MDedge Psychiatry

Medicare has received a key endorsement of its plan to restrict payment for the controversial Alzheimer’s disease (AD) drug aducanumab (Aduhelm) – but also drew pleas from other groups for more generous reimbursement of the drug, as well as expected similar medications currently in development.

The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services received more than 9,900 comments on its plan, according to the current tally posted on its website. However, it is unclear when the final count will be available.

CMS intends to limit federal payment for monoclonal antibodies that target amyloid to clinical trials. Among supporters of this approach is the influential Medicare Payment Advisory Commission, an expert panel that helps Congress and CMS manage the federal health program.

Opponents of the CMS plan include several pharmaceutical companies. Patient and consumer groups, individuals, and lawmakers had mixed views.

CMS officials will weigh the feedback provided in the comments when setting a final coverage policy for aducanumab. It is expected the agency’s final decision will be announced on April 11.
 

Ongoing debate

The comments submitted to CMS reflect ongoing debate about whether the evidence proves aducanumab provides significant clinical benefit.

The Food and Drug Administration’s unusual approach to clearing the drug for U.S. sales triggered a review of its management of the accelerated approval process by the Office of Inspector General for the Department of Health & Human Services.

The FDA granted an accelerated approval for aducanumab in June based on evidence that the drug clears amyloid in the brain. However, it is unclear whether clearing the protein from the brain results in clinical benefit.

Usually, accelerated approvals precede the completion of phase 3 drug trials, with the FDA allowing early access to a medicine while awaiting confirmatory trials.

In the case of aducanumab, results of the phase 3 confirmatory trials ENGAGE and EMERGE were available at the time of FDA approval. However, interpretation of the findings is controversial.

Biogen contends that the amyloid-clearing effect of the higher dose of aducanumab shown in EMERGE indicates the drug has clinical potential. However, others argue that amyloid clearance does not indicate clinical benefit.

Limiting Medicare coverage of aducanumab for treatment of AD means “the progression of disease, for nearly all beneficiaries, would continue unabated,” Biogen wrote in its comment to CMS.
 

Conflicting data

Supporters of the CMS plan have a different view of the trial data. They note the failure of aducanumab in the companion ENGAGE trial, while also questioning the magnitude of benefit suggested by even the most positive data cited for the drug in the EMERGE trial.

Both studies used the Clinical Dementia Rating-Sum of Boxes (CDR-SB) score, an 18-point scale measuring cognition and function.

In his comment to CMS, MedPAC chairman Michael E. Chernew, PhD, noted the change in CDR-SB score of 0.39 in EMERGE’s high-dose aducanumab group. CMS has described this as being “less than the 1-2 point change that has been suggested as a minimal clinically important difference,” Dr. Chernew wrote.

MedPAC does not normally comment on Medicare coverage decisions, but did so in this case because of its significance and because of the potential fiscal implications, he noted.

“Though there is only limited, conflicting data on Aduhelm’s clinical effectiveness, Medicare would pay a high price for the product,” Dr. Chernew wrote, pointing out the $28,200 annual U.S. price of the drug.

MedPAC thus endorsed the coverage-with-evidence-development (CED) pathway. Under this approach, Medicare would pay for these drugs when used in clinical trials that meet certain criteria.
 

Legal challenge?

In its comment to CMS, Biogen questioned the agency’s legal grounds for limiting coverage of aducanumab. A mandate on clinical trials as part of the CED proposal “runs afoul of the Administrative Procedure Act’s prohibition against arbitrary and capricious agency action,” Biogen said.

The drug company argued that its own planned follow-on studies would provide the kind of data Medicare officials want to see. It also argued for greater use of observational data, including real-world evidence, and of information from Medicare claims.

Roche’s Genentech, which is also developing antiamyloid drugs for AD, echoed some of Biogen’s concerns about the aducanumab plan.

CMS’ CED plan would be “unnecessarily restrictive and discouraging for patients living with this destructive disease,” David Burt, executive director for federal government affairs at Genentech, wrote in a comment to CMS.

