams “have aimed to gain more insight into the etiology and underlying mechanisms of development and course of mental health difficulties in individuals who experience a concussion” and have arrived at a biopsychosocial framework, in light of “the myriad of contributing physiological, biological, and psychosocial factors.”
They recommend the establishment of “specialized multidisciplinary or interdisciplinary concussion care programs should include health care professionals with strong clinical foundations and training in mental health conditions.”
Speedy multidisciplinary care
Commenting on the research, Charles Tator, MD, PhD, professor of neurosurgery, University of Toronto, Division of Neurosurgery, Toronto Western Hospital, said the researchers “performed a thorough systematic review” showing “emphatically that depression occurs in this population.”
Dr. Tator, the director of the Canadian Concussion Centre, who was not involved with the current study, continued: “Nowadays clinical discoveries are validated through a progression of case reports, single-center retrospective cohort studies like ours, referenced by [Dr.] Lambert et al., and then confirmatory systematic reviews, each adding important layers of evidence.”
“This evaluative process has now endorsed the importance of early treatment of mental health symptoms in patients with persisting symptoms, which can include depression, anxiety, and PTSD,” he said.
He recommended that treatment should start with family physicians and nurse practitioners “but may require escalation to psychologists and social workers and then to psychiatrists who are often more skilled in medication selection.”
He encouraged “speedy multidisciplinary care,” noting that the possibility of suicide is worrisome.
No source of study funding was listed. A study coauthor, Shannon Scratch, PhD, has reported receiving funds from the Holland Bloorview Kids Rehabilitation Hospital Foundation (via the Holland Family Professorship in Acquired Brain Injury) during the conduct of this study. No other disclosures were reported. Dr. Tator has reported no relevant financial relationships.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
Results of a large meta-analysis that included 18 studies and more than 9,000 patients showed a fourfold higher risk of developing depressive symptoms in those with PPCS versus those without PPCS.
“In this meta-analysis, experiencing PPCS was associated with a higher risk of experiencing depressive symptoms,” write the investigators, led by Maude Lambert, PhD, of the School of Psychology, University of Ottawa, and Bloorview Research Institute, Toronto.
“There are several important clinical and health policy implications of the findings. Most notably, the development of strategies for effective prevention and earlier intervention to optimize mental health recovery following a concussion should be supported,” they add.
The study was published online in JAMA Network Open.
‘Important minority’
An “important minority” of 15%-30% of those with concussions continue to experience symptoms for months, or even years, following the injury, the investigators note.
Symptoms vary but can include headaches, fatigue, dizziness, cognitive difficulties, and emotional changes, which can “significantly impact an individual’s everyday functioning.”
The association between PPCS and mental health outcomes “has emerged as an area of interest” over the past decade, with multiple studies pointing to bidirectional associations between depressive symptoms and PPCS, the researchers note. Individuals with PPCS are at significantly higher risk of experiencing depressive symptoms, and depressive symptoms, in turn, predict more prolonged postconcussion recovery, they add.
The authors conducted a previous scoping review that showed individuals with PPCS had “greater mental health difficulties than individuals who recovered from concussion or healthy controls.”
But “quantitative summaries evaluating the magnitude and nature of the association between PPCS and mental health outcomes were not conducted,” so they decided to conduct a follow-up meta-analysis to corroborate the hypothesis that PPCS may be associated with depressive symptoms.
The researchers also wanted to “investigate potential moderators of that association and determine whether the association between depressive symptoms and PPCS differed based on age, sex, mental illness, history of concussion, and time since the injury.”
This could have “significant public health implications” as it represents an “important step” toward understanding the association between PPCS and mental health, paving the way for the “development of optimal postconcussion intervention strategies, targeting effective prevention and earlier intervention to enhance recovery trajectories, improve mental health, and promote well-being following concussion.”
To be included in the meta-analysis, a study had to focus on participants who had experienced a concussion, diagnosed by a health care professional, or as classified by diagnostic measures, and who experienced greater than or equal to 1 concussion symptom lasting greater than 4 weeks.
There was no explicit upper limit on duration, and individuals of all ages were eligible.
Depressive symptoms were defined as “an outcome that must be measured by a validated and standardized measure of depression.”
Biopsychosocial model
Of 580 reports assessed for eligibility, 18 were included in the meta-analysis, incorporating a total of 9,101 participants, with a median (range) sample size of 154 (48-4,462) participants and a mean (SD) participant age of 33.7 (14.4) years.
The mean length of time since the concussion was 21.3 (18.7) weeks. Of the participants, a mean of 36.1% (11.1%) had a history of greater than or equal to 2 concussions.
Close to three-quarters of the studies (72%) used a cross-sectional design, with most studies conducted in North America, and the remaining conducted in Europe, China, and New Zealand.
The researchers found a “significant positive association” between PPCS and postinjury depressive symptoms (odds ratio, 4.87; 95% confidence interval, 3.01-7.90; P < .001), “representing a large effect size.”
Funnel plot and Egger test analyses “suggested the presence of a publication bias.” However, even after accounting for publication bias, the effect size “of large magnitude” remained, the authors report (OR, 4.56; 95% CI, 2.82-7.37; P < .001).
No significant moderators were identified, “likely due to the small number of studies included,” they speculate.
They note that the current study “does not allow inference about the causal directionality of the association” between PPCS and postinjury depressive symptoms, so the question remains: Do PPCS induce depressive symptoms, or do depressive symptoms induce PPCS?”
Despite this unanswered question, the findings still have important clinical and public health implications, highlighting “the need for a greater understanding of the mechanisms of development and etiology of depressive symptoms postconcussion” and emphasizing “the necessary emergence for timely and effective treatment interventions for depressive symptoms to optimize the long-term prognosis of concussion,” the authors note.
They add that several research teams “have aimed to gain more insight into the etiology and underlying mechanisms of development and course of mental health difficulties in individuals who experience a concussion” and have arrived at a biopsychosocial framework, in light of “the myriad of contributing physiological, biological, and psychosocial factors.”
They recommend the establishment of “specialized multidisciplinary or interdisciplinary concussion care programs should include health care professionals with strong clinical foundations and training in mental health conditions.”
Speedy multidisciplinary care
Commenting on the research, Charles Tator, MD, PhD, professor of neurosurgery, University of Toronto, Division of Neurosurgery, Toronto Western Hospital, said the researchers “performed a thorough systematic review” showing “emphatically that depression occurs in this population.”
Dr. Tator, the director of the Canadian Concussion Centre, who was not involved with the current study, continued: “Nowadays clinical discoveries are validated through a progression of case reports, single-center retrospective cohort studies like ours, referenced by [Dr.] Lambert et al., and then confirmatory systematic reviews, each adding important layers of evidence.”
“This evaluative process has now endorsed the importance of early treatment of mental health symptoms in patients with persisting symptoms, which can include depression, anxiety, and PTSD,” he said.
He recommended that treatment should start with family physicians and nurse practitioners “but may require escalation to psychologists and social workers and then to psychiatrists who are often more skilled in medication selection.”
He encouraged “speedy multidisciplinary care,” noting that the possibility of suicide is worrisome.
No source of study funding was listed. A study coauthor, Shannon Scratch, PhD, has reported receiving funds from the Holland Bloorview Kids Rehabilitation Hospital Foundation (via the Holland Family Professorship in Acquired Brain Injury) during the conduct of this study. No other disclosures were reported. Dr. Tator has reported no relevant financial relationships.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
FROM JAMA NETWORK OPEN
Transition to Tenecteplase From t-PA for Acute Ischemic Stroke at Walter Reed National Military Medical Center
Tissue plasminogen activator (t-PA) has been the standard IV thrombolytic used in acute ischemic stroke treatment since its US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval in 1995. Trials have established this drug’s efficacy in the treatment of acute ischemic stroke and the appropriate patient population for therapy.1-3 Published guidelines and experiences have made clear that a written protocol with extensive personnel training is important to deliver this care properly.4
Tenecteplase has been available for use in the treatment of acute myocardial infarction (MI) and studied in acute ischemic strokes since 2000. Recent large multicenter trials have suggested tenecteplase may work better than t-PA in the recanalization of large vessel occlusions (LVOs) and have provided guidance on proper dosing in acute ischemic stroke victims.5-8 Compared with t-PA, tenecteplase has a longer half-life, is more fibrin specific (causing less coagulopathy), and is more resistant to endogenous plasminogen activator inhibitor.9,10 Using tenecteplase for acute ischemic stroke is simpler as a single dose bolus rather than a bolus followed by a 1-hour infusion with t-PA. Immediate mechanical thrombectomy for LVO is less complicated without the 1-hour t-PA infusion.5,6 Tenecteplase use also allows for nonthrombectomy hospitals to accelerate transfer times for patients who need thrombectomy following thrombolysis by eliminating the need for critical care nurse–staffed ambulances for interfacility transfer.11 Tenecteplase also is cheaper: Tenecteplase costs $3748 per vial, whereas t-PA costs $5800 per vial equating to roughly a $2000 savings per patient.12,13 Finally, the pharmacy formulary is simplified by using a single thrombolytic agent for both cardiac and neurologic emergencies.
