User login
Bringing you the latest news, research and reviews, exclusive interviews, podcasts, quizzes, and more.
div[contains(@class, 'header__large-screen')]
div[contains(@class, 'read-next-article')]
div[contains(@class, 'nav-primary')]
nav[contains(@class, 'nav-primary')]
section[contains(@class, 'footer-nav-section-wrapper')]
footer[@id='footer']
div[contains(@class, 'main-prefix')]
section[contains(@class, 'nav-hidden')]
div[contains(@class, 'ce-card-content')]
nav[contains(@class, 'nav-ce-stack')]
Collateral damage in the war on obesity
In a recent New York Times opinion article, author Aubrey Gordon claims that since a visit to her pediatrician in fourth grade she has felt like an “enemy combatant in the nation’s war on childhood obesity.” (“Leave Fat Kids Alone,” Nov. 13, 2020).
At that unfortunate encounter, she recalls being told that “You’ll be thin and beautiful ... If you can just stay the same weight.” In retrospect she feels that the comment by her well-meaning but misguided physician “planted the seeds of depression” that have plagued her ever since.
Ms. Gordon goes on to list the many national and local initiatives that have done little to bend the curve in this country’s obesity trajectory but have succeeded in targeting bodies like hers as an epidemic and have resulted in her and thousands of other children being treated as “its virus personified.”
It is deeply troubling to read of her journey through life as collateral damage in a failed war effort, but Ms. Gordon offers little advice to us other than that we stop doing what we have been doing. It hasn’t been helping and it’s not working.
I suspect she would agree that obesity is one of our nation’s most serious public health problems. There is voluminous evidence of the association of obesity with cardiac disease, cancer, mental health challenges, and more recently COVID-19 – just to name a few. If blaming obese children who are the victims is counterproductive where do we point the finger? It is tempting to blame parents and certainly they deserve some culpability. Some parents could have created less obesity-enabling environments through healthier menu choices and done a better job discouraging sedentary behaviors. However, some families lack the access to, or the resources to, provide less calorie-dense food options. We know that many obese children have parents who have been obese themselves since childhood and we know that breaking the obesity cycle can be extremely difficult. Do we extend the sweep of our finger-pointing to include grandparents and great grandparents?
While guilt can be a powerful motivating force, obesity seems to be one of those conditions in which by the time it becomes obvious to a family, the die is cast and blaming the victim or her parents is going to do little more than engender bad feelings. We have done more than enough. In fact, Ms. Gordon’s commentary suggests we have gone too far in creating public opinion that being lean is healthy and being overweight is bad. More motivational testimonials will merely add to the shaming.
Obesity is clearly a societal problem and selectively targeting the victims is not the answer. A famine would certainly lower our national body mass index, but not even the most callous among us would include it on the list of options. Attempts at levying a hefty tax on sweetened beverages have been attempted sporadically around the country without much success. We are a nation that cherishes our personal freedoms and unfortunately this includes the freedom to do some things the aren’t in our own best interests.
You could argue that this leaves us with education as our only hope of turning the tide. However, educating without characterizing the obese among us as bad, ugly, and undisciplined people is a public relations challenge of heroic proportions. Choosing language and images that somehow convey the idea that although obesity is bad being obese doesn’t make you a bad or ugly person is walking along a fine semantic edge.
If I sound discouraged, you are reading me correctly. As pediatricians, we are left doing the few things that have been shown to make a difference. This means promoting breastfeeding and encouraging thoughtful introduction of solid foods; both strategies can be done before the child can hear our well-intentioned but misguided words of encouragement.
Dr. Wilkoff practiced primary care pediatrics in Brunswick, Maine for nearly 40 years. He has authored several books on behavioral pediatrics, including “How to Say No to Your Toddler.” Other than a Littman stethoscope he accepted as a first-year medical student in 1966, Dr. Wilkoff reports having nothing to disclose. Email him at [email protected].
In a recent New York Times opinion article, author Aubrey Gordon claims that since a visit to her pediatrician in fourth grade she has felt like an “enemy combatant in the nation’s war on childhood obesity.” (“Leave Fat Kids Alone,” Nov. 13, 2020).
At that unfortunate encounter, she recalls being told that “You’ll be thin and beautiful ... If you can just stay the same weight.” In retrospect she feels that the comment by her well-meaning but misguided physician “planted the seeds of depression” that have plagued her ever since.
Ms. Gordon goes on to list the many national and local initiatives that have done little to bend the curve in this country’s obesity trajectory but have succeeded in targeting bodies like hers as an epidemic and have resulted in her and thousands of other children being treated as “its virus personified.”
It is deeply troubling to read of her journey through life as collateral damage in a failed war effort, but Ms. Gordon offers little advice to us other than that we stop doing what we have been doing. It hasn’t been helping and it’s not working.
I suspect she would agree that obesity is one of our nation’s most serious public health problems. There is voluminous evidence of the association of obesity with cardiac disease, cancer, mental health challenges, and more recently COVID-19 – just to name a few. If blaming obese children who are the victims is counterproductive where do we point the finger? It is tempting to blame parents and certainly they deserve some culpability. Some parents could have created less obesity-enabling environments through healthier menu choices and done a better job discouraging sedentary behaviors. However, some families lack the access to, or the resources to, provide less calorie-dense food options. We know that many obese children have parents who have been obese themselves since childhood and we know that breaking the obesity cycle can be extremely difficult. Do we extend the sweep of our finger-pointing to include grandparents and great grandparents?
While guilt can be a powerful motivating force, obesity seems to be one of those conditions in which by the time it becomes obvious to a family, the die is cast and blaming the victim or her parents is going to do little more than engender bad feelings. We have done more than enough. In fact, Ms. Gordon’s commentary suggests we have gone too far in creating public opinion that being lean is healthy and being overweight is bad. More motivational testimonials will merely add to the shaming.
Obesity is clearly a societal problem and selectively targeting the victims is not the answer. A famine would certainly lower our national body mass index, but not even the most callous among us would include it on the list of options. Attempts at levying a hefty tax on sweetened beverages have been attempted sporadically around the country without much success. We are a nation that cherishes our personal freedoms and unfortunately this includes the freedom to do some things the aren’t in our own best interests.
You could argue that this leaves us with education as our only hope of turning the tide. However, educating without characterizing the obese among us as bad, ugly, and undisciplined people is a public relations challenge of heroic proportions. Choosing language and images that somehow convey the idea that although obesity is bad being obese doesn’t make you a bad or ugly person is walking along a fine semantic edge.
If I sound discouraged, you are reading me correctly. As pediatricians, we are left doing the few things that have been shown to make a difference. This means promoting breastfeeding and encouraging thoughtful introduction of solid foods; both strategies can be done before the child can hear our well-intentioned but misguided words of encouragement.
Dr. Wilkoff practiced primary care pediatrics in Brunswick, Maine for nearly 40 years. He has authored several books on behavioral pediatrics, including “How to Say No to Your Toddler.” Other than a Littman stethoscope he accepted as a first-year medical student in 1966, Dr. Wilkoff reports having nothing to disclose. Email him at [email protected].
In a recent New York Times opinion article, author Aubrey Gordon claims that since a visit to her pediatrician in fourth grade she has felt like an “enemy combatant in the nation’s war on childhood obesity.” (“Leave Fat Kids Alone,” Nov. 13, 2020).
At that unfortunate encounter, she recalls being told that “You’ll be thin and beautiful ... If you can just stay the same weight.” In retrospect she feels that the comment by her well-meaning but misguided physician “planted the seeds of depression” that have plagued her ever since.
Ms. Gordon goes on to list the many national and local initiatives that have done little to bend the curve in this country’s obesity trajectory but have succeeded in targeting bodies like hers as an epidemic and have resulted in her and thousands of other children being treated as “its virus personified.”
It is deeply troubling to read of her journey through life as collateral damage in a failed war effort, but Ms. Gordon offers little advice to us other than that we stop doing what we have been doing. It hasn’t been helping and it’s not working.
I suspect she would agree that obesity is one of our nation’s most serious public health problems. There is voluminous evidence of the association of obesity with cardiac disease, cancer, mental health challenges, and more recently COVID-19 – just to name a few. If blaming obese children who are the victims is counterproductive where do we point the finger? It is tempting to blame parents and certainly they deserve some culpability. Some parents could have created less obesity-enabling environments through healthier menu choices and done a better job discouraging sedentary behaviors. However, some families lack the access to, or the resources to, provide less calorie-dense food options. We know that many obese children have parents who have been obese themselves since childhood and we know that breaking the obesity cycle can be extremely difficult. Do we extend the sweep of our finger-pointing to include grandparents and great grandparents?
While guilt can be a powerful motivating force, obesity seems to be one of those conditions in which by the time it becomes obvious to a family, the die is cast and blaming the victim or her parents is going to do little more than engender bad feelings. We have done more than enough. In fact, Ms. Gordon’s commentary suggests we have gone too far in creating public opinion that being lean is healthy and being overweight is bad. More motivational testimonials will merely add to the shaming.
Obesity is clearly a societal problem and selectively targeting the victims is not the answer. A famine would certainly lower our national body mass index, but not even the most callous among us would include it on the list of options. Attempts at levying a hefty tax on sweetened beverages have been attempted sporadically around the country without much success. We are a nation that cherishes our personal freedoms and unfortunately this includes the freedom to do some things the aren’t in our own best interests.
You could argue that this leaves us with education as our only hope of turning the tide. However, educating without characterizing the obese among us as bad, ugly, and undisciplined people is a public relations challenge of heroic proportions. Choosing language and images that somehow convey the idea that although obesity is bad being obese doesn’t make you a bad or ugly person is walking along a fine semantic edge.
If I sound discouraged, you are reading me correctly. As pediatricians, we are left doing the few things that have been shown to make a difference. This means promoting breastfeeding and encouraging thoughtful introduction of solid foods; both strategies can be done before the child can hear our well-intentioned but misguided words of encouragement.
Dr. Wilkoff practiced primary care pediatrics in Brunswick, Maine for nearly 40 years. He has authored several books on behavioral pediatrics, including “How to Say No to Your Toddler.” Other than a Littman stethoscope he accepted as a first-year medical student in 1966, Dr. Wilkoff reports having nothing to disclose. Email him at [email protected].
Cloth masks provide inferior protection vs. medical masks, suggests evidence review
according to an evidence review published Jan. 11 in Annals of Family Medicine.
Nevertheless, cloth masks may provide some degree of protection, filtration studies indicate. If clinicians use cloth masks, they should take into account the fit, material, and number of layers, the review authors wrote.
And if cloth masks are used as a last resort, such as during shortages of personal protective equipment (PPE), additional measures may help, such as pairing cloth masks with plastic face shields.
“We recommend frequent cloth mask changes to reduce the risk of moisture retention and washing according to hospital laundry standards to decrease the risk of ineffective cleaning,” review author Ariel Kiyomi Daoud, a researcher at the University of Colorado at Denver, Aurora, and colleagues wrote.
The investigators identified and analyzed nine studies related to cloth masks’ ability to prevent respiratory viral infections among health care clinicians. The studies generally were not specific to SARS-CoV-2. They focused on four nonrandomized trials, three laboratory efficacy studies, one single-case experiment, and one randomized controlled trial.
Filtration and fit
“Seven publications addressed the filtration efficacy of commercial cloth masks or materials used to create homemade masks ... in a laboratory setting,” the researchers wrote. These studies found that cloth materials prevent some level of penetration, but generally have “lesser filtration efficiency and greater variability than medical masks” do.
One study found that the materials with the greatest filtration efficacy – vacuum bags and tea towels – had low airflow, which limits their use.
Two studies found that additional layers may increase the viral filtration efficacy of cloth masks.
Several studies that assessed mask fit and airflow found that cloth masks “have worse fit and a greater level of particle leakage, compared to medical masks,” the authors reported. Most studies did not examine cloth masks’ ability to protect wearers from respiratory droplets or contact, which the World Health Organization consider the primary means of SARS-CoV-2 spread, with aerosols playing a smaller role. “Thus, we must interpret these results with caution in the context of COVID-19,” the authors wrote. “For a primary care clinician without access to medical masks, our qualitative synthesis of the literature suggests that it is better to wear a cloth mask than no mask,” as long as other protective measures are considered along with cloth mask use.
Generally consistent guidance
Agencies and researchers have shared similar recommendations about the use of cloth masks in health care settings.
“Health care workers are at the frontline and they need to be protected,” said Abrar Ahmad Chughtai, MBBS, MPH, PhD, an epidemiologist at University of New South Wales, Sydney, in an interview. “Many studies show that respirators are more effective, compared to medical masks, and medical masks are more effective, compared to cloth masks. So ideally, all frontline health care workers should use respirators. If respirators are not available, then medical masks should be used. Cloth masks are not as effective as medical masks and ideally should not be used in health care settings.”
Dr. Chughtai has written about cloth masks for protection against SARS-CoV-2 and was an investigator for a 2015 randomized trial that compared medical masks and cloth masks in health care workers.
In that trial, which was considered in the review, greater rates of influenza-like illness occurred in the cloth mask arm, compared with the medical mask arm.
“Studies show that three or more layers of cloth may reduce the spread of droplets and aerosols from the wearers,” Dr. Chughtai said. “So, cloth masks may be used in community settings to prevent spread of infections from the sick, particularly asymptomatic, people.”
In addition, cloth masks “may be used by health care workers as a last resort, if no other option is available,” he said. In that case, they should have at least three layers, fit to the face, and be washed regularly.
Not considered PPE
According to routine infection prevention and control recommendations for health care personnel from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, face masks – often referred to as surgical masks or procedure masks – should be worn by workers “at all times while they are in the healthcare facility, including in break rooms or other spaces where they might encounter coworkers.”
Unlike cloth masks, face masks offer “protection for the wearer against exposure to splashes and sprays of infectious material from others,” as well as source control, the agency says. Health care personnel “should remove their respirator or face mask, perform hand hygiene, and put on their cloth mask when leaving the facility at the end of their shift,” according to the CDC.
“Cloth masks are NOT PPE and should not be worn for the care of patients with suspected or confirmed COVID-19 or other situations where use of a respirator or face mask is recommended,” the agency notes.
When respirators or face masks are unavailable, health care personnel “might use cloth masks as a last resort for care of patients with suspected or confirmed diagnosis for which face mask or respirator use is normally recommended,” according to CDC guidance.
In that scenario, cloth masks “should ideally be used in combination with a face shield that covers the entire front (that extends to the chin or below) and sides of the face,” the CDC says.
Limited data for comparisons
A Dec. 29, 2020, update in Annals of Internal Medicine about masks for prevention of respiratory virus infections highlighted two recent studies in the United States that reported on mask use in health care settings. A study of more than 16,000 health care workers and first responders found that those who used an N95 or surgical mask all of the time were less likely to have SARS-CoV-2 antibodies, compared with workers who did not wear masks all the time. The adjusted odds ratio with consistent N95 use was 0.83, and the aOR with consistent surgical mask use was 0.86.
In the second study, which included more than 20,000 asymptomatic health care workers, risk for infection was reduced with any mask use versus no mask use (OR, 0.58). An N95 mask was associated with decreased risk versus a surgical mask (OR, 0.76). The studies had methodological limitations, however, and “evidence for various comparisons about mask use in health care settings and risk for SARS-CoV-2 remains insufficient,” the authors of the update wrote.
The Annals of Family Medicine review authors had no relevant disclosures. Dr. Chughtai has tested filtration of 3M masks and worked with CleanSpace Technology to research fit testing of respirators, and the 2015 randomized trial was funded by an Australian Research Council Linkage Grant with 3M as a partner on the grant. The Dec. 29, 2020, update was of a review that originally was supported by grants from the Agency for Healthcare Research Quality.
SOURCE: Daoud AK et al. Ann Fam Med. 2020 Jan 11. doi: 10.1370/afm.2640.
according to an evidence review published Jan. 11 in Annals of Family Medicine.
Nevertheless, cloth masks may provide some degree of protection, filtration studies indicate. If clinicians use cloth masks, they should take into account the fit, material, and number of layers, the review authors wrote.
And if cloth masks are used as a last resort, such as during shortages of personal protective equipment (PPE), additional measures may help, such as pairing cloth masks with plastic face shields.
“We recommend frequent cloth mask changes to reduce the risk of moisture retention and washing according to hospital laundry standards to decrease the risk of ineffective cleaning,” review author Ariel Kiyomi Daoud, a researcher at the University of Colorado at Denver, Aurora, and colleagues wrote.
The investigators identified and analyzed nine studies related to cloth masks’ ability to prevent respiratory viral infections among health care clinicians. The studies generally were not specific to SARS-CoV-2. They focused on four nonrandomized trials, three laboratory efficacy studies, one single-case experiment, and one randomized controlled trial.
Filtration and fit
“Seven publications addressed the filtration efficacy of commercial cloth masks or materials used to create homemade masks ... in a laboratory setting,” the researchers wrote. These studies found that cloth materials prevent some level of penetration, but generally have “lesser filtration efficiency and greater variability than medical masks” do.
One study found that the materials with the greatest filtration efficacy – vacuum bags and tea towels – had low airflow, which limits their use.
Two studies found that additional layers may increase the viral filtration efficacy of cloth masks.
Several studies that assessed mask fit and airflow found that cloth masks “have worse fit and a greater level of particle leakage, compared to medical masks,” the authors reported. Most studies did not examine cloth masks’ ability to protect wearers from respiratory droplets or contact, which the World Health Organization consider the primary means of SARS-CoV-2 spread, with aerosols playing a smaller role. “Thus, we must interpret these results with caution in the context of COVID-19,” the authors wrote. “For a primary care clinician without access to medical masks, our qualitative synthesis of the literature suggests that it is better to wear a cloth mask than no mask,” as long as other protective measures are considered along with cloth mask use.
Generally consistent guidance
Agencies and researchers have shared similar recommendations about the use of cloth masks in health care settings.
“Health care workers are at the frontline and they need to be protected,” said Abrar Ahmad Chughtai, MBBS, MPH, PhD, an epidemiologist at University of New South Wales, Sydney, in an interview. “Many studies show that respirators are more effective, compared to medical masks, and medical masks are more effective, compared to cloth masks. So ideally, all frontline health care workers should use respirators. If respirators are not available, then medical masks should be used. Cloth masks are not as effective as medical masks and ideally should not be used in health care settings.”
Dr. Chughtai has written about cloth masks for protection against SARS-CoV-2 and was an investigator for a 2015 randomized trial that compared medical masks and cloth masks in health care workers.
In that trial, which was considered in the review, greater rates of influenza-like illness occurred in the cloth mask arm, compared with the medical mask arm.
“Studies show that three or more layers of cloth may reduce the spread of droplets and aerosols from the wearers,” Dr. Chughtai said. “So, cloth masks may be used in community settings to prevent spread of infections from the sick, particularly asymptomatic, people.”
In addition, cloth masks “may be used by health care workers as a last resort, if no other option is available,” he said. In that case, they should have at least three layers, fit to the face, and be washed regularly.
Not considered PPE
According to routine infection prevention and control recommendations for health care personnel from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, face masks – often referred to as surgical masks or procedure masks – should be worn by workers “at all times while they are in the healthcare facility, including in break rooms or other spaces where they might encounter coworkers.”
Unlike cloth masks, face masks offer “protection for the wearer against exposure to splashes and sprays of infectious material from others,” as well as source control, the agency says. Health care personnel “should remove their respirator or face mask, perform hand hygiene, and put on their cloth mask when leaving the facility at the end of their shift,” according to the CDC.
“Cloth masks are NOT PPE and should not be worn for the care of patients with suspected or confirmed COVID-19 or other situations where use of a respirator or face mask is recommended,” the agency notes.
When respirators or face masks are unavailable, health care personnel “might use cloth masks as a last resort for care of patients with suspected or confirmed diagnosis for which face mask or respirator use is normally recommended,” according to CDC guidance.
In that scenario, cloth masks “should ideally be used in combination with a face shield that covers the entire front (that extends to the chin or below) and sides of the face,” the CDC says.
Limited data for comparisons
A Dec. 29, 2020, update in Annals of Internal Medicine about masks for prevention of respiratory virus infections highlighted two recent studies in the United States that reported on mask use in health care settings. A study of more than 16,000 health care workers and first responders found that those who used an N95 or surgical mask all of the time were less likely to have SARS-CoV-2 antibodies, compared with workers who did not wear masks all the time. The adjusted odds ratio with consistent N95 use was 0.83, and the aOR with consistent surgical mask use was 0.86.
In the second study, which included more than 20,000 asymptomatic health care workers, risk for infection was reduced with any mask use versus no mask use (OR, 0.58). An N95 mask was associated with decreased risk versus a surgical mask (OR, 0.76). The studies had methodological limitations, however, and “evidence for various comparisons about mask use in health care settings and risk for SARS-CoV-2 remains insufficient,” the authors of the update wrote.
