Prescription medications

Photo courtesy of CDC

A large, retrospective study has shown that nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) can increase the risk of bleeding and cardiovascular events in patients who are receiving antithrombotic therapy after myocardial infarction (MI).

The risks were increased regardless of the type of antithrombotic treatment patients received, the types of NSAIDs they were prescribed, or the duration of NSAID use.

Researchers reported these findings in JAMA.

Anne-Marie Schjerning Olsen, MD, PhD, of Copenhagen University Hospital Gentofte in Hellerup, Denmark, and her colleagues conducted the research. They used nationwide administrative registries in Denmark (2002-2011) to analyze patients 30 years of age or older who were admitted with first-time MI and were alive 30 days after hospital discharge.

The team looked at subsequent treatment with aspirin, clopidogrel, or other oral anticoagulants and their combinations, as well as ongoing, concomitant, prescription NSAID use. They assessed the risk of bleeding requiring hospitalization and a composite cardiovascular outcome (cardiovascular death, nonfatal recurrent MI, and stroke).

The study included 61,971 patients with a mean age of 68 years. Thirty-four percent of these patients filled at least 1 NSAID prescription.

At a median follow-up of 3.5 years, 18,105 patients (29.2%) had died. There were 5288 bleeding events (8.5%) and 18,568 cardiovascular events (30.0%).

A multivariate analysis showed that NSAID use increased the risk of bleeding (hazard ratio, 2.02) and cardiovascular events (hazard ratio, 1.40). The increased risk of these events was present regardless of the type of antithrombotic treatment, the types of NSAIDs used, or the duration of NSAID use.

Dr Schjerning Olsen and her colleagues said additional research is needed to confirm these findings, but physicians should exercise caution when prescribing NSAIDs to patients with a recent MI.

Authors of a related editorial pointed out that this study only included prescription NSAID use. In countries where NSAIDs are available over the counter, physicians may be unaware that patients are taking these drugs.

Prescription medications

Photo courtesy of CDC

A large, retrospective study has shown that nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) can increase the risk of bleeding and cardiovascular events in patients who are receiving antithrombotic therapy after myocardial infarction (MI).

The risks were increased regardless of the type of antithrombotic treatment patients received, the types of NSAIDs they were prescribed, or the duration of NSAID use.

Researchers reported these findings in JAMA.

Anne-Marie Schjerning Olsen, MD, PhD, of Copenhagen University Hospital Gentofte in Hellerup, Denmark, and her colleagues conducted the research. They used nationwide administrative registries in Denmark (2002-2011) to analyze patients 30 years of age or older who were admitted with first-time MI and were alive 30 days after hospital discharge.

The team looked at subsequent treatment with aspirin, clopidogrel, or other oral anticoagulants and their combinations, as well as ongoing, concomitant, prescription NSAID use. They assessed the risk of bleeding requiring hospitalization and a composite cardiovascular outcome (cardiovascular death, nonfatal recurrent MI, and stroke).

The study included 61,971 patients with a mean age of 68 years. Thirty-four percent of these patients filled at least 1 NSAID prescription.

At a median follow-up of 3.5 years, 18,105 patients (29.2%) had died. There were 5288 bleeding events (8.5%) and 18,568 cardiovascular events (30.0%).

A multivariate analysis showed that NSAID use increased the risk of bleeding (hazard ratio, 2.02) and cardiovascular events (hazard ratio, 1.40). The increased risk of these events was present regardless of the type of antithrombotic treatment, the types of NSAIDs used, or the duration of NSAID use.

Dr Schjerning Olsen and her colleagues said additional research is needed to confirm these findings, but physicians should exercise caution when prescribing NSAIDs to patients with a recent MI.

Authors of a related editorial pointed out that this study only included prescription NSAID use. In countries where NSAIDs are available over the counter, physicians may be unaware that patients are taking these drugs.

Prescription medications

Photo courtesy of CDC

A large, retrospective study has shown that nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) can increase the risk of bleeding and cardiovascular events in patients who are receiving antithrombotic therapy after myocardial infarction (MI).

The risks were increased regardless of the type of antithrombotic treatment patients received, the types of NSAIDs they were prescribed, or the duration of NSAID use.

Researchers reported these findings in JAMA.

Anne-Marie Schjerning Olsen, MD, PhD, of Copenhagen University Hospital Gentofte in Hellerup, Denmark, and her colleagues conducted the research. They used nationwide administrative registries in Denmark (2002-2011) to analyze patients 30 years of age or older who were admitted with first-time MI and were alive 30 days after hospital discharge.

The team looked at subsequent treatment with aspirin, clopidogrel, or other oral anticoagulants and their combinations, as well as ongoing, concomitant, prescription NSAID use. They assessed the risk of bleeding requiring hospitalization and a composite cardiovascular outcome (cardiovascular death, nonfatal recurrent MI, and stroke).

The study included 61,971 patients with a mean age of 68 years. Thirty-four percent of these patients filled at least 1 NSAID prescription.

At a median follow-up of 3.5 years, 18,105 patients (29.2%) had died. There were 5288 bleeding events (8.5%) and 18,568 cardiovascular events (30.0%).

A multivariate analysis showed that NSAID use increased the risk of bleeding (hazard ratio, 2.02) and cardiovascular events (hazard ratio, 1.40). The increased risk of these events was present regardless of the type of antithrombotic treatment, the types of NSAIDs used, or the duration of NSAID use.

Dr Schjerning Olsen and her colleagues said additional research is needed to confirm these findings, but physicians should exercise caution when prescribing NSAIDs to patients with a recent MI.

Authors of a related editorial pointed out that this study only included prescription NSAID use. In countries where NSAIDs are available over the counter, physicians may be unaware that patients are taking these drugs.

From left: Investigators

Kristine Crews, Barthelemy

Diouf, and William Evans

Photo by Seth Dixon

A gene variant may help predict vincristine-related toxicity in children with acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL).

A study of more than 300 children with ALL showed that patients with an inherited variant in the gene CEP72 were more likely to develop peripheral neuropathy after receiving the chemotherapy drug vincristine.

If these results can be replicated in additional populations, they may provide a basis for safer dosing of the drug, according to investigators.

William Evans, PharmD, of St Jude Children’s Research Hospital in Memphis, Tennessee, and his colleagues conducted this research and shared the results in JAMA.

The investigators analyzed patients in 2 prospective clinical trials for childhood ALL that included treatment with 36 to 39 doses of vincristine. The team performed genetic analyses and assessed vincristine-induced peripheral neuropathy in 321 patients in whom DNA data were available.

This included 222 patients with a median age of 6 years who were enrolled in a St Jude Children’s Research Hospital study from 1994 to 1998, as well as 99 patients with a median age of 11.4 years who were enrolled in a Children’s Oncology Group (COG) study from 2007 to 2010.

Grade 2 to 4 vincristine-induced peripheral neuropathy occurred in 28.8% of patients (64/222) in the St Jude cohort and in 22.2% (22/99) in the COG cohort.

The investigators found that a single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) in the promoter region of the CEP72 gene, which encodes a centrosomal protein involved in microtubule formation, was significantly associated with vincristine-induced neuropathy (P=6.3×10^-9).

This SNP had a minor allele frequency of 37%, and 16% of patients (50/321) were homozygous for the risk allele (TT at rs924607).

Among patients with the high-risk CEP72 genotype, 56% (28/50) had at least 1 episode of grade 2 to 4 neuropathy. This was significantly higher than in patients with the CEP72 CC or CT genotypes. About 21% of those patients (58/271) had at least 1 episode of grade 2 to 4 neuropathy (P=2.4×10^-6).

In addition, the severity of neuropathy was greater in patients who were homozygous for the TT genotype than in patients with the CC or CT genotype—2.4-fold greater by Poisson regression (P<0.0001) and 2.7-fold greater based on the mean grade of neuropathy (P=0.004).

Finally, in lab experiments, the investigators found that reducing CEP72 expression in human neurons and leukemia cells increased their sensitivity to vincristine.

In a related editorial, Howard L. McLeod, PharmD, of the Moffitt Cancer Center in Tampa, Florida, noted that this study has several strengths: genome-wide discovery in patients from well-conducted clinical trials, replication in a multicenter cohort, statistical robustness, and laboratory correlative findings that contribute to biologic plausibility.

However, he also pointed out that vincristine remains a component of the most widely accepted treatment regimens for childhood ALL.

“It is not clear that vincristine can be removed from the treatment options for a child with CEP72 variants, although this study suggests that the resulting increase in leukemia cellular sensitivity makes vincristine dose reductions possible without compromising antileukemic effect,” he wrote.

“However, there is value in the association of CEP72 with vincristine-induced peripheral neuropathy (VIPN). The ability to objectively ascribe a degree of heightened VIPN risk will allow for greater transparency in discussions of risk and benefits of therapy with patients and their family members.”

“This also may lead to developmental therapeutic approaches to modulate CEP72 function as either primary prevention or treatment of chronic VIPN. This study also represents an initial robust effort to generate predictors for adverse drug reactions in cancer care.”

From left: Investigators

Kristine Crews, Barthelemy

Diouf, and William Evans

Photo by Seth Dixon

A gene variant may help predict vincristine-related toxicity in children with acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL).

A study of more than 300 children with ALL showed that patients with an inherited variant in the gene CEP72 were more likely to develop peripheral neuropathy after receiving the chemotherapy drug vincristine.

If these results can be replicated in additional populations, they may provide a basis for safer dosing of the drug, according to investigators.