Tenecteplase does have some drawbacks to consider. Currently, tenecteplase is not approved by the FDA for the indication of acute ischemic stroke, though the drug is endorsed by the American Heart Association stroke guidelines of 2019 as an alternative to t-PA.14 There is no stroke-specific preparation of the drug, leading to potential dosing errors. Therefore, a systematic process to safely transition from t-PA to tenecteplase for acute ischemic stroke was undertaken at Walter Reed National Military Medical Center (WRNMMC) in Bethesda, Maryland. Here, we report the process required in making a complex switch in thrombolytic medication along with the potential benefits of making this transition.
OBSERVATIONS
The process to implement tenecteplase required extensive training and education for staff physicians, nurses, pharmacists, radiologists, trainees, and the rapid response team. Our institution administered IV thrombolytic drugs up to 25 times annually to acute ischemic stroke victims, meaning we had to train personnel extensively and repeatedly.
In preparation for the transition to tenecteplase, hospital leadership gathered staff for multidisciplinary administrative meetings that included neurology, emergency medicine, intensive care, pharmacy, radiology, and nursing departments. The purpose of these meetings was to establish a standard operating procedure (SOP) to ensure a safe transition. This process began in May 2020 and involved regular meetings to draft and revise our SOP. Additionally, several leadership and training sessions were held over a 6-month period. Stroke boxes were developed that contained the required evaluation tools, consent forms, medications (tenecteplase and treatments for known complications), dosing cards, and instructions. Final approval of the updated acute ischemic stroke hospital policy was obtained in November 2020 and signed by the above departments.
All inclusion and exclusion criteria were determined to be the same for tenecteplase as they were for t-PA with the notable exception that the WAKE-UP trial protocol would not be supported until further evidence became available.9 The results of the WAKE-UP trial had previously been used at WRNMMC to justify administration of t-PA in patients who awoke with symptoms of acute ischemic stroke, the last known well was unclear or > 4.5 hours, and for whom a magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of the brain could be obtained rapidly. Based on the WAKE-UP trial, if the MRI scan of the brain in these patients demonstrated restricted diffusion without fluid attenuated inversion recovery (FLAIR) signal changes (diffusion-weighted [DWI]-FLAIR mismatch sign), this indicated that the stroke had likely occurred recently, and it was safe to administer t-PA. This allowed for administration of t-PA outside the standard treatment window of 4.5 hours from last known well, especially in the cases of patients who awoke with symptoms.
Since safety data are not yet available for the use of tenecteplase in this fashion, the WAKE-UP trial protocol was not used as an inclusion criterion. The informed consent form was modified, and the following scenarios were outlined: (1) If the patient or surrogate is immediately available to consent, paper consent will be documented with the additional note that tenecteplase is being used off-label; and (2) If the patient cannot consent and a surrogate is not immediately available, the medicine will be used emergently as long as the neurology resident and attending physicians agree.15
Risk mitigation was considered carefully. The stroke box described above is stocked and maintained by the pharmacy as we have transitioned to using designated pharmacists for the storage and preparation of tenecteplase. We highly recommend the use of designated pharmacists or emergency department pharmacists in this manner to avoid dosing errors.7,16 Since the current pharmacy-provided tenecteplase bottle contains twice the maximum dose indicated for ischemic stroke, only a 5 mL syringe is included in the stroke box to ensure a maximum dose of 25 mg is drawn up after reconstitution. Dosing card charts were made like existing dosing card charts for t-PA to quickly calculate the 0.25 mg/kg dose. In training, the difference in dosing in ischemic stroke was emphasized. Finally, pharmacy has taken responsibility for dosing the medication during stroke codes.
Any medical personnel at WRNMMC can initiate a stroke code by sending a page to the neurology consult service (Figure). 
TRANSITION AND RESULTS
From November 2020 to December 2021, 10 patients have been treated in total at WRNMMC (Table). 
CONCLUSIONS
The available evidence supports the transition from t-PA to tenecteplase for acute ischemic stroke. The successful transition required months of preparation involving multidisciplinary meetings between neurology, nursing, pharmacy, radiology, rapid response teams, critical care, and emergency medicine departments. Safeguards must be implemented to avoid a tenecteplase dosing error that can lead to potentially life-threatening adverse effects. The results at WRNMMC thus far are promising for safety and efficacy. Several process improvements are planned: a hospital-wide overhead page will accompany the direct page to neurology; other team members, including radiology and pharmacy, will be included on the acute stroke alert; and a stroke-specific paging application will be implemented to better track real-time stroke metrics and improve flow. These measures mirror processes that are occurring in institutions that treat acute stroke patients.
1. Lees KR, Bluhmki E, von Kummer R, et al. Time to treatment with intravenous alteplase and outcome in stroke: an updated pooled analysis of ECASS, ATLANTIS, NINDS, and EPITHET trials. Lancet. 2010;375(9727):1695-1703. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(10)60491-6
2. National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke rt-PA Stroke Study Group. Tissue plasminogen activator for acute ischemic stroke. N Engl J Med. 1995;333(24):1581- 1587. doi:10.1056/NEJM199512143332401
3. Hacke W, Donnan G, Fieschi C, et al. Association of outcome with early stroke treatment: pooled analysis of ATLANTIS, ECASS, and NINDS rt-PA stroke trials. Lancet. 2004;363(9411):768-774. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(04)15692-4
4. Jauch EC, Saver JL, Adams HP Jr, et al. Guidelines for the early management of patients with acute ischemic stroke: a guideline for healthcare professionals from the American Heart Association/American Stroke Association. Stroke. 2013;44(3):870-947. doi:10.1161/STR.0b013e318284056a
5. Campbell B, Mitchell P, Churilov L, et al. Tenecteplase versus alteplase before thrombectomy for ischemic stroke. N Engl J Med. 2018;378(17):1573-1582. doi:10.1056/nejmoa1716405
6. Yang P, Zhang Y, Zhang L, et al. Endovascular thrombectomy with or without intravenous alteplase in acute stroke. N Engl J Med. 2020;382(21):1981-1993. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa2001123
7. Menon BK, Buck BH, Singh N, et al. Intravenous tenecteplase compared with alteplase for acute ischaemic stroke in Canada (AcT): a pragmatic, multicentre, open-label, registry-linked, randomised, controlled, noninferiority trial. Lancet. 2022;400(10347):161-169. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(22)01054-6
8. Campbell BCV, Mitchell PJ, Churilov L, et al. Effect of intravenous tenecteplase dose on cerebral reperfusion before thrombectomy in patients with large vessel occlusion ischemic stroke: the EXTEND-IA TNK part 2 randomized clinical trial. JAMA. 2020;323(13):1257- 1265. doi:10.1001/jama.2020.1511
9. Warach SJ, Dula AN, Milling TJ Jr. Tenecteplase thrombolysis for acute ischemic stroke. Stroke. 2020;51(11):3440- 3451. doi:10.1161/STROKEAHA.120.029749
10. Huang X, Moreton FC, Kalladka D, et al. Coagulation and fibrinolytic activity of tenecteplase and alteplase in acute ischemic stroke. Stroke. 2015;46(12):3543-3546. doi:10.1161/STROKEAHA.115.011290
11. Burgos AM, Saver JL. Evidence that tenecteplase is noninferior to alteplase for acute ischemic stroke: meta-analysis of 5 randomized trials. Stroke. 2019;50(8):2156-2162. doi:10.1161/STROKEAHA.119.025080
12. Potla N, Ganti L. Tenecteplase vs. alteplase for acute ischemic stroke: a systematic review. Int J Emerg Med. 2022;15(1). doi:10.1186/s12245-021-00399-w
13. Warach SJ, Winegar A, Ottenbacher A, Miller C, Gibson D. Abstract WMP52: reduced hospital costs for ischemic stroke treated with tenecteplase. Stroke. 2022;53(suppl 1):AWMP52. doi:10.1161/str.53.suppl_1.WMP52
14. Powers WJ, Rabinstein AA, Ackerson T, et al. Guidelines for the Early Management of Patients With Acute Ischemic Stroke: 2019 Update to the 2018 Guidelines for the Early Management of Acute Ischemic Stroke: A Guideline for Healthcare Professionals From the American Heart Association/American Stroke Association. Stroke. 2019;50(12):e344-e418. doi:10.1161/str.0000000000000211
15. Faris H, Dewar B, Dowlatshahi D, et al. Ethical justification for deferral of consent in the AcT trial for acute ischemic stroke. Stroke. 2022;53(7):2420-2423. doi:10.1161/strokeaha.122.038760
16. Kvistad CE, Næss H, Helleberg BH, et al. Tenecteplase versus alteplase for the management of acute ischaemic stroke in Norway (NOR-TEST 2, part A): a phase 3, randomised, open-label, blinded endpoint, non-inferiority trial. Lancet Neurol. 2022;21(6):511-519. doi:10.1016/S1474-4422(22)00124-7
Tissue plasminogen activator (t-PA) has been the standard IV thrombolytic used in acute ischemic stroke treatment since its US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval in 1995. Trials have established this drug’s efficacy in the treatment of acute ischemic stroke and the appropriate patient population for therapy.1-3 Published guidelines and experiences have made clear that a written protocol with extensive personnel training is important to deliver this care properly.4
Tenecteplase has been available for use in the treatment of acute myocardial infarction (MI) and studied in acute ischemic strokes since 2000. Recent large multicenter trials have suggested tenecteplase may work better than t-PA in the recanalization of large vessel occlusions (LVOs) and have provided guidance on proper dosing in acute ischemic stroke victims.5-8 Compared with t-PA, tenecteplase has a longer half-life, is more fibrin specific (causing less coagulopathy), and is more resistant to endogenous plasminogen activator inhibitor.9,10 Using tenecteplase for acute ischemic stroke is simpler as a single dose bolus rather than a bolus followed by a 1-hour infusion with t-PA. Immediate mechanical thrombectomy for LVO is less complicated without the 1-hour t-PA infusion.5,6 Tenecteplase use also allows for nonthrombectomy hospitals to accelerate transfer times for patients who need thrombectomy following thrombolysis by eliminating the need for critical care nurse–staffed ambulances for interfacility transfer.11 Tenecteplase also is cheaper: Tenecteplase costs $3748 per vial, whereas t-PA costs $5800 per vial equating to roughly a $2000 savings per patient.12,13 Finally, the pharmacy formulary is simplified by using a single thrombolytic agent for both cardiac and neurologic emergencies.