The Annals of Family Medicine review authors had no relevant disclosures. Dr. Chughtai has tested filtration of 3M masks and worked with CleanSpace Technology to research fit testing of respirators, and the 2015 randomized trial was funded by an Australian Research Council Linkage Grant with 3M as a partner on the grant. The Dec. 29, 2020, update was of a review that originally was supported by grants from the Agency for Healthcare Research Quality.
SOURCE: Daoud AK et al. Ann Fam Med. 2020 Jan 11. doi: 10.1370/afm.2640.
according to an evidence review published Jan. 11 in Annals of Family Medicine.
Nevertheless, cloth masks may provide some degree of protection, filtration studies indicate. If clinicians use cloth masks, they should take into account the fit, material, and number of layers, the review authors wrote.
And if cloth masks are used as a last resort, such as during shortages of personal protective equipment (PPE), additional measures may help, such as pairing cloth masks with plastic face shields.
“We recommend frequent cloth mask changes to reduce the risk of moisture retention and washing according to hospital laundry standards to decrease the risk of ineffective cleaning,” review author Ariel Kiyomi Daoud, a researcher at the University of Colorado at Denver, Aurora, and colleagues wrote.
The investigators identified and analyzed nine studies related to cloth masks’ ability to prevent respiratory viral infections among health care clinicians. The studies generally were not specific to SARS-CoV-2. They focused on four nonrandomized trials, three laboratory efficacy studies, one single-case experiment, and one randomized controlled trial.
Filtration and fit
“Seven publications addressed the filtration efficacy of commercial cloth masks or materials used to create homemade masks ... in a laboratory setting,” the researchers wrote. These studies found that cloth materials prevent some level of penetration, but generally have “lesser filtration efficiency and greater variability than medical masks” do.
One study found that the materials with the greatest filtration efficacy – vacuum bags and tea towels – had low airflow, which limits their use.
Two studies found that additional layers may increase the viral filtration efficacy of cloth masks.
Several studies that assessed mask fit and airflow found that cloth masks “have worse fit and a greater level of particle leakage, compared to medical masks,” the authors reported. Most studies did not examine cloth masks’ ability to protect wearers from respiratory droplets or contact, which the World Health Organization consider the primary means of SARS-CoV-2 spread, with aerosols playing a smaller role. “Thus, we must interpret these results with caution in the context of COVID-19,” the authors wrote. “For a primary care clinician without access to medical masks, our qualitative synthesis of the literature suggests that it is better to wear a cloth mask than no mask,” as long as other protective measures are considered along with cloth mask use.
Generally consistent guidance
Agencies and researchers have shared similar recommendations about the use of cloth masks in health care settings.
“Health care workers are at the frontline and they need to be protected,” said Abrar Ahmad Chughtai, MBBS, MPH, PhD, an epidemiologist at University of New South Wales, Sydney, in an interview. “Many studies show that respirators are more effective, compared to medical masks, and medical masks are more effective, compared to cloth masks. So ideally, all frontline health care workers should use respirators. If respirators are not available, then medical masks should be used. Cloth masks are not as effective as medical masks and ideally should not be used in health care settings.”
Dr. Chughtai has written about cloth masks for protection against SARS-CoV-2 and was an investigator for a 2015 randomized trial that compared medical masks and cloth masks in health care workers.
In that trial, which was considered in the review, greater rates of influenza-like illness occurred in the cloth mask arm, compared with the medical mask arm.
“Studies show that three or more layers of cloth may reduce the spread of droplets and aerosols from the wearers,” Dr. Chughtai said. “So, cloth masks may be used in community settings to prevent spread of infections from the sick, particularly asymptomatic, people.”
In addition, cloth masks “may be used by health care workers as a last resort, if no other option is available,” he said. In that case, they should have at least three layers, fit to the face, and be washed regularly.
Not considered PPE
According to routine infection prevention and control recommendations for health care personnel from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, face masks – often referred to as surgical masks or procedure masks – should be worn by workers “at all times while they are in the healthcare facility, including in break rooms or other spaces where they might encounter coworkers.”
Unlike cloth masks, face masks offer “protection for the wearer against exposure to splashes and sprays of infectious material from others,” as well as source control, the agency says. Health care personnel “should remove their respirator or face mask, perform hand hygiene, and put on their cloth mask when leaving the facility at the end of their shift,” according to the CDC.
“Cloth masks are NOT PPE and should not be worn for the care of patients with suspected or confirmed COVID-19 or other situations where use of a respirator or face mask is recommended,” the agency notes.
When respirators or face masks are unavailable, health care personnel “might use cloth masks as a last resort for care of patients with suspected or confirmed diagnosis for which face mask or respirator use is normally recommended,” according to CDC guidance.
In that scenario, cloth masks “should ideally be used in combination with a face shield that covers the entire front (that extends to the chin or below) and sides of the face,” the CDC says.
Limited data for comparisons
A Dec. 29, 2020, update in Annals of Internal Medicine about masks for prevention of respiratory virus infections highlighted two recent studies in the United States that reported on mask use in health care settings. A study of more than 16,000 health care workers and first responders found that those who used an N95 or surgical mask all of the time were less likely to have SARS-CoV-2 antibodies, compared with workers who did not wear masks all the time. The adjusted odds ratio with consistent N95 use was 0.83, and the aOR with consistent surgical mask use was 0.86.
In the second study, which included more than 20,000 asymptomatic health care workers, risk for infection was reduced with any mask use versus no mask use (OR, 0.58). An N95 mask was associated with decreased risk versus a surgical mask (OR, 0.76). The studies had methodological limitations, however, and “evidence for various comparisons about mask use in health care settings and risk for SARS-CoV-2 remains insufficient,” the authors of the update wrote.
The Annals of Family Medicine review authors had no relevant disclosures. Dr. Chughtai has tested filtration of 3M masks and worked with CleanSpace Technology to research fit testing of respirators, and the 2015 randomized trial was funded by an Australian Research Council Linkage Grant with 3M as a partner on the grant. The Dec. 29, 2020, update was of a review that originally was supported by grants from the Agency for Healthcare Research Quality.
SOURCE: Daoud AK et al. Ann Fam Med. 2020 Jan 11. doi: 10.1370/afm.2640.
FROM ANNALS OF FAMILY MEDICINE
Feds authorize $3 billion to boost vaccine rollout
The CDC will send $3 billion to the states to boost a lagging national COVID-19 vaccination program.
The Department of Health and Human Services announced the new funding as only 30% of the more than 22 million doses of vaccine distributed in the U.S. has been injected into Americans’ arms.
Along with the $3 billion, HHS said another $19 billion is headed to states and jurisdictions to boost COVID-19 testing programs. The amount each state will receive will be determined by population.
The news comes days after President-elect Joe Biden said he planned to release all available doses of vaccine after he takes office on Jan. 20. The Trump administration has been holding back millions of doses to ensure supply of vaccine to provide the necessary second dose for those who received the first shot.
“This funding is another timely investment that will strengthen our nation’s efforts to stop the COVID-19 pandemic in America,” CDC Director Robert Redfield, MD, said in a statement. “Particularly now, it is crucial that states and communities have the resources they need to conduct testing, and to distribute and administer safe, high-quality COVID-19 vaccines safely and equitably.”
Federal officials and public health experts, however, expressed concerns this weekend about Biden’s plan.
Outgoing Trump administration officials and others said they worry that doing so will leave providers without enough second doses for people getting the two-shot vaccines.
If Biden releases all available doses and the vaccine-making process has an issue, they said, that could pose a supply risk.
“We have product that is going through QC right now – quality control – for sterility, identity check that we have tens and tens of millions of product. We always will. But batches fail. Sterility fails ... and then you don’t have a product for that second dose,” Alex Azar, secretary of health and human services, told the American Hospital Association on Jan. 8, according to CNN.
“And frankly, talking about that or encouraging that can really undermine a critical public health need, which is that people come back for their second vaccine,” he said.
One of the main roadblocks in the vaccine rollout has been administering the doses that have already been distributed. The U.S. has shipped 22.1 million doses, and 6.6 million first shots have been given, according to the latest CDC data updated Jan. 8. Mr. Azar and other federal health officials have encouraged states to use their current supply and expand vaccine access to more priority groups.
“We would be delighted to learn that jurisdictions have actually administered many more doses than they are presently reporting,” a spokesman for the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services told CNN. “We are encouraging jurisdictions to expand their priority groups as needed to ensure no vaccine is sitting on the shelf after having been delivered to the jurisdiction-directed locations.”
Releasing more vaccines for first doses could create ethical concerns as well, since people getting vaccines expect to get a second dose in the proper amount of time, according to The Week. Biden’s transition team said on Jan. 8 that he won’t delay the second dose but, instead, plans to ramp up production to stay on track.
To do this well, the federal government should create a coordinated vaccine strategy that sets expectations for an around-the-clock operation and help state and local vaccination programs meet their goals, Leana Wen, MD, a professor at George Washington University, wrote in an editorial for The Washington Post.
“The Biden team’s urgency around vaccinations is commendable,” she added in a Twitter post on Jan. 11. “I’d like to see a guarantee that every 1st dose given will be followed with a timely 2nd dose. Otherwise, there are ethical concerns that could add to vaccine hesitancy.”
Biden has pledged that 100 million doses will be administered in his first 100 days in office. He has grown frustrated as concerns grow that his administration could fall short of the promise, according to Politico. His coronavirus response team has noted several challenges, including what they say is a lack of long-term planning by the Trump administration and an initial refusal to share key information.
“We’re uncovering new information each day, and we’re unearthing – of course – more work to be done,” Vivek Murthy, MD, Biden’s nominee for surgeon general, told Politico.
The team has uncovered staffing shortages, technology problems, and issues with health care insurance coverage. The incoming Biden team has developed several initiatives, such as mobile vaccination units and new federal sites to give shots. It could take weeks to get the vaccine rollout on track, the news outlet reported.
“Will this be challenging? Absolutely,” Anthony Fauci, MD, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases and Biden’s incoming chief medical adviser on the coronavirus, told Politico. “This is an unprecedented effort to vaccinate the entire country over a period of time that’s fighting against people dying at record numbers. To say it’s not a challenge would be unrealistic. Do I think it can be done? Yes.”
A version of this article first appeared on WebMD.com.
The CDC will send $3 billion to the states to boost a lagging national COVID-19 vaccination program.
The Department of Health and Human Services announced the new funding as only 30% of the more than 22 million doses of vaccine distributed in the U.S. has been injected into Americans’ arms.
Along with the $3 billion, HHS said another $19 billion is headed to states and jurisdictions to boost COVID-19 testing programs. The amount each state will receive will be determined by population.
The news comes days after President-elect Joe Biden said he planned to release all available doses of vaccine after he takes office on Jan. 20. The Trump administration has been holding back millions of doses to ensure supply of vaccine to provide the necessary second dose for those who received the first shot.
“This funding is another timely investment that will strengthen our nation’s efforts to stop the COVID-19 pandemic in America,” CDC Director Robert Redfield, MD, said in a statement. “Particularly now, it is crucial that states and communities have the resources they need to conduct testing, and to distribute and administer safe, high-quality COVID-19 vaccines safely and equitably.”
Federal officials and public health experts, however, expressed concerns this weekend about Biden’s plan.
Outgoing Trump administration officials and others said they worry that doing so will leave providers without enough second doses for people getting the two-shot vaccines.
If Biden releases all available doses and the vaccine-making process has an issue, they said, that could pose a supply risk.
“We have product that is going through QC right now – quality control – for sterility, identity check that we have tens and tens of millions of product. We always will. But batches fail. Sterility fails ... and then you don’t have a product for that second dose,” Alex Azar, secretary of health and human services, told the American Hospital Association on Jan. 8, according to CNN.
“And frankly, talking about that or encouraging that can really undermine a critical public health need, which is that people come back for their second vaccine,” he said.
One of the main roadblocks in the vaccine rollout has been administering the doses that have already been distributed. The U.S. has shipped 22.1 million doses, and 6.6 million first shots have been given, according to the latest CDC data updated Jan. 8. Mr. Azar and other federal health officials have encouraged states to use their current supply and expand vaccine access to more priority groups.
“We would be delighted to learn that jurisdictions have actually administered many more doses than they are presently reporting,” a spokesman for the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services told CNN. “We are encouraging jurisdictions to expand their priority groups as needed to ensure no vaccine is sitting on the shelf after having been delivered to the jurisdiction-directed locations.”
Releasing more vaccines for first doses could create ethical concerns as well, since people getting vaccines expect to get a second dose in the proper amount of time, according to The Week. Biden’s transition team said on Jan. 8 that he won’t delay the second dose but, instead, plans to ramp up production to stay on track.
To do this well, the federal government should create a coordinated vaccine strategy that sets expectations for an around-the-clock operation and help state and local vaccination programs meet their goals, Leana Wen, MD, a professor at George Washington University, wrote in an editorial for The Washington Post.
“The Biden team’s urgency around vaccinations is commendable,” she added in a Twitter post on Jan. 11. “I’d like to see a guarantee that every 1st dose given will be followed with a timely 2nd dose. Otherwise, there are ethical concerns that could add to vaccine hesitancy.”
Biden has pledged that 100 million doses will be administered in his first 100 days in office. He has grown frustrated as concerns grow that his administration could fall short of the promise, according to Politico. His coronavirus response team has noted several challenges, including what they say is a lack of long-term planning by the Trump administration and an initial refusal to share key information.
“We’re uncovering new information each day, and we’re unearthing – of course – more work to be done,” Vivek Murthy, MD, Biden’s nominee for surgeon general, told Politico.
The team has uncovered staffing shortages, technology problems, and issues with health care insurance coverage. The incoming Biden team has developed several initiatives, such as mobile vaccination units and new federal sites to give shots. It could take weeks to get the vaccine rollout on track, the news outlet reported.
“Will this be challenging? Absolutely,” Anthony Fauci, MD, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases and Biden’s incoming chief medical adviser on the coronavirus, told Politico. “This is an unprecedented effort to vaccinate the entire country over a period of time that’s fighting against people dying at record numbers. To say it’s not a challenge would be unrealistic. Do I think it can be done? Yes.”
A version of this article first appeared on WebMD.com.
The CDC will send $3 billion to the states to boost a lagging national COVID-19 vaccination program.
The Department of Health and Human Services announced the new funding as only 30% of the more than 22 million doses of vaccine distributed in the U.S. has been injected into Americans’ arms.
Along with the $3 billion, HHS said another $19 billion is headed to states and jurisdictions to boost COVID-19 testing programs. The amount each state will receive will be determined by population.
The news comes days after President-elect Joe Biden said he planned to release all available doses of vaccine after he takes office on Jan. 20. The Trump administration has been holding back millions of doses to ensure supply of vaccine to provide the necessary second dose for those who received the first shot.
“This funding is another timely investment that will strengthen our nation’s efforts to stop the COVID-19 pandemic in America,” CDC Director Robert Redfield, MD, said in a statement. “Particularly now, it is crucial that states and communities have the resources they need to conduct testing, and to distribute and administer safe, high-quality COVID-19 vaccines safely and equitably.”
Federal officials and public health experts, however, expressed concerns this weekend about Biden’s plan.
Outgoing Trump administration officials and others said they worry that doing so will leave providers without enough second doses for people getting the two-shot vaccines.
If Biden releases all available doses and the vaccine-making process has an issue, they said, that could pose a supply risk.
“We have product that is going through QC right now – quality control – for sterility, identity check that we have tens and tens of millions of product. We always will. But batches fail. Sterility fails ... and then you don’t have a product for that second dose,” Alex Azar, secretary of health and human services, told the American Hospital Association on Jan. 8, according to CNN.
“And frankly, talking about that or encouraging that can really undermine a critical public health need, which is that people come back for their second vaccine,” he said.
One of the main roadblocks in the vaccine rollout has been administering the doses that have already been distributed. The U.S. has shipped 22.1 million doses, and 6.6 million first shots have been given, according to the latest CDC data updated Jan. 8. Mr. Azar and other federal health officials have encouraged states to use their current supply and expand vaccine access to more priority groups.
“We would be delighted to learn that jurisdictions have actually administered many more doses than they are presently reporting,” a spokesman for the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services told CNN. “We are encouraging jurisdictions to expand their priority groups as needed to ensure no vaccine is sitting on the shelf after having been delivered to the jurisdiction-directed locations.”
Releasing more vaccines for first doses could create ethical concerns as well, since people getting vaccines expect to get a second dose in the proper amount of time, according to The Week. Biden’s transition team said on Jan. 8 that he won’t delay the second dose but, instead, plans to ramp up production to stay on track.
To do this well, the federal government should create a coordinated vaccine strategy that sets expectations for an around-the-clock operation and help state and local vaccination programs meet their goals, Leana Wen, MD, a professor at George Washington University, wrote in an editorial for The Washington Post.
“The Biden team’s urgency around vaccinations is commendable,” she added in a Twitter post on Jan. 11. “I’d like to see a guarantee that every 1st dose given will be followed with a timely 2nd dose. Otherwise, there are ethical concerns that could add to vaccine hesitancy.”
Biden has pledged that 100 million doses will be administered in his first 100 days in office. He has grown frustrated as concerns grow that his administration could fall short of the promise, according to Politico. His coronavirus response team has noted several challenges, including what they say is a lack of long-term planning by the Trump administration and an initial refusal to share key information.
“We’re uncovering new information each day, and we’re unearthing – of course – more work to be done,” Vivek Murthy, MD, Biden’s nominee for surgeon general, told Politico.
The team has uncovered staffing shortages, technology problems, and issues with health care insurance coverage. The incoming Biden team has developed several initiatives, such as mobile vaccination units and new federal sites to give shots. It could take weeks to get the vaccine rollout on track, the news outlet reported.
“Will this be challenging? Absolutely,” Anthony Fauci, MD, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases and Biden’s incoming chief medical adviser on the coronavirus, told Politico. “This is an unprecedented effort to vaccinate the entire country over a period of time that’s fighting against people dying at record numbers. To say it’s not a challenge would be unrealistic. Do I think it can be done? Yes.”
A version of this article first appeared on WebMD.com.
Physicians react: Doctors worry about patients reading their clinical notes
Patients will soon be able to read the notes that physicians make during an episode of care, as well as information about diagnostic testing and imaging results, tests for STDs, fetal ultrasounds, and cancer biopsies. This open access is raising concerns among physicians.
As part of the 21st Century Cures Act, patients have the right to see their medical notes. Known as Open Notes, the policy will go into effect on April 5, 2021. The Department of Health & Human Services recently changed the original start date, which was to be Nov. 2, 2020.
The mandate has some physicians worrying about potential legal risks and possible violation of doctor-patient confidentiality. When asked to share their views on the new Open Notes mandate, many physicians expressed their concerns but also cited some of the positive effects that could come from this.
Potentially more legal woes for physicians?
A key concern raised by one physician commenter is that patients could misunderstand legitimate medical terminology or even put a physician in legal crosshairs. For example, a medical term such as “spontaneous abortion” could be misconstrued by patients. A physician might write notes with the idea that a patient is reading them and thus might alter those notes in a way that creates legal trouble.
“This layers another level of censorship and legal liability onto physicians, who in attempting to be [politically correct], may omit critical information or have to use euphemisms in order to avoid conflict,” one physician said.
She also questioned whether notes might now have to be run through legal counsel before being posted to avoid potential liability.
Another doctor questioned how physicians would be able to document patients suspected of faking injuries for pain medication, for example. Could such documentation lead to lawsuits for the doctor?
As one physician noted, some patients “are drug seekers. Some refuse to aid in their own care. Some are malingerers. Not documenting that is bad medicine.”
The possibility of violating doctor-patient confidentiality laws, particularly for teenagers, could be another negative effect of Open Notes, said one physician.
“Won’t this violate the statutes that teenagers have the right to confidential evaluations?” the commenter mused. “If charts are to be immediately available, then STDs and pregnancies they weren’t ready to talk about will now be suddenly known by their parents.”
One doctor has already faced this issue. “I already ran into this problem once,” he noted. “Now I warn those on their parents’ insurance before I start the visit. I have literally had a patient state, ‘well then we are done,’ and leave without being seen due to it.”
Another physician questioned the possibility of having to write notes differently than they do now, especially if the patients have lower reading comprehension abilities.
One physician who uses Open Notes said he receives patient requests for changes that have little to do with the actual diagnosis and relate to ancillary issues. He highlighted patients who “don’t want psych diagnosis in their chart or are concerned a diagnosis will raise their insurance premium, so they ask me to delete it.”
Will Open Notes erode patient communication?
One physician questioned whether it would lead to patients being less open and forthcoming about their medical concerns with doctors.