William Evans, PharmD, of St Jude Children’s Research Hospital in Memphis, Tennessee, and his colleagues conducted this research and shared the results in JAMA.

The investigators analyzed patients in 2 prospective clinical trials for childhood ALL that included treatment with 36 to 39 doses of vincristine. The team performed genetic analyses and assessed vincristine-induced peripheral neuropathy in 321 patients in whom DNA data were available.

This included 222 patients with a median age of 6 years who were enrolled in a St Jude Children’s Research Hospital study from 1994 to 1998, as well as 99 patients with a median age of 11.4 years who were enrolled in a Children’s Oncology Group (COG) study from 2007 to 2010.

Grade 2 to 4 vincristine-induced peripheral neuropathy occurred in 28.8% of patients (64/222) in the St Jude cohort and in 22.2% (22/99) in the COG cohort.

The investigators found that a single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) in the promoter region of the CEP72 gene, which encodes a centrosomal protein involved in microtubule formation, was significantly associated with vincristine-induced neuropathy (P=6.3×10^-9).

This SNP had a minor allele frequency of 37%, and 16% of patients (50/321) were homozygous for the risk allele (TT at rs924607).

Among patients with the high-risk CEP72 genotype, 56% (28/50) had at least 1 episode of grade 2 to 4 neuropathy. This was significantly higher than in patients with the CEP72 CC or CT genotypes. About 21% of those patients (58/271) had at least 1 episode of grade 2 to 4 neuropathy (P=2.4×10^-6).

In addition, the severity of neuropathy was greater in patients who were homozygous for the TT genotype than in patients with the CC or CT genotype—2.4-fold greater by Poisson regression (P<0.0001) and 2.7-fold greater based on the mean grade of neuropathy (P=0.004).

Finally, in lab experiments, the investigators found that reducing CEP72 expression in human neurons and leukemia cells increased their sensitivity to vincristine.

In a related editorial, Howard L. McLeod, PharmD, of the Moffitt Cancer Center in Tampa, Florida, noted that this study has several strengths: genome-wide discovery in patients from well-conducted clinical trials, replication in a multicenter cohort, statistical robustness, and laboratory correlative findings that contribute to biologic plausibility.

However, he also pointed out that vincristine remains a component of the most widely accepted treatment regimens for childhood ALL.

“It is not clear that vincristine can be removed from the treatment options for a child with CEP72 variants, although this study suggests that the resulting increase in leukemia cellular sensitivity makes vincristine dose reductions possible without compromising antileukemic effect,” he wrote.

“However, there is value in the association of CEP72 with vincristine-induced peripheral neuropathy (VIPN). The ability to objectively ascribe a degree of heightened VIPN risk will allow for greater transparency in discussions of risk and benefits of therapy with patients and their family members.”

“This also may lead to developmental therapeutic approaches to modulate CEP72 function as either primary prevention or treatment of chronic VIPN. This study also represents an initial robust effort to generate predictors for adverse drug reactions in cancer care.”

From left: Investigators

Kristine Crews, Barthelemy

Diouf, and William Evans

Photo by Seth Dixon

A gene variant may help predict vincristine-related toxicity in children with acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL).

A study of more than 300 children with ALL showed that patients with an inherited variant in the gene CEP72 were more likely to develop peripheral neuropathy after receiving the chemotherapy drug vincristine.

If these results can be replicated in additional populations, they may provide a basis for safer dosing of the drug, according to investigators.

William Evans, PharmD, of St Jude Children’s Research Hospital in Memphis, Tennessee, and his colleagues conducted this research and shared the results in JAMA.

The investigators analyzed patients in 2 prospective clinical trials for childhood ALL that included treatment with 36 to 39 doses of vincristine. The team performed genetic analyses and assessed vincristine-induced peripheral neuropathy in 321 patients in whom DNA data were available.

This included 222 patients with a median age of 6 years who were enrolled in a St Jude Children’s Research Hospital study from 1994 to 1998, as well as 99 patients with a median age of 11.4 years who were enrolled in a Children’s Oncology Group (COG) study from 2007 to 2010.

Grade 2 to 4 vincristine-induced peripheral neuropathy occurred in 28.8% of patients (64/222) in the St Jude cohort and in 22.2% (22/99) in the COG cohort.

The investigators found that a single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) in the promoter region of the CEP72 gene, which encodes a centrosomal protein involved in microtubule formation, was significantly associated with vincristine-induced neuropathy (P=6.3×10^-9).

This SNP had a minor allele frequency of 37%, and 16% of patients (50/321) were homozygous for the risk allele (TT at rs924607).

Among patients with the high-risk CEP72 genotype, 56% (28/50) had at least 1 episode of grade 2 to 4 neuropathy. This was significantly higher than in patients with the CEP72 CC or CT genotypes. About 21% of those patients (58/271) had at least 1 episode of grade 2 to 4 neuropathy (P=2.4×10^-6).

In addition, the severity of neuropathy was greater in patients who were homozygous for the TT genotype than in patients with the CC or CT genotype—2.4-fold greater by Poisson regression (P<0.0001) and 2.7-fold greater based on the mean grade of neuropathy (P=0.004).

Finally, in lab experiments, the investigators found that reducing CEP72 expression in human neurons and leukemia cells increased their sensitivity to vincristine.

In a related editorial, Howard L. McLeod, PharmD, of the Moffitt Cancer Center in Tampa, Florida, noted that this study has several strengths: genome-wide discovery in patients from well-conducted clinical trials, replication in a multicenter cohort, statistical robustness, and laboratory correlative findings that contribute to biologic plausibility.

However, he also pointed out that vincristine remains a component of the most widely accepted treatment regimens for childhood ALL.

“It is not clear that vincristine can be removed from the treatment options for a child with CEP72 variants, although this study suggests that the resulting increase in leukemia cellular sensitivity makes vincristine dose reductions possible without compromising antileukemic effect,” he wrote.

“However, there is value in the association of CEP72 with vincristine-induced peripheral neuropathy (VIPN). The ability to objectively ascribe a degree of heightened VIPN risk will allow for greater transparency in discussions of risk and benefits of therapy with patients and their family members.”

“This also may lead to developmental therapeutic approaches to modulate CEP72 function as either primary prevention or treatment of chronic VIPN. This study also represents an initial robust effort to generate predictors for adverse drug reactions in cancer care.”

Even a short course of NSAIDs markedly raises the risk of major bleeding in patients receiving antithrombotic medication after having a myocardial infarction, according to a report published online Feb. 24 in JAMA.

In a nationwide Danish study, this risk was increased no matter which antithrombotic regimens the participants were taking and no matter which NSAIDs they were given. “There was no safe therapeutic window for concomitant NSAID use, because even short-term (0-3 days) treatment was associated with increased risk of bleeding,” said Dr. Anne-Marie Schjerning Olsen of Copenhagen University Hospital Gentofte, Hellerup (Denmark), and her associates.

Denise Fulton/Frontline Medical News

More research is needed to confirm the findings of this observational study, but until then “physicians should exercise appropriate caution when prescribing NSAIDs for patients who have recently experienced MI,” they noted.

The only NSAID available over the counter in Denmark during the study period was ibuprofen, and it could only be purchased in low (20-mg) doses and in limited quantities (100 tablets). In countries like the United States, where ibuprofen and other NSAIDs are available without prescriptions and where there are few restrictions on the amounts that can be purchased, these study findings are even more worrying, Dr. Schjerning Olsen and her colleagues said.

Several current guidelines discourage the use of NSAIDs in people with a history of MI, including recommendations from the American Heart Association and the European Medicines Agency. But several sources have indicated that many such patients are being exposed to the drugs. To study the issue, the investigators analyzed data in four nationwide Danish health care registries. They identified roughly 62,000 adults (mean age 67.7 years) hospitalized for recent MI in 2002-2011 and put on antithrombotic medications, of whom nearly 21,000 (33.8%) also received at least one prescription for NSAID treatment.

During a median follow-up of 3.5 years, there were 5,288 major bleeding events in the study cohort, including 799 fatal bleeding events.

The incidence of major bleeding events was 4.2 per 100 person-years among patients given NSAIDs, compared with 2.2 per 100 person-years without NSAID therapy, for a hazard ratio of 2.0. Bleeding risk was markedly increased from the first day of exposure to NSAIDs (HR of 3.37 on days 0-3), and it persisted through 90 days. This pattern was consistent across all antithrombotic regimens and regardless of whether the prescribed NSAIDs were selective COX-2 inhibitors, such as rofecoxib or celecoxib, or nonselective COX-2 inhibitors, such as ibuprofen or diclofenac (JAMA 2015 Feb. 24 [doi:10.1001/jama.2015.0809]).

When major gastrointestinal bleeding events were considered individually, the incidence was 2.1 events per 100 person-years among NSAID users, compared with only 0.8 events per 100 person-years without NSAIDs, for an HR of 2.65. The incidence of combined cardiovascular events was 11.2 per 100 person-years among NSAID users, compared with 8.3 per 100 person-years without NSAIDs, for an HR of 1.4.

These results persisted through several sensitivity analyses. They remained consistent when patients with rheumatoid arthritis were excluded from the analysis; such patients are the primary users of NSAIDs in the age group of the study population. The findings also remained consistent when patients at high risk of bleeding due to comorbidities were excluded from the analysis, including those with malignancy, acute or chronic renal failure, or a history of bleeding events.

“Although it seems unlikely that physicians can completely avoid prescription of NSAIDs, even among high-risk patients, these results highlight the importance of considering the balance of benefits and risks before initiating any NSAID treatment,” Dr. Schjerning Olsen and her associates said.