Tenecteplase does have some drawbacks to consider. Currently, tenecteplase is not approved by the FDA for the indication of acute ischemic stroke, though the drug is endorsed by the American Heart Association stroke guidelines of 2019 as an alternative to t-PA.14 There is no stroke-specific preparation of the drug, leading to potential dosing errors. Therefore, a systematic process to safely transition from t-PA to tenecteplase for acute ischemic stroke was undertaken at Walter Reed National Military Medical Center (WRNMMC) in Bethesda, Maryland. Here, we report the process required in making a complex switch in thrombolytic medication along with the potential benefits of making this transition.
OBSERVATIONS
The process to implement tenecteplase required extensive training and education for staff physicians, nurses, pharmacists, radiologists, trainees, and the rapid response team. Our institution administered IV thrombolytic drugs up to 25 times annually to acute ischemic stroke victims, meaning we had to train personnel extensively and repeatedly.
In preparation for the transition to tenecteplase, hospital leadership gathered staff for multidisciplinary administrative meetings that included neurology, emergency medicine, intensive care, pharmacy, radiology, and nursing departments. The purpose of these meetings was to establish a standard operating procedure (SOP) to ensure a safe transition. This process began in May 2020 and involved regular meetings to draft and revise our SOP. Additionally, several leadership and training sessions were held over a 6-month period. Stroke boxes were developed that contained the required evaluation tools, consent forms, medications (tenecteplase and treatments for known complications), dosing cards, and instructions. Final approval of the updated acute ischemic stroke hospital policy was obtained in November 2020 and signed by the above departments.
All inclusion and exclusion criteria were determined to be the same for tenecteplase as they were for t-PA with the notable exception that the WAKE-UP trial protocol would not be supported until further evidence became available.9 The results of the WAKE-UP trial had previously been used at WRNMMC to justify administration of t-PA in patients who awoke with symptoms of acute ischemic stroke, the last known well was unclear or > 4.5 hours, and for whom a magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of the brain could be obtained rapidly. Based on the WAKE-UP trial, if the MRI scan of the brain in these patients demonstrated restricted diffusion without fluid attenuated inversion recovery (FLAIR) signal changes (diffusion-weighted [DWI]-FLAIR mismatch sign), this indicated that the stroke had likely occurred recently, and it was safe to administer t-PA. This allowed for administration of t-PA outside the standard treatment window of 4.5 hours from last known well, especially in the cases of patients who awoke with symptoms.
Since safety data are not yet available for the use of tenecteplase in this fashion, the WAKE-UP trial protocol was not used as an inclusion criterion. The informed consent form was modified, and the following scenarios were outlined: (1) If the patient or surrogate is immediately available to consent, paper consent will be documented with the additional note that tenecteplase is being used off-label; and (2) If the patient cannot consent and a surrogate is not immediately available, the medicine will be used emergently as long as the neurology resident and attending physicians agree.15
Risk mitigation was considered carefully. The stroke box described above is stocked and maintained by the pharmacy as we have transitioned to using designated pharmacists for the storage and preparation of tenecteplase. We highly recommend the use of designated pharmacists or emergency department pharmacists in this manner to avoid dosing errors.7,16 Since the current pharmacy-provided tenecteplase bottle contains twice the maximum dose indicated for ischemic stroke, only a 5 mL syringe is included in the stroke box to ensure a maximum dose of 25 mg is drawn up after reconstitution. Dosing card charts were made like existing dosing card charts for t-PA to quickly calculate the 0.25 mg/kg dose. In training, the difference in dosing in ischemic stroke was emphasized. Finally, pharmacy has taken responsibility for dosing the medication during stroke codes.
Any medical personnel at WRNMMC can initiate a stroke code by sending a page to the neurology consult service (Figure).
TRANSITION AND RESULTS
From November 2020 to December 2021, 10 patients have been treated in total at WRNMMC (Table).
CONCLUSIONS
The available evidence supports the transition from t-PA to tenecteplase for acute ischemic stroke. The successful transition required months of preparation involving multidisciplinary meetings between neurology, nursing, pharmacy, radiology, rapid response teams, critical care, and emergency medicine departments. Safeguards must be implemented to avoid a tenecteplase dosing error that can lead to potentially life-threatening adverse effects. The results at WRNMMC thus far are promising for safety and efficacy. Several process improvements are planned: a hospital-wide overhead page will accompany the direct page to neurology; other team members, including radiology and pharmacy, will be included on the acute stroke alert; and a stroke-specific paging application will be implemented to better track real-time stroke metrics and improve flow. These measures mirror processes that are occurring in institutions that treat acute stroke patients.
Tissue plasminogen activator (t-PA) has been the standard IV thrombolytic used in acute ischemic stroke treatment since its US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval in 1995. Trials have established this drug’s efficacy in the treatment of acute ischemic stroke and the appropriate patient population for therapy.1-3 Published guidelines and experiences have made clear that a written protocol with extensive personnel training is important to deliver this care properly.4
Tenecteplase has been available for use in the treatment of acute myocardial infarction (MI) and studied in acute ischemic strokes since 2000. Recent large multicenter trials have suggested tenecteplase may work better than t-PA in the recanalization of large vessel occlusions (LVOs) and have provided guidance on proper dosing in acute ischemic stroke victims.5-8 Compared with t-PA, tenecteplase has a longer half-life, is more fibrin specific (causing less coagulopathy), and is more resistant to endogenous plasminogen activator inhibitor.9,10 Using tenecteplase for acute ischemic stroke is simpler as a single dose bolus rather than a bolus followed by a 1-hour infusion with t-PA. Immediate mechanical thrombectomy for LVO is less complicated without the 1-hour t-PA infusion.5,6 Tenecteplase use also allows for nonthrombectomy hospitals to accelerate transfer times for patients who need thrombectomy following thrombolysis by eliminating the need for critical care nurse–staffed ambulances for interfacility transfer.11 Tenecteplase also is cheaper: Tenecteplase costs $3748 per vial, whereas t-PA costs $5800 per vial equating to roughly a $2000 savings per patient.12,13 Finally, the pharmacy formulary is simplified by using a single thrombolytic agent for both cardiac and neurologic emergencies.
Tenecteplase does have some drawbacks to consider. Currently, tenecteplase is not approved by the FDA for the indication of acute ischemic stroke, though the drug is endorsed by the American Heart Association stroke guidelines of 2019 as an alternative to t-PA.14 There is no stroke-specific preparation of the drug, leading to potential dosing errors. Therefore, a systematic process to safely transition from t-PA to tenecteplase for acute ischemic stroke was undertaken at Walter Reed National Military Medical Center (WRNMMC) in Bethesda, Maryland. Here, we report the process required in making a complex switch in thrombolytic medication along with the potential benefits of making this transition.
OBSERVATIONS
The process to implement tenecteplase required extensive training and education for staff physicians, nurses, pharmacists, radiologists, trainees, and the rapid response team. Our institution administered IV thrombolytic drugs up to 25 times annually to acute ischemic stroke victims, meaning we had to train personnel extensively and repeatedly.