“The main problem I see is the patient not telling me the whole story, or worse, telling me the story, and then asking me not to document it (as many have done in the past) because they don’t want their spouse, family, etc. to read the notes and they have already given their permission for them to do so, for a variety of reasons,” he commented. “This includes topics of STDs, infidelity, depression, suicidal thoughts, and other symptoms the patient doesn’t want their family to read about.”
Some physicians envision positive developments
Many physicians are unconcerned by the new mandate. “I see some potential good in this, such as improving doctor-patient communication and more scrupulous charting,” one physician said.
A doctor working in the U.S. federal health care system noted that open access has been a part of that system for decades.
“Since health care providers work in this unveiled setting for their entire career, they usually know how to write appropriate clinical notes and what information needs to be included in them,” he wrote. “Now it’s time for the rest of the medical community to catch up to a reality that we have worked within for decades now.
“The world did not end, malpractice complaints did not increase, and physician/patient relationships were not damaged. Living in the information age, archaic practices like private notes were surely going to end at some point.”
One doctor who has been using Open Notes has had experiences in which the patient noted an error in the medical chart that needed correcting. “I have had one patient correct me on a timeline in the HPI which was helpful and I made the requested correction in that instance,” he said.
Another physician agreed. “I’ve had patients add or correct valuable information I’ve missed. Good probably outweighs the bad if we set limits on behaviors expressed by the personality disordered group. The majority of people don’t seem to care and still ask me ‘what would you do’ or ‘tell me what to do.’ It’s all about patient/physician trust.”
Another talked about how Open Notes should have little or no impact. “Here’s a novel concept – talking to our patients,” he commented. “There is nothing in every one of my chart notes that has not already been discussed with my patients and I dictate (speech to text) my findings and plan in front of them. So, if they are reviewing my office notes, it will only serve to reinforce what we have already discussed.”
“I don’t intend to change anything,” he added. “Chances are if they were to see a test result before I have a chance to discuss it with them, they will have already ‘Googled’ its meaning and we can have more meaningful interaction if they have a basic understanding of the test.”
“I understand that this is anxiety provoking, but in general I think it is appropriate for patients to have access to their notes,” said another physician. “If physicians write lousy notes that say they did things they didn’t do, that fail to actually state a diagnosis and a plan (and they often do), that is the doc’s problem, not the patient’s.”
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
Patients will soon be able to read the notes that physicians make during an episode of care, as well as information about diagnostic testing and imaging results, tests for STDs, fetal ultrasounds, and cancer biopsies. This open access is raising concerns among physicians.
As part of the 21st Century Cures Act, patients have the right to see their medical notes. Known as Open Notes, the policy will go into effect on April 5, 2021. The Department of Health & Human Services recently changed the original start date, which was to be Nov. 2, 2020.
The mandate has some physicians worrying about potential legal risks and possible violation of doctor-patient confidentiality. When asked to share their views on the new Open Notes mandate, many physicians expressed their concerns but also cited some of the positive effects that could come from this.
Potentially more legal woes for physicians?
A key concern raised by one physician commenter is that patients could misunderstand legitimate medical terminology or even put a physician in legal crosshairs. For example, a medical term such as “spontaneous abortion” could be misconstrued by patients. A physician might write notes with the idea that a patient is reading them and thus might alter those notes in a way that creates legal trouble.
“This layers another level of censorship and legal liability onto physicians, who in attempting to be [politically correct], may omit critical information or have to use euphemisms in order to avoid conflict,” one physician said.
She also questioned whether notes might now have to be run through legal counsel before being posted to avoid potential liability.
Another doctor questioned how physicians would be able to document patients suspected of faking injuries for pain medication, for example. Could such documentation lead to lawsuits for the doctor?
As one physician noted, some patients “are drug seekers. Some refuse to aid in their own care. Some are malingerers. Not documenting that is bad medicine.”
The possibility of violating doctor-patient confidentiality laws, particularly for teenagers, could be another negative effect of Open Notes, said one physician.
“Won’t this violate the statutes that teenagers have the right to confidential evaluations?” the commenter mused. “If charts are to be immediately available, then STDs and pregnancies they weren’t ready to talk about will now be suddenly known by their parents.”
One doctor has already faced this issue. “I already ran into this problem once,” he noted. “Now I warn those on their parents’ insurance before I start the visit. I have literally had a patient state, ‘well then we are done,’ and leave without being seen due to it.”
Another physician questioned the possibility of having to write notes differently than they do now, especially if the patients have lower reading comprehension abilities.
One physician who uses Open Notes said he receives patient requests for changes that have little to do with the actual diagnosis and relate to ancillary issues. He highlighted patients who “don’t want psych diagnosis in their chart or are concerned a diagnosis will raise their insurance premium, so they ask me to delete it.”
Will Open Notes erode patient communication?
One physician questioned whether it would lead to patients being less open and forthcoming about their medical concerns with doctors.
“The main problem I see is the patient not telling me the whole story, or worse, telling me the story, and then asking me not to document it (as many have done in the past) because they don’t want their spouse, family, etc. to read the notes and they have already given their permission for them to do so, for a variety of reasons,” he commented. “This includes topics of STDs, infidelity, depression, suicidal thoughts, and other symptoms the patient doesn’t want their family to read about.”
Some physicians envision positive developments
Many physicians are unconcerned by the new mandate. “I see some potential good in this, such as improving doctor-patient communication and more scrupulous charting,” one physician said.
A doctor working in the U.S. federal health care system noted that open access has been a part of that system for decades.
“Since health care providers work in this unveiled setting for their entire career, they usually know how to write appropriate clinical notes and what information needs to be included in them,” he wrote. “Now it’s time for the rest of the medical community to catch up to a reality that we have worked within for decades now.
“The world did not end, malpractice complaints did not increase, and physician/patient relationships were not damaged. Living in the information age, archaic practices like private notes were surely going to end at some point.”
One doctor who has been using Open Notes has had experiences in which the patient noted an error in the medical chart that needed correcting. “I have had one patient correct me on a timeline in the HPI which was helpful and I made the requested correction in that instance,” he said.
Another physician agreed. “I’ve had patients add or correct valuable information I’ve missed. Good probably outweighs the bad if we set limits on behaviors expressed by the personality disordered group. The majority of people don’t seem to care and still ask me ‘what would you do’ or ‘tell me what to do.’ It’s all about patient/physician trust.”
Another talked about how Open Notes should have little or no impact. “Here’s a novel concept – talking to our patients,” he commented. “There is nothing in every one of my chart notes that has not already been discussed with my patients and I dictate (speech to text) my findings and plan in front of them. So, if they are reviewing my office notes, it will only serve to reinforce what we have already discussed.”
“I don’t intend to change anything,” he added. “Chances are if they were to see a test result before I have a chance to discuss it with them, they will have already ‘Googled’ its meaning and we can have more meaningful interaction if they have a basic understanding of the test.”
“I understand that this is anxiety provoking, but in general I think it is appropriate for patients to have access to their notes,” said another physician. “If physicians write lousy notes that say they did things they didn’t do, that fail to actually state a diagnosis and a plan (and they often do), that is the doc’s problem, not the patient’s.”
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
Patients will soon be able to read the notes that physicians make during an episode of care, as well as information about diagnostic testing and imaging results, tests for STDs, fetal ultrasounds, and cancer biopsies. This open access is raising concerns among physicians.
As part of the 21st Century Cures Act, patients have the right to see their medical notes. Known as Open Notes, the policy will go into effect on April 5, 2021. The Department of Health & Human Services recently changed the original start date, which was to be Nov. 2, 2020.
The mandate has some physicians worrying about potential legal risks and possible violation of doctor-patient confidentiality. When asked to share their views on the new Open Notes mandate, many physicians expressed their concerns but also cited some of the positive effects that could come from this.
Potentially more legal woes for physicians?
A key concern raised by one physician commenter is that patients could misunderstand legitimate medical terminology or even put a physician in legal crosshairs. For example, a medical term such as “spontaneous abortion” could be misconstrued by patients. A physician might write notes with the idea that a patient is reading them and thus might alter those notes in a way that creates legal trouble.
“This layers another level of censorship and legal liability onto physicians, who in attempting to be [politically correct], may omit critical information or have to use euphemisms in order to avoid conflict,” one physician said.
She also questioned whether notes might now have to be run through legal counsel before being posted to avoid potential liability.
Another doctor questioned how physicians would be able to document patients suspected of faking injuries for pain medication, for example. Could such documentation lead to lawsuits for the doctor?
As one physician noted, some patients “are drug seekers. Some refuse to aid in their own care. Some are malingerers. Not documenting that is bad medicine.”
The possibility of violating doctor-patient confidentiality laws, particularly for teenagers, could be another negative effect of Open Notes, said one physician.
“Won’t this violate the statutes that teenagers have the right to confidential evaluations?” the commenter mused. “If charts are to be immediately available, then STDs and pregnancies they weren’t ready to talk about will now be suddenly known by their parents.”
One doctor has already faced this issue. “I already ran into this problem once,” he noted. “Now I warn those on their parents’ insurance before I start the visit. I have literally had a patient state, ‘well then we are done,’ and leave without being seen due to it.”
Another physician questioned the possibility of having to write notes differently than they do now, especially if the patients have lower reading comprehension abilities.
One physician who uses Open Notes said he receives patient requests for changes that have little to do with the actual diagnosis and relate to ancillary issues. He highlighted patients who “don’t want psych diagnosis in their chart or are concerned a diagnosis will raise their insurance premium, so they ask me to delete it.”
Will Open Notes erode patient communication?
One physician questioned whether it would lead to patients being less open and forthcoming about their medical concerns with doctors.
“The main problem I see is the patient not telling me the whole story, or worse, telling me the story, and then asking me not to document it (as many have done in the past) because they don’t want their spouse, family, etc. to read the notes and they have already given their permission for them to do so, for a variety of reasons,” he commented. “This includes topics of STDs, infidelity, depression, suicidal thoughts, and other symptoms the patient doesn’t want their family to read about.”
Some physicians envision positive developments
Many physicians are unconcerned by the new mandate. “I see some potential good in this, such as improving doctor-patient communication and more scrupulous charting,” one physician said.
A doctor working in the U.S. federal health care system noted that open access has been a part of that system for decades.
“Since health care providers work in this unveiled setting for their entire career, they usually know how to write appropriate clinical notes and what information needs to be included in them,” he wrote. “Now it’s time for the rest of the medical community to catch up to a reality that we have worked within for decades now.
“The world did not end, malpractice complaints did not increase, and physician/patient relationships were not damaged. Living in the information age, archaic practices like private notes were surely going to end at some point.”
One doctor who has been using Open Notes has had experiences in which the patient noted an error in the medical chart that needed correcting. “I have had one patient correct me on a timeline in the HPI which was helpful and I made the requested correction in that instance,” he said.
Another physician agreed. “I’ve had patients add or correct valuable information I’ve missed. Good probably outweighs the bad if we set limits on behaviors expressed by the personality disordered group. The majority of people don’t seem to care and still ask me ‘what would you do’ or ‘tell me what to do.’ It’s all about patient/physician trust.”
Another talked about how Open Notes should have little or no impact. “Here’s a novel concept – talking to our patients,” he commented. “There is nothing in every one of my chart notes that has not already been discussed with my patients and I dictate (speech to text) my findings and plan in front of them. So, if they are reviewing my office notes, it will only serve to reinforce what we have already discussed.”
“I don’t intend to change anything,” he added. “Chances are if they were to see a test result before I have a chance to discuss it with them, they will have already ‘Googled’ its meaning and we can have more meaningful interaction if they have a basic understanding of the test.”
“I understand that this is anxiety provoking, but in general I think it is appropriate for patients to have access to their notes,” said another physician. “If physicians write lousy notes that say they did things they didn’t do, that fail to actually state a diagnosis and a plan (and they often do), that is the doc’s problem, not the patient’s.”
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
Heavy drinking by teens may affect white-matter integrity
Heavy alcohol use in adolescence is linked to disruptions in white-matter integrity, new research suggests.
In a case-control study of more than 400 participants, the association was more pronounced in younger adolescents and in the anterior and middle corpus callosum, which serve the interhemispheric integration of frontal networking and communication.
The results provide clinicians with yet another reason to ask adolescents about their alcohol use, said investigator Adolf Pfefferbaum, MD, Center for Health Sciences, SRI International, Menlo Park, Calif., and professor emeritus at Stanford (Calif.) University.
However, when questioning adolescents about their alcohol use, “sometimes it’s better to ask: ‘How much alcohol do you drink?’ ” instead of just asking if they drink, Dr. Pfefferbaum said in an interview. That’s because they may be more willing to answer the first question honestly.
It’s also important for clinicians to nonjudgmentally tell teens there is evidence “that heavy drinking is bad for their brain,” he added.
The findings were published online Dec. 30, 2020, in JAMA Psychiatry.
Fractional anisotropy
Adolescence is a critical period of physiological and social maturation accompanied by significant structural, functional, and neurochemical brain changes, the investigators noted.
Diffusion tensor imaging (DTI) produces a measure called fractional anisotropy (FA), which characterizes some of these brain changes by measuring molecular water diffusion in the brain.
“FA is a measure of the integrity of brain white matter; so, the part of the brain that connects neurons with each other,” Dr. Pfefferbaum said. He added that FA decreases in diseases such as multiple sclerosis (MS), reflecting “some kind of pathology.”
Affected fiber systems include the corpus callosum, superior longitudinal fasciculus, internal and external capsule, brain stem, and cortical projection fibers. Disruption of these neural systems may degrade neural signal transmission and affect certain cognitive functions, possibly resulting in enhanced impulsivity, poor inhibitory control, and restricted working memory capacity, the researchers wrote.
FA follows an inverted U-shaped pattern. “The natural trajectory is to increase from infancy up to middle adolescence and then, as we get older, from about age 25 to 30 years, starts to go down. Our brains are starting to show signs of aging a bit by then,” said Dr. Pfefferbaum.
The current analysis assessed 451 adolescents (228 boys and 223 girls) from the NCANDA study, for whom researchers had four years of longitudinal DTI data. All were aged 12- 21 years at baseline.
The NCANDA cohort was recruited across five U.S. sites. Participants are assessed yearly on psychobiologic measures, including brain maturation. The cohort, which did not have any significant substance abuse upon entry, is balanced in terms of gender and ethnicity.
The investigators quantified the developmental change of white-matter (WM) integrity within each individual as the slope of FA over visits. They also examined altered developmental trajectories associated with drinking onset during adolescence and the differential alcohol associations by age with specific regional WM fiber tracts.
Researchers assessed drinking on a scale of 1-4, based on the youth-adjusted Cahalan score. The scale considers quantity and frequency to classify drinking levels based on past-year self-reported patterns.
Altered trajectory
Results showed that 291 participants (37.2%) remained at no to low drinking levels (youth-adjusted Cahalan score, 0) throughout the time points examined, and 160 (20.5%) were classified as heavy drinkers for at least two consecutive visits (youth-adjusted Cahalan score >1).
Among the no to low drinkers, 48.4% were boys with a mean age of 16.5 years and 51.2% were girls with a mean age of 16.5 years. About two thirds of the group (66%) were White.
Among heavy drinkers, 53.8% were boys with a mean age of 20.1 years and 46.3% were girls with a mean age of 20.5 years. In this group, 88.8% were White.
The investigators did not analyze moderate drinkers or those who initiated heavy drinking for only one visit.
The findings also showed that heavy drinkers exhibited significant reduction of whole-brain FA. The slopes of the 78 heavy drinkers were significantly more negative than the 78 matched no to low drinkers (mean, –0.0013 vs. 0.0001; P = .008).
“The concept of the slopes is really important here because it’s the trajectory that seems to be the most sensitive measure,” Dr. Pfefferbaum said. “Probably what’s happening is the exposure to alcohol is interfering with the normal myelination and normal development of the adolescent’s white matter.”
The no to low drinkers had relatively stable FA measures across all visits.
A reduction in FA was significantly linked to heavy drinking. An analysis of 63 youth who transitioned from being a no to low drinker to a heavy drinker showed that before the transition, they had significantly increased FA over visits (95% CI of slope, 0.0011-0.0024; P < .001). In addition, their corresponding slopes were not different from other no to low drinkers of the same age range.
However, this group’s FA declined significantly after they reported heavy drinking, resulting in slopes significantly below zero (95% CI of slope, –0.0036 to –0.0014; P < .001) and that were lower than the no to low participants of the same age range.
and further illustrates that heavy drinking in adolescence affects WM integrity, Dr. Pfefferbaum said.
Potential markers
None of the slope measures correlated with number of visits or use of tobacco or cannabis. The association of alcohol with the slope measures was more apparent in the younger cohort (<19 years).
“The effects were seen more readily in younger adolescents because they are the ones who are still progressing along this normal developmental trajectory,” Dr. Pfefferbaum noted. “In a sense, the younger you are when you’re exposed to alcohol, probably the more vulnerable you are.”
Previous studies have suggested that damage in WM tracts is associated with heightened neural reactivity to alcohol cues in adults with alcohol use disorder. Given this evidence, the greater WM degradation at younger versus older ages might help explain why adolescents who initiate early drinking are more likely to develop addiction later in life, the investigators wrote.
Of the five major fiber tracts, only the commissural fibers (corpus callosum) showed a significant association with alcohol. The researchers noted that WM volume shrinkage and callosal demyelination are two of the most prominent markers in adult alcoholism and are potential markers in adolescent alcohol abuse.
Upon further extending the analysis to the four subregions of the corpus callosum, the investigators found that only the anterior and middle callosal regions (genu and body) showed significant age-alcohol interactions.
This could be a result of the timing of fiber myelination in these regions of the brain, compared with others, Dr. Pfefferbaum said.
He noted that these fibers connect the left and right part of the anterior regions of the brain, especially the frontal lobes, which are particularly vulnerable to the effects of alcohol. “It may well be that we have this interaction of the developmental time and the sensitivity of the frontal parts of the brain.”
Cognitive effects?
Although the researchers did not find any sex effects, Dr. Pfefferbaum stressed that this doesn’t mean they do not exist. “We just may not have the power to see them,” he said.
The study did not look specifically at binge drinkers, defined as consuming five drinks in 2 hours for men and four drinks in 2 hours for women. Dr. Pfefferbaum noted that it is difficult to get “good quantification” of binge drinking. “We don’t have a fine enough grain analysis to separate that out,” he said.
Asked whether the altered FA trajectory in heavy drinkers affects cognition, Dr. Pfefferbaum said “those studies are still in progress,” with results hopefully available within about a year.
Dr. Pfefferbaum said he and his colleagues are continuing to follow these adolescents and hope to see if the altered FA trajectory in heavy drinkers returns to normal, adding: “The real question now is: If they stop heavy drinking, will they get back on track?”
This study is believed to be the first to suggest in vivo differential vulnerability in WM microstructure with respect to age, the authors note.
In addition to asking teens about their alcohol use, the clinician’s role should be to “counsel and refer,” said Dr. Pfefferbaum. He also suggested accessing resources from the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism.
Important data, but several limitations
In an interview, Oscar G. Bukstein, MD, MPH, medical director of outpatient psychiatry service at Boston Children’s Hospital, and professor of psychiatry at Harvard Medical School, also in Boston, said the findings provide further evidence that alcohol affects the maturing brain.
This study, and others that have examined cannabis use, “show that you have a dynamically growing brain with certain sections, particularly in this case the anterior and middle corpus callosum, that mature later [and] that are more likely to be affected by early alcohol use,” said Dr. Bukstein, who was not involved with the research.
He stressed the importance of determining the mechanism involved and noted some study limitations. For example, the DTI technology used may “already be out of date,” he said.
Using older technology may have prevented finding an impact of heavy drinking on parts of the brain other than the anterior and middle corpus callosum, Dr. Bukstein noted.
Newer technology might provide “a finer-grain nonlinear voxel-wise analysis,” although using more updated scanning techniques may not have detected additional differences in study groups, he added.
Dr. Bukstein also noted that there were limitations: The study did not have “gradations,” but only looked at heavy drinking and no to low drinking. “You’d like to find out about kids who are somewhere in the middle.” It also didn’t determine a “cutoff” where deleterious effects of alcohol on the brain begin, Dr. Bukstein added.
Additionally, the study didn’t look at brain development outcomes in children with conditions such as depression and ADHD that are known to lead to substance use – something a larger study may have been able to do, he said.
Dr. Bukstein noted that a newer and much larger study, the Adolescent Brain Cognitive Development study, has begun assessing kids for risk factors such as substance use, starting at age 10 years.
The study was funded by grants from NIAAA and by the National Institute on Drug Abuse, the National Institute of Mental Health, the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, and the Stanford Institute for Human-Centered Artificial Intelligence–AWS Cloud Credits for Research. Dr. Pfefferbaum reported receiving an NIAAA grant during the conduct of the study. Dr. Bukstein disclosed no relevant financial relationships.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
Heavy alcohol use in adolescence is linked to disruptions in white-matter integrity, new research suggests.