The study was funded by the Danish Council for Independent Research, the William Harvey Research Institute at Barts, and the London School of Medicine and Dentistry. Dr. Schjerning Olsen reported having no financial conflicts of interest; one of her associates reported ties to Cardiome, Merck, Sanofi, Daiichi, and Bristol-Myers Squibb.

Even a short course of NSAIDs markedly raises the risk of major bleeding in patients receiving antithrombotic medication after having a myocardial infarction, according to a report published online Feb. 24 in JAMA.

In a nationwide Danish study, this risk was increased no matter which antithrombotic regimens the participants were taking and no matter which NSAIDs they were given. “There was no safe therapeutic window for concomitant NSAID use, because even short-term (0-3 days) treatment was associated with increased risk of bleeding,” said Dr. Anne-Marie Schjerning Olsen of Copenhagen University Hospital Gentofte, Hellerup (Denmark), and her associates.

Denise Fulton/Frontline Medical News

More research is needed to confirm the findings of this observational study, but until then “physicians should exercise appropriate caution when prescribing NSAIDs for patients who have recently experienced MI,” they noted.

The only NSAID available over the counter in Denmark during the study period was ibuprofen, and it could only be purchased in low (20-mg) doses and in limited quantities (100 tablets). In countries like the United States, where ibuprofen and other NSAIDs are available without prescriptions and where there are few restrictions on the amounts that can be purchased, these study findings are even more worrying, Dr. Schjerning Olsen and her colleagues said.

Several current guidelines discourage the use of NSAIDs in people with a history of MI, including recommendations from the American Heart Association and the European Medicines Agency. But several sources have indicated that many such patients are being exposed to the drugs. To study the issue, the investigators analyzed data in four nationwide Danish health care registries. They identified roughly 62,000 adults (mean age 67.7 years) hospitalized for recent MI in 2002-2011 and put on antithrombotic medications, of whom nearly 21,000 (33.8%) also received at least one prescription for NSAID treatment.

During a median follow-up of 3.5 years, there were 5,288 major bleeding events in the study cohort, including 799 fatal bleeding events.

The incidence of major bleeding events was 4.2 per 100 person-years among patients given NSAIDs, compared with 2.2 per 100 person-years without NSAID therapy, for a hazard ratio of 2.0. Bleeding risk was markedly increased from the first day of exposure to NSAIDs (HR of 3.37 on days 0-3), and it persisted through 90 days. This pattern was consistent across all antithrombotic regimens and regardless of whether the prescribed NSAIDs were selective COX-2 inhibitors, such as rofecoxib or celecoxib, or nonselective COX-2 inhibitors, such as ibuprofen or diclofenac (JAMA 2015 Feb. 24 [doi:10.1001/jama.2015.0809]).

When major gastrointestinal bleeding events were considered individually, the incidence was 2.1 events per 100 person-years among NSAID users, compared with only 0.8 events per 100 person-years without NSAIDs, for an HR of 2.65. The incidence of combined cardiovascular events was 11.2 per 100 person-years among NSAID users, compared with 8.3 per 100 person-years without NSAIDs, for an HR of 1.4.

These results persisted through several sensitivity analyses. They remained consistent when patients with rheumatoid arthritis were excluded from the analysis; such patients are the primary users of NSAIDs in the age group of the study population. The findings also remained consistent when patients at high risk of bleeding due to comorbidities were excluded from the analysis, including those with malignancy, acute or chronic renal failure, or a history of bleeding events.

“Although it seems unlikely that physicians can completely avoid prescription of NSAIDs, even among high-risk patients, these results highlight the importance of considering the balance of benefits and risks before initiating any NSAID treatment,” Dr. Schjerning Olsen and her associates said.

The study was funded by the Danish Council for Independent Research, the William Harvey Research Institute at Barts, and the London School of Medicine and Dentistry. Dr. Schjerning Olsen reported having no financial conflicts of interest; one of her associates reported ties to Cardiome, Merck, Sanofi, Daiichi, and Bristol-Myers Squibb.

Even a short course of NSAIDs markedly raises the risk of major bleeding in patients receiving antithrombotic medication after having a myocardial infarction, according to a report published online Feb. 24 in JAMA.

In a nationwide Danish study, this risk was increased no matter which antithrombotic regimens the participants were taking and no matter which NSAIDs they were given. “There was no safe therapeutic window for concomitant NSAID use, because even short-term (0-3 days) treatment was associated with increased risk of bleeding,” said Dr. Anne-Marie Schjerning Olsen of Copenhagen University Hospital Gentofte, Hellerup (Denmark), and her associates.

Denise Fulton/Frontline Medical News

More research is needed to confirm the findings of this observational study, but until then “physicians should exercise appropriate caution when prescribing NSAIDs for patients who have recently experienced MI,” they noted.

The only NSAID available over the counter in Denmark during the study period was ibuprofen, and it could only be purchased in low (20-mg) doses and in limited quantities (100 tablets). In countries like the United States, where ibuprofen and other NSAIDs are available without prescriptions and where there are few restrictions on the amounts that can be purchased, these study findings are even more worrying, Dr. Schjerning Olsen and her colleagues said.

Several current guidelines discourage the use of NSAIDs in people with a history of MI, including recommendations from the American Heart Association and the European Medicines Agency. But several sources have indicated that many such patients are being exposed to the drugs. To study the issue, the investigators analyzed data in four nationwide Danish health care registries. They identified roughly 62,000 adults (mean age 67.7 years) hospitalized for recent MI in 2002-2011 and put on antithrombotic medications, of whom nearly 21,000 (33.8%) also received at least one prescription for NSAID treatment.

During a median follow-up of 3.5 years, there were 5,288 major bleeding events in the study cohort, including 799 fatal bleeding events.

The incidence of major bleeding events was 4.2 per 100 person-years among patients given NSAIDs, compared with 2.2 per 100 person-years without NSAID therapy, for a hazard ratio of 2.0. Bleeding risk was markedly increased from the first day of exposure to NSAIDs (HR of 3.37 on days 0-3), and it persisted through 90 days. This pattern was consistent across all antithrombotic regimens and regardless of whether the prescribed NSAIDs were selective COX-2 inhibitors, such as rofecoxib or celecoxib, or nonselective COX-2 inhibitors, such as ibuprofen or diclofenac (JAMA 2015 Feb. 24 [doi:10.1001/jama.2015.0809]).

When major gastrointestinal bleeding events were considered individually, the incidence was 2.1 events per 100 person-years among NSAID users, compared with only 0.8 events per 100 person-years without NSAIDs, for an HR of 2.65. The incidence of combined cardiovascular events was 11.2 per 100 person-years among NSAID users, compared with 8.3 per 100 person-years without NSAIDs, for an HR of 1.4.

These results persisted through several sensitivity analyses. They remained consistent when patients with rheumatoid arthritis were excluded from the analysis; such patients are the primary users of NSAIDs in the age group of the study population. The findings also remained consistent when patients at high risk of bleeding due to comorbidities were excluded from the analysis, including those with malignancy, acute or chronic renal failure, or a history of bleeding events.

“Although it seems unlikely that physicians can completely avoid prescription of NSAIDs, even among high-risk patients, these results highlight the importance of considering the balance of benefits and risks before initiating any NSAID treatment,” Dr. Schjerning Olsen and her associates said.

The study was funded by the Danish Council for Independent Research, the William Harvey Research Institute at Barts, and the London School of Medicine and Dentistry. Dr. Schjerning Olsen reported having no financial conflicts of interest; one of her associates reported ties to Cardiome, Merck, Sanofi, Daiichi, and Bristol-Myers Squibb.

Inpatients discharged from teaching hospitals on weekends experience similar postdischarge outcomes and shorter lengths of stay compared with patients discharged on weekdays, according to a recent Journal of Hospital Medicine study.

The study, led by Finlay McAlister, MSc, MD, LMCC, general internist and population health investigator at the Alberta Heritage Foundation for Medical Research in Canada, examined death or nonelective readmission rates for general medicine inpatients 30 days after weekend and weekday discharges at all seven teaching hospitals in Alberta.

Although fewer pharmacists, physicians, and therapists typically are available to assist patients discharged on weekends, Dr. McAlister and colleagues found that patients sent home on weekends do not bounce back to the hospital or the ED sooner than patients sent home on weekdays.

"If somebody is ready to go [home] on a weekend, you do not have to hold them until Monday, and nurse them and give them a false impression that that will improve their 30-day outcome," Dr. McAlister says.

In a previous study of patients with heart failure, Dr. McAlister noticed a trend that suggested better outcomes for patients discharged on weekdays. However, after studying a wider spectrum of patients with various diagnoses, he concluded there is no difference between weekend and weekday discharges in terms of patients' 30-day outcome.

Dr. McAlister suggests more research can be done to determine whether there is a difference in outcomes for weekend discharges from nonteaching hospitals.

"Because teaching hospitals may be a bit of a safety net, in terms of having house staff that is there seven days a week," he says. "The impact of reduced staffing levels may be more severe than at nonteaching hospitals."

Visit our website for more information on patient-discharge recommendations.

Inpatients discharged from teaching hospitals on weekends experience similar postdischarge outcomes and shorter lengths of stay compared with patients discharged on weekdays, according to a recent Journal of Hospital Medicine study.

The study, led by Finlay McAlister, MSc, MD, LMCC, general internist and population health investigator at the Alberta Heritage Foundation for Medical Research in Canada, examined death or nonelective readmission rates for general medicine inpatients 30 days after weekend and weekday discharges at all seven teaching hospitals in Alberta.