In preparation for the transition to tenecteplase, hospital leadership gathered staff for multidisciplinary administrative meetings that included neurology, emergency medicine, intensive care, pharmacy, radiology, and nursing departments. The purpose of these meetings was to establish a standard operating procedure (SOP) to ensure a safe transition. This process began in May 2020 and involved regular meetings to draft and revise our SOP. Additionally, several leadership and training sessions were held over a 6-month period. Stroke boxes were developed that contained the required evaluation tools, consent forms, medications (tenecteplase and treatments for known complications), dosing cards, and instructions. Final approval of the updated acute ischemic stroke hospital policy was obtained in November 2020 and signed by the above departments.
All inclusion and exclusion criteria were determined to be the same for tenecteplase as they were for t-PA with the notable exception that the WAKE-UP trial protocol would not be supported until further evidence became available.9 The results of the WAKE-UP trial had previously been used at WRNMMC to justify administration of t-PA in patients who awoke with symptoms of acute ischemic stroke, the last known well was unclear or > 4.5 hours, and for whom a magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of the brain could be obtained rapidly. Based on the WAKE-UP trial, if the MRI scan of the brain in these patients demonstrated restricted diffusion without fluid attenuated inversion recovery (FLAIR) signal changes (diffusion-weighted [DWI]-FLAIR mismatch sign), this indicated that the stroke had likely occurred recently, and it was safe to administer t-PA. This allowed for administration of t-PA outside the standard treatment window of 4.5 hours from last known well, especially in the cases of patients who awoke with symptoms.
Since safety data are not yet available for the use of tenecteplase in this fashion, the WAKE-UP trial protocol was not used as an inclusion criterion. The informed consent form was modified, and the following scenarios were outlined: (1) If the patient or surrogate is immediately available to consent, paper consent will be documented with the additional note that tenecteplase is being used off-label; and (2) If the patient cannot consent and a surrogate is not immediately available, the medicine will be used emergently as long as the neurology resident and attending physicians agree.15
Risk mitigation was considered carefully. The stroke box described above is stocked and maintained by the pharmacy as we have transitioned to using designated pharmacists for the storage and preparation of tenecteplase. We highly recommend the use of designated pharmacists or emergency department pharmacists in this manner to avoid dosing errors.7,16 Since the current pharmacy-provided tenecteplase bottle contains twice the maximum dose indicated for ischemic stroke, only a 5 mL syringe is included in the stroke box to ensure a maximum dose of 25 mg is drawn up after reconstitution. Dosing card charts were made like existing dosing card charts for t-PA to quickly calculate the 0.25 mg/kg dose. In training, the difference in dosing in ischemic stroke was emphasized. Finally, pharmacy has taken responsibility for dosing the medication during stroke codes.
Any medical personnel at WRNMMC can initiate a stroke code by sending a page to the neurology consult service (Figure).
TRANSITION AND RESULTS
From November 2020 to December 2021, 10 patients have been treated in total at WRNMMC (Table).
CONCLUSIONS
The available evidence supports the transition from t-PA to tenecteplase for acute ischemic stroke. The successful transition required months of preparation involving multidisciplinary meetings between neurology, nursing, pharmacy, radiology, rapid response teams, critical care, and emergency medicine departments. Safeguards must be implemented to avoid a tenecteplase dosing error that can lead to potentially life-threatening adverse effects. The results at WRNMMC thus far are promising for safety and efficacy. Several process improvements are planned: a hospital-wide overhead page will accompany the direct page to neurology; other team members, including radiology and pharmacy, will be included on the acute stroke alert; and a stroke-specific paging application will be implemented to better track real-time stroke metrics and improve flow. These measures mirror processes that are occurring in institutions that treat acute stroke patients.
1. Lees KR, Bluhmki E, von Kummer R, et al. Time to treatment with intravenous alteplase and outcome in stroke: an updated pooled analysis of ECASS, ATLANTIS, NINDS, and EPITHET trials. Lancet. 2010;375(9727):1695-1703. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(10)60491-6
2. National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke rt-PA Stroke Study Group. Tissue plasminogen activator for acute ischemic stroke. N Engl J Med. 1995;333(24):1581- 1587. doi:10.1056/NEJM199512143332401
3. Hacke W, Donnan G, Fieschi C, et al. Association of outcome with early stroke treatment: pooled analysis of ATLANTIS, ECASS, and NINDS rt-PA stroke trials. Lancet. 2004;363(9411):768-774. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(04)15692-4
4. Jauch EC, Saver JL, Adams HP Jr, et al. Guidelines for the early management of patients with acute ischemic stroke: a guideline for healthcare professionals from the American Heart Association/American Stroke Association. Stroke. 2013;44(3):870-947. doi:10.1161/STR.0b013e318284056a
5. Campbell B, Mitchell P, Churilov L, et al. Tenecteplase versus alteplase before thrombectomy for ischemic stroke. N Engl J Med. 2018;378(17):1573-1582. doi:10.1056/nejmoa1716405
6. Yang P, Zhang Y, Zhang L, et al. Endovascular thrombectomy with or without intravenous alteplase in acute stroke. N Engl J Med. 2020;382(21):1981-1993. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa2001123
7. Menon BK, Buck BH, Singh N, et al. Intravenous tenecteplase compared with alteplase for acute ischaemic stroke in Canada (AcT): a pragmatic, multicentre, open-label, registry-linked, randomised, controlled, noninferiority trial. Lancet. 2022;400(10347):161-169. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(22)01054-6
8. Campbell BCV, Mitchell PJ, Churilov L, et al. Effect of intravenous tenecteplase dose on cerebral reperfusion before thrombectomy in patients with large vessel occlusion ischemic stroke: the EXTEND-IA TNK part 2 randomized clinical trial. JAMA. 2020;323(13):1257- 1265. doi:10.1001/jama.2020.1511
9. Warach SJ, Dula AN, Milling TJ Jr. Tenecteplase thrombolysis for acute ischemic stroke. Stroke. 2020;51(11):3440- 3451. doi:10.1161/STROKEAHA.120.029749
10. Huang X, Moreton FC, Kalladka D, et al. Coagulation and fibrinolytic activity of tenecteplase and alteplase in acute ischemic stroke. Stroke. 2015;46(12):3543-3546. doi:10.1161/STROKEAHA.115.011290
11. Burgos AM, Saver JL. Evidence that tenecteplase is noninferior to alteplase for acute ischemic stroke: meta-analysis of 5 randomized trials. Stroke. 2019;50(8):2156-2162. doi:10.1161/STROKEAHA.119.025080
12. Potla N, Ganti L. Tenecteplase vs. alteplase for acute ischemic stroke: a systematic review. Int J Emerg Med. 2022;15(1). doi:10.1186/s12245-021-00399-w
13. Warach SJ, Winegar A, Ottenbacher A, Miller C, Gibson D. Abstract WMP52: reduced hospital costs for ischemic stroke treated with tenecteplase. Stroke. 2022;53(suppl 1):AWMP52. doi:10.1161/str.53.suppl_1.WMP52
14. Powers WJ, Rabinstein AA, Ackerson T, et al. Guidelines for the Early Management of Patients With Acute Ischemic Stroke: 2019 Update to the 2018 Guidelines for the Early Management of Acute Ischemic Stroke: A Guideline for Healthcare Professionals From the American Heart Association/American Stroke Association. Stroke. 2019;50(12):e344-e418. doi:10.1161/str.0000000000000211
15. Faris H, Dewar B, Dowlatshahi D, et al. Ethical justification for deferral of consent in the AcT trial for acute ischemic stroke. Stroke. 2022;53(7):2420-2423. doi:10.1161/strokeaha.122.038760
16. Kvistad CE, Næss H, Helleberg BH, et al. Tenecteplase versus alteplase for the management of acute ischaemic stroke in Norway (NOR-TEST 2, part A): a phase 3, randomised, open-label, blinded endpoint, non-inferiority trial. Lancet Neurol. 2022;21(6):511-519. doi:10.1016/S1474-4422(22)00124-7
1. Lees KR, Bluhmki E, von Kummer R, et al. Time to treatment with intravenous alteplase and outcome in stroke: an updated pooled analysis of ECASS, ATLANTIS, NINDS, and EPITHET trials. Lancet. 2010;375(9727):1695-1703. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(10)60491-6
2. National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke rt-PA Stroke Study Group. Tissue plasminogen activator for acute ischemic stroke. N Engl J Med. 1995;333(24):1581- 1587. doi:10.1056/NEJM199512143332401
3. Hacke W, Donnan G, Fieschi C, et al. Association of outcome with early stroke treatment: pooled analysis of ATLANTIS, ECASS, and NINDS rt-PA stroke trials. Lancet. 2004;363(9411):768-774. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(04)15692-4
4. Jauch EC, Saver JL, Adams HP Jr, et al. Guidelines for the early management of patients with acute ischemic stroke: a guideline for healthcare professionals from the American Heart Association/American Stroke Association. Stroke. 2013;44(3):870-947. doi:10.1161/STR.0b013e318284056a
5. Campbell B, Mitchell P, Churilov L, et al. Tenecteplase versus alteplase before thrombectomy for ischemic stroke. N Engl J Med. 2018;378(17):1573-1582. doi:10.1056/nejmoa1716405