In a case-control study of more than 400 participants, the association was more pronounced in younger adolescents and in the anterior and middle corpus callosum, which serve the interhemispheric integration of frontal networking and communication.
The results provide clinicians with yet another reason to ask adolescents about their alcohol use, said investigator Adolf Pfefferbaum, MD, Center for Health Sciences, SRI International, Menlo Park, Calif., and professor emeritus at Stanford (Calif.) University.
However, when questioning adolescents about their alcohol use, “sometimes it’s better to ask: ‘How much alcohol do you drink?’ ” instead of just asking if they drink, Dr. Pfefferbaum said in an interview. That’s because they may be more willing to answer the first question honestly.
It’s also important for clinicians to nonjudgmentally tell teens there is evidence “that heavy drinking is bad for their brain,” he added.
The findings were published online Dec. 30, 2020, in JAMA Psychiatry.
Fractional anisotropy
Adolescence is a critical period of physiological and social maturation accompanied by significant structural, functional, and neurochemical brain changes, the investigators noted.
Diffusion tensor imaging (DTI) produces a measure called fractional anisotropy (FA), which characterizes some of these brain changes by measuring molecular water diffusion in the brain.
“FA is a measure of the integrity of brain white matter; so, the part of the brain that connects neurons with each other,” Dr. Pfefferbaum said. He added that FA decreases in diseases such as multiple sclerosis (MS), reflecting “some kind of pathology.”
Affected fiber systems include the corpus callosum, superior longitudinal fasciculus, internal and external capsule, brain stem, and cortical projection fibers. Disruption of these neural systems may degrade neural signal transmission and affect certain cognitive functions, possibly resulting in enhanced impulsivity, poor inhibitory control, and restricted working memory capacity, the researchers wrote.
FA follows an inverted U-shaped pattern. “The natural trajectory is to increase from infancy up to middle adolescence and then, as we get older, from about age 25 to 30 years, starts to go down. Our brains are starting to show signs of aging a bit by then,” said Dr. Pfefferbaum.
The current analysis assessed 451 adolescents (228 boys and 223 girls) from the NCANDA study, for whom researchers had four years of longitudinal DTI data. All were aged 12- 21 years at baseline.
The NCANDA cohort was recruited across five U.S. sites. Participants are assessed yearly on psychobiologic measures, including brain maturation. The cohort, which did not have any significant substance abuse upon entry, is balanced in terms of gender and ethnicity.
The investigators quantified the developmental change of white-matter (WM) integrity within each individual as the slope of FA over visits. They also examined altered developmental trajectories associated with drinking onset during adolescence and the differential alcohol associations by age with specific regional WM fiber tracts.
Researchers assessed drinking on a scale of 1-4, based on the youth-adjusted Cahalan score. The scale considers quantity and frequency to classify drinking levels based on past-year self-reported patterns.
Altered trajectory
Results showed that 291 participants (37.2%) remained at no to low drinking levels (youth-adjusted Cahalan score, 0) throughout the time points examined, and 160 (20.5%) were classified as heavy drinkers for at least two consecutive visits (youth-adjusted Cahalan score >1).
Among the no to low drinkers, 48.4% were boys with a mean age of 16.5 years and 51.2% were girls with a mean age of 16.5 years. About two thirds of the group (66%) were White.
Among heavy drinkers, 53.8% were boys with a mean age of 20.1 years and 46.3% were girls with a mean age of 20.5 years. In this group, 88.8% were White.
The investigators did not analyze moderate drinkers or those who initiated heavy drinking for only one visit.
The findings also showed that heavy drinkers exhibited significant reduction of whole-brain FA. The slopes of the 78 heavy drinkers were significantly more negative than the 78 matched no to low drinkers (mean, –0.0013 vs. 0.0001; P = .008).
“The concept of the slopes is really important here because it’s the trajectory that seems to be the most sensitive measure,” Dr. Pfefferbaum said. “Probably what’s happening is the exposure to alcohol is interfering with the normal myelination and normal development of the adolescent’s white matter.”
The no to low drinkers had relatively stable FA measures across all visits.
A reduction in FA was significantly linked to heavy drinking. An analysis of 63 youth who transitioned from being a no to low drinker to a heavy drinker showed that before the transition, they had significantly increased FA over visits (95% CI of slope, 0.0011-0.0024; P < .001). In addition, their corresponding slopes were not different from other no to low drinkers of the same age range.
However, this group’s FA declined significantly after they reported heavy drinking, resulting in slopes significantly below zero (95% CI of slope, –0.0036 to –0.0014; P < .001) and that were lower than the no to low participants of the same age range.
and further illustrates that heavy drinking in adolescence affects WM integrity, Dr. Pfefferbaum said.
Potential markers
None of the slope measures correlated with number of visits or use of tobacco or cannabis. The association of alcohol with the slope measures was more apparent in the younger cohort (<19 years).
“The effects were seen more readily in younger adolescents because they are the ones who are still progressing along this normal developmental trajectory,” Dr. Pfefferbaum noted. “In a sense, the younger you are when you’re exposed to alcohol, probably the more vulnerable you are.”
Previous studies have suggested that damage in WM tracts is associated with heightened neural reactivity to alcohol cues in adults with alcohol use disorder. Given this evidence, the greater WM degradation at younger versus older ages might help explain why adolescents who initiate early drinking are more likely to develop addiction later in life, the investigators wrote.
Of the five major fiber tracts, only the commissural fibers (corpus callosum) showed a significant association with alcohol. The researchers noted that WM volume shrinkage and callosal demyelination are two of the most prominent markers in adult alcoholism and are potential markers in adolescent alcohol abuse.
Upon further extending the analysis to the four subregions of the corpus callosum, the investigators found that only the anterior and middle callosal regions (genu and body) showed significant age-alcohol interactions.
This could be a result of the timing of fiber myelination in these regions of the brain, compared with others, Dr. Pfefferbaum said.
He noted that these fibers connect the left and right part of the anterior regions of the brain, especially the frontal lobes, which are particularly vulnerable to the effects of alcohol. “It may well be that we have this interaction of the developmental time and the sensitivity of the frontal parts of the brain.”
Cognitive effects?
Although the researchers did not find any sex effects, Dr. Pfefferbaum stressed that this doesn’t mean they do not exist. “We just may not have the power to see them,” he said.
The study did not look specifically at binge drinkers, defined as consuming five drinks in 2 hours for men and four drinks in 2 hours for women. Dr. Pfefferbaum noted that it is difficult to get “good quantification” of binge drinking. “We don’t have a fine enough grain analysis to separate that out,” he said.
Asked whether the altered FA trajectory in heavy drinkers affects cognition, Dr. Pfefferbaum said “those studies are still in progress,” with results hopefully available within about a year.
Dr. Pfefferbaum said he and his colleagues are continuing to follow these adolescents and hope to see if the altered FA trajectory in heavy drinkers returns to normal, adding: “The real question now is: If they stop heavy drinking, will they get back on track?”
This study is believed to be the first to suggest in vivo differential vulnerability in WM microstructure with respect to age, the authors note.
In addition to asking teens about their alcohol use, the clinician’s role should be to “counsel and refer,” said Dr. Pfefferbaum. He also suggested accessing resources from the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism.
Important data, but several limitations
In an interview, Oscar G. Bukstein, MD, MPH, medical director of outpatient psychiatry service at Boston Children’s Hospital, and professor of psychiatry at Harvard Medical School, also in Boston, said the findings provide further evidence that alcohol affects the maturing brain.
This study, and others that have examined cannabis use, “show that you have a dynamically growing brain with certain sections, particularly in this case the anterior and middle corpus callosum, that mature later [and] that are more likely to be affected by early alcohol use,” said Dr. Bukstein, who was not involved with the research.
He stressed the importance of determining the mechanism involved and noted some study limitations. For example, the DTI technology used may “already be out of date,” he said.
Using older technology may have prevented finding an impact of heavy drinking on parts of the brain other than the anterior and middle corpus callosum, Dr. Bukstein noted.
Newer technology might provide “a finer-grain nonlinear voxel-wise analysis,” although using more updated scanning techniques may not have detected additional differences in study groups, he added.
Dr. Bukstein also noted that there were limitations: The study did not have “gradations,” but only looked at heavy drinking and no to low drinking. “You’d like to find out about kids who are somewhere in the middle.” It also didn’t determine a “cutoff” where deleterious effects of alcohol on the brain begin, Dr. Bukstein added.
Additionally, the study didn’t look at brain development outcomes in children with conditions such as depression and ADHD that are known to lead to substance use – something a larger study may have been able to do, he said.
Dr. Bukstein noted that a newer and much larger study, the Adolescent Brain Cognitive Development study, has begun assessing kids for risk factors such as substance use, starting at age 10 years.
The study was funded by grants from NIAAA and by the National Institute on Drug Abuse, the National Institute of Mental Health, the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, and the Stanford Institute for Human-Centered Artificial Intelligence–AWS Cloud Credits for Research. Dr. Pfefferbaum reported receiving an NIAAA grant during the conduct of the study. Dr. Bukstein disclosed no relevant financial relationships.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
Heavy alcohol use in adolescence is linked to disruptions in white-matter integrity, new research suggests.
In a case-control study of more than 400 participants, the association was more pronounced in younger adolescents and in the anterior and middle corpus callosum, which serve the interhemispheric integration of frontal networking and communication.
The results provide clinicians with yet another reason to ask adolescents about their alcohol use, said investigator Adolf Pfefferbaum, MD, Center for Health Sciences, SRI International, Menlo Park, Calif., and professor emeritus at Stanford (Calif.) University.
However, when questioning adolescents about their alcohol use, “sometimes it’s better to ask: ‘How much alcohol do you drink?’ ” instead of just asking if they drink, Dr. Pfefferbaum said in an interview. That’s because they may be more willing to answer the first question honestly.
It’s also important for clinicians to nonjudgmentally tell teens there is evidence “that heavy drinking is bad for their brain,” he added.
The findings were published online Dec. 30, 2020, in JAMA Psychiatry.
Fractional anisotropy
Adolescence is a critical period of physiological and social maturation accompanied by significant structural, functional, and neurochemical brain changes, the investigators noted.
Diffusion tensor imaging (DTI) produces a measure called fractional anisotropy (FA), which characterizes some of these brain changes by measuring molecular water diffusion in the brain.
“FA is a measure of the integrity of brain white matter; so, the part of the brain that connects neurons with each other,” Dr. Pfefferbaum said. He added that FA decreases in diseases such as multiple sclerosis (MS), reflecting “some kind of pathology.”
Affected fiber systems include the corpus callosum, superior longitudinal fasciculus, internal and external capsule, brain stem, and cortical projection fibers. Disruption of these neural systems may degrade neural signal transmission and affect certain cognitive functions, possibly resulting in enhanced impulsivity, poor inhibitory control, and restricted working memory capacity, the researchers wrote.
FA follows an inverted U-shaped pattern. “The natural trajectory is to increase from infancy up to middle adolescence and then, as we get older, from about age 25 to 30 years, starts to go down. Our brains are starting to show signs of aging a bit by then,” said Dr. Pfefferbaum.
The current analysis assessed 451 adolescents (228 boys and 223 girls) from the NCANDA study, for whom researchers had four years of longitudinal DTI data. All were aged 12- 21 years at baseline.
The NCANDA cohort was recruited across five U.S. sites. Participants are assessed yearly on psychobiologic measures, including brain maturation. The cohort, which did not have any significant substance abuse upon entry, is balanced in terms of gender and ethnicity.
The investigators quantified the developmental change of white-matter (WM) integrity within each individual as the slope of FA over visits. They also examined altered developmental trajectories associated with drinking onset during adolescence and the differential alcohol associations by age with specific regional WM fiber tracts.
Researchers assessed drinking on a scale of 1-4, based on the youth-adjusted Cahalan score. The scale considers quantity and frequency to classify drinking levels based on past-year self-reported patterns.
Altered trajectory
Results showed that 291 participants (37.2%) remained at no to low drinking levels (youth-adjusted Cahalan score, 0) throughout the time points examined, and 160 (20.5%) were classified as heavy drinkers for at least two consecutive visits (youth-adjusted Cahalan score >1).
Among the no to low drinkers, 48.4% were boys with a mean age of 16.5 years and 51.2% were girls with a mean age of 16.5 years. About two thirds of the group (66%) were White.
Among heavy drinkers, 53.8% were boys with a mean age of 20.1 years and 46.3% were girls with a mean age of 20.5 years. In this group, 88.8% were White.
The investigators did not analyze moderate drinkers or those who initiated heavy drinking for only one visit.
The findings also showed that heavy drinkers exhibited significant reduction of whole-brain FA. The slopes of the 78 heavy drinkers were significantly more negative than the 78 matched no to low drinkers (mean, –0.0013 vs. 0.0001; P = .008).
“The concept of the slopes is really important here because it’s the trajectory that seems to be the most sensitive measure,” Dr. Pfefferbaum said. “Probably what’s happening is the exposure to alcohol is interfering with the normal myelination and normal development of the adolescent’s white matter.”
The no to low drinkers had relatively stable FA measures across all visits.
A reduction in FA was significantly linked to heavy drinking. An analysis of 63 youth who transitioned from being a no to low drinker to a heavy drinker showed that before the transition, they had significantly increased FA over visits (95% CI of slope, 0.0011-0.0024; P < .001). In addition, their corresponding slopes were not different from other no to low drinkers of the same age range.
However, this group’s FA declined significantly after they reported heavy drinking, resulting in slopes significantly below zero (95% CI of slope, –0.0036 to –0.0014; P < .001) and that were lower than the no to low participants of the same age range.
and further illustrates that heavy drinking in adolescence affects WM integrity, Dr. Pfefferbaum said.
Potential markers
None of the slope measures correlated with number of visits or use of tobacco or cannabis. The association of alcohol with the slope measures was more apparent in the younger cohort (<19 years).
“The effects were seen more readily in younger adolescents because they are the ones who are still progressing along this normal developmental trajectory,” Dr. Pfefferbaum noted. “In a sense, the younger you are when you’re exposed to alcohol, probably the more vulnerable you are.”
Previous studies have suggested that damage in WM tracts is associated with heightened neural reactivity to alcohol cues in adults with alcohol use disorder. Given this evidence, the greater WM degradation at younger versus older ages might help explain why adolescents who initiate early drinking are more likely to develop addiction later in life, the investigators wrote.
Of the five major fiber tracts, only the commissural fibers (corpus callosum) showed a significant association with alcohol. The researchers noted that WM volume shrinkage and callosal demyelination are two of the most prominent markers in adult alcoholism and are potential markers in adolescent alcohol abuse.
Upon further extending the analysis to the four subregions of the corpus callosum, the investigators found that only the anterior and middle callosal regions (genu and body) showed significant age-alcohol interactions.
This could be a result of the timing of fiber myelination in these regions of the brain, compared with others, Dr. Pfefferbaum said.
He noted that these fibers connect the left and right part of the anterior regions of the brain, especially the frontal lobes, which are particularly vulnerable to the effects of alcohol. “It may well be that we have this interaction of the developmental time and the sensitivity of the frontal parts of the brain.”
Cognitive effects?
Although the researchers did not find any sex effects, Dr. Pfefferbaum stressed that this doesn’t mean they do not exist. “We just may not have the power to see them,” he said.
The study did not look specifically at binge drinkers, defined as consuming five drinks in 2 hours for men and four drinks in 2 hours for women. Dr. Pfefferbaum noted that it is difficult to get “good quantification” of binge drinking. “We don’t have a fine enough grain analysis to separate that out,” he said.
Asked whether the altered FA trajectory in heavy drinkers affects cognition, Dr. Pfefferbaum said “those studies are still in progress,” with results hopefully available within about a year.
Dr. Pfefferbaum said he and his colleagues are continuing to follow these adolescents and hope to see if the altered FA trajectory in heavy drinkers returns to normal, adding: “The real question now is: If they stop heavy drinking, will they get back on track?”
This study is believed to be the first to suggest in vivo differential vulnerability in WM microstructure with respect to age, the authors note.
In addition to asking teens about their alcohol use, the clinician’s role should be to “counsel and refer,” said Dr. Pfefferbaum. He also suggested accessing resources from the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism.
Important data, but several limitations
In an interview, Oscar G. Bukstein, MD, MPH, medical director of outpatient psychiatry service at Boston Children’s Hospital, and professor of psychiatry at Harvard Medical School, also in Boston, said the findings provide further evidence that alcohol affects the maturing brain.
This study, and others that have examined cannabis use, “show that you have a dynamically growing brain with certain sections, particularly in this case the anterior and middle corpus callosum, that mature later [and] that are more likely to be affected by early alcohol use,” said Dr. Bukstein, who was not involved with the research.
He stressed the importance of determining the mechanism involved and noted some study limitations. For example, the DTI technology used may “already be out of date,” he said.
Using older technology may have prevented finding an impact of heavy drinking on parts of the brain other than the anterior and middle corpus callosum, Dr. Bukstein noted.
Newer technology might provide “a finer-grain nonlinear voxel-wise analysis,” although using more updated scanning techniques may not have detected additional differences in study groups, he added.
Dr. Bukstein also noted that there were limitations: The study did not have “gradations,” but only looked at heavy drinking and no to low drinking. “You’d like to find out about kids who are somewhere in the middle.” It also didn’t determine a “cutoff” where deleterious effects of alcohol on the brain begin, Dr. Bukstein added.
Additionally, the study didn’t look at brain development outcomes in children with conditions such as depression and ADHD that are known to lead to substance use – something a larger study may have been able to do, he said.
Dr. Bukstein noted that a newer and much larger study, the Adolescent Brain Cognitive Development study, has begun assessing kids for risk factors such as substance use, starting at age 10 years.
The study was funded by grants from NIAAA and by the National Institute on Drug Abuse, the National Institute of Mental Health, the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, and the Stanford Institute for Human-Centered Artificial Intelligence–AWS Cloud Credits for Research. Dr. Pfefferbaum reported receiving an NIAAA grant during the conduct of the study. Dr. Bukstein disclosed no relevant financial relationships.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
Atrophic Lesion on the Abdomen
The Diagnosis: Anetoderma of Prematurity
Anetoderma is a rare benign cutaneous disorder characterized by atrophic patches of skin due to dermal thinning. The term anetoderma is derived from the Greek words anetos (relaxed) and derma (skin).1 The physical appearance of the skin is associated with a reduction or loss of elastic tissue in the dermal layer, as seen on histolopathology.2
Two forms of anetoderma have been described. Primary anetoderma is an idiopathic form with no preceding inflammatory lesions. Secondary anetoderma is a reactive process linked to a known preceding inflammatory, infectious, autoimmune, or drug-induced condition.3 On histopathology, both primary and secondary anetoderma are characterized by a loss of elastic tissue or elastin fibers in the superficial to mid dermis.2
Anetoderma of prematurity was first described in 1996 by Prizant et al4 in 9 extremely premature (24-29 weeks' gestation) infants in neonatal intensive care units (NICUs). Although the exact mechanism behind anetoderma of prematurity is still unknown, Prizant et al4 and other investigators5 postulated that application of adhesive monitoring leads in the NICU played a role in the development of the lesions.
Iatrogenic anetoderma of prematurity is clinically characterized by circumscribed areas of either wrinkled macular depression or pouchlike herniations, ranging from flesh-colored to violaceous hues. Lesion size varies from a few millimeters to several centimeters in diameter, and they often are oval or round in shape.2 Although not common, it is possible for the atrophic patches to be preceded by an area of ecchymosis without necrosis or atrophy and, if present, they usually evolve within a few days to the characteristic appearance of anetoderma.3 They are found at discrete sites where monitoring leads or other medical devices are commonly placed, such as the forehead, abdomen, chest, and proximal limbs.
Lesions of anetoderma of prematurity are not present at birth, which distinguishes them from congenital anetoderma.6 It is unclear if the lesions are associated with the degree of prematurity, extremely low birth weight, or other associated factors of preterm birth. Although often clinically diagnosed, the diagnosis can be confirmed by a loss of elastic fibers on histopathology when stained with Verhoeff-van Gieson stain.1 Over time, the atrophic patches have the potential to evolve into herniated forms of anetoderma. Self-healing or improvement of the lesions often does not occur. Although the lesion is benign, it often requires surgical correction later in life for cosmesis.