Although fewer pharmacists, physicians, and therapists typically are available to assist patients discharged on weekends, Dr. McAlister and colleagues found that patients sent home on weekends do not bounce back to the hospital or the ED sooner than patients sent home on weekdays.

"If somebody is ready to go [home] on a weekend, you do not have to hold them until Monday, and nurse them and give them a false impression that that will improve their 30-day outcome," Dr. McAlister says.

In a previous study of patients with heart failure, Dr. McAlister noticed a trend that suggested better outcomes for patients discharged on weekdays. However, after studying a wider spectrum of patients with various diagnoses, he concluded there is no difference between weekend and weekday discharges in terms of patients' 30-day outcome.

Dr. McAlister suggests more research can be done to determine whether there is a difference in outcomes for weekend discharges from nonteaching hospitals.

"Because teaching hospitals may be a bit of a safety net, in terms of having house staff that is there seven days a week," he says. "The impact of reduced staffing levels may be more severe than at nonteaching hospitals."

Visit our website for more information on patient-discharge recommendations.

Inpatients discharged from teaching hospitals on weekends experience similar postdischarge outcomes and shorter lengths of stay compared with patients discharged on weekdays, according to a recent Journal of Hospital Medicine study.

The study, led by Finlay McAlister, MSc, MD, LMCC, general internist and population health investigator at the Alberta Heritage Foundation for Medical Research in Canada, examined death or nonelective readmission rates for general medicine inpatients 30 days after weekend and weekday discharges at all seven teaching hospitals in Alberta.

Although fewer pharmacists, physicians, and therapists typically are available to assist patients discharged on weekends, Dr. McAlister and colleagues found that patients sent home on weekends do not bounce back to the hospital or the ED sooner than patients sent home on weekdays.

"If somebody is ready to go [home] on a weekend, you do not have to hold them until Monday, and nurse them and give them a false impression that that will improve their 30-day outcome," Dr. McAlister says.

In a previous study of patients with heart failure, Dr. McAlister noticed a trend that suggested better outcomes for patients discharged on weekdays. However, after studying a wider spectrum of patients with various diagnoses, he concluded there is no difference between weekend and weekday discharges in terms of patients' 30-day outcome.

Dr. McAlister suggests more research can be done to determine whether there is a difference in outcomes for weekend discharges from nonteaching hospitals.

"Because teaching hospitals may be a bit of a safety net, in terms of having house staff that is there seven days a week," he says. "The impact of reduced staffing levels may be more severe than at nonteaching hospitals."

Visit our website for more information on patient-discharge recommendations.

A pair of rural South Carolina hospitals that may soon shutter their doors is the latest example of the pressure on rural hospitalists, says a veteran HM director. But hospital closures also give rural hospitalists the opportunity to carve out a niche doing medical work that best serves their community.

Marlboro Park Hospital and Chesterfield General Hospital, 15 miles apart in northeastern South Carolina, are set to close this spring as Community Health Systems—which runs the hospitals and employs hospital staff—announced it would not renew its operating lease. A new operator is being sought.

The fear of a rural institution closing is a common one for hospitalists, says Dana Giarrizzi, DO, FHM, national medical director for telehospitalist services for Eagle Hospital Physicians and section leader for the rural section of SHM.

"There's always that feeling of walking the tightrope," Dr. Giarrizzi says. "It's a fine line because you can't offer everything…there aren't enough physicians."

And while hospitals' shrinking bottom lines, more intensive reporting and quality protocols, and ongoing changes to the rules of the Affordable Care Act have roiled rural hospitalists, Dr. Giarrizzi sees the current environment as one that offers rural groups an opportunity to focus on what they do best and home in on that.

"It's really important [for rural hospitalist groups] to figure out what their niche is, figure out what works for them, and then to run that well," Dr. Giarrizzi adds. "I think it hurts them when they're pushed or when they feel like they have to do everything…you don't have that ability. These small rural hospitals serve their purpose, but their purpose isn't to serve everything."

Visit our website for more information on rural hospitals.

A pair of rural South Carolina hospitals that may soon shutter their doors is the latest example of the pressure on rural hospitalists, says a veteran HM director. But hospital closures also give rural hospitalists the opportunity to carve out a niche doing medical work that best serves their community.

Marlboro Park Hospital and Chesterfield General Hospital, 15 miles apart in northeastern South Carolina, are set to close this spring as Community Health Systems—which runs the hospitals and employs hospital staff—announced it would not renew its operating lease. A new operator is being sought.

The fear of a rural institution closing is a common one for hospitalists, says Dana Giarrizzi, DO, FHM, national medical director for telehospitalist services for Eagle Hospital Physicians and section leader for the rural section of SHM.

"There's always that feeling of walking the tightrope," Dr. Giarrizzi says. "It's a fine line because you can't offer everything…there aren't enough physicians."

And while hospitals' shrinking bottom lines, more intensive reporting and quality protocols, and ongoing changes to the rules of the Affordable Care Act have roiled rural hospitalists, Dr. Giarrizzi sees the current environment as one that offers rural groups an opportunity to focus on what they do best and home in on that.

"It's really important [for rural hospitalist groups] to figure out what their niche is, figure out what works for them, and then to run that well," Dr. Giarrizzi adds. "I think it hurts them when they're pushed or when they feel like they have to do everything…you don't have that ability. These small rural hospitals serve their purpose, but their purpose isn't to serve everything."

Visit our website for more information on rural hospitals.

A pair of rural South Carolina hospitals that may soon shutter their doors is the latest example of the pressure on rural hospitalists, says a veteran HM director. But hospital closures also give rural hospitalists the opportunity to carve out a niche doing medical work that best serves their community.

Marlboro Park Hospital and Chesterfield General Hospital, 15 miles apart in northeastern South Carolina, are set to close this spring as Community Health Systems—which runs the hospitals and employs hospital staff—announced it would not renew its operating lease. A new operator is being sought.

The fear of a rural institution closing is a common one for hospitalists, says Dana Giarrizzi, DO, FHM, national medical director for telehospitalist services for Eagle Hospital Physicians and section leader for the rural section of SHM.

"There's always that feeling of walking the tightrope," Dr. Giarrizzi says. "It's a fine line because you can't offer everything…there aren't enough physicians."

And while hospitals' shrinking bottom lines, more intensive reporting and quality protocols, and ongoing changes to the rules of the Affordable Care Act have roiled rural hospitalists, Dr. Giarrizzi sees the current environment as one that offers rural groups an opportunity to focus on what they do best and home in on that.

"It's really important [for rural hospitalist groups] to figure out what their niche is, figure out what works for them, and then to run that well," Dr. Giarrizzi adds. "I think it hurts them when they're pushed or when they feel like they have to do everything…you don't have that ability. These small rural hospitals serve their purpose, but their purpose isn't to serve everything."

Visit our website for more information on rural hospitals.

Discovery of a genetic variation that may boost the risk of peripheral neuropathy for some cancer patients on vincristine therapy could lead to better treatment regimens for those patients.

Investigators uncovered the genetic variation in a study that analyzed DNA samples from 321 children with acute lymphoblastic leukemia who received standard vincristine therapy while participating in two prospective clinical trials (JAMA 2015 Feb. 24 [doi:10.1001/jama.2015.0894]).

William E. Evans, Pharm.D., and Kristine R. Crews, Pharm.D., both of St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital, Memphis, Tenn., discussed what spurred the search for genetic risk factors and what’s next for researchers looking to cut the chance of side effects associated with vincristine treatment in a video interview.

[email protected]

Discovery of a genetic variation that may boost the risk of peripheral neuropathy for some cancer patients on vincristine therapy could lead to better treatment regimens for those patients.

Investigators uncovered the genetic variation in a study that analyzed DNA samples from 321 children with acute lymphoblastic leukemia who received standard vincristine therapy while participating in two prospective clinical trials (JAMA 2015 Feb. 24 [doi:10.1001/jama.2015.0894]).

William E. Evans, Pharm.D., and Kristine R. Crews, Pharm.D., both of St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital, Memphis, Tenn., discussed what spurred the search for genetic risk factors and what’s next for researchers looking to cut the chance of side effects associated with vincristine treatment in a video interview.

[email protected]

Discovery of a genetic variation that may boost the risk of peripheral neuropathy for some cancer patients on vincristine therapy could lead to better treatment regimens for those patients.

Investigators uncovered the genetic variation in a study that analyzed DNA samples from 321 children with acute lymphoblastic leukemia who received standard vincristine therapy while participating in two prospective clinical trials (JAMA 2015 Feb. 24 [doi:10.1001/jama.2015.0894]).

William E. Evans, Pharm.D., and Kristine R. Crews, Pharm.D., both of St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital, Memphis, Tenn., discussed what spurred the search for genetic risk factors and what’s next for researchers looking to cut the chance of side effects associated with vincristine treatment in a video interview.

[email protected]

NASHVILLE, TENN. – The 10-year outcome for most giant intracranial aneurysms is rather dismal even if the lesions are initially successfully treated, according to findings from the International Study of Unruptured Intracranial Aneurysms.

Most patients lived through the first 2 years after diagnosis, but by 10 years, 37% of treated patients had died. Untreated patients had significantly higher mortality at 57%, Dr. James C. Torner said at the International Stroke Conference, which was sponsored by the American Heart Association.

“Compared to small aneurysms, the risk of all-cause mortality for these giant aneurysms is seven times greater in the first year, and the risk of hemorrhage or procedure-related death is 15 times higher. The risk does decrease over time, but it’s still elevated. It’s twice as high for death from hemorrhage and six times more likely from death due to rupture or a procedure by 10 years.”