6. Yang P, Zhang Y, Zhang L, et al. Endovascular thrombectomy with or without intravenous alteplase in acute stroke. N Engl J Med. 2020;382(21):1981-1993. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa2001123
7. Menon BK, Buck BH, Singh N, et al. Intravenous tenecteplase compared with alteplase for acute ischaemic stroke in Canada (AcT): a pragmatic, multicentre, open-label, registry-linked, randomised, controlled, noninferiority trial. Lancet. 2022;400(10347):161-169. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(22)01054-6
8. Campbell BCV, Mitchell PJ, Churilov L, et al. Effect of intravenous tenecteplase dose on cerebral reperfusion before thrombectomy in patients with large vessel occlusion ischemic stroke: the EXTEND-IA TNK part 2 randomized clinical trial. JAMA. 2020;323(13):1257- 1265. doi:10.1001/jama.2020.1511
9. Warach SJ, Dula AN, Milling TJ Jr. Tenecteplase thrombolysis for acute ischemic stroke. Stroke. 2020;51(11):3440- 3451. doi:10.1161/STROKEAHA.120.029749
10. Huang X, Moreton FC, Kalladka D, et al. Coagulation and fibrinolytic activity of tenecteplase and alteplase in acute ischemic stroke. Stroke. 2015;46(12):3543-3546. doi:10.1161/STROKEAHA.115.011290
11. Burgos AM, Saver JL. Evidence that tenecteplase is noninferior to alteplase for acute ischemic stroke: meta-analysis of 5 randomized trials. Stroke. 2019;50(8):2156-2162. doi:10.1161/STROKEAHA.119.025080
12. Potla N, Ganti L. Tenecteplase vs. alteplase for acute ischemic stroke: a systematic review. Int J Emerg Med. 2022;15(1). doi:10.1186/s12245-021-00399-w
13. Warach SJ, Winegar A, Ottenbacher A, Miller C, Gibson D. Abstract WMP52: reduced hospital costs for ischemic stroke treated with tenecteplase. Stroke. 2022;53(suppl 1):AWMP52. doi:10.1161/str.53.suppl_1.WMP52
14. Powers WJ, Rabinstein AA, Ackerson T, et al. Guidelines for the Early Management of Patients With Acute Ischemic Stroke: 2019 Update to the 2018 Guidelines for the Early Management of Acute Ischemic Stroke: A Guideline for Healthcare Professionals From the American Heart Association/American Stroke Association. Stroke. 2019;50(12):e344-e418. doi:10.1161/str.0000000000000211
15. Faris H, Dewar B, Dowlatshahi D, et al. Ethical justification for deferral of consent in the AcT trial for acute ischemic stroke. Stroke. 2022;53(7):2420-2423. doi:10.1161/strokeaha.122.038760
16. Kvistad CE, Næss H, Helleberg BH, et al. Tenecteplase versus alteplase for the management of acute ischaemic stroke in Norway (NOR-TEST 2, part A): a phase 3, randomised, open-label, blinded endpoint, non-inferiority trial. Lancet Neurol. 2022;21(6):511-519. doi:10.1016/S1474-4422(22)00124-7
Long COVID comes into focus, showing older patients fare worse
These findings help define long COVID, guiding providers and patients through the recovery process, Barak Mizrahi, MSc, of KI Research Institute, Kfar Malal, Israel, and colleagues reported.
“To provide efficient continuous treatment and prevent adverse events related to potential long term effects and delayed symptoms of COVID-19, determining the magnitude and severity of this phenomenon and distinguishing it from similar clinical manifestations that occur normally or following infections with other pathogens is essential,” the investigators wrote in The BMJ.
To this end, they conducted a retrospective, nationwide cohort study involving 1,913,234 people who took a polymerase chain reaction test for SARS-CoV-2 between March 1, 2020, and Oct. 1, 2021. They compared a range of long-term outcomes at different intervals post infection, and compared these trends across subgroups sorted by age, sex, and variant. Outcomes ranged broadly, including respiratory disorders, cough, arthralgia, weakness, hair loss, and others.
The investigators compared hazard ratios for each of these outcomes among patients who tested positive versus those who tested negative at three intervals after testing: 30-90 days, 30-180 days, and 180-360 days. Statistically significant differences in the risks of these outcomes between infected versus uninfected groups suggested that COVID was playing a role.
“The health outcomes that represent long COVID showed a significant increase in both early and late phases,” the investigators wrote. These outcomes included anosmia and dysgeusia, cognitive impairment, dyspnea, weakness, and palpitations. In contrast, chest pain, myalgia, arthralgia, cough, and dizziness were associated with patients who were in the early phase, but not the late phase of long COVID.
“Vaccinated patients with a breakthrough SARS-CoV-2 infection had a lower risk for dyspnea and similar risk for other outcomes compared with unvaccinated infected patients,” the investigators noted.
For the long COVID outcomes, plots of risk differences over time showed that symptoms tended to get milder or resolve within a few months to a year. Patients 41-60 years were most likely to be impacted by long COVID outcomes, and show least improvement at 1 year, compared with other age groups.
“We believe that these findings will shed light on what is ‘long COVID’, support patients and doctors, and facilitate better and more efficient care,” Mr. Mizrahi and coauthor Maytal Bivas-Benita, PhD said in a joint written comment. “Primary care physicians (and patients) will now more clearly understand what are the symptoms that might be related to COVID and for how long they might linger. This would help physicians monitor the patients efficiently, ease their patients’ concerns and navigate a more efficient disease management.”
They suggested that the findings should hold consistent for future variants, although they could not “rule out the possibility of the emergence of new and more severe variants which will be more virulent and cause a more severe illness.”
One “major limitation” of the study, according to Monica Verduzco-Gutierrez, MD, a physiatrist and professor and chair of rehabilitation medicine at the University of Texas Health Science Center, San Antonio, is the lack of data for fatigue and dysautonomia, which are “the major presentations” that she sees in her long COVID clinic.
“The authors of the article focus on the primary damage being related to the lungs, though we know this is a systemic disease beyond the respiratory system, with endothelial dysfunction and immune dysregulation,” Dr. Verduzco-Gutierrez, who is also director of COVID recovery at the University of Texas Health Science Center, said in an interview.
Although it was reassuring to see that younger adults with long COVID trended toward improvement, she noted that patients 41-60 years “still had pretty significant symptoms” after 12 months.
“That [age group comprises] probably the majority of my patients that I’m seeing in the long COVID clinic,” Dr. Verduzco-Gutierrez said. “If you look at the whole thing, it looks better, but then when you drill down to that age group where you’re seeing patients, then it’s not.”
Dr. Verduzco-Gutierrez is so busy managing patients with long COVID that new appointments in her clinic are now delayed until May 31, so most patients will remain under the care of their primary care providers. She recommended that these physicians follow guidance from the American Academy of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, who offer consensus statements based on clinical characteristics, with separate recommendations for pediatric patients.
Our understanding of long COVID will continue to improve, and with it, available recommendations, she predicted, but further advances will require persistent effort.
“I think no matter what this [study] shows us, more research is needed,” Dr. Verduzco-Gutierrez said. “We can’t just forget about it, just because there is a population of people who get better. What about the ones who don’t?”
The investigators and Dr. Verduzco-Gutierrez disclosed no conflicts of interest.
These findings help define long COVID, guiding providers and patients through the recovery process, Barak Mizrahi, MSc, of KI Research Institute, Kfar Malal, Israel, and colleagues reported.
“To provide efficient continuous treatment and prevent adverse events related to potential long term effects and delayed symptoms of COVID-19, determining the magnitude and severity of this phenomenon and distinguishing it from similar clinical manifestations that occur normally or following infections with other pathogens is essential,” the investigators wrote in The BMJ.
To this end, they conducted a retrospective, nationwide cohort study involving 1,913,234 people who took a polymerase chain reaction test for SARS-CoV-2 between March 1, 2020, and Oct. 1, 2021. They compared a range of long-term outcomes at different intervals post infection, and compared these trends across subgroups sorted by age, sex, and variant. Outcomes ranged broadly, including respiratory disorders, cough, arthralgia, weakness, hair loss, and others.
The investigators compared hazard ratios for each of these outcomes among patients who tested positive versus those who tested negative at three intervals after testing: 30-90 days, 30-180 days, and 180-360 days. Statistically significant differences in the risks of these outcomes between infected versus uninfected groups suggested that COVID was playing a role.
“The health outcomes that represent long COVID showed a significant increase in both early and late phases,” the investigators wrote. These outcomes included anosmia and dysgeusia, cognitive impairment, dyspnea, weakness, and palpitations. In contrast, chest pain, myalgia, arthralgia, cough, and dizziness were associated with patients who were in the early phase, but not the late phase of long COVID.