Infants in the NICU are at risk for iatrogenic cutaneous injuries, which rarely may include anetoderma. Anetoderma of prematurity has been linked to the use of monitoring leads, adhesive tape, and other medical devices placed on the skin. Prizant et al4 postulated that the cause of anetoderma in these infants was irritants such as skin cleansers, urine, or sweat that may be trapped under the electrodes. Other hypotheses include local hypoxemia due to prolonged pressure from the electrodes on immature skin or excessive traction used when removing adhesive tape from the skin.7,8 Premature infants may be more susceptible to these lesions because of the reduced epidermal thickness of premature skin; immaturity of skin structure; or functional immaturity of elastin deposition regulators, such as elastase, lysyl oxidase, the complement system, and decay-accelerating factor.3 The diagnosis should be differentiated from congenital anetoderma, which also has been described in premature neonates but is characterized by lesions that are present at birth. Its origins are still unclear, despite having histopathologic features similar to iatrogenic anetoderma.9
Focal dermal hypoplasia (FDH) is the hallmark cutaneous finding in Goltz syndrome, a rare set of congenital abnormalities of the skin, oral structures, musculoskeletal system, and central nervous system. Similar to congenital anetoderma, FDH also is characterized by atrophic cutaneous lesions; however, the cutaneous lesions in FDH appear as linear, streaky atrophic lesions often with telangiectasias that follow Blaschko lines.10 The cutaneous lesions in FDH often are associated with other noncutaneous signs such as polydactyly or asymmetric limbs.10 Cutis laxa is caused by an abnormality in the elastic tissue resulting in a loose sagging appearance of the skin and frequently results in an aged facial appearance. There are both acquired and inherited forms that can be either solely cutaneous or present with extracutaneous features, such as cardiac abnormalities or emphysema.11
In contrast to the atrophic appearance of anetodermas, connective tissue nevi and nevus lipomatosus superficialis present as hamartomas that either can be present at birth or arise in infancy. Connective tissue nevi are hamartomas of dermal connective tissue that consist of excessive production of collagen, elastin, or glycosaminoglycans and appear as slightly elevated, flesh-colored to yellow nodules or plaques.12 Connective tissue nevi often are described in association with other diseases, most commonly tuberous sclerosis (shagreen patches) or familial cutaneous collagenoma. Nevus lipomatosus superficialis is an asymptomatic connective tissue hamartoma composed of mature adipocytes in the dermis. The lesions consist of clusters of flesh-colored to yellow, soft, rubbery papules or nodules with a smooth or verrucoid surface that do not cross the midline and may follow Blaschko lines.11
With advances in neonatal infant medical care, survival of extremely premature infants is increasing, and it is possible that this rare cutaneous disorder may become more prevalent. Care should be taken to avoid unnecessary pressure on surfaces where electrodes are placed and tightly applied adhesive tape. When electrodes are placed on the ventral side, the child should be placed supine; similarly, place electrodes on the dorsal side when the child is lying prone.5 A diagnosis of anetoderma of prematurity later in childhood may be difficult, so knowledge and awareness can help guide pediatricians and dermatologists to a correct diagnosis and prevent unnecessary evaluations and/or concerns.
- Misch KJ, Rhodes EL, Allen J, et al. Anetoderma of Jadassohn. J R Soc Med.1988;81:734-736.
- Venencie PY, Winkelmann RK. Histopathologic findings in anetoderma. Arch Dermatol. 1984;120:1040-1044.
- Maffeis L, Pugni L, Pietrasanta C, et al. Case report iatrogenic anetoderma of prematurity: a case report and review of the literature. 2014;2014:781493.
- Prizant TL, Lucky AW, Frieden IJ, et al. Spontaneous atrophic patches in extremely premature infants: anetoderma of prematurity. Arch Dermatol. 1996;132:671-674.
- Goujon E, Beer F, Gay S, et al. Anetoderma of prematurity: an iatrogenic consequence of neonatal intensive care anetoderma of prematurity from NICU. Arch Dermatol. 2010;146:565-567.
- Wain EM, Mellerio JE, Robson A, et al. Congenital anetoderma in a preterm infant. Pediatr Dermatol. 2008;25:626-629.
- Colditz PB, Dunster KR, Joy GJ, et al. Anetoderma of prematurity in association with electrocardiographic electrodes. J Am Acad Dermatol. 1999;41:479-481.
- Goujan E, Beer F, Gay S, et al. Study supervision. Arch Dermatol. 2010;146:565-567.
- Aberer E, Weissenbacher G. Congenital anetoderma induced by intrauterine infection? Arch Dermatol. 1997;133:526-527.
- Mallory SB, Krafchik BR, Moore DJ, et al. Goltz syndrome. Pediatr Dermatol. 1989;6:251-253.
- Bolognia J, Schaffer J, Cerroni L. Dermatology. Elsevier Saunders; 2017.
- Uitto J, Santa Cruz DJ, Eisen AZ. Connective tissue nevi of the skin. clinical, genetic, and histopathologic classification of hamartomas of the collagen, elastin, and proteoglycan type. J Am Acad Dermatol. 1980;3:441-461.
The Diagnosis: Anetoderma of Prematurity
Anetoderma is a rare benign cutaneous disorder characterized by atrophic patches of skin due to dermal thinning. The term anetoderma is derived from the Greek words anetos (relaxed) and derma (skin).1 The physical appearance of the skin is associated with a reduction or loss of elastic tissue in the dermal layer, as seen on histolopathology.2
Two forms of anetoderma have been described. Primary anetoderma is an idiopathic form with no preceding inflammatory lesions. Secondary anetoderma is a reactive process linked to a known preceding inflammatory, infectious, autoimmune, or drug-induced condition.3 On histopathology, both primary and secondary anetoderma are characterized by a loss of elastic tissue or elastin fibers in the superficial to mid dermis.2
Anetoderma of prematurity was first described in 1996 by Prizant et al4 in 9 extremely premature (24-29 weeks' gestation) infants in neonatal intensive care units (NICUs). Although the exact mechanism behind anetoderma of prematurity is still unknown, Prizant et al4 and other investigators5 postulated that application of adhesive monitoring leads in the NICU played a role in the development of the lesions.
Iatrogenic anetoderma of prematurity is clinically characterized by circumscribed areas of either wrinkled macular depression or pouchlike herniations, ranging from flesh-colored to violaceous hues. Lesion size varies from a few millimeters to several centimeters in diameter, and they often are oval or round in shape.2 Although not common, it is possible for the atrophic patches to be preceded by an area of ecchymosis without necrosis or atrophy and, if present, they usually evolve within a few days to the characteristic appearance of anetoderma.3 They are found at discrete sites where monitoring leads or other medical devices are commonly placed, such as the forehead, abdomen, chest, and proximal limbs.
Lesions of anetoderma of prematurity are not present at birth, which distinguishes them from congenital anetoderma.6 It is unclear if the lesions are associated with the degree of prematurity, extremely low birth weight, or other associated factors of preterm birth. Although often clinically diagnosed, the diagnosis can be confirmed by a loss of elastic fibers on histopathology when stained with Verhoeff-van Gieson stain.1 Over time, the atrophic patches have the potential to evolve into herniated forms of anetoderma. Self-healing or improvement of the lesions often does not occur. Although the lesion is benign, it often requires surgical correction later in life for cosmesis.
Infants in the NICU are at risk for iatrogenic cutaneous injuries, which rarely may include anetoderma. Anetoderma of prematurity has been linked to the use of monitoring leads, adhesive tape, and other medical devices placed on the skin. Prizant et al4 postulated that the cause of anetoderma in these infants was irritants such as skin cleansers, urine, or sweat that may be trapped under the electrodes. Other hypotheses include local hypoxemia due to prolonged pressure from the electrodes on immature skin or excessive traction used when removing adhesive tape from the skin.7,8 Premature infants may be more susceptible to these lesions because of the reduced epidermal thickness of premature skin; immaturity of skin structure; or functional immaturity of elastin deposition regulators, such as elastase, lysyl oxidase, the complement system, and decay-accelerating factor.3 The diagnosis should be differentiated from congenital anetoderma, which also has been described in premature neonates but is characterized by lesions that are present at birth. Its origins are still unclear, despite having histopathologic features similar to iatrogenic anetoderma.9
Focal dermal hypoplasia (FDH) is the hallmark cutaneous finding in Goltz syndrome, a rare set of congenital abnormalities of the skin, oral structures, musculoskeletal system, and central nervous system. Similar to congenital anetoderma, FDH also is characterized by atrophic cutaneous lesions; however, the cutaneous lesions in FDH appear as linear, streaky atrophic lesions often with telangiectasias that follow Blaschko lines.10 The cutaneous lesions in FDH often are associated with other noncutaneous signs such as polydactyly or asymmetric limbs.10 Cutis laxa is caused by an abnormality in the elastic tissue resulting in a loose sagging appearance of the skin and frequently results in an aged facial appearance. There are both acquired and inherited forms that can be either solely cutaneous or present with extracutaneous features, such as cardiac abnormalities or emphysema.11
In contrast to the atrophic appearance of anetodermas, connective tissue nevi and nevus lipomatosus superficialis present as hamartomas that either can be present at birth or arise in infancy. Connective tissue nevi are hamartomas of dermal connective tissue that consist of excessive production of collagen, elastin, or glycosaminoglycans and appear as slightly elevated, flesh-colored to yellow nodules or plaques.12 Connective tissue nevi often are described in association with other diseases, most commonly tuberous sclerosis (shagreen patches) or familial cutaneous collagenoma. Nevus lipomatosus superficialis is an asymptomatic connective tissue hamartoma composed of mature adipocytes in the dermis. The lesions consist of clusters of flesh-colored to yellow, soft, rubbery papules or nodules with a smooth or verrucoid surface that do not cross the midline and may follow Blaschko lines.11
With advances in neonatal infant medical care, survival of extremely premature infants is increasing, and it is possible that this rare cutaneous disorder may become more prevalent. Care should be taken to avoid unnecessary pressure on surfaces where electrodes are placed and tightly applied adhesive tape. When electrodes are placed on the ventral side, the child should be placed supine; similarly, place electrodes on the dorsal side when the child is lying prone.5 A diagnosis of anetoderma of prematurity later in childhood may be difficult, so knowledge and awareness can help guide pediatricians and dermatologists to a correct diagnosis and prevent unnecessary evaluations and/or concerns.
The Diagnosis: Anetoderma of Prematurity
Anetoderma is a rare benign cutaneous disorder characterized by atrophic patches of skin due to dermal thinning. The term anetoderma is derived from the Greek words anetos (relaxed) and derma (skin).1 The physical appearance of the skin is associated with a reduction or loss of elastic tissue in the dermal layer, as seen on histolopathology.2
Two forms of anetoderma have been described. Primary anetoderma is an idiopathic form with no preceding inflammatory lesions. Secondary anetoderma is a reactive process linked to a known preceding inflammatory, infectious, autoimmune, or drug-induced condition.3 On histopathology, both primary and secondary anetoderma are characterized by a loss of elastic tissue or elastin fibers in the superficial to mid dermis.2
Anetoderma of prematurity was first described in 1996 by Prizant et al4 in 9 extremely premature (24-29 weeks' gestation) infants in neonatal intensive care units (NICUs). Although the exact mechanism behind anetoderma of prematurity is still unknown, Prizant et al4 and other investigators5 postulated that application of adhesive monitoring leads in the NICU played a role in the development of the lesions.
Iatrogenic anetoderma of prematurity is clinically characterized by circumscribed areas of either wrinkled macular depression or pouchlike herniations, ranging from flesh-colored to violaceous hues. Lesion size varies from a few millimeters to several centimeters in diameter, and they often are oval or round in shape.2 Although not common, it is possible for the atrophic patches to be preceded by an area of ecchymosis without necrosis or atrophy and, if present, they usually evolve within a few days to the characteristic appearance of anetoderma.3 They are found at discrete sites where monitoring leads or other medical devices are commonly placed, such as the forehead, abdomen, chest, and proximal limbs.
Lesions of anetoderma of prematurity are not present at birth, which distinguishes them from congenital anetoderma.6 It is unclear if the lesions are associated with the degree of prematurity, extremely low birth weight, or other associated factors of preterm birth. Although often clinically diagnosed, the diagnosis can be confirmed by a loss of elastic fibers on histopathology when stained with Verhoeff-van Gieson stain.1 Over time, the atrophic patches have the potential to evolve into herniated forms of anetoderma. Self-healing or improvement of the lesions often does not occur. Although the lesion is benign, it often requires surgical correction later in life for cosmesis.
Infants in the NICU are at risk for iatrogenic cutaneous injuries, which rarely may include anetoderma. Anetoderma of prematurity has been linked to the use of monitoring leads, adhesive tape, and other medical devices placed on the skin. Prizant et al4 postulated that the cause of anetoderma in these infants was irritants such as skin cleansers, urine, or sweat that may be trapped under the electrodes. Other hypotheses include local hypoxemia due to prolonged pressure from the electrodes on immature skin or excessive traction used when removing adhesive tape from the skin.7,8 Premature infants may be more susceptible to these lesions because of the reduced epidermal thickness of premature skin; immaturity of skin structure; or functional immaturity of elastin deposition regulators, such as elastase, lysyl oxidase, the complement system, and decay-accelerating factor.3 The diagnosis should be differentiated from congenital anetoderma, which also has been described in premature neonates but is characterized by lesions that are present at birth. Its origins are still unclear, despite having histopathologic features similar to iatrogenic anetoderma.9
Focal dermal hypoplasia (FDH) is the hallmark cutaneous finding in Goltz syndrome, a rare set of congenital abnormalities of the skin, oral structures, musculoskeletal system, and central nervous system. Similar to congenital anetoderma, FDH also is characterized by atrophic cutaneous lesions; however, the cutaneous lesions in FDH appear as linear, streaky atrophic lesions often with telangiectasias that follow Blaschko lines.10 The cutaneous lesions in FDH often are associated with other noncutaneous signs such as polydactyly or asymmetric limbs.10 Cutis laxa is caused by an abnormality in the elastic tissue resulting in a loose sagging appearance of the skin and frequently results in an aged facial appearance. There are both acquired and inherited forms that can be either solely cutaneous or present with extracutaneous features, such as cardiac abnormalities or emphysema.11
In contrast to the atrophic appearance of anetodermas, connective tissue nevi and nevus lipomatosus superficialis present as hamartomas that either can be present at birth or arise in infancy. Connective tissue nevi are hamartomas of dermal connective tissue that consist of excessive production of collagen, elastin, or glycosaminoglycans and appear as slightly elevated, flesh-colored to yellow nodules or plaques.12 Connective tissue nevi often are described in association with other diseases, most commonly tuberous sclerosis (shagreen patches) or familial cutaneous collagenoma. Nevus lipomatosus superficialis is an asymptomatic connective tissue hamartoma composed of mature adipocytes in the dermis. The lesions consist of clusters of flesh-colored to yellow, soft, rubbery papules or nodules with a smooth or verrucoid surface that do not cross the midline and may follow Blaschko lines.11
With advances in neonatal infant medical care, survival of extremely premature infants is increasing, and it is possible that this rare cutaneous disorder may become more prevalent. Care should be taken to avoid unnecessary pressure on surfaces where electrodes are placed and tightly applied adhesive tape. When electrodes are placed on the ventral side, the child should be placed supine; similarly, place electrodes on the dorsal side when the child is lying prone.5 A diagnosis of anetoderma of prematurity later in childhood may be difficult, so knowledge and awareness can help guide pediatricians and dermatologists to a correct diagnosis and prevent unnecessary evaluations and/or concerns.
- Misch KJ, Rhodes EL, Allen J, et al. Anetoderma of Jadassohn. J R Soc Med.1988;81:734-736.
- Venencie PY, Winkelmann RK. Histopathologic findings in anetoderma. Arch Dermatol. 1984;120:1040-1044.
- Maffeis L, Pugni L, Pietrasanta C, et al. Case report iatrogenic anetoderma of prematurity: a case report and review of the literature. 2014;2014:781493.
- Prizant TL, Lucky AW, Frieden IJ, et al. Spontaneous atrophic patches in extremely premature infants: anetoderma of prematurity. Arch Dermatol. 1996;132:671-674.
- Goujon E, Beer F, Gay S, et al. Anetoderma of prematurity: an iatrogenic consequence of neonatal intensive care anetoderma of prematurity from NICU. Arch Dermatol. 2010;146:565-567.
- Wain EM, Mellerio JE, Robson A, et al. Congenital anetoderma in a preterm infant. Pediatr Dermatol. 2008;25:626-629.
- Colditz PB, Dunster KR, Joy GJ, et al. Anetoderma of prematurity in association with electrocardiographic electrodes. J Am Acad Dermatol. 1999;41:479-481.
- Goujan E, Beer F, Gay S, et al. Study supervision. Arch Dermatol. 2010;146:565-567.
- Aberer E, Weissenbacher G. Congenital anetoderma induced by intrauterine infection? Arch Dermatol. 1997;133:526-527.
- Mallory SB, Krafchik BR, Moore DJ, et al. Goltz syndrome. Pediatr Dermatol. 1989;6:251-253.
- Bolognia J, Schaffer J, Cerroni L. Dermatology. Elsevier Saunders; 2017.
- Uitto J, Santa Cruz DJ, Eisen AZ. Connective tissue nevi of the skin. clinical, genetic, and histopathologic classification of hamartomas of the collagen, elastin, and proteoglycan type. J Am Acad Dermatol. 1980;3:441-461.
- Misch KJ, Rhodes EL, Allen J, et al. Anetoderma of Jadassohn. J R Soc Med.1988;81:734-736.
- Venencie PY, Winkelmann RK. Histopathologic findings in anetoderma. Arch Dermatol. 1984;120:1040-1044.
- Maffeis L, Pugni L, Pietrasanta C, et al. Case report iatrogenic anetoderma of prematurity: a case report and review of the literature. 2014;2014:781493.
- Prizant TL, Lucky AW, Frieden IJ, et al. Spontaneous atrophic patches in extremely premature infants: anetoderma of prematurity. Arch Dermatol. 1996;132:671-674.
- Goujon E, Beer F, Gay S, et al. Anetoderma of prematurity: an iatrogenic consequence of neonatal intensive care anetoderma of prematurity from NICU. Arch Dermatol. 2010;146:565-567.
- Wain EM, Mellerio JE, Robson A, et al. Congenital anetoderma in a preterm infant. Pediatr Dermatol. 2008;25:626-629.
- Colditz PB, Dunster KR, Joy GJ, et al. Anetoderma of prematurity in association with electrocardiographic electrodes. J Am Acad Dermatol. 1999;41:479-481.
- Goujan E, Beer F, Gay S, et al. Study supervision. Arch Dermatol. 2010;146:565-567.
- Aberer E, Weissenbacher G. Congenital anetoderma induced by intrauterine infection? Arch Dermatol. 1997;133:526-527.
- Mallory SB, Krafchik BR, Moore DJ, et al. Goltz syndrome. Pediatr Dermatol. 1989;6:251-253.
- Bolognia J, Schaffer J, Cerroni L. Dermatology. Elsevier Saunders; 2017.
- Uitto J, Santa Cruz DJ, Eisen AZ. Connective tissue nevi of the skin. clinical, genetic, and histopathologic classification of hamartomas of the collagen, elastin, and proteoglycan type. J Am Acad Dermatol. 1980;3:441-461.
An 18-month-old child presented with a 4-cm, atrophic, flesh-colored plaque on the left lateral aspect of the abdomen with overlying wrinkling of the skin. There was no outpouching of the skin or pain associated with the lesion. No other skin abnormalities were noted. The child was born premature at 30 weeks’ gestation (birth weight, 1400 g). The postnatal course was complicated by respiratory distress syndrome requiring prolonged ventilator support. The infant was in the neonatal intensive care unit for 5 months. The atrophic lesion first developed at 5 months of life and remained stable. Although the lesion was not present at birth, the parents noted that it was preceded by an ecchymotic lesion without necrosis that was first noticed at 2 months of life while the patient was in the neonatal intensive care unit.
Over half of COVID-19 transmission may occur via asymptomatic people
As COVID-19 cases surge and vaccinations lag, health authorities continue to seek additional ways to mitigate the spread of the novel coronavirus.
Now, a modeling study estimates that more than half of transmissions come from pre-, never-, and asymptomatic individuals, indicating that symptom-based screening will have little effect on spread.
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention study, published online Jan. 7 in JAMA Network Open, concludes that for optimal control, protective measures such as masking and social distancing should be supplemented with strategic testing of potentially exposed but asymptomatic individuals .
“In the absence of effective and widespread use of therapeutics or vaccines that can shorten or eliminate infectivity, successful control of SARS-CoV-2 cannot rely solely on identifying and isolating symptomatic cases; even if implemented effectively, this strategy would be insufficient,” CDC biologist Michael J. Johansson, PhD, and colleagues warn. “Multiple measures that effectively address transmission risk in the absence of symptoms are imperative to control SARS-CoV-2.”
According to the authors, the effectiveness of some current transmission prevention efforts has been disputed and subject to mixed messaging. Therefore, they decided to model the proportion of COVID-19 infections that are likely the result of individuals who show no symptoms and may be unknowingly infecting others.