Dr. Torner of the University of Iowa, Iowa City, presented 10-year outcomes from the International Study of Unruptured Intracranial Aneurysms (ISUIA), which followed 4,059 patients, of whom 187 had a giant unruptured intracranial aneurysm.

The mean lesion size was about 30 mm, but ranged from 25 to 63 mm. A third involved the internal carotid, and another third were cavernous. The remainder were either vestibular, posterior communicating, anterior cerebral, or middle cerebral.

Most were irregular; about 40% were a single sac. Daughter sacs were present in the rest. The volume ranged from 1,100 to 38,000 mm³, with about 10% having a volume of greater than 20,000 mm³.

Most of the patients were women (91%). Age was not related to occurrence; patients ranged from 25 to 82 years. There were some common risk factors, including smoking (in 70%), a family history of aneurysm (in 10%), a family history of coronary artery disease (in up to 45%, depending on patient age), hypertension (in up to 40%), and vascular headache. Patients aged 50 years or older were most likely to present with vascular headache (75%).

The baseline score on the modified Rankin Scale (mRS) was 1 in about 93% of the group. But 80% presented with some symptoms, including cranial nerve deficit (47%; commonly in cranial nerves III and IV), mass effect (16%), headache (44%), orbital pain (21%), and partial vision loss (25%).

Surgery was performed in 39% and endovascular treatment in 27%; the rest of the patients were initially untreated, although 3% later received endovascular treatment and 5% underwent surgical treatment during the follow-up period.

By 10 years, many of the lesions had ruptured. Posterior aneurysms were most likely to rupture (53%), while cavernous aneurysms were least likely to rupture (5%). About a third of the posterior communicating and 36% of the anterior lesions were unruptured.

The risk of rupture increased over the first 5 years, rising from almost 0% in year 1 to 20% by year 5. “Hemorrhage risk is huge over the first 5 years, even with the cavernous aneurysms – even they can rupture,” Dr. Torner said. “In those with smaller aneurysms, the risk of rupture may be high in the first 2 years, but then it subsides somewhat.”

Among the 59% of the overall group who survived, the mRS score remained excellent (1 or 2) by 10 years. Of the remainder who died, 23% died of a cranial or subarachnoid hemorrhage, and 11% of a cerebral infarct. Coronary disease, respiratory disease, and cancer were the other causes.

Treated patients generally fared better than untreated, although mortality varied significantly by lesion location. For anterior lesions, the death rate was 25% in untreated patients , 32% for surgical patients, and 19% in endovascular patients. Death rates for those with posterior communicating lesions were 90% for untreated and 50% for surgically treated patients; all of those with endovascular treatment died. For those with posterior lesions, death rates approached 100% for all groups.

Dr. Torner cautioned that because the study outcomes were collected during the 1990s, most treated patients underwent only coiling or clipping; better outcomes may be seen with more advanced therapies.

He said he had no relevant financial disclosures.

[email protected]

On Twitter @alz_gal

NASHVILLE, TENN. – The 10-year outcome for most giant intracranial aneurysms is rather dismal even if the lesions are initially successfully treated, according to findings from the International Study of Unruptured Intracranial Aneurysms.

Most patients lived through the first 2 years after diagnosis, but by 10 years, 37% of treated patients had died. Untreated patients had significantly higher mortality at 57%, Dr. James C. Torner said at the International Stroke Conference, which was sponsored by the American Heart Association.

“Compared to small aneurysms, the risk of all-cause mortality for these giant aneurysms is seven times greater in the first year, and the risk of hemorrhage or procedure-related death is 15 times higher. The risk does decrease over time, but it’s still elevated. It’s twice as high for death from hemorrhage and six times more likely from death due to rupture or a procedure by 10 years.”

Dr. Torner of the University of Iowa, Iowa City, presented 10-year outcomes from the International Study of Unruptured Intracranial Aneurysms (ISUIA), which followed 4,059 patients, of whom 187 had a giant unruptured intracranial aneurysm.

The mean lesion size was about 30 mm, but ranged from 25 to 63 mm. A third involved the internal carotid, and another third were cavernous. The remainder were either vestibular, posterior communicating, anterior cerebral, or middle cerebral.

Most were irregular; about 40% were a single sac. Daughter sacs were present in the rest. The volume ranged from 1,100 to 38,000 mm³, with about 10% having a volume of greater than 20,000 mm³.

Most of the patients were women (91%). Age was not related to occurrence; patients ranged from 25 to 82 years. There were some common risk factors, including smoking (in 70%), a family history of aneurysm (in 10%), a family history of coronary artery disease (in up to 45%, depending on patient age), hypertension (in up to 40%), and vascular headache. Patients aged 50 years or older were most likely to present with vascular headache (75%).

The baseline score on the modified Rankin Scale (mRS) was 1 in about 93% of the group. But 80% presented with some symptoms, including cranial nerve deficit (47%; commonly in cranial nerves III and IV), mass effect (16%), headache (44%), orbital pain (21%), and partial vision loss (25%).

Surgery was performed in 39% and endovascular treatment in 27%; the rest of the patients were initially untreated, although 3% later received endovascular treatment and 5% underwent surgical treatment during the follow-up period.

By 10 years, many of the lesions had ruptured. Posterior aneurysms were most likely to rupture (53%), while cavernous aneurysms were least likely to rupture (5%). About a third of the posterior communicating and 36% of the anterior lesions were unruptured.

The risk of rupture increased over the first 5 years, rising from almost 0% in year 1 to 20% by year 5. “Hemorrhage risk is huge over the first 5 years, even with the cavernous aneurysms – even they can rupture,” Dr. Torner said. “In those with smaller aneurysms, the risk of rupture may be high in the first 2 years, but then it subsides somewhat.”

Among the 59% of the overall group who survived, the mRS score remained excellent (1 or 2) by 10 years. Of the remainder who died, 23% died of a cranial or subarachnoid hemorrhage, and 11% of a cerebral infarct. Coronary disease, respiratory disease, and cancer were the other causes.

Treated patients generally fared better than untreated, although mortality varied significantly by lesion location. For anterior lesions, the death rate was 25% in untreated patients , 32% for surgical patients, and 19% in endovascular patients. Death rates for those with posterior communicating lesions were 90% for untreated and 50% for surgically treated patients; all of those with endovascular treatment died. For those with posterior lesions, death rates approached 100% for all groups.

Dr. Torner cautioned that because the study outcomes were collected during the 1990s, most treated patients underwent only coiling or clipping; better outcomes may be seen with more advanced therapies.

He said he had no relevant financial disclosures.

[email protected]

On Twitter @alz_gal

NASHVILLE, TENN. – The 10-year outcome for most giant intracranial aneurysms is rather dismal even if the lesions are initially successfully treated, according to findings from the International Study of Unruptured Intracranial Aneurysms.

Most patients lived through the first 2 years after diagnosis, but by 10 years, 37% of treated patients had died. Untreated patients had significantly higher mortality at 57%, Dr. James C. Torner said at the International Stroke Conference, which was sponsored by the American Heart Association.

“Compared to small aneurysms, the risk of all-cause mortality for these giant aneurysms is seven times greater in the first year, and the risk of hemorrhage or procedure-related death is 15 times higher. The risk does decrease over time, but it’s still elevated. It’s twice as high for death from hemorrhage and six times more likely from death due to rupture or a procedure by 10 years.”

Dr. Torner of the University of Iowa, Iowa City, presented 10-year outcomes from the International Study of Unruptured Intracranial Aneurysms (ISUIA), which followed 4,059 patients, of whom 187 had a giant unruptured intracranial aneurysm.

The mean lesion size was about 30 mm, but ranged from 25 to 63 mm. A third involved the internal carotid, and another third were cavernous. The remainder were either vestibular, posterior communicating, anterior cerebral, or middle cerebral.

Most were irregular; about 40% were a single sac. Daughter sacs were present in the rest. The volume ranged from 1,100 to 38,000 mm³, with about 10% having a volume of greater than 20,000 mm³.

Most of the patients were women (91%). Age was not related to occurrence; patients ranged from 25 to 82 years. There were some common risk factors, including smoking (in 70%), a family history of aneurysm (in 10%), a family history of coronary artery disease (in up to 45%, depending on patient age), hypertension (in up to 40%), and vascular headache. Patients aged 50 years or older were most likely to present with vascular headache (75%).

The baseline score on the modified Rankin Scale (mRS) was 1 in about 93% of the group. But 80% presented with some symptoms, including cranial nerve deficit (47%; commonly in cranial nerves III and IV), mass effect (16%), headache (44%), orbital pain (21%), and partial vision loss (25%).

Surgery was performed in 39% and endovascular treatment in 27%; the rest of the patients were initially untreated, although 3% later received endovascular treatment and 5% underwent surgical treatment during the follow-up period.

By 10 years, many of the lesions had ruptured. Posterior aneurysms were most likely to rupture (53%), while cavernous aneurysms were least likely to rupture (5%). About a third of the posterior communicating and 36% of the anterior lesions were unruptured.

The risk of rupture increased over the first 5 years, rising from almost 0% in year 1 to 20% by year 5. “Hemorrhage risk is huge over the first 5 years, even with the cavernous aneurysms – even they can rupture,” Dr. Torner said. “In those with smaller aneurysms, the risk of rupture may be high in the first 2 years, but then it subsides somewhat.”

Among the 59% of the overall group who survived, the mRS score remained excellent (1 or 2) by 10 years. Of the remainder who died, 23% died of a cranial or subarachnoid hemorrhage, and 11% of a cerebral infarct. Coronary disease, respiratory disease, and cancer were the other causes.