“Vaccinated patients with a breakthrough SARS-CoV-2 infection had a lower risk for dyspnea and similar risk for other outcomes compared with unvaccinated infected patients,” the investigators noted.
For the long COVID outcomes, plots of risk differences over time showed that symptoms tended to get milder or resolve within a few months to a year. Patients 41-60 years were most likely to be impacted by long COVID outcomes, and show least improvement at 1 year, compared with other age groups.
“We believe that these findings will shed light on what is ‘long COVID’, support patients and doctors, and facilitate better and more efficient care,” Mr. Mizrahi and coauthor Maytal Bivas-Benita, PhD said in a joint written comment. “Primary care physicians (and patients) will now more clearly understand what are the symptoms that might be related to COVID and for how long they might linger. This would help physicians monitor the patients efficiently, ease their patients’ concerns and navigate a more efficient disease management.”
They suggested that the findings should hold consistent for future variants, although they could not “rule out the possibility of the emergence of new and more severe variants which will be more virulent and cause a more severe illness.”
One “major limitation” of the study, according to Monica Verduzco-Gutierrez, MD, a physiatrist and professor and chair of rehabilitation medicine at the University of Texas Health Science Center, San Antonio, is the lack of data for fatigue and dysautonomia, which are “the major presentations” that she sees in her long COVID clinic.
“The authors of the article focus on the primary damage being related to the lungs, though we know this is a systemic disease beyond the respiratory system, with endothelial dysfunction and immune dysregulation,” Dr. Verduzco-Gutierrez, who is also director of COVID recovery at the University of Texas Health Science Center, said in an interview.
Although it was reassuring to see that younger adults with long COVID trended toward improvement, she noted that patients 41-60 years “still had pretty significant symptoms” after 12 months.
“That [age group comprises] probably the majority of my patients that I’m seeing in the long COVID clinic,” Dr. Verduzco-Gutierrez said. “If you look at the whole thing, it looks better, but then when you drill down to that age group where you’re seeing patients, then it’s not.”
Dr. Verduzco-Gutierrez is so busy managing patients with long COVID that new appointments in her clinic are now delayed until May 31, so most patients will remain under the care of their primary care providers. She recommended that these physicians follow guidance from the American Academy of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, who offer consensus statements based on clinical characteristics, with separate recommendations for pediatric patients.
Our understanding of long COVID will continue to improve, and with it, available recommendations, she predicted, but further advances will require persistent effort.
“I think no matter what this [study] shows us, more research is needed,” Dr. Verduzco-Gutierrez said. “We can’t just forget about it, just because there is a population of people who get better. What about the ones who don’t?”
The investigators and Dr. Verduzco-Gutierrez disclosed no conflicts of interest.
These findings help define long COVID, guiding providers and patients through the recovery process, Barak Mizrahi, MSc, of KI Research Institute, Kfar Malal, Israel, and colleagues reported.
“To provide efficient continuous treatment and prevent adverse events related to potential long term effects and delayed symptoms of COVID-19, determining the magnitude and severity of this phenomenon and distinguishing it from similar clinical manifestations that occur normally or following infections with other pathogens is essential,” the investigators wrote in The BMJ.
To this end, they conducted a retrospective, nationwide cohort study involving 1,913,234 people who took a polymerase chain reaction test for SARS-CoV-2 between March 1, 2020, and Oct. 1, 2021. They compared a range of long-term outcomes at different intervals post infection, and compared these trends across subgroups sorted by age, sex, and variant. Outcomes ranged broadly, including respiratory disorders, cough, arthralgia, weakness, hair loss, and others.
The investigators compared hazard ratios for each of these outcomes among patients who tested positive versus those who tested negative at three intervals after testing: 30-90 days, 30-180 days, and 180-360 days. Statistically significant differences in the risks of these outcomes between infected versus uninfected groups suggested that COVID was playing a role.
“The health outcomes that represent long COVID showed a significant increase in both early and late phases,” the investigators wrote. These outcomes included anosmia and dysgeusia, cognitive impairment, dyspnea, weakness, and palpitations. In contrast, chest pain, myalgia, arthralgia, cough, and dizziness were associated with patients who were in the early phase, but not the late phase of long COVID.
“Vaccinated patients with a breakthrough SARS-CoV-2 infection had a lower risk for dyspnea and similar risk for other outcomes compared with unvaccinated infected patients,” the investigators noted.
For the long COVID outcomes, plots of risk differences over time showed that symptoms tended to get milder or resolve within a few months to a year. Patients 41-60 years were most likely to be impacted by long COVID outcomes, and show least improvement at 1 year, compared with other age groups.
“We believe that these findings will shed light on what is ‘long COVID’, support patients and doctors, and facilitate better and more efficient care,” Mr. Mizrahi and coauthor Maytal Bivas-Benita, PhD said in a joint written comment. “Primary care physicians (and patients) will now more clearly understand what are the symptoms that might be related to COVID and for how long they might linger. This would help physicians monitor the patients efficiently, ease their patients’ concerns and navigate a more efficient disease management.”
They suggested that the findings should hold consistent for future variants, although they could not “rule out the possibility of the emergence of new and more severe variants which will be more virulent and cause a more severe illness.”
One “major limitation” of the study, according to Monica Verduzco-Gutierrez, MD, a physiatrist and professor and chair of rehabilitation medicine at the University of Texas Health Science Center, San Antonio, is the lack of data for fatigue and dysautonomia, which are “the major presentations” that she sees in her long COVID clinic.
“The authors of the article focus on the primary damage being related to the lungs, though we know this is a systemic disease beyond the respiratory system, with endothelial dysfunction and immune dysregulation,” Dr. Verduzco-Gutierrez, who is also director of COVID recovery at the University of Texas Health Science Center, said in an interview.
Although it was reassuring to see that younger adults with long COVID trended toward improvement, she noted that patients 41-60 years “still had pretty significant symptoms” after 12 months.
“That [age group comprises] probably the majority of my patients that I’m seeing in the long COVID clinic,” Dr. Verduzco-Gutierrez said. “If you look at the whole thing, it looks better, but then when you drill down to that age group where you’re seeing patients, then it’s not.”
Dr. Verduzco-Gutierrez is so busy managing patients with long COVID that new appointments in her clinic are now delayed until May 31, so most patients will remain under the care of their primary care providers. She recommended that these physicians follow guidance from the American Academy of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, who offer consensus statements based on clinical characteristics, with separate recommendations for pediatric patients.
Our understanding of long COVID will continue to improve, and with it, available recommendations, she predicted, but further advances will require persistent effort.
“I think no matter what this [study] shows us, more research is needed,” Dr. Verduzco-Gutierrez said. “We can’t just forget about it, just because there is a population of people who get better. What about the ones who don’t?”
The investigators and Dr. Verduzco-Gutierrez disclosed no conflicts of interest.
FROM THE BMJ
Some BP meds tied to significantly lower risk for dementia, Alzheimer’s
Antihypertensive medications that stimulate rather than inhibit type 2 and 4 angiotensin II receptors can lower the rate of dementia among new users of these medications, new research suggests.
Results from a cohort study of more than 57,000 older Medicare beneficiaries showed that the initiation of antihypertensives that stimulate the receptors was linked to a 16% lower risk for incident Alzheimer’s disease and related dementia (ADRD) and an 18% lower risk for vascular dementia compared with those that inhibit the receptors.
“Achieving appropriate blood pressure control is essential for maximizing brain health, and this promising research suggests certain antihypertensives could yield brain benefit compared to others,” lead study author Zachary A. Marcum, PharmD, PhD, associate professor, University of Washington School of Pharmacy, Seattle, told this news organization.
The findings were published online in JAMA Network Open.
Medicare beneficiaries
Previous observational studies showed that antihypertensive medications that stimulate type 2 and 4 angiotensin II receptors, in comparison with those that don’t, were associated with lower rates of dementia. However, those studies included individuals with prevalent hypertension and were relatively small.
The new retrospective cohort study included a random sample of 57,773 Medicare beneficiaries aged at least 65 years with new-onset hypertension. The mean age of participants was 73.8 years, 62.9% were women, and 86.9% were White.
Over the course of the study, some participants filled at least one prescription for a stimulating angiotensin II receptor type 2 and 4, such as angiotensin II receptor type 1 blockers, dihydropyridine calcium channel blockers, and thiazide diuretics.
Others participants filled a prescription for an inhibiting type 2 and 4 angiotensin II receptors, including angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors, beta-blockers, and nondihydropyridine calcium channel blockers.
“All these medications lower blood pressure, but they do it in different ways,” said Dr. Marcum.
The researchers were interested in the varying activity of these drugs at the type 2 and 4 angiotensin II receptors.