“Unfortunately, there continues to be some skepticism about the value of community-wide mitigation efforts for preventing transmission such as masking, distancing, and hand hygiene, particularly for people without symptoms,” corresponding author Jay C. Butler, MD, said in an interview. “So we wanted to have a base assumption about how much transmission occurs from asymptomatic people to underscore the importance of mitigation measures and of creating immunity through vaccine delivery.”
Such a yardstick is especially germane in the context of the new, more transmissible variant. “It really puts [things] in a bigger box and underscores, boldfaces, and italicizes the need to change people’s behaviors and the importance of mitigation,” Dr. Butler said. It also highlights the advisability of targeted strategic testing in congregate settings, schools, and universities, which is already underway.
The analysis
Based on data from several COVID-19 studies from last year, the CDC’s analytical model assumes at baseline that infectiousness peaks at the median point of symptom onset, and that 30% of infected individuals never develop symptoms but are nevertheless 75% as infectious as those who develop overt symptoms.
The investigators then model multiple scenarios of transmission based pre- and never-symptomatic individuals, assuming different incubation and infectious periods, and varying numbers of days from point of infection to symptom onset.
When combined, the models predicts that 59% of all transmission would come from asymptomatic transmission – 35% from presymptomatic individuals and 24% from never-symptomatic individuals.
The findings complement those of an earlier CDC analysis, according to the authors.
The overall proportion of transmission from presymptomatic and never-symptomatic individuals is key to identifying mitigation measures that may be able to control SARS-CoV-2, the authors stated.
For example, they explain, if the infection reproduction number (R) in a particular setting is 2.0, a reduction in transmission of at least 50% is needed in order to reduce R to below 1.0. “Given that in some settings R is likely much greater than 2 and more than half of transmissions may come from individuals who are asymptomatic at the time of transmission, effective control must mitigate transmission risk from people without symptoms,” they wrote.
The authors acknowledge that the study applies a simplistic model to a complex and evolving phenomenon, and that the exact proportions of presymptomatic and never-symptomatic transmission and the incubation periods are not known. They also note symptoms and transmissions appear to vary across different population groups, with older individuals more likely than younger persons to experience symptoms, according to previous studies.
“Assume that everyone is potentially infected”
Other experts agree that expanded testing of asymptomatic individuals is important. “Screening for fever and isolation of symptomatic individuals is a common-sense approach to help prevent spread, but these measures are by no means adequate since it’s been clearly documented that individuals who are either asymptomatic or presymptomatic can still spread the virus,” said Brett Williams, MD, an infectious disease specialist and assistant professor of medicine at Rush University in Chicago.
“As we saw with the White House Rose Garden superspreader outbreak, testing does not reliably exclude infection either because the tested individual has not yet become positive or the test is falsely negative,” Dr. Williams, who was not involved in the CDC study, said in an interview. He further noted that when prevalence is as high as it currently is in the United States, the rate of false negatives will be high because a large proportion of those screened will be unknowingly infected.
At his center, all visitors and staff are screened with a temperature probe on entry, and since the earliest days of the pandemic, universal masking has been required. “Nationally there have been many instances of hospital break room outbreaks because of staff eating lunch together, and these outbreaks also demonstrate the incompleteness of symptomatic isolation,” Dr. Williams said.
For his part, virologist Frank Esper, MD, a pediatric infectious disease specialist at the Cleveland Clinic, said that while it’s been understood for some time that many infected people will not exhibit symptoms, “the question that remains is just how infectious are they?”
Dr. Esper’s takeaway from the modeling study is not so much that we need more screening of possibly exposed but asymptomatic people, but rather testing symptomatic people and tracing their contacts is not enough.
“We need to continue to assume that everyone is potentially infected whether they know it or not. And even though we have ramped up our testing to a much greater capacity than in the first wave, we need to continue to wear masks and socially distance because just identifying people who are sick and isolating or quarantining them is not going to be enough to contain the pandemic.”
And although assumption-based modeling is helpful, it cannot tell us “how many asymptomatic people are actually infected,” said Dr. Esper, who was not involved in the CDC study.
Dr. Esper also pointed out that the study estimates are based on data from early Chinese studies, but the virus has since changed. The new, more transmissible strain in the United States and elsewhere may involve not only more infections but also a longer presymptomatic stage. “So the CDC study may actually undershoot asymptomatic infections,” he said.
He also agreed with the authors that when it comes to infection, not all humans are equal. “Older people tend to be more symptomatic and become symptomatic more quickly so the asymptomatic rate is not the same across board from young people age 20 to older people.”
The bottom line, said David. A. Hirschwerk, MD, an infectious disease specialist at Northwell Health in Manhasset, N.Y., is that these data support the maintenance of protective measures we’ve been taking over the past months. “They support the concept that asymptomatic people are a significant source of transmission and that we need to adhere to mask wearing and social distancing, particularly indoors,” Dr. Hirschwerk, who was not involved in the analysis, said in an interview. “More testing would be better but it has to be fast and it has to be efficient, and there are a lot of challenges to overcome.”
The study was done as part of the CDC’s coronavirus disease 2019 response and was supported solely by federal base and response funding. The authors and commentators have disclosed no relevant financial relationships.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
As COVID-19 cases surge and vaccinations lag, health authorities continue to seek additional ways to mitigate the spread of the novel coronavirus.
Now, a modeling study estimates that more than half of transmissions come from pre-, never-, and asymptomatic individuals, indicating that symptom-based screening will have little effect on spread.
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention study, published online Jan. 7 in JAMA Network Open, concludes that for optimal control, protective measures such as masking and social distancing should be supplemented with strategic testing of potentially exposed but asymptomatic individuals .
“In the absence of effective and widespread use of therapeutics or vaccines that can shorten or eliminate infectivity, successful control of SARS-CoV-2 cannot rely solely on identifying and isolating symptomatic cases; even if implemented effectively, this strategy would be insufficient,” CDC biologist Michael J. Johansson, PhD, and colleagues warn. “Multiple measures that effectively address transmission risk in the absence of symptoms are imperative to control SARS-CoV-2.”
According to the authors, the effectiveness of some current transmission prevention efforts has been disputed and subject to mixed messaging. Therefore, they decided to model the proportion of COVID-19 infections that are likely the result of individuals who show no symptoms and may be unknowingly infecting others.
“Unfortunately, there continues to be some skepticism about the value of community-wide mitigation efforts for preventing transmission such as masking, distancing, and hand hygiene, particularly for people without symptoms,” corresponding author Jay C. Butler, MD, said in an interview. “So we wanted to have a base assumption about how much transmission occurs from asymptomatic people to underscore the importance of mitigation measures and of creating immunity through vaccine delivery.”
Such a yardstick is especially germane in the context of the new, more transmissible variant. “It really puts [things] in a bigger box and underscores, boldfaces, and italicizes the need to change people’s behaviors and the importance of mitigation,” Dr. Butler said. It also highlights the advisability of targeted strategic testing in congregate settings, schools, and universities, which is already underway.
The analysis
Based on data from several COVID-19 studies from last year, the CDC’s analytical model assumes at baseline that infectiousness peaks at the median point of symptom onset, and that 30% of infected individuals never develop symptoms but are nevertheless 75% as infectious as those who develop overt symptoms.
The investigators then model multiple scenarios of transmission based pre- and never-symptomatic individuals, assuming different incubation and infectious periods, and varying numbers of days from point of infection to symptom onset.
When combined, the models predicts that 59% of all transmission would come from asymptomatic transmission – 35% from presymptomatic individuals and 24% from never-symptomatic individuals.
The findings complement those of an earlier CDC analysis, according to the authors.
The overall proportion of transmission from presymptomatic and never-symptomatic individuals is key to identifying mitigation measures that may be able to control SARS-CoV-2, the authors stated.
For example, they explain, if the infection reproduction number (R) in a particular setting is 2.0, a reduction in transmission of at least 50% is needed in order to reduce R to below 1.0. “Given that in some settings R is likely much greater than 2 and more than half of transmissions may come from individuals who are asymptomatic at the time of transmission, effective control must mitigate transmission risk from people without symptoms,” they wrote.
The authors acknowledge that the study applies a simplistic model to a complex and evolving phenomenon, and that the exact proportions of presymptomatic and never-symptomatic transmission and the incubation periods are not known. They also note symptoms and transmissions appear to vary across different population groups, with older individuals more likely than younger persons to experience symptoms, according to previous studies.
“Assume that everyone is potentially infected”
Other experts agree that expanded testing of asymptomatic individuals is important. “Screening for fever and isolation of symptomatic individuals is a common-sense approach to help prevent spread, but these measures are by no means adequate since it’s been clearly documented that individuals who are either asymptomatic or presymptomatic can still spread the virus,” said Brett Williams, MD, an infectious disease specialist and assistant professor of medicine at Rush University in Chicago.
“As we saw with the White House Rose Garden superspreader outbreak, testing does not reliably exclude infection either because the tested individual has not yet become positive or the test is falsely negative,” Dr. Williams, who was not involved in the CDC study, said in an interview. He further noted that when prevalence is as high as it currently is in the United States, the rate of false negatives will be high because a large proportion of those screened will be unknowingly infected.
At his center, all visitors and staff are screened with a temperature probe on entry, and since the earliest days of the pandemic, universal masking has been required. “Nationally there have been many instances of hospital break room outbreaks because of staff eating lunch together, and these outbreaks also demonstrate the incompleteness of symptomatic isolation,” Dr. Williams said.
For his part, virologist Frank Esper, MD, a pediatric infectious disease specialist at the Cleveland Clinic, said that while it’s been understood for some time that many infected people will not exhibit symptoms, “the question that remains is just how infectious are they?”
Dr. Esper’s takeaway from the modeling study is not so much that we need more screening of possibly exposed but asymptomatic people, but rather testing symptomatic people and tracing their contacts is not enough.
“We need to continue to assume that everyone is potentially infected whether they know it or not. And even though we have ramped up our testing to a much greater capacity than in the first wave, we need to continue to wear masks and socially distance because just identifying people who are sick and isolating or quarantining them is not going to be enough to contain the pandemic.”
And although assumption-based modeling is helpful, it cannot tell us “how many asymptomatic people are actually infected,” said Dr. Esper, who was not involved in the CDC study.
Dr. Esper also pointed out that the study estimates are based on data from early Chinese studies, but the virus has since changed. The new, more transmissible strain in the United States and elsewhere may involve not only more infections but also a longer presymptomatic stage. “So the CDC study may actually undershoot asymptomatic infections,” he said.
He also agreed with the authors that when it comes to infection, not all humans are equal. “Older people tend to be more symptomatic and become symptomatic more quickly so the asymptomatic rate is not the same across board from young people age 20 to older people.”
The bottom line, said David. A. Hirschwerk, MD, an infectious disease specialist at Northwell Health in Manhasset, N.Y., is that these data support the maintenance of protective measures we’ve been taking over the past months. “They support the concept that asymptomatic people are a significant source of transmission and that we need to adhere to mask wearing and social distancing, particularly indoors,” Dr. Hirschwerk, who was not involved in the analysis, said in an interview. “More testing would be better but it has to be fast and it has to be efficient, and there are a lot of challenges to overcome.”
The study was done as part of the CDC’s coronavirus disease 2019 response and was supported solely by federal base and response funding. The authors and commentators have disclosed no relevant financial relationships.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
As COVID-19 cases surge and vaccinations lag, health authorities continue to seek additional ways to mitigate the spread of the novel coronavirus.
Now, a modeling study estimates that more than half of transmissions come from pre-, never-, and asymptomatic individuals, indicating that symptom-based screening will have little effect on spread.
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention study, published online Jan. 7 in JAMA Network Open, concludes that for optimal control, protective measures such as masking and social distancing should be supplemented with strategic testing of potentially exposed but asymptomatic individuals .
“In the absence of effective and widespread use of therapeutics or vaccines that can shorten or eliminate infectivity, successful control of SARS-CoV-2 cannot rely solely on identifying and isolating symptomatic cases; even if implemented effectively, this strategy would be insufficient,” CDC biologist Michael J. Johansson, PhD, and colleagues warn. “Multiple measures that effectively address transmission risk in the absence of symptoms are imperative to control SARS-CoV-2.”
According to the authors, the effectiveness of some current transmission prevention efforts has been disputed and subject to mixed messaging. Therefore, they decided to model the proportion of COVID-19 infections that are likely the result of individuals who show no symptoms and may be unknowingly infecting others.
“Unfortunately, there continues to be some skepticism about the value of community-wide mitigation efforts for preventing transmission such as masking, distancing, and hand hygiene, particularly for people without symptoms,” corresponding author Jay C. Butler, MD, said in an interview. “So we wanted to have a base assumption about how much transmission occurs from asymptomatic people to underscore the importance of mitigation measures and of creating immunity through vaccine delivery.”
Such a yardstick is especially germane in the context of the new, more transmissible variant. “It really puts [things] in a bigger box and underscores, boldfaces, and italicizes the need to change people’s behaviors and the importance of mitigation,” Dr. Butler said. It also highlights the advisability of targeted strategic testing in congregate settings, schools, and universities, which is already underway.
The analysis
Based on data from several COVID-19 studies from last year, the CDC’s analytical model assumes at baseline that infectiousness peaks at the median point of symptom onset, and that 30% of infected individuals never develop symptoms but are nevertheless 75% as infectious as those who develop overt symptoms.
The investigators then model multiple scenarios of transmission based pre- and never-symptomatic individuals, assuming different incubation and infectious periods, and varying numbers of days from point of infection to symptom onset.
When combined, the models predicts that 59% of all transmission would come from asymptomatic transmission – 35% from presymptomatic individuals and 24% from never-symptomatic individuals.
The findings complement those of an earlier CDC analysis, according to the authors.
The overall proportion of transmission from presymptomatic and never-symptomatic individuals is key to identifying mitigation measures that may be able to control SARS-CoV-2, the authors stated.
For example, they explain, if the infection reproduction number (R) in a particular setting is 2.0, a reduction in transmission of at least 50% is needed in order to reduce R to below 1.0. “Given that in some settings R is likely much greater than 2 and more than half of transmissions may come from individuals who are asymptomatic at the time of transmission, effective control must mitigate transmission risk from people without symptoms,” they wrote.
The authors acknowledge that the study applies a simplistic model to a complex and evolving phenomenon, and that the exact proportions of presymptomatic and never-symptomatic transmission and the incubation periods are not known. They also note symptoms and transmissions appear to vary across different population groups, with older individuals more likely than younger persons to experience symptoms, according to previous studies.
“Assume that everyone is potentially infected”
Other experts agree that expanded testing of asymptomatic individuals is important. “Screening for fever and isolation of symptomatic individuals is a common-sense approach to help prevent spread, but these measures are by no means adequate since it’s been clearly documented that individuals who are either asymptomatic or presymptomatic can still spread the virus,” said Brett Williams, MD, an infectious disease specialist and assistant professor of medicine at Rush University in Chicago.
“As we saw with the White House Rose Garden superspreader outbreak, testing does not reliably exclude infection either because the tested individual has not yet become positive or the test is falsely negative,” Dr. Williams, who was not involved in the CDC study, said in an interview. He further noted that when prevalence is as high as it currently is in the United States, the rate of false negatives will be high because a large proportion of those screened will be unknowingly infected.
At his center, all visitors and staff are screened with a temperature probe on entry, and since the earliest days of the pandemic, universal masking has been required. “Nationally there have been many instances of hospital break room outbreaks because of staff eating lunch together, and these outbreaks also demonstrate the incompleteness of symptomatic isolation,” Dr. Williams said.
For his part, virologist Frank Esper, MD, a pediatric infectious disease specialist at the Cleveland Clinic, said that while it’s been understood for some time that many infected people will not exhibit symptoms, “the question that remains is just how infectious are they?”
Dr. Esper’s takeaway from the modeling study is not so much that we need more screening of possibly exposed but asymptomatic people, but rather testing symptomatic people and tracing their contacts is not enough.
“We need to continue to assume that everyone is potentially infected whether they know it or not. And even though we have ramped up our testing to a much greater capacity than in the first wave, we need to continue to wear masks and socially distance because just identifying people who are sick and isolating or quarantining them is not going to be enough to contain the pandemic.”
And although assumption-based modeling is helpful, it cannot tell us “how many asymptomatic people are actually infected,” said Dr. Esper, who was not involved in the CDC study.
Dr. Esper also pointed out that the study estimates are based on data from early Chinese studies, but the virus has since changed. The new, more transmissible strain in the United States and elsewhere may involve not only more infections but also a longer presymptomatic stage. “So the CDC study may actually undershoot asymptomatic infections,” he said.
He also agreed with the authors that when it comes to infection, not all humans are equal. “Older people tend to be more symptomatic and become symptomatic more quickly so the asymptomatic rate is not the same across board from young people age 20 to older people.”
The bottom line, said David. A. Hirschwerk, MD, an infectious disease specialist at Northwell Health in Manhasset, N.Y., is that these data support the maintenance of protective measures we’ve been taking over the past months. “They support the concept that asymptomatic people are a significant source of transmission and that we need to adhere to mask wearing and social distancing, particularly indoors,” Dr. Hirschwerk, who was not involved in the analysis, said in an interview. “More testing would be better but it has to be fast and it has to be efficient, and there are a lot of challenges to overcome.”
The study was done as part of the CDC’s coronavirus disease 2019 response and was supported solely by federal base and response funding. The authors and commentators have disclosed no relevant financial relationships.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
Data call for biologics trials in undertreated juvenile arthritis subtype
Children with enthesitis-related arthritis often have a high burden of disease and could benefit from medications currently approved for adults with spondyloarthritis, according to a review published in Arthritis Care & Research.
“Enthesitis-related arthritis (ERA) was the JIA [juvenile idiopathic arthritis] category applied to children with spondyloarthritis (SpA), recognizing enthesitis as a defining characteristic,” wrote Pamela F. Weiss, MD, of Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia, and colleagues.
The ERA criteria include “arthritis plus enthesitis; or arthritis or enthesitis plus at least two of the following: sacroiliac tenderness or inflammatory back pain, HLA-B27 positivity, first-degree relative with HLA-B27–associated disease, acute anterior uveitis, and arthritis in a male older than 6 years,” the review authors noted.
“None of the [Food and Drug Administration]–approved therapies for peripheral SpA or nonradiographic axial SpA” have been studied or approved for use in children with ERA, but data support biologic similarity to SpA in adults; notably, studies of the HLA-B27 allele have identified it as a risk factor for both SpA and ERA, they said.
Common factors in adult and childhood conditions
“The principal commonalities of children with ERA and axial arthritis, and adults with nonradiographic axial SpA, include enthesitis, arthritis, inflammatory back pain, anterior uveitis, HLA-B27 positivity, and family history of HLA-B27–associated disease,” the review authors wrote.
The first-line treatment for both ERA with axial arthritis and nonradiographic axial SpA is NSAIDs, followed by tumor necrosis factor (TNF) inhibitors if needed, they said. However, conventional disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (cDMARDs) may be used in cases of peripheral disease affecting five or more joints. Studies of treatment response show similarities between ERA in children and SpA in adults, the authors added, with nearly half of adults with axial disease unable to achieve remission and approximately one-third of children with ERA failing to respond to therapy.
Clinical trials could improve options and outcomes for those with ERA who need advanced therapy and such trials should evaluate response of axial and peripheral disease separately, the review authors emphasized. For example, “Eligibility criteria for children with ERA and axial features could include the presence of some of the following disease features: active inflammatory sacroiliitis based on typical MRI changes according to ASAS/OMERACT [Assessment of SpondyloArthritis international Society/Outcome Measures in Rheumatology Clinical Trials] criteria; elevated CRP [C-reactive protein]; and inadequate response or intolerance to NSAIDs,” they noted. “Considering the similarities between adult spondyloarthritis and ERA in terms of etiology, genetics, pathogenesis, and clinical manifestations, it is evident that medications approved for axial or peripheral SpA should be studied in children with ERA involving axial or peripheral joints, respectively, with the intent to achieve labeling for use in children,” they concluded.
New data highlight ERA disease burden
The need for additional therapies for ERA patients gained more support from a recent study in which a majority of children with ERA or juvenile psoriatic arthritis (jPsA) used biologics, but those with sacroiliitis in particular showed a significant disease burden despite high biologic use.
The International Leagues Against Rheumatism criteria include seven categories of juvenile idiopathic arthritis, of which ERA and jPsA are the most common; however, characteristics of these children have not been well described, wrote Dax G. Rumsey, MD, of the University of Alberta, Edmonton, and colleagues.
“Children with ERA are more likely to have a clinical picture with predominantly peripheral arthritis, typically described as an oligoarthritis involving the lower limbs with high risk of axial disease, relative to the other categories of JIA,” and report more intense pain and worse health status, compared with children in other categories, the researchers wrote.
To more completely characterize children with ERA and jPsA, the researchers assessed 522 children with ERA and 380 with jPsA. The children were enrolled in the Childhood Arthritis and Rheumatology Research Alliance (CARRA) Registry. The findings were published in a brief report in Arthritis Care & Research.