Treated patients generally fared better than untreated, although mortality varied significantly by lesion location. For anterior lesions, the death rate was 25% in untreated patients , 32% for surgical patients, and 19% in endovascular patients. Death rates for those with posterior communicating lesions were 90% for untreated and 50% for surgically treated patients; all of those with endovascular treatment died. For those with posterior lesions, death rates approached 100% for all groups.

Dr. Torner cautioned that because the study outcomes were collected during the 1990s, most treated patients underwent only coiling or clipping; better outcomes may be seen with more advanced therapies.

He said he had no relevant financial disclosures.

[email protected]

On Twitter @alz_gal

“To look deep into your child’s eyes and see in him both yourself and something utterly strange, and then to develop a zealous attachment to every aspect of him, is to achieve parenthood’s self-regarding, yet unselfish, abandon. It is astonishing how often such mutuality had been realized – how frequently parents who had supposed that they couldn’t care for an exceptional child discover that they can. The parental predisposition to love prevails in the most harrowing of circumstances. There is more imagination in the world than one might think.”

Andrew Solomon, “Far from the Tree: Parents, Children, and the Search for Identity” (New York: Scribner, 2012).

In his most recent book, writer and lecturer Andrew Solomon describes a deep love that leads to redemption. His case histories describe parents becoming virtuous through the practice of caring. Solomon records both their loving and their suffering. He does not see caring, necessarily, as an inherent trait but rather sees virtue emerging from the act of caring. The philosophical study of caring and virtue is known as the “ethics of care.” This column considers the ethics of care in relation to our patients and their families.

‘Ethics of care’ origins

Care ethics emerged as a distinct moral theory when psychologist Carol Gilligan, Ph.D., and philosopher Nel Noddings, Ph.D., labeled traditional moral theory as biased toward the male gender. They asserted the “voice of care” as a female alternative to Lawrence Kohlberg’s male “voice of justice.”

Originally, therefore, care ethics were described as a feminist ethic. To drive home this point, the suffragettes argued that granting voting rights to (white) women would lead to moral, social improvements! The naive assumption was that women by nature had traits of compassion, empathy, nurturance, and kindness, as exemplified by the good mother. This is known as feminist essentialism. Taking this gendered view further, Nel Noddings states that the domestic sphere is the originator and nurturer of justice, in the sense that the best social policies are identified, modeled, and sustained by practices in the “best families.” This is a difficult position: Who decides on the characteristics of “best families?”

Practice of caring vs. ethics

The practice of caring can be described as actions performed by the carer, or as a value, or as a disposition or virtue that resides in the person who is caring. The following points summarize the current positions of philosophers who identify themselves as care ethicists.

• Care reflects a specific type of moral reasoning. This is the Kohlberg-Gilligan argument of male vs. female reasoning. Although care and justice have evolved as distinct ethical practices and ideals, they are not necessarily incompatible. As gender roles soften and gender as a concept becomes more blurry, care and justice can be intertwined. Reasoning does not have to be either justice based or care based.

• Care is the practice of caring for someone (Andrew Solomon’s case histories). This stance does not romanticize the practice of caring. This stance does not consider caring as a trait or disposition. This stance acknowledges the suffering and hardship in caring that can coexist with love. This stance points to the potential for individual spiritual and personal growth that can accompany caregiving. Andrew Solomon would agree to the notion of stages of caring (“Moral Boundaries: A Political Argument for an Ethic of Care,” New York: Routledge, 1994). These stages are: (1) attentiveness, becoming aware of need; (2) responsibility, a willingness to respond and take care of need; (3) competence, the skill of providing good and successful care; and (4) responsiveness, consideration of the position of others as they see it and recognition of the potential for abuse in care. The practice of caring is more of a daily reality than the abstract virtue.

• Care is an inherent virtue. This stance includes both feminist essentialism and feminist care ethics. In feminist essentialism, the process of moral development follows gender roles. The prototypical caregiving mother and a care-receiving child romanticize and elevate motherhood to the ideal practice of care. Feminist care ethicists avoid this essentialism by situating caring practices in place and time. They describe care as the symbolic practice rather than actual practice of women. Feminist care ethicists explore care as a gender neutral activity, advancing a utopian vision of care as a gender-neutral activity and virtue. Cognitive capacities and virtues associated with mothering, (better described as being associated with parenting), are seen as essential to the concept of care. These virtues are preservative love (work of protection with cheerfulness and humility), fostering growth (sponsoring or nurturing a child’s unfolding), and training for social acceptability (a process of socialization that requires conscience and a struggle for authenticity). This position also is reflected in Solomon’s ethics of care.

• Care is an inherent character trait or disposition. This stance understands care ethics as a form of virtue ethics, with care being a central virtue. There is an emphasis on relationship as fundamental to being, and the parent-child relationship as paramount. Virtue ethics views emotions such as empathy, compassion, and sensitivity as prerequisites for moral development and the ethics of care.

• Care as social justice and political imperative. One of the earliest objections to an ethics of care was that it valorized the oppression of women. Nietzsche held that those who are oppressed develop moral theories that reaffirm subservient traits as virtues. Women who perform the work of care often perform this care to their own economic disadvantage. A social justice perspective implies that the voice of care is the voice of an oppressed person, and eschews the idea that moral maturity means self-sacrifice and self-effacement. Care ethics informed by a social justice perspective asks who is caring for whom and whether this relationship is just.

When care ethics are applied to domestic politics, economic justice, international relations, and culture, interesting ideas emerge. Governments and businesses become responsible for support in sickness, disability, old age, bad luck, and reversal of fortune, for providing protection, health care, and clean environments, and for upholding the rights of individuals. A focus on autonomy, independence, and self-determination, which traditionally are seen as male traits, devalues interdependence and relatedness, which traditionally are seen as female values. Care ethics suggest that we replace hierarchy and domination that is based on gender, class, race, and ethnicity with cooperation and attention to interdependency. Interdependency is ubiquitous, and care ethics is a political theory with universal application. The practice of caring has no political affiliation; however, if we had founding mothers instead of founding fathers, would the United States be based more on ethics of care?

•The caring professions. The practice of caring is a practice that helps individuals meet their basic needs, maintain capabilities, and alleviate pain and suffering, so they can survive and function in society. Using this definition, the practice of care does not require any emotional attachment. Using this definition, the activity itself is a virtuous moral position. The health care professions mostly provide “services” rather than “care.” Is empathy a necessary ingredient for the practice of care? Many people believe so, and organizations such as the Watson Caring Science Institute (watsoncaringscience.org) are dedicated to putting the caring back into health care.

Meaning for the psychiatrist

When caregivers of patients with dementia were asked how they felt about caregiving, they responded positively. Caregiving felt good. Here is a listing of some their responses:

“Feeling needed and responsible.”

“Feeling good inside, doing for someone what you want for yourself and knowing I’ve done my best.”

“Being able to help.”

“To brighten her days.”

“I know he is being cared for the way he is used to.”

“I feel that she is loved and not alone.”

These caregivers were mostly spouses (61%), with an average of 3.1 caregiving years. Caregivers reported that their relatives were moderately disabled, but they perceived more reward than burden (Int. J. Geriatr. Psychiatry, 2004;19:533-7). The caregivers’ quality of life also proved similar to those in an age-controlled normal community sample. So if caregiving can be carried out without significantly affecting quality of life, caregiving can be more rewarding than burdensome.

Questions for the family psychiatrist:

• How am I caring for my patients and their families?

• What does it mean to care rather than provide a service?

• How has my psychiatric training changed how I perceive caring? Do I now care in a different way?

• Has the way I care developed through my practice of caring?

• Where am I in the stages of caring?

• When does caring mean advocacy?

Questions to ask patients and their families:

• Do you experience reward in caregiving?

• Are there ways to sustain and enhance the satisfaction and reward of caring?

• How might you explore the practice of caring?

• Has caring been redeeming for you?

• Has caring brought individual growth for you, despite the hardships?

Dr. Heru is with the department of psychiatry at the University of Colorado at Denver, Aurora. She is editor of the recently published book, “Working With Families in Medical Settings: A Multidisciplinary Guide for Psychiatrists and Other Health Professionals” (New York: Routledge, 2013). Some of the research for this article came from The Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy.

“To look deep into your child’s eyes and see in him both yourself and something utterly strange, and then to develop a zealous attachment to every aspect of him, is to achieve parenthood’s self-regarding, yet unselfish, abandon. It is astonishing how often such mutuality had been realized – how frequently parents who had supposed that they couldn’t care for an exceptional child discover that they can. The parental predisposition to love prevails in the most harrowing of circumstances. There is more imagination in the world than one might think.”

Andrew Solomon, “Far from the Tree: Parents, Children, and the Search for Identity” (New York: Scribner, 2012).

In his most recent book, writer and lecturer Andrew Solomon describes a deep love that leads to redemption. His case histories describe parents becoming virtuous through the practice of caring. Solomon records both their loving and their suffering. He does not see caring, necessarily, as an inherent trait but rather sees virtue emerging from the act of caring. The philosophical study of caring and virtue is known as the “ethics of care.” This column considers the ethics of care in relation to our patients and their families.

‘Ethics of care’ origins

Care ethics emerged as a distinct moral theory when psychologist Carol Gilligan, Ph.D., and philosopher Nel Noddings, Ph.D., labeled traditional moral theory as biased toward the male gender. They asserted the “voice of care” as a female alternative to Lawrence Kohlberg’s male “voice of justice.”