For each 30-day interval, they categorized beneficiaries into four groups: a stimulating medication group (n = 4,879) consisting of individuals mostly taking stimulating antihypertensives; an inhibiting medication group (n = 10,303) that mostly included individuals prescribed this type of antihypertensive; a mixed group (n = 2,179) that included a combination of the first two classifications; and a nonuser group (n = 40,413) of individuals who were not using either type of drug.
The primary outcome was time to first occurrence of ADRD. The secondary outcome was time to first occurrence of vascular dementia.
Researchers controlled for cardiovascular risk factors and sociodemographic characteristics, such as age, sex, race/ethnicity, and receipt of low-income subsidy.
Unanswered questions
After adjustments, results showed that initiation of an antihypertensive medication regimen that exclusively stimulates, rather than inhibits, type 2 and 4 angiotensin II receptors was associated with a 16% lower risk for incident ADRD over a follow-up of just under 7 years (hazard ratio, 0.84; 95% confidence interval, 0.79-0.90; P < .001).
The mixed regimen was also associated with statistically significant (P = .001) reduced odds of ADRD compared with the inhibiting medications.
As for vascular dementia, use of stimulating vs. inhibiting medications was associated with an 18% lower risk (HR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.69-0.96; P = .02).
Again, use of the mixed regimen was associated with reduced risk of vascular dementia compared with the inhibiting medications (P = .03).
A variety of potential mechanisms might explain the superiority of stimulating agents when it comes to dementia risk, said Dr. Marcum. These could include, for example, increased blood flow to the brain and reduced amyloid.
“But more mechanistic work is needed as well as evaluation of dose responses, because that’s not something we looked at in this study,” Dr. Marcum said. “There are still a lot of unanswered questions.”
Stimulators instead of inhibitors?
The results of the current analysis come on the heels of some previous work showing the benefits of lowering blood pressure. For example, the Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial (SPRINT) showed that targeting a systolic blood pressure below 120 mm Hg significantly reduces risk for heart disease, stroke, and death from these diseases.
But in contrast to previous research, the current study included only beneficiaries with incident hypertension and new use of antihypertensive medications, and it adjusted for time-varying confounding.
Prescribing stimulating instead of inhibiting treatments could make a difference at the population level, Dr. Marcum noted.
“If we could shift the prescribing a little bit from inhibiting to stimulating, that could possibly reduce dementia risk,” he said.
However, “we’re not suggesting [that all patients] have their regimen switched,” he added.
That’s because inhibiting medications still have an important place in the antihypertensive treatment armamentarium, Dr. Marcum noted. As an example, beta-blockers are used post heart attack.
As well, factors such as cost and side effects should be taken into consideration when prescribing an antihypertensive drug.
The new results could be used to set up a comparison in a future randomized controlled trial that would provide the strongest evidence for estimating causal effects of treatments, said Dr. Marcum.
‘More convincing’
Carlos G. Santos-Gallego, MD, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, said the study is “more convincing” than previous related research, as it has a larger sample size and a longer follow-up.
“And the exquisite statistical analysis gives more robustness, more solidity, to the hypothesis that drugs that stimulate type 2 and 4 angiotensin II receptors might be protective for dementia,” said Dr. Santos-Gallego, who was not involved with the research.
However, he noted that the retrospective study had some limitations, including the underdiagnosis of dementia. “The diagnosis of dementia is, honestly, very poorly done in the clinical setting,” he said.
As well, the study could be subject to “confounding by indication,” Dr. Santos-Gallego said. “There could be a third variable, another confounding factor, that’s responsible both for the dementia and for the prescription of these drugs,” he added.
For example, he noted that comorbidities such as atrial fibrillation, myocardial infarction, and heart failure might increase the risk of dementia.
He agreed with the investigators that a randomized clinical trial would address these limitations. “All comorbidities would be equally shared” in the randomized groups, and all participants would be given “a specific test for dementia at the same time,” Dr. Santos-Gallego said.
Still, he noted that the new results are in keeping with hypertension guidelines that recommend stimulating drugs.
“This trial definitely shows that the current hypertension guidelines are good treatment for our patients, not only to control blood pressure and not only to prevent infarction to prevent stroke but also to prevent dementia,” said Dr. Santos-Gallego.
Also commenting for this news organization, Heather Snyder, PhD, vice president of medical and scientific relations at the Alzheimer’s Association, said the new data provide “clarity” on why previous research had differing results on the effect of antihypertensives on cognition.
Among the caveats of this new analysis is that “it’s unclear if the demographics in this study are fully representative of Medicare beneficiaries,” said Dr. Snyder.
She, too, said a clinical trial is important “to understand if there is a preventative and/or treatment potential in the medications that stimulate type 2 and 4 angiotensin II receptors.”
The study received funding from the National Institute on Aging. Dr. Marcum and Dr. Santos-Gallego have reported no relevant financial relationships.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
Antihypertensive medications that stimulate rather than inhibit type 2 and 4 angiotensin II receptors can lower the rate of dementia among new users of these medications, new research suggests.
Results from a cohort study of more than 57,000 older Medicare beneficiaries showed that the initiation of antihypertensives that stimulate the receptors was linked to a 16% lower risk for incident Alzheimer’s disease and related dementia (ADRD) and an 18% lower risk for vascular dementia compared with those that inhibit the receptors.
“Achieving appropriate blood pressure control is essential for maximizing brain health, and this promising research suggests certain antihypertensives could yield brain benefit compared to others,” lead study author Zachary A. Marcum, PharmD, PhD, associate professor, University of Washington School of Pharmacy, Seattle, told this news organization.
The findings were published online in JAMA Network Open.
Medicare beneficiaries
Previous observational studies showed that antihypertensive medications that stimulate type 2 and 4 angiotensin II receptors, in comparison with those that don’t, were associated with lower rates of dementia. However, those studies included individuals with prevalent hypertension and were relatively small.
The new retrospective cohort study included a random sample of 57,773 Medicare beneficiaries aged at least 65 years with new-onset hypertension. The mean age of participants was 73.8 years, 62.9% were women, and 86.9% were White.
Over the course of the study, some participants filled at least one prescription for a stimulating angiotensin II receptor type 2 and 4, such as angiotensin II receptor type 1 blockers, dihydropyridine calcium channel blockers, and thiazide diuretics.
Others participants filled a prescription for an inhibiting type 2 and 4 angiotensin II receptors, including angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors, beta-blockers, and nondihydropyridine calcium channel blockers.
“All these medications lower blood pressure, but they do it in different ways,” said Dr. Marcum.
The researchers were interested in the varying activity of these drugs at the type 2 and 4 angiotensin II receptors.
For each 30-day interval, they categorized beneficiaries into four groups: a stimulating medication group (n = 4,879) consisting of individuals mostly taking stimulating antihypertensives; an inhibiting medication group (n = 10,303) that mostly included individuals prescribed this type of antihypertensive; a mixed group (n = 2,179) that included a combination of the first two classifications; and a nonuser group (n = 40,413) of individuals who were not using either type of drug.
The primary outcome was time to first occurrence of ADRD. The secondary outcome was time to first occurrence of vascular dementia.
Researchers controlled for cardiovascular risk factors and sociodemographic characteristics, such as age, sex, race/ethnicity, and receipt of low-income subsidy.
Unanswered questions
After adjustments, results showed that initiation of an antihypertensive medication regimen that exclusively stimulates, rather than inhibits, type 2 and 4 angiotensin II receptors was associated with a 16% lower risk for incident ADRD over a follow-up of just under 7 years (hazard ratio, 0.84; 95% confidence interval, 0.79-0.90; P < .001).
The mixed regimen was also associated with statistically significant (P = .001) reduced odds of ADRD compared with the inhibiting medications.
As for vascular dementia, use of stimulating vs. inhibiting medications was associated with an 18% lower risk (HR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.69-0.96; P = .02).
Again, use of the mixed regimen was associated with reduced risk of vascular dementia compared with the inhibiting medications (P = .03).
A variety of potential mechanisms might explain the superiority of stimulating agents when it comes to dementia risk, said Dr. Marcum. These could include, for example, increased blood flow to the brain and reduced amyloid.
“But more mechanistic work is needed as well as evaluation of dose responses, because that’s not something we looked at in this study,” Dr. Marcum said. “There are still a lot of unanswered questions.”
Stimulators instead of inhibitors?
The results of the current analysis come on the heels of some previous work showing the benefits of lowering blood pressure. For example, the Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial (SPRINT) showed that targeting a systolic blood pressure below 120 mm Hg significantly reduces risk for heart disease, stroke, and death from these diseases.
But in contrast to previous research, the current study included only beneficiaries with incident hypertension and new use of antihypertensive medications, and it adjusted for time-varying confounding.
Prescribing stimulating instead of inhibiting treatments could make a difference at the population level, Dr. Marcum noted.
“If we could shift the prescribing a little bit from inhibiting to stimulating, that could possibly reduce dementia risk,” he said.
However, “we’re not suggesting [that all patients] have their regimen switched,” he added.
That’s because inhibiting medications still have an important place in the antihypertensive treatment armamentarium, Dr. Marcum noted. As an example, beta-blockers are used post heart attack.