Overall, 69% of the children took at least one biologic, including 72% with ERA and 64% with jPsA. Biologic use was even higher (81%) among the 28% of patients with sacroiliitis (40% of ERA patients and 12% of jPsA patients). Approximately 36% of the patients with sacroiliitis were positive for HLA-B27. In addition, Physician Global Assessment scores and clinical Juvenile Arthritis Disease Activity Score-10 (cJADAS10) scores were significantly higher at the first clinical visit with sacroiliitis, compared with the first visit without, which confirms “the clinical impression that active sacroiliitis significantly impacts children and their families,” the researchers said.
The average age at diagnosis was 10.8 years for ERA and 8.2 years for jPsA, and significantly more ERA patients were male (56% vs. 38%). However, more of the patients with sacroiliitis (54%) were female. More than half of the patients reported polyarticular involvement.
The study findings were limited by several factors, including the classification of ERA or jPsA and the reliance on physician diagnoses, as well as the variation in identifying sacroiliitis, the researchers said. However, the results increase understanding of the pathophysiology of ERA and jPsA to help determine optimal treatment, they concluded.
Data highlight research and treatment gaps
“Recent research demonstrates a large, unmet medical need in the treatment of JIA with 52%-65% of all JIA patients, including those with ERA and jPsA, having been treated with at least one biologic DMARD and 15%-19% having been treated with an FDA-unapproved biologic. In those with ERA or jPsA, 72%-79% of the children had been treated with a biologic DMARD, although no biologic DMARD has ever been FDA approved for these JIA categories,” Daniel J. Lovell, MD, and Hermine I. Brunner, MD, both with Cincinnati Children’s Hospital Medical Center, wrote in an editorial that accompanied the new study. Dr. Lovell and Dr. Brunner also were coauthors of the review article.
The new study supports findings from other recent publications, the editorialists noted. The new results showed “a significant proportion of the JIA population with active sacroiliitis with high disease burden despite very frequent (over 80% of the population) [treatment] with unstudied and unapproved biologic DMARDs,” they said. “These children with sacroiliitis had significantly greater disease burden with higher physician assessment of disease activity, higher parent assessment of disease impact, and higher disease activity as measured by the Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis Disease Activity Score, compared to the children with ERA or jPsA without sacroiliitis,” they noted.
Previously, “the FDA granted pharmaceutical companies studying new treatments in adult SpA automatic full waivers from doing studies in children for new medications for ‘axial spondyloarthropathies including ankylosing spondylitis’ up until July 2020,” the editorialists said. However, “It is now time now for the pharmaceutical industry to perform FDA-monitored clinical trials of children and adolescents with SpA,” they emphasized. “This will allow for the scientific assessment of proper dosing, efficacy, and safety of the increasing number of new medications that are being licensed by the FDA for the treatment of SpA, such as the anti-TNF, anti–IL[interleukin]-17, and anti–IL-23 biologics, and perhaps JAK [Janus kinase] agents, to address this unmet medical need in these patients with juvenile SpA,” they concluded.
Dr. Weiss disclosed grant support from the National Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases (NIAMS), and financial relationships with Eli Lilly and Pfizer. Dr. Lovell disclosed relationships with companies including Abbott, AbbVie Amgen, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, GlaxoSmithKline, Hoffmann-La Roche, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, Takeda, UCB, and Wyeth, as well as serving on the data and safety monitoring board for Forest Research and NIAMS. Dr. Brunner disclosed relationships with companies including Ablynx, AbbVie, AstraZeneca-MedImmune, Biogen, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly, EMD Serono, F. Hoffmann-La Roche, Genzyme, GlaxoSmithKline, Merck, Novartis, R-Pharm, and Sanofi. The study by Dr. Rumsey and colleagues was supported by Amgen. Dr. Rumsey and colleagues had no relevant financial conflicts to disclose.
SOURCES: Weiss PF et al. Arthritis Care Res. 2020 Dec 5. doi: 10.1002/acr.24529; Rumsey DG et al. Arthritis Care Res. 2020 Dec. 16. doi: 10.1002/acr.24537; Lovell DJ and Brunner HI. Arthritis Care Res. 2020 Dec 16. doi: 10.1002/acr.24536.
Children with enthesitis-related arthritis often have a high burden of disease and could benefit from medications currently approved for adults with spondyloarthritis, according to a review published in Arthritis Care & Research.
“Enthesitis-related arthritis (ERA) was the JIA [juvenile idiopathic arthritis] category applied to children with spondyloarthritis (SpA), recognizing enthesitis as a defining characteristic,” wrote Pamela F. Weiss, MD, of Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia, and colleagues.
The ERA criteria include “arthritis plus enthesitis; or arthritis or enthesitis plus at least two of the following: sacroiliac tenderness or inflammatory back pain, HLA-B27 positivity, first-degree relative with HLA-B27–associated disease, acute anterior uveitis, and arthritis in a male older than 6 years,” the review authors noted.
“None of the [Food and Drug Administration]–approved therapies for peripheral SpA or nonradiographic axial SpA” have been studied or approved for use in children with ERA, but data support biologic similarity to SpA in adults; notably, studies of the HLA-B27 allele have identified it as a risk factor for both SpA and ERA, they said.
Common factors in adult and childhood conditions
“The principal commonalities of children with ERA and axial arthritis, and adults with nonradiographic axial SpA, include enthesitis, arthritis, inflammatory back pain, anterior uveitis, HLA-B27 positivity, and family history of HLA-B27–associated disease,” the review authors wrote.
The first-line treatment for both ERA with axial arthritis and nonradiographic axial SpA is NSAIDs, followed by tumor necrosis factor (TNF) inhibitors if needed, they said. However, conventional disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (cDMARDs) may be used in cases of peripheral disease affecting five or more joints. Studies of treatment response show similarities between ERA in children and SpA in adults, the authors added, with nearly half of adults with axial disease unable to achieve remission and approximately one-third of children with ERA failing to respond to therapy.
Clinical trials could improve options and outcomes for those with ERA who need advanced therapy and such trials should evaluate response of axial and peripheral disease separately, the review authors emphasized. For example, “Eligibility criteria for children with ERA and axial features could include the presence of some of the following disease features: active inflammatory sacroiliitis based on typical MRI changes according to ASAS/OMERACT [Assessment of SpondyloArthritis international Society/Outcome Measures in Rheumatology Clinical Trials] criteria; elevated CRP [C-reactive protein]; and inadequate response or intolerance to NSAIDs,” they noted. “Considering the similarities between adult spondyloarthritis and ERA in terms of etiology, genetics, pathogenesis, and clinical manifestations, it is evident that medications approved for axial or peripheral SpA should be studied in children with ERA involving axial or peripheral joints, respectively, with the intent to achieve labeling for use in children,” they concluded.
New data highlight ERA disease burden
The need for additional therapies for ERA patients gained more support from a recent study in which a majority of children with ERA or juvenile psoriatic arthritis (jPsA) used biologics, but those with sacroiliitis in particular showed a significant disease burden despite high biologic use.
The International Leagues Against Rheumatism criteria include seven categories of juvenile idiopathic arthritis, of which ERA and jPsA are the most common; however, characteristics of these children have not been well described, wrote Dax G. Rumsey, MD, of the University of Alberta, Edmonton, and colleagues.
“Children with ERA are more likely to have a clinical picture with predominantly peripheral arthritis, typically described as an oligoarthritis involving the lower limbs with high risk of axial disease, relative to the other categories of JIA,” and report more intense pain and worse health status, compared with children in other categories, the researchers wrote.
To more completely characterize children with ERA and jPsA, the researchers assessed 522 children with ERA and 380 with jPsA. The children were enrolled in the Childhood Arthritis and Rheumatology Research Alliance (CARRA) Registry. The findings were published in a brief report in Arthritis Care & Research.
Overall, 69% of the children took at least one biologic, including 72% with ERA and 64% with jPsA. Biologic use was even higher (81%) among the 28% of patients with sacroiliitis (40% of ERA patients and 12% of jPsA patients). Approximately 36% of the patients with sacroiliitis were positive for HLA-B27. In addition, Physician Global Assessment scores and clinical Juvenile Arthritis Disease Activity Score-10 (cJADAS10) scores were significantly higher at the first clinical visit with sacroiliitis, compared with the first visit without, which confirms “the clinical impression that active sacroiliitis significantly impacts children and their families,” the researchers said.
The average age at diagnosis was 10.8 years for ERA and 8.2 years for jPsA, and significantly more ERA patients were male (56% vs. 38%). However, more of the patients with sacroiliitis (54%) were female. More than half of the patients reported polyarticular involvement.
The study findings were limited by several factors, including the classification of ERA or jPsA and the reliance on physician diagnoses, as well as the variation in identifying sacroiliitis, the researchers said. However, the results increase understanding of the pathophysiology of ERA and jPsA to help determine optimal treatment, they concluded.
Data highlight research and treatment gaps
“Recent research demonstrates a large, unmet medical need in the treatment of JIA with 52%-65% of all JIA patients, including those with ERA and jPsA, having been treated with at least one biologic DMARD and 15%-19% having been treated with an FDA-unapproved biologic. In those with ERA or jPsA, 72%-79% of the children had been treated with a biologic DMARD, although no biologic DMARD has ever been FDA approved for these JIA categories,” Daniel J. Lovell, MD, and Hermine I. Brunner, MD, both with Cincinnati Children’s Hospital Medical Center, wrote in an editorial that accompanied the new study. Dr. Lovell and Dr. Brunner also were coauthors of the review article.
The new study supports findings from other recent publications, the editorialists noted. The new results showed “a significant proportion of the JIA population with active sacroiliitis with high disease burden despite very frequent (over 80% of the population) [treatment] with unstudied and unapproved biologic DMARDs,” they said. “These children with sacroiliitis had significantly greater disease burden with higher physician assessment of disease activity, higher parent assessment of disease impact, and higher disease activity as measured by the Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis Disease Activity Score, compared to the children with ERA or jPsA without sacroiliitis,” they noted.
Previously, “the FDA granted pharmaceutical companies studying new treatments in adult SpA automatic full waivers from doing studies in children for new medications for ‘axial spondyloarthropathies including ankylosing spondylitis’ up until July 2020,” the editorialists said. However, “It is now time now for the pharmaceutical industry to perform FDA-monitored clinical trials of children and adolescents with SpA,” they emphasized. “This will allow for the scientific assessment of proper dosing, efficacy, and safety of the increasing number of new medications that are being licensed by the FDA for the treatment of SpA, such as the anti-TNF, anti–IL[interleukin]-17, and anti–IL-23 biologics, and perhaps JAK [Janus kinase] agents, to address this unmet medical need in these patients with juvenile SpA,” they concluded.
Dr. Weiss disclosed grant support from the National Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases (NIAMS), and financial relationships with Eli Lilly and Pfizer. Dr. Lovell disclosed relationships with companies including Abbott, AbbVie Amgen, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, GlaxoSmithKline, Hoffmann-La Roche, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, Takeda, UCB, and Wyeth, as well as serving on the data and safety monitoring board for Forest Research and NIAMS. Dr. Brunner disclosed relationships with companies including Ablynx, AbbVie, AstraZeneca-MedImmune, Biogen, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly, EMD Serono, F. Hoffmann-La Roche, Genzyme, GlaxoSmithKline, Merck, Novartis, R-Pharm, and Sanofi. The study by Dr. Rumsey and colleagues was supported by Amgen. Dr. Rumsey and colleagues had no relevant financial conflicts to disclose.
SOURCES: Weiss PF et al. Arthritis Care Res. 2020 Dec 5. doi: 10.1002/acr.24529; Rumsey DG et al. Arthritis Care Res. 2020 Dec. 16. doi: 10.1002/acr.24537; Lovell DJ and Brunner HI. Arthritis Care Res. 2020 Dec 16. doi: 10.1002/acr.24536.
Children with enthesitis-related arthritis often have a high burden of disease and could benefit from medications currently approved for adults with spondyloarthritis, according to a review published in Arthritis Care & Research.
“Enthesitis-related arthritis (ERA) was the JIA [juvenile idiopathic arthritis] category applied to children with spondyloarthritis (SpA), recognizing enthesitis as a defining characteristic,” wrote Pamela F. Weiss, MD, of Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia, and colleagues.
The ERA criteria include “arthritis plus enthesitis; or arthritis or enthesitis plus at least two of the following: sacroiliac tenderness or inflammatory back pain, HLA-B27 positivity, first-degree relative with HLA-B27–associated disease, acute anterior uveitis, and arthritis in a male older than 6 years,” the review authors noted.
“None of the [Food and Drug Administration]–approved therapies for peripheral SpA or nonradiographic axial SpA” have been studied or approved for use in children with ERA, but data support biologic similarity to SpA in adults; notably, studies of the HLA-B27 allele have identified it as a risk factor for both SpA and ERA, they said.
Common factors in adult and childhood conditions
“The principal commonalities of children with ERA and axial arthritis, and adults with nonradiographic axial SpA, include enthesitis, arthritis, inflammatory back pain, anterior uveitis, HLA-B27 positivity, and family history of HLA-B27–associated disease,” the review authors wrote.
The first-line treatment for both ERA with axial arthritis and nonradiographic axial SpA is NSAIDs, followed by tumor necrosis factor (TNF) inhibitors if needed, they said. However, conventional disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (cDMARDs) may be used in cases of peripheral disease affecting five or more joints. Studies of treatment response show similarities between ERA in children and SpA in adults, the authors added, with nearly half of adults with axial disease unable to achieve remission and approximately one-third of children with ERA failing to respond to therapy.
Clinical trials could improve options and outcomes for those with ERA who need advanced therapy and such trials should evaluate response of axial and peripheral disease separately, the review authors emphasized. For example, “Eligibility criteria for children with ERA and axial features could include the presence of some of the following disease features: active inflammatory sacroiliitis based on typical MRI changes according to ASAS/OMERACT [Assessment of SpondyloArthritis international Society/Outcome Measures in Rheumatology Clinical Trials] criteria; elevated CRP [C-reactive protein]; and inadequate response or intolerance to NSAIDs,” they noted. “Considering the similarities between adult spondyloarthritis and ERA in terms of etiology, genetics, pathogenesis, and clinical manifestations, it is evident that medications approved for axial or peripheral SpA should be studied in children with ERA involving axial or peripheral joints, respectively, with the intent to achieve labeling for use in children,” they concluded.
New data highlight ERA disease burden
The need for additional therapies for ERA patients gained more support from a recent study in which a majority of children with ERA or juvenile psoriatic arthritis (jPsA) used biologics, but those with sacroiliitis in particular showed a significant disease burden despite high biologic use.
The International Leagues Against Rheumatism criteria include seven categories of juvenile idiopathic arthritis, of which ERA and jPsA are the most common; however, characteristics of these children have not been well described, wrote Dax G. Rumsey, MD, of the University of Alberta, Edmonton, and colleagues.
“Children with ERA are more likely to have a clinical picture with predominantly peripheral arthritis, typically described as an oligoarthritis involving the lower limbs with high risk of axial disease, relative to the other categories of JIA,” and report more intense pain and worse health status, compared with children in other categories, the researchers wrote.
To more completely characterize children with ERA and jPsA, the researchers assessed 522 children with ERA and 380 with jPsA. The children were enrolled in the Childhood Arthritis and Rheumatology Research Alliance (CARRA) Registry. The findings were published in a brief report in Arthritis Care & Research.
Overall, 69% of the children took at least one biologic, including 72% with ERA and 64% with jPsA. Biologic use was even higher (81%) among the 28% of patients with sacroiliitis (40% of ERA patients and 12% of jPsA patients). Approximately 36% of the patients with sacroiliitis were positive for HLA-B27. In addition, Physician Global Assessment scores and clinical Juvenile Arthritis Disease Activity Score-10 (cJADAS10) scores were significantly higher at the first clinical visit with sacroiliitis, compared with the first visit without, which confirms “the clinical impression that active sacroiliitis significantly impacts children and their families,” the researchers said.
The average age at diagnosis was 10.8 years for ERA and 8.2 years for jPsA, and significantly more ERA patients were male (56% vs. 38%). However, more of the patients with sacroiliitis (54%) were female. More than half of the patients reported polyarticular involvement.
The study findings were limited by several factors, including the classification of ERA or jPsA and the reliance on physician diagnoses, as well as the variation in identifying sacroiliitis, the researchers said. However, the results increase understanding of the pathophysiology of ERA and jPsA to help determine optimal treatment, they concluded.
Data highlight research and treatment gaps
“Recent research demonstrates a large, unmet medical need in the treatment of JIA with 52%-65% of all JIA patients, including those with ERA and jPsA, having been treated with at least one biologic DMARD and 15%-19% having been treated with an FDA-unapproved biologic. In those with ERA or jPsA, 72%-79% of the children had been treated with a biologic DMARD, although no biologic DMARD has ever been FDA approved for these JIA categories,” Daniel J. Lovell, MD, and Hermine I. Brunner, MD, both with Cincinnati Children’s Hospital Medical Center, wrote in an editorial that accompanied the new study. Dr. Lovell and Dr. Brunner also were coauthors of the review article.
The new study supports findings from other recent publications, the editorialists noted. The new results showed “a significant proportion of the JIA population with active sacroiliitis with high disease burden despite very frequent (over 80% of the population) [treatment] with unstudied and unapproved biologic DMARDs,” they said. “These children with sacroiliitis had significantly greater disease burden with higher physician assessment of disease activity, higher parent assessment of disease impact, and higher disease activity as measured by the Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis Disease Activity Score, compared to the children with ERA or jPsA without sacroiliitis,” they noted.
Previously, “the FDA granted pharmaceutical companies studying new treatments in adult SpA automatic full waivers from doing studies in children for new medications for ‘axial spondyloarthropathies including ankylosing spondylitis’ up until July 2020,” the editorialists said. However, “It is now time now for the pharmaceutical industry to perform FDA-monitored clinical trials of children and adolescents with SpA,” they emphasized. “This will allow for the scientific assessment of proper dosing, efficacy, and safety of the increasing number of new medications that are being licensed by the FDA for the treatment of SpA, such as the anti-TNF, anti–IL[interleukin]-17, and anti–IL-23 biologics, and perhaps JAK [Janus kinase] agents, to address this unmet medical need in these patients with juvenile SpA,” they concluded.
Dr. Weiss disclosed grant support from the National Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases (NIAMS), and financial relationships with Eli Lilly and Pfizer. Dr. Lovell disclosed relationships with companies including Abbott, AbbVie Amgen, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, GlaxoSmithKline, Hoffmann-La Roche, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, Takeda, UCB, and Wyeth, as well as serving on the data and safety monitoring board for Forest Research and NIAMS. Dr. Brunner disclosed relationships with companies including Ablynx, AbbVie, AstraZeneca-MedImmune, Biogen, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly, EMD Serono, F. Hoffmann-La Roche, Genzyme, GlaxoSmithKline, Merck, Novartis, R-Pharm, and Sanofi. The study by Dr. Rumsey and colleagues was supported by Amgen. Dr. Rumsey and colleagues had no relevant financial conflicts to disclose.
SOURCES: Weiss PF et al. Arthritis Care Res. 2020 Dec 5. doi: 10.1002/acr.24529; Rumsey DG et al. Arthritis Care Res. 2020 Dec. 16. doi: 10.1002/acr.24537; Lovell DJ and Brunner HI. Arthritis Care Res. 2020 Dec 16. doi: 10.1002/acr.24536.
FROM ARTHRITIS CARE & RESEARCH
AAP issues new guidelines for diagnosing, managing eating disorders
For too long, eating disorders have been considered a disease that afflicted mostly affluent white teenage girls, but there really is no type for eating disorders, said Laurie L. Hornberger, MD, MPH, lead author of a new clinical report on eating disorders in children and adolescents prepared by the American Academy of Pediatrics Committee on Adolescence.
In a separate interview with Pediatric News, Dr. Hornberger, associate professor of pediatrics, University of Missouri–Kansas City, explained that eating disorders occur across the spectrum of races, ethnicities, sexes, and socioeconomic statuses, so “getting caught up in that stereotype can cause you to overlook kids with significant problems.” Pediatricians are on the front line in identifying and referring eating disorders for treatment, which is crucial to earlier detection, intervention, and better outcomes, she said.
“Once you become familiar with the signs and symptoms of EDs [eating disorders] and actively start screening for them, you realize how common they are,” she noted, adding that pediatricians should be inquiring routinely about body image, attempts at weight management and what was involved in that weight management. Efforts to restrict calories, limit food choices/groups, exercise excessively, force vomiting, abuse laxatives, etc., are all signs. If the child/adolescent experiences guilt with eating, feels the need to compensate for their eating with exercise or purging, is preoccupied with thoughts of food or calorie counting, feels he/she has lost control of their eating, or experiences uncontrollable binges where they are unable to stop eating despite feeling full and wanting to stop, these are all further evidence of an eating disorder, she added.