Originally, therefore, care ethics were described as a feminist ethic. To drive home this point, the suffragettes argued that granting voting rights to (white) women would lead to moral, social improvements! The naive assumption was that women by nature had traits of compassion, empathy, nurturance, and kindness, as exemplified by the good mother. This is known as feminist essentialism. Taking this gendered view further, Nel Noddings states that the domestic sphere is the originator and nurturer of justice, in the sense that the best social policies are identified, modeled, and sustained by practices in the “best families.” This is a difficult position: Who decides on the characteristics of “best families?”

Practice of caring vs. ethics

The practice of caring can be described as actions performed by the carer, or as a value, or as a disposition or virtue that resides in the person who is caring. The following points summarize the current positions of philosophers who identify themselves as care ethicists.

• Care reflects a specific type of moral reasoning. This is the Kohlberg-Gilligan argument of male vs. female reasoning. Although care and justice have evolved as distinct ethical practices and ideals, they are not necessarily incompatible. As gender roles soften and gender as a concept becomes more blurry, care and justice can be intertwined. Reasoning does not have to be either justice based or care based.

• Care is the practice of caring for someone (Andrew Solomon’s case histories). This stance does not romanticize the practice of caring. This stance does not consider caring as a trait or disposition. This stance acknowledges the suffering and hardship in caring that can coexist with love. This stance points to the potential for individual spiritual and personal growth that can accompany caregiving. Andrew Solomon would agree to the notion of stages of caring (“Moral Boundaries: A Political Argument for an Ethic of Care,” New York: Routledge, 1994). These stages are: (1) attentiveness, becoming aware of need; (2) responsibility, a willingness to respond and take care of need; (3) competence, the skill of providing good and successful care; and (4) responsiveness, consideration of the position of others as they see it and recognition of the potential for abuse in care. The practice of caring is more of a daily reality than the abstract virtue.

• Care is an inherent virtue. This stance includes both feminist essentialism and feminist care ethics. In feminist essentialism, the process of moral development follows gender roles. The prototypical caregiving mother and a care-receiving child romanticize and elevate motherhood to the ideal practice of care. Feminist care ethicists avoid this essentialism by situating caring practices in place and time. They describe care as the symbolic practice rather than actual practice of women. Feminist care ethicists explore care as a gender neutral activity, advancing a utopian vision of care as a gender-neutral activity and virtue. Cognitive capacities and virtues associated with mothering, (better described as being associated with parenting), are seen as essential to the concept of care. These virtues are preservative love (work of protection with cheerfulness and humility), fostering growth (sponsoring or nurturing a child’s unfolding), and training for social acceptability (a process of socialization that requires conscience and a struggle for authenticity). This position also is reflected in Solomon’s ethics of care.

• Care is an inherent character trait or disposition. This stance understands care ethics as a form of virtue ethics, with care being a central virtue. There is an emphasis on relationship as fundamental to being, and the parent-child relationship as paramount. Virtue ethics views emotions such as empathy, compassion, and sensitivity as prerequisites for moral development and the ethics of care.

• Care as social justice and political imperative. One of the earliest objections to an ethics of care was that it valorized the oppression of women. Nietzsche held that those who are oppressed develop moral theories that reaffirm subservient traits as virtues. Women who perform the work of care often perform this care to their own economic disadvantage. A social justice perspective implies that the voice of care is the voice of an oppressed person, and eschews the idea that moral maturity means self-sacrifice and self-effacement. Care ethics informed by a social justice perspective asks who is caring for whom and whether this relationship is just.

When care ethics are applied to domestic politics, economic justice, international relations, and culture, interesting ideas emerge. Governments and businesses become responsible for support in sickness, disability, old age, bad luck, and reversal of fortune, for providing protection, health care, and clean environments, and for upholding the rights of individuals. A focus on autonomy, independence, and self-determination, which traditionally are seen as male traits, devalues interdependence and relatedness, which traditionally are seen as female values. Care ethics suggest that we replace hierarchy and domination that is based on gender, class, race, and ethnicity with cooperation and attention to interdependency. Interdependency is ubiquitous, and care ethics is a political theory with universal application. The practice of caring has no political affiliation; however, if we had founding mothers instead of founding fathers, would the United States be based more on ethics of care?

•The caring professions. The practice of caring is a practice that helps individuals meet their basic needs, maintain capabilities, and alleviate pain and suffering, so they can survive and function in society. Using this definition, the practice of care does not require any emotional attachment. Using this definition, the activity itself is a virtuous moral position. The health care professions mostly provide “services” rather than “care.” Is empathy a necessary ingredient for the practice of care? Many people believe so, and organizations such as the Watson Caring Science Institute (watsoncaringscience.org) are dedicated to putting the caring back into health care.

Meaning for the psychiatrist

When caregivers of patients with dementia were asked how they felt about caregiving, they responded positively. Caregiving felt good. Here is a listing of some their responses:

“Feeling needed and responsible.”

“Feeling good inside, doing for someone what you want for yourself and knowing I’ve done my best.”

“Being able to help.”

“To brighten her days.”

“I know he is being cared for the way he is used to.”

“I feel that she is loved and not alone.”

These caregivers were mostly spouses (61%), with an average of 3.1 caregiving years. Caregivers reported that their relatives were moderately disabled, but they perceived more reward than burden (Int. J. Geriatr. Psychiatry, 2004;19:533-7). The caregivers’ quality of life also proved similar to those in an age-controlled normal community sample. So if caregiving can be carried out without significantly affecting quality of life, caregiving can be more rewarding than burdensome.

Questions for the family psychiatrist:

• How am I caring for my patients and their families?

• What does it mean to care rather than provide a service?

• How has my psychiatric training changed how I perceive caring? Do I now care in a different way?

• Has the way I care developed through my practice of caring?

• Where am I in the stages of caring?

• When does caring mean advocacy?

Questions to ask patients and their families:

• Do you experience reward in caregiving?

• Are there ways to sustain and enhance the satisfaction and reward of caring?

• How might you explore the practice of caring?

• Has caring been redeeming for you?

• Has caring brought individual growth for you, despite the hardships?

Dr. Heru is with the department of psychiatry at the University of Colorado at Denver, Aurora. She is editor of the recently published book, “Working With Families in Medical Settings: A Multidisciplinary Guide for Psychiatrists and Other Health Professionals” (New York: Routledge, 2013). Some of the research for this article came from The Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy.

“To look deep into your child’s eyes and see in him both yourself and something utterly strange, and then to develop a zealous attachment to every aspect of him, is to achieve parenthood’s self-regarding, yet unselfish, abandon. It is astonishing how often such mutuality had been realized – how frequently parents who had supposed that they couldn’t care for an exceptional child discover that they can. The parental predisposition to love prevails in the most harrowing of circumstances. There is more imagination in the world than one might think.”

Andrew Solomon, “Far from the Tree: Parents, Children, and the Search for Identity” (New York: Scribner, 2012).

In his most recent book, writer and lecturer Andrew Solomon describes a deep love that leads to redemption. His case histories describe parents becoming virtuous through the practice of caring. Solomon records both their loving and their suffering. He does not see caring, necessarily, as an inherent trait but rather sees virtue emerging from the act of caring. The philosophical study of caring and virtue is known as the “ethics of care.” This column considers the ethics of care in relation to our patients and their families.

‘Ethics of care’ origins

Care ethics emerged as a distinct moral theory when psychologist Carol Gilligan, Ph.D., and philosopher Nel Noddings, Ph.D., labeled traditional moral theory as biased toward the male gender. They asserted the “voice of care” as a female alternative to Lawrence Kohlberg’s male “voice of justice.”

Originally, therefore, care ethics were described as a feminist ethic. To drive home this point, the suffragettes argued that granting voting rights to (white) women would lead to moral, social improvements! The naive assumption was that women by nature had traits of compassion, empathy, nurturance, and kindness, as exemplified by the good mother. This is known as feminist essentialism. Taking this gendered view further, Nel Noddings states that the domestic sphere is the originator and nurturer of justice, in the sense that the best social policies are identified, modeled, and sustained by practices in the “best families.” This is a difficult position: Who decides on the characteristics of “best families?”

Practice of caring vs. ethics

The practice of caring can be described as actions performed by the carer, or as a value, or as a disposition or virtue that resides in the person who is caring. The following points summarize the current positions of philosophers who identify themselves as care ethicists.

• Care reflects a specific type of moral reasoning. This is the Kohlberg-Gilligan argument of male vs. female reasoning. Although care and justice have evolved as distinct ethical practices and ideals, they are not necessarily incompatible. As gender roles soften and gender as a concept becomes more blurry, care and justice can be intertwined. Reasoning does not have to be either justice based or care based.

• Care is the practice of caring for someone (Andrew Solomon’s case histories). This stance does not romanticize the practice of caring. This stance does not consider caring as a trait or disposition. This stance acknowledges the suffering and hardship in caring that can coexist with love. This stance points to the potential for individual spiritual and personal growth that can accompany caregiving. Andrew Solomon would agree to the notion of stages of caring (“Moral Boundaries: A Political Argument for an Ethic of Care,” New York: Routledge, 1994). These stages are: (1) attentiveness, becoming aware of need; (2) responsibility, a willingness to respond and take care of need; (3) competence, the skill of providing good and successful care; and (4) responsiveness, consideration of the position of others as they see it and recognition of the potential for abuse in care. The practice of caring is more of a daily reality than the abstract virtue.