As well, factors such as cost and side effects should be taken into consideration when prescribing an antihypertensive drug.
The new results could be used to set up a comparison in a future randomized controlled trial that would provide the strongest evidence for estimating causal effects of treatments, said Dr. Marcum.
‘More convincing’
Carlos G. Santos-Gallego, MD, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, said the study is “more convincing” than previous related research, as it has a larger sample size and a longer follow-up.
“And the exquisite statistical analysis gives more robustness, more solidity, to the hypothesis that drugs that stimulate type 2 and 4 angiotensin II receptors might be protective for dementia,” said Dr. Santos-Gallego, who was not involved with the research.
However, he noted that the retrospective study had some limitations, including the underdiagnosis of dementia. “The diagnosis of dementia is, honestly, very poorly done in the clinical setting,” he said.
As well, the study could be subject to “confounding by indication,” Dr. Santos-Gallego said. “There could be a third variable, another confounding factor, that’s responsible both for the dementia and for the prescription of these drugs,” he added.
For example, he noted that comorbidities such as atrial fibrillation, myocardial infarction, and heart failure might increase the risk of dementia.
He agreed with the investigators that a randomized clinical trial would address these limitations. “All comorbidities would be equally shared” in the randomized groups, and all participants would be given “a specific test for dementia at the same time,” Dr. Santos-Gallego said.
Still, he noted that the new results are in keeping with hypertension guidelines that recommend stimulating drugs.
“This trial definitely shows that the current hypertension guidelines are good treatment for our patients, not only to control blood pressure and not only to prevent infarction to prevent stroke but also to prevent dementia,” said Dr. Santos-Gallego.
Also commenting for this news organization, Heather Snyder, PhD, vice president of medical and scientific relations at the Alzheimer’s Association, said the new data provide “clarity” on why previous research had differing results on the effect of antihypertensives on cognition.
Among the caveats of this new analysis is that “it’s unclear if the demographics in this study are fully representative of Medicare beneficiaries,” said Dr. Snyder.
She, too, said a clinical trial is important “to understand if there is a preventative and/or treatment potential in the medications that stimulate type 2 and 4 angiotensin II receptors.”
The study received funding from the National Institute on Aging. Dr. Marcum and Dr. Santos-Gallego have reported no relevant financial relationships.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
Antihypertensive medications that stimulate rather than inhibit type 2 and 4 angiotensin II receptors can lower the rate of dementia among new users of these medications, new research suggests.
Results from a cohort study of more than 57,000 older Medicare beneficiaries showed that the initiation of antihypertensives that stimulate the receptors was linked to a 16% lower risk for incident Alzheimer’s disease and related dementia (ADRD) and an 18% lower risk for vascular dementia compared with those that inhibit the receptors.
“Achieving appropriate blood pressure control is essential for maximizing brain health, and this promising research suggests certain antihypertensives could yield brain benefit compared to others,” lead study author Zachary A. Marcum, PharmD, PhD, associate professor, University of Washington School of Pharmacy, Seattle, told this news organization.
The findings were published online in JAMA Network Open.
Medicare beneficiaries
Previous observational studies showed that antihypertensive medications that stimulate type 2 and 4 angiotensin II receptors, in comparison with those that don’t, were associated with lower rates of dementia. However, those studies included individuals with prevalent hypertension and were relatively small.
The new retrospective cohort study included a random sample of 57,773 Medicare beneficiaries aged at least 65 years with new-onset hypertension. The mean age of participants was 73.8 years, 62.9% were women, and 86.9% were White.
Over the course of the study, some participants filled at least one prescription for a stimulating angiotensin II receptor type 2 and 4, such as angiotensin II receptor type 1 blockers, dihydropyridine calcium channel blockers, and thiazide diuretics.
Others participants filled a prescription for an inhibiting type 2 and 4 angiotensin II receptors, including angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors, beta-blockers, and nondihydropyridine calcium channel blockers.
“All these medications lower blood pressure, but they do it in different ways,” said Dr. Marcum.
The researchers were interested in the varying activity of these drugs at the type 2 and 4 angiotensin II receptors.
For each 30-day interval, they categorized beneficiaries into four groups: a stimulating medication group (n = 4,879) consisting of individuals mostly taking stimulating antihypertensives; an inhibiting medication group (n = 10,303) that mostly included individuals prescribed this type of antihypertensive; a mixed group (n = 2,179) that included a combination of the first two classifications; and a nonuser group (n = 40,413) of individuals who were not using either type of drug.
The primary outcome was time to first occurrence of ADRD. The secondary outcome was time to first occurrence of vascular dementia.
Researchers controlled for cardiovascular risk factors and sociodemographic characteristics, such as age, sex, race/ethnicity, and receipt of low-income subsidy.
Unanswered questions
After adjustments, results showed that initiation of an antihypertensive medication regimen that exclusively stimulates, rather than inhibits, type 2 and 4 angiotensin II receptors was associated with a 16% lower risk for incident ADRD over a follow-up of just under 7 years (hazard ratio, 0.84; 95% confidence interval, 0.79-0.90; P < .001).
The mixed regimen was also associated with statistically significant (P = .001) reduced odds of ADRD compared with the inhibiting medications.
As for vascular dementia, use of stimulating vs. inhibiting medications was associated with an 18% lower risk (HR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.69-0.96; P = .02).
Again, use of the mixed regimen was associated with reduced risk of vascular dementia compared with the inhibiting medications (P = .03).
A variety of potential mechanisms might explain the superiority of stimulating agents when it comes to dementia risk, said Dr. Marcum. These could include, for example, increased blood flow to the brain and reduced amyloid.
“But more mechanistic work is needed as well as evaluation of dose responses, because that’s not something we looked at in this study,” Dr. Marcum said. “There are still a lot of unanswered questions.”
Stimulators instead of inhibitors?
The results of the current analysis come on the heels of some previous work showing the benefits of lowering blood pressure. For example, the Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial (SPRINT) showed that targeting a systolic blood pressure below 120 mm Hg significantly reduces risk for heart disease, stroke, and death from these diseases.
But in contrast to previous research, the current study included only beneficiaries with incident hypertension and new use of antihypertensive medications, and it adjusted for time-varying confounding.
Prescribing stimulating instead of inhibiting treatments could make a difference at the population level, Dr. Marcum noted.
“If we could shift the prescribing a little bit from inhibiting to stimulating, that could possibly reduce dementia risk,” he said.
However, “we’re not suggesting [that all patients] have their regimen switched,” he added.
That’s because inhibiting medications still have an important place in the antihypertensive treatment armamentarium, Dr. Marcum noted. As an example, beta-blockers are used post heart attack.
As well, factors such as cost and side effects should be taken into consideration when prescribing an antihypertensive drug.
The new results could be used to set up a comparison in a future randomized controlled trial that would provide the strongest evidence for estimating causal effects of treatments, said Dr. Marcum.
‘More convincing’
Carlos G. Santos-Gallego, MD, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, said the study is “more convincing” than previous related research, as it has a larger sample size and a longer follow-up.
“And the exquisite statistical analysis gives more robustness, more solidity, to the hypothesis that drugs that stimulate type 2 and 4 angiotensin II receptors might be protective for dementia,” said Dr. Santos-Gallego, who was not involved with the research.
However, he noted that the retrospective study had some limitations, including the underdiagnosis of dementia. “The diagnosis of dementia is, honestly, very poorly done in the clinical setting,” he said.
As well, the study could be subject to “confounding by indication,” Dr. Santos-Gallego said. “There could be a third variable, another confounding factor, that’s responsible both for the dementia and for the prescription of these drugs,” he added.
For example, he noted that comorbidities such as atrial fibrillation, myocardial infarction, and heart failure might increase the risk of dementia.
He agreed with the investigators that a randomized clinical trial would address these limitations. “All comorbidities would be equally shared” in the randomized groups, and all participants would be given “a specific test for dementia at the same time,” Dr. Santos-Gallego said.
Still, he noted that the new results are in keeping with hypertension guidelines that recommend stimulating drugs.
“This trial definitely shows that the current hypertension guidelines are good treatment for our patients, not only to control blood pressure and not only to prevent infarction to prevent stroke but also to prevent dementia,” said Dr. Santos-Gallego.
Also commenting for this news organization, Heather Snyder, PhD, vice president of medical and scientific relations at the Alzheimer’s Association, said the new data provide “clarity” on why previous research had differing results on the effect of antihypertensives on cognition.
Among the caveats of this new analysis is that “it’s unclear if the demographics in this study are fully representative of Medicare beneficiaries,” said Dr. Snyder.
She, too, said a clinical trial is important “to understand if there is a preventative and/or treatment potential in the medications that stimulate type 2 and 4 angiotensin II receptors.”
The study received funding from the National Institute on Aging. Dr. Marcum and Dr. Santos-Gallego have reported no relevant financial relationships.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.