There are also physical clues to alert pediatricians. Abrupt or sharp increases or decreases in weight, as measured in growth charts, should be monitored and questioned, Dr. Hornberger cautioned. Physicians should be careful to hold compliments on weight loss until learning how the weight loss was achieved. “Vital signs, such as a resting bradycardia and orthostatic tachycardia, can reflect malnutrition, as can other physical findings. Although lab screening is frequently normal, it should not, by itself, rule out an [eating disorder]. Pediatricians should also be aware of the signs and symptoms of medical instability in an [eating disorder] patient that warrant hospitalization for renourishment,” she explained.
Number of eating disorders increased in 2020
Current pandemic conditions have shown an uptick in the number of referrals and long wait lists for eating disorder centers, noted Dr. Hornberger. Having a formal eating disorder treatment program nearby is a luxury not all communities have, so being able to call upon primary care pediatricians to be an active part of a treatment team, which ideally includes a mental health provider and dietitian, both experienced in eating disorders, is pretty important. In coordination with the team, pediatricians are responsible for monitoring physical recovery and remaining alert for signs of struggle to recover and the need for a higher level of care.
In a separate interview with Pediatric News, Margaret Thew, DNP, FNP-BC, medical director of adolescent medicine at the Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, observed, “COVID-19 has created a surge of children and adolescents struggling with eating disorders. Eating disorder numbers have been associated with social media promoting the avoidance of COVID-19–related weight gain and influencers promoting thin body image. The abrupt end of face-to-face learning, sports participation, and generalized anxiety have further influenced mental health and disordered eating behaviors. Early in the pandemic, the true impact on the psychosocial well-being of children and teens was not known. We are only now seeing the impact months into this pandemic. The timeliness of the American Association of Pediatrics guidelines on the identification and management of children and teens presenting with an eating disorder is pivotal to recognition and treatment,” she said.
“I applaud the AAP for presenting timely guidelines on the evaluation and management of eating disorders for the general pediatrician, yet feel the authors fell short in recognizing the challenges of mitigating management of an eating disorder,” Ms. Thew added.
“Treatment of disordered eating requires all parties to accept the diagnosis and no longer support unhealthy eating patterns. The environment rationalizing the disordered eating may require changes to reduce behaviors and improve nutrition,” she cautioned.
New guidelines offer a range of diagnostic and treatment resources
In preparing the current report, the authors included the most recent definitions of eating disorders outlined in the “Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders,” 5th Edition (DSM-5). Special attention was paid to four classifications of eating disorders in particular – anorexia nervosa (AN), avoidant/restrictive food intake disorder (ARFID); binge-eating disorder (BED); and bulimia nervosa (BN) – because so many disorders are subclassified under these.
Beyond providing a list of comprehensive definitions, the guidance reviews prevalence data for eating disorders, and provides detailed screening, assessment, and laboratory evaluation guidelines. Medical complications, including psychological, neurologic, dermatologic, dental and/or oral, cardiovascular, gastrointestinal, renal and electrolyte, and endocrine effects are discussed in detail as are treatment principles, financial considerations, and prognosis. Besides the important prevention and advocacy roles the authors identify for pediatricians, the guidelines highlight four key areas where pediatricians play a key role in the screening and management of eating disorders, as touched on previously by the guidance authors in this article.
In a separate AAP press release, Margo Lane, MD, coauthor of the report, noted, “As pediatricians, there is much we can also do outside the clinic to advocate for our patients, through legislation and policy that support services, including medical care, nutritional intervention, mental health treatment, and care coordination.” Physicians can also play an important role in reprograming familial and societal attitudes and behaviors by encouraging more positive language that deemphasizes weight and embraces and celebrates kids of all shapes and sizes, added Dr. Lane.
Dr. Hornberger and colleagues as well as Ms. Thew had no conflicts of interest and no relevant financial disclosures.
SOURCE: Pediatrics. 2021;147(1):e2020040279. doi: 10.1542/peds.2020-040279.
For too long, eating disorders have been considered a disease that afflicted mostly affluent white teenage girls, but there really is no type for eating disorders, said Laurie L. Hornberger, MD, MPH, lead author of a new clinical report on eating disorders in children and adolescents prepared by the American Academy of Pediatrics Committee on Adolescence.
In a separate interview with Pediatric News, Dr. Hornberger, associate professor of pediatrics, University of Missouri–Kansas City, explained that eating disorders occur across the spectrum of races, ethnicities, sexes, and socioeconomic statuses, so “getting caught up in that stereotype can cause you to overlook kids with significant problems.” Pediatricians are on the front line in identifying and referring eating disorders for treatment, which is crucial to earlier detection, intervention, and better outcomes, she said.
“Once you become familiar with the signs and symptoms of EDs [eating disorders] and actively start screening for them, you realize how common they are,” she noted, adding that pediatricians should be inquiring routinely about body image, attempts at weight management and what was involved in that weight management. Efforts to restrict calories, limit food choices/groups, exercise excessively, force vomiting, abuse laxatives, etc., are all signs. If the child/adolescent experiences guilt with eating, feels the need to compensate for their eating with exercise or purging, is preoccupied with thoughts of food or calorie counting, feels he/she has lost control of their eating, or experiences uncontrollable binges where they are unable to stop eating despite feeling full and wanting to stop, these are all further evidence of an eating disorder, she added.
There are also physical clues to alert pediatricians. Abrupt or sharp increases or decreases in weight, as measured in growth charts, should be monitored and questioned, Dr. Hornberger cautioned. Physicians should be careful to hold compliments on weight loss until learning how the weight loss was achieved. “Vital signs, such as a resting bradycardia and orthostatic tachycardia, can reflect malnutrition, as can other physical findings. Although lab screening is frequently normal, it should not, by itself, rule out an [eating disorder]. Pediatricians should also be aware of the signs and symptoms of medical instability in an [eating disorder] patient that warrant hospitalization for renourishment,” she explained.
Number of eating disorders increased in 2020
Current pandemic conditions have shown an uptick in the number of referrals and long wait lists for eating disorder centers, noted Dr. Hornberger. Having a formal eating disorder treatment program nearby is a luxury not all communities have, so being able to call upon primary care pediatricians to be an active part of a treatment team, which ideally includes a mental health provider and dietitian, both experienced in eating disorders, is pretty important. In coordination with the team, pediatricians are responsible for monitoring physical recovery and remaining alert for signs of struggle to recover and the need for a higher level of care.
In a separate interview with Pediatric News, Margaret Thew, DNP, FNP-BC, medical director of adolescent medicine at the Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, observed, “COVID-19 has created a surge of children and adolescents struggling with eating disorders. Eating disorder numbers have been associated with social media promoting the avoidance of COVID-19–related weight gain and influencers promoting thin body image. The abrupt end of face-to-face learning, sports participation, and generalized anxiety have further influenced mental health and disordered eating behaviors. Early in the pandemic, the true impact on the psychosocial well-being of children and teens was not known. We are only now seeing the impact months into this pandemic. The timeliness of the American Association of Pediatrics guidelines on the identification and management of children and teens presenting with an eating disorder is pivotal to recognition and treatment,” she said.
“I applaud the AAP for presenting timely guidelines on the evaluation and management of eating disorders for the general pediatrician, yet feel the authors fell short in recognizing the challenges of mitigating management of an eating disorder,” Ms. Thew added.
“Treatment of disordered eating requires all parties to accept the diagnosis and no longer support unhealthy eating patterns. The environment rationalizing the disordered eating may require changes to reduce behaviors and improve nutrition,” she cautioned.
New guidelines offer a range of diagnostic and treatment resources
In preparing the current report, the authors included the most recent definitions of eating disorders outlined in the “Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders,” 5th Edition (DSM-5). Special attention was paid to four classifications of eating disorders in particular – anorexia nervosa (AN), avoidant/restrictive food intake disorder (ARFID); binge-eating disorder (BED); and bulimia nervosa (BN) – because so many disorders are subclassified under these.
Beyond providing a list of comprehensive definitions, the guidance reviews prevalence data for eating disorders, and provides detailed screening, assessment, and laboratory evaluation guidelines. Medical complications, including psychological, neurologic, dermatologic, dental and/or oral, cardiovascular, gastrointestinal, renal and electrolyte, and endocrine effects are discussed in detail as are treatment principles, financial considerations, and prognosis. Besides the important prevention and advocacy roles the authors identify for pediatricians, the guidelines highlight four key areas where pediatricians play a key role in the screening and management of eating disorders, as touched on previously by the guidance authors in this article.
In a separate AAP press release, Margo Lane, MD, coauthor of the report, noted, “As pediatricians, there is much we can also do outside the clinic to advocate for our patients, through legislation and policy that support services, including medical care, nutritional intervention, mental health treatment, and care coordination.” Physicians can also play an important role in reprograming familial and societal attitudes and behaviors by encouraging more positive language that deemphasizes weight and embraces and celebrates kids of all shapes and sizes, added Dr. Lane.
Dr. Hornberger and colleagues as well as Ms. Thew had no conflicts of interest and no relevant financial disclosures.
SOURCE: Pediatrics. 2021;147(1):e2020040279. doi: 10.1542/peds.2020-040279.
For too long, eating disorders have been considered a disease that afflicted mostly affluent white teenage girls, but there really is no type for eating disorders, said Laurie L. Hornberger, MD, MPH, lead author of a new clinical report on eating disorders in children and adolescents prepared by the American Academy of Pediatrics Committee on Adolescence.
In a separate interview with Pediatric News, Dr. Hornberger, associate professor of pediatrics, University of Missouri–Kansas City, explained that eating disorders occur across the spectrum of races, ethnicities, sexes, and socioeconomic statuses, so “getting caught up in that stereotype can cause you to overlook kids with significant problems.” Pediatricians are on the front line in identifying and referring eating disorders for treatment, which is crucial to earlier detection, intervention, and better outcomes, she said.
“Once you become familiar with the signs and symptoms of EDs [eating disorders] and actively start screening for them, you realize how common they are,” she noted, adding that pediatricians should be inquiring routinely about body image, attempts at weight management and what was involved in that weight management. Efforts to restrict calories, limit food choices/groups, exercise excessively, force vomiting, abuse laxatives, etc., are all signs. If the child/adolescent experiences guilt with eating, feels the need to compensate for their eating with exercise or purging, is preoccupied with thoughts of food or calorie counting, feels he/she has lost control of their eating, or experiences uncontrollable binges where they are unable to stop eating despite feeling full and wanting to stop, these are all further evidence of an eating disorder, she added.
There are also physical clues to alert pediatricians. Abrupt or sharp increases or decreases in weight, as measured in growth charts, should be monitored and questioned, Dr. Hornberger cautioned. Physicians should be careful to hold compliments on weight loss until learning how the weight loss was achieved. “Vital signs, such as a resting bradycardia and orthostatic tachycardia, can reflect malnutrition, as can other physical findings. Although lab screening is frequently normal, it should not, by itself, rule out an [eating disorder]. Pediatricians should also be aware of the signs and symptoms of medical instability in an [eating disorder] patient that warrant hospitalization for renourishment,” she explained.
Number of eating disorders increased in 2020
Current pandemic conditions have shown an uptick in the number of referrals and long wait lists for eating disorder centers, noted Dr. Hornberger. Having a formal eating disorder treatment program nearby is a luxury not all communities have, so being able to call upon primary care pediatricians to be an active part of a treatment team, which ideally includes a mental health provider and dietitian, both experienced in eating disorders, is pretty important. In coordination with the team, pediatricians are responsible for monitoring physical recovery and remaining alert for signs of struggle to recover and the need for a higher level of care.
In a separate interview with Pediatric News, Margaret Thew, DNP, FNP-BC, medical director of adolescent medicine at the Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, observed, “COVID-19 has created a surge of children and adolescents struggling with eating disorders. Eating disorder numbers have been associated with social media promoting the avoidance of COVID-19–related weight gain and influencers promoting thin body image. The abrupt end of face-to-face learning, sports participation, and generalized anxiety have further influenced mental health and disordered eating behaviors. Early in the pandemic, the true impact on the psychosocial well-being of children and teens was not known. We are only now seeing the impact months into this pandemic. The timeliness of the American Association of Pediatrics guidelines on the identification and management of children and teens presenting with an eating disorder is pivotal to recognition and treatment,” she said.
“I applaud the AAP for presenting timely guidelines on the evaluation and management of eating disorders for the general pediatrician, yet feel the authors fell short in recognizing the challenges of mitigating management of an eating disorder,” Ms. Thew added.
“Treatment of disordered eating requires all parties to accept the diagnosis and no longer support unhealthy eating patterns. The environment rationalizing the disordered eating may require changes to reduce behaviors and improve nutrition,” she cautioned.
New guidelines offer a range of diagnostic and treatment resources
In preparing the current report, the authors included the most recent definitions of eating disorders outlined in the “Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders,” 5th Edition (DSM-5). Special attention was paid to four classifications of eating disorders in particular – anorexia nervosa (AN), avoidant/restrictive food intake disorder (ARFID); binge-eating disorder (BED); and bulimia nervosa (BN) – because so many disorders are subclassified under these.
Beyond providing a list of comprehensive definitions, the guidance reviews prevalence data for eating disorders, and provides detailed screening, assessment, and laboratory evaluation guidelines. Medical complications, including psychological, neurologic, dermatologic, dental and/or oral, cardiovascular, gastrointestinal, renal and electrolyte, and endocrine effects are discussed in detail as are treatment principles, financial considerations, and prognosis. Besides the important prevention and advocacy roles the authors identify for pediatricians, the guidelines highlight four key areas where pediatricians play a key role in the screening and management of eating disorders, as touched on previously by the guidance authors in this article.
In a separate AAP press release, Margo Lane, MD, coauthor of the report, noted, “As pediatricians, there is much we can also do outside the clinic to advocate for our patients, through legislation and policy that support services, including medical care, nutritional intervention, mental health treatment, and care coordination.” Physicians can also play an important role in reprograming familial and societal attitudes and behaviors by encouraging more positive language that deemphasizes weight and embraces and celebrates kids of all shapes and sizes, added Dr. Lane.
Dr. Hornberger and colleagues as well as Ms. Thew had no conflicts of interest and no relevant financial disclosures.
SOURCE: Pediatrics. 2021;147(1):e2020040279. doi: 10.1542/peds.2020-040279.
FROM PEDIATRICS
Anaphylaxis cases after COVID-19 vaccine rising but still rare: CDC
Health care providers should be ready to treat rare cases of anaphylaxis following administration of COVID-19 vaccines, federal medical officials have urged. The officials also stressed the importance of continuing vaccinations, despite reports of the rare side effect.
There have been 29 cases of anaphylaxis to date following administration of a COVID-19 vaccine, officials from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention said in a call with reporters on Jan. 6.
The severe allergic reaction, which appears to be rare, can happen with either the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine or the rival Moderna product. The Food and Drug Administration granted emergency use authorizations for these two vaccines in December.
Even with the cases seen to date, the COVID-19 vaccines remain a “good value proposition,” Nancy Messonnier, MD, director of the CDC’s National Center for Immunization, said in the call.
There have been about 11.1 cases of anaphylaxis per million doses with the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine, which is higher than the estimated 1.3 cases per million doses with influenza vaccines, she said. But the low risk of anaphylaxis must be balanced against the threat of COVID-19, which currently claims about 2,000 lives a day in the United States, she said. In addition, many people are reporting long-term complications with COVID-19 even if they recover.
Kept in context, the data on anaphylaxis should not scare people away from getting a COVID-19 vaccine, she added.
“Their risk from COVID and poor outcomes is still more than the risk of a severe outcome from the vaccine,” Dr. Messonnier said. “And fortunately, we know how to treat anaphylaxis.”
Dr. Messonnier urged health care workers administering COVID-19 vaccines to be prepared.
“Anybody administering vaccines needs not just to have the EpiPen available, but frankly, to know how to use it,” Dr. Messonnier said.
MMWR details
The CDC on Jan. 6 also provided an update on anaphylaxis in Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report (MMWR).
The information included in the report was based on cases reported with the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine – the first to get emergency use authorization from the FDA. On the call with reporters, CDC officials confirmed there have been additional reports since then and anaphylaxis has been reported with both the Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna vaccines. CDC officials said they could not give a breakdown of how many cases were linked to each of these products at this time.
Between Dec. 14 and 23, 2020, monitoring by the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System detected 21 cases of anaphylaxis after administration of a reported 1,893,360 first doses of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine. Most reactions – 71% – occurred within 15 minutes of vaccination.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
Health care providers should be ready to treat rare cases of anaphylaxis following administration of COVID-19 vaccines, federal medical officials have urged. The officials also stressed the importance of continuing vaccinations, despite reports of the rare side effect.
There have been 29 cases of anaphylaxis to date following administration of a COVID-19 vaccine, officials from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention said in a call with reporters on Jan. 6.
The severe allergic reaction, which appears to be rare, can happen with either the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine or the rival Moderna product. The Food and Drug Administration granted emergency use authorizations for these two vaccines in December.
Even with the cases seen to date, the COVID-19 vaccines remain a “good value proposition,” Nancy Messonnier, MD, director of the CDC’s National Center for Immunization, said in the call.
There have been about 11.1 cases of anaphylaxis per million doses with the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine, which is higher than the estimated 1.3 cases per million doses with influenza vaccines, she said. But the low risk of anaphylaxis must be balanced against the threat of COVID-19, which currently claims about 2,000 lives a day in the United States, she said. In addition, many people are reporting long-term complications with COVID-19 even if they recover.
Kept in context, the data on anaphylaxis should not scare people away from getting a COVID-19 vaccine, she added.
“Their risk from COVID and poor outcomes is still more than the risk of a severe outcome from the vaccine,” Dr. Messonnier said. “And fortunately, we know how to treat anaphylaxis.”
Dr. Messonnier urged health care workers administering COVID-19 vaccines to be prepared.
“Anybody administering vaccines needs not just to have the EpiPen available, but frankly, to know how to use it,” Dr. Messonnier said.
MMWR details
The CDC on Jan. 6 also provided an update on anaphylaxis in Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report (MMWR).
The information included in the report was based on cases reported with the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine – the first to get emergency use authorization from the FDA. On the call with reporters, CDC officials confirmed there have been additional reports since then and anaphylaxis has been reported with both the Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna vaccines. CDC officials said they could not give a breakdown of how many cases were linked to each of these products at this time.
Between Dec. 14 and 23, 2020, monitoring by the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System detected 21 cases of anaphylaxis after administration of a reported 1,893,360 first doses of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine. Most reactions – 71% – occurred within 15 minutes of vaccination.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
Health care providers should be ready to treat rare cases of anaphylaxis following administration of COVID-19 vaccines, federal medical officials have urged. The officials also stressed the importance of continuing vaccinations, despite reports of the rare side effect.
There have been 29 cases of anaphylaxis to date following administration of a COVID-19 vaccine, officials from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention said in a call with reporters on Jan. 6.
The severe allergic reaction, which appears to be rare, can happen with either the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine or the rival Moderna product. The Food and Drug Administration granted emergency use authorizations for these two vaccines in December.
Even with the cases seen to date, the COVID-19 vaccines remain a “good value proposition,” Nancy Messonnier, MD, director of the CDC’s National Center for Immunization, said in the call.
There have been about 11.1 cases of anaphylaxis per million doses with the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine, which is higher than the estimated 1.3 cases per million doses with influenza vaccines, she said. But the low risk of anaphylaxis must be balanced against the threat of COVID-19, which currently claims about 2,000 lives a day in the United States, she said. In addition, many people are reporting long-term complications with COVID-19 even if they recover.
Kept in context, the data on anaphylaxis should not scare people away from getting a COVID-19 vaccine, she added.
“Their risk from COVID and poor outcomes is still more than the risk of a severe outcome from the vaccine,” Dr. Messonnier said. “And fortunately, we know how to treat anaphylaxis.”
Dr. Messonnier urged health care workers administering COVID-19 vaccines to be prepared.
“Anybody administering vaccines needs not just to have the EpiPen available, but frankly, to know how to use it,” Dr. Messonnier said.
MMWR details
The CDC on Jan. 6 also provided an update on anaphylaxis in Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report (MMWR).
The information included in the report was based on cases reported with the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine – the first to get emergency use authorization from the FDA. On the call with reporters, CDC officials confirmed there have been additional reports since then and anaphylaxis has been reported with both the Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna vaccines. CDC officials said they could not give a breakdown of how many cases were linked to each of these products at this time.
Between Dec. 14 and 23, 2020, monitoring by the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System detected 21 cases of anaphylaxis after administration of a reported 1,893,360 first doses of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine. Most reactions – 71% – occurred within 15 minutes of vaccination.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.