• Care is an inherent virtue. This stance includes both feminist essentialism and feminist care ethics. In feminist essentialism, the process of moral development follows gender roles. The prototypical caregiving mother and a care-receiving child romanticize and elevate motherhood to the ideal practice of care. Feminist care ethicists avoid this essentialism by situating caring practices in place and time. They describe care as the symbolic practice rather than actual practice of women. Feminist care ethicists explore care as a gender neutral activity, advancing a utopian vision of care as a gender-neutral activity and virtue. Cognitive capacities and virtues associated with mothering, (better described as being associated with parenting), are seen as essential to the concept of care. These virtues are preservative love (work of protection with cheerfulness and humility), fostering growth (sponsoring or nurturing a child’s unfolding), and training for social acceptability (a process of socialization that requires conscience and a struggle for authenticity). This position also is reflected in Solomon’s ethics of care.

• Care is an inherent character trait or disposition. This stance understands care ethics as a form of virtue ethics, with care being a central virtue. There is an emphasis on relationship as fundamental to being, and the parent-child relationship as paramount. Virtue ethics views emotions such as empathy, compassion, and sensitivity as prerequisites for moral development and the ethics of care.

• Care as social justice and political imperative. One of the earliest objections to an ethics of care was that it valorized the oppression of women. Nietzsche held that those who are oppressed develop moral theories that reaffirm subservient traits as virtues. Women who perform the work of care often perform this care to their own economic disadvantage. A social justice perspective implies that the voice of care is the voice of an oppressed person, and eschews the idea that moral maturity means self-sacrifice and self-effacement. Care ethics informed by a social justice perspective asks who is caring for whom and whether this relationship is just.

When care ethics are applied to domestic politics, economic justice, international relations, and culture, interesting ideas emerge. Governments and businesses become responsible for support in sickness, disability, old age, bad luck, and reversal of fortune, for providing protection, health care, and clean environments, and for upholding the rights of individuals. A focus on autonomy, independence, and self-determination, which traditionally are seen as male traits, devalues interdependence and relatedness, which traditionally are seen as female values. Care ethics suggest that we replace hierarchy and domination that is based on gender, class, race, and ethnicity with cooperation and attention to interdependency. Interdependency is ubiquitous, and care ethics is a political theory with universal application. The practice of caring has no political affiliation; however, if we had founding mothers instead of founding fathers, would the United States be based more on ethics of care?

•The caring professions. The practice of caring is a practice that helps individuals meet their basic needs, maintain capabilities, and alleviate pain and suffering, so they can survive and function in society. Using this definition, the practice of care does not require any emotional attachment. Using this definition, the activity itself is a virtuous moral position. The health care professions mostly provide “services” rather than “care.” Is empathy a necessary ingredient for the practice of care? Many people believe so, and organizations such as the Watson Caring Science Institute (watsoncaringscience.org) are dedicated to putting the caring back into health care.

Meaning for the psychiatrist

When caregivers of patients with dementia were asked how they felt about caregiving, they responded positively. Caregiving felt good. Here is a listing of some their responses:

“Feeling needed and responsible.”

“Feeling good inside, doing for someone what you want for yourself and knowing I’ve done my best.”

“Being able to help.”

“To brighten her days.”

“I know he is being cared for the way he is used to.”

“I feel that she is loved and not alone.”

These caregivers were mostly spouses (61%), with an average of 3.1 caregiving years. Caregivers reported that their relatives were moderately disabled, but they perceived more reward than burden (Int. J. Geriatr. Psychiatry, 2004;19:533-7). The caregivers’ quality of life also proved similar to those in an age-controlled normal community sample. So if caregiving can be carried out without significantly affecting quality of life, caregiving can be more rewarding than burdensome.

Questions for the family psychiatrist:

• How am I caring for my patients and their families?

• What does it mean to care rather than provide a service?

• How has my psychiatric training changed how I perceive caring? Do I now care in a different way?

• Has the way I care developed through my practice of caring?

• Where am I in the stages of caring?

• When does caring mean advocacy?

Questions to ask patients and their families:

• Do you experience reward in caregiving?

• Are there ways to sustain and enhance the satisfaction and reward of caring?

• How might you explore the practice of caring?

• Has caring been redeeming for you?

• Has caring brought individual growth for you, despite the hardships?

Dr. Heru is with the department of psychiatry at the University of Colorado at Denver, Aurora. She is editor of the recently published book, “Working With Families in Medical Settings: A Multidisciplinary Guide for Psychiatrists and Other Health Professionals” (New York: Routledge, 2013). Some of the research for this article came from The Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy.

Rapid reversal of international normalized ratio, along with systolic blood pressure reduction, in patients with oral anticoagulant–associated intracerebral hemorrhage can significantly reduce the rates of hematoma enlargement and in-hospital mortality, a retrospective cohort study has found.

In the German study of 1,176 patients with oral anticoagulant–associated intracerebral hemorrhage, patients whose INR was reduced below 1.3 with use of vitamin K agonists and whose systolic BP was reduced below 160 mm Hg within 4 hours of admission had a 72% reduction in the rates of hematoma enlargement and 40% reduction in in-hospital mortality, compared with patients who did not achieve those reductions in that time frame.

Researchers also showed that there were no significant increases in hemorrhagic complications, but fewer ischemic complications, among patients who resumed oral anticoagulation, according to the study published online Feb. 24 in JAMA.

“Consensus exists that elevated international normalized ratio (INR) levels should be reversed to minimize hematoma enlargement, yet mode, timing, and extent of INR reversal are unclear [and] valid data on safety and clinical benefit of [oral anticoagulant] resumption are missing and remain to be established,” wrote Dr. Joji B. Kuramatsu of the University of Erlangen-Nuremberg, Germany, and coauthors (JAMA 2015;313:824-836 [doi:10.1001/jama.2015.0846]).

The study was supported by the Johannes and Frieda Marohn Foundation. Authors declared a range of funding, grants, fees, and honoraria from the pharmaceutical industry.

Rapid reversal of international normalized ratio, along with systolic blood pressure reduction, in patients with oral anticoagulant–associated intracerebral hemorrhage can significantly reduce the rates of hematoma enlargement and in-hospital mortality, a retrospective cohort study has found.

In the German study of 1,176 patients with oral anticoagulant–associated intracerebral hemorrhage, patients whose INR was reduced below 1.3 with use of vitamin K agonists and whose systolic BP was reduced below 160 mm Hg within 4 hours of admission had a 72% reduction in the rates of hematoma enlargement and 40% reduction in in-hospital mortality, compared with patients who did not achieve those reductions in that time frame.

Researchers also showed that there were no significant increases in hemorrhagic complications, but fewer ischemic complications, among patients who resumed oral anticoagulation, according to the study published online Feb. 24 in JAMA.

“Consensus exists that elevated international normalized ratio (INR) levels should be reversed to minimize hematoma enlargement, yet mode, timing, and extent of INR reversal are unclear [and] valid data on safety and clinical benefit of [oral anticoagulant] resumption are missing and remain to be established,” wrote Dr. Joji B. Kuramatsu of the University of Erlangen-Nuremberg, Germany, and coauthors (JAMA 2015;313:824-836 [doi:10.1001/jama.2015.0846]).

The study was supported by the Johannes and Frieda Marohn Foundation. Authors declared a range of funding, grants, fees, and honoraria from the pharmaceutical industry.

Rapid reversal of international normalized ratio, along with systolic blood pressure reduction, in patients with oral anticoagulant–associated intracerebral hemorrhage can significantly reduce the rates of hematoma enlargement and in-hospital mortality, a retrospective cohort study has found.

In the German study of 1,176 patients with oral anticoagulant–associated intracerebral hemorrhage, patients whose INR was reduced below 1.3 with use of vitamin K agonists and whose systolic BP was reduced below 160 mm Hg within 4 hours of admission had a 72% reduction in the rates of hematoma enlargement and 40% reduction in in-hospital mortality, compared with patients who did not achieve those reductions in that time frame.

Researchers also showed that there were no significant increases in hemorrhagic complications, but fewer ischemic complications, among patients who resumed oral anticoagulation, according to the study published online Feb. 24 in JAMA.

“Consensus exists that elevated international normalized ratio (INR) levels should be reversed to minimize hematoma enlargement, yet mode, timing, and extent of INR reversal are unclear [and] valid data on safety and clinical benefit of [oral anticoagulant] resumption are missing and remain to be established,” wrote Dr. Joji B. Kuramatsu of the University of Erlangen-Nuremberg, Germany, and coauthors (JAMA 2015;313:824-836 [doi:10.1001/jama.2015.0846]).

The study was supported by the Johannes and Frieda Marohn Foundation. Authors declared a range of funding, grants, fees, and honoraria from the pharmaceutical industry.

ANSWER
The radiograph shows a normal-appearing chest. Of note, though, is an anterior dislocation of the right shoulder. In addition, there is a fracture within the greater tuberosity of the right humerus.

Prompt orthopedic evaluation is obtained. In further discussion with the family, it was revealed that the patient had been experiencing falls recently; this injury was most likely the result of one.

ANSWER
The radiograph shows a normal-appearing chest. Of note, though, is an anterior dislocation of the right shoulder. In addition, there is a fracture within the greater tuberosity of the right humerus.

Prompt orthopedic evaluation is obtained. In further discussion with the family, it was revealed that the patient had been experiencing falls recently; this injury was most likely the result of one.

ANSWER
The radiograph shows a normal-appearing chest. Of note, though, is an anterior dislocation of the right shoulder. In addition, there is a fracture within the greater tuberosity of the right humerus.

Prompt orthopedic evaluation is obtained. In further discussion with the family, it was revealed that the patient had been experiencing falls recently; this injury was most likely the result of one.