CMS should clarify that the CED requirement would not apply to cases of FDA-approved antiamyloid therapies that have demonstrated “clinically meaningful improvement,” Mr. Burt added. He noted there are phase 3 trials of drugs in this class that could soon produce data.

CMS should “fully consider the broad ramifications and significant unintended consequences of prematurely placing unduly severe restrictions on the entire class of antiamyloid monoclonal antibodies,” Mr. Burt wrote.
 

Health care inequity

In its comment to CMS, Biogen also noted the Medicare proposal would “compound the already pervasive inequities in access to treatment and will ultimately prove highly detrimental to health equity.”

There are already concerns about the access of Black and Latinx patients to clinical trials. The planned CED approach would tightly restrict access to aducanumab, as well as expected follow-ons in the amyloid-directed monoclonal antibody (mAb) drug class, the company said.

“Many of the trial sites for Aduhelm, as well as for other amyloid-directed [monoclonal antibodies] are not hospital-based outpatient settings, but include infusion centers, private practices, and medical research centers,” Biogen wrote.

Patient groups such as UsAgainstAlzheimer’s told CMS the CED approach would worsen disparities, despite the aim of Medicare officials to increase participation of Black and Latinx patients in future testing.

“CMS will be hard-pressed to achieve diversity if such hospitals are the only locations where Medicare beneficiaries are able to access mAbs,” USAgainstAlzheimer’s wrote in a Feb. 10 comment.

In contrast, the nonprofit National Center for Health Research praised CMS for what it described as an effort to address a lack of representation of Black and Latinx patients in earlier aducanumab research.

However, the NCHR also suggested CMS revise its plan to mandate that clinical trials include patients who are representative of the national population diagnosed with AD.

“Rather than being concerned about the percentage of patients in specific racial and ethnic groups, we propose that CMS include sufficient numbers of patients in different racial, ethnic, and age groups to ensure that there is enough statistical power for subgroup analyses to determine safety and efficacy for each of the major demographic groups,” the NCHR wrote.
 

Patient health, Medicare at risk

On Feb. 8, a group of House Republican lawmakers asked CMS to reverse its stance. In a publicly released letter, Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers of Washington state, the ranking Republican on the House Energy and Commerce Committee, and colleagues urged broader coverage of aducanumab.

In the letter, the group emphasized the idea of aducanumab as a potential treatment for patients with Down syndrome who are at risk for AD.

“The link between Down Syndrome and AD is still being researched by scientists,” Rep. Rodgers and colleagues wrote.

“However, there appears to be a correlation between the additional 21st chromosome present in people with Down Syndrome and the chromosome’s gene that makes amyloid precursor proteins and can cause a build-up of the beta-amyloid plaques common amongst those with AD,” they add.

On the other hand, CMS garnered earlier support from influential Democrats. On Jan. 13, House Energy and Commerce Chairman Frank Pallone Jr (D-N.J.) and House Oversight and Reform Chairwoman Carolyn B. Maloney (D-N.Y.) released a letter praising CMS for its plan for covering aducanumab.

In addition to the HHS-OIG review of the FDA’s approval of the drug, the two House committees are in the midst of their own investigation of the agency’s decision to clear the drug.

“Any broader coverage determination before there is clarity on Aduhelm’s approval process and findings from the myriad ongoing investigations may put the health of millions of Alzheimer’s patients on the line and the financial stability of the nation’s health insurance program for American seniors at risk,” Rep. Pallone and Rep. Maloney wrote.

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

Medicare has received a key endorsement of its plan to restrict payment for the controversial Alzheimer’s disease (AD) drug aducanumab (Aduhelm) – but also drew pleas from other groups for more generous reimbursement of the drug, as well as expected similar medications currently in development.

The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services received more than 9,900 comments on its plan, according to the current tally posted on its website. However, it is unclear when the final count will be available.

CMS intends to limit federal payment for monoclonal antibodies that target amyloid to clinical trials. Among supporters of this approach is the influential Medicare Payment Advisory Commission, an expert panel that helps Congress and CMS manage the federal health program.

Opponents of the CMS plan include several pharmaceutical companies. Patient and consumer groups, individuals, and lawmakers had mixed views.

CMS officials will weigh the feedback provided in the comments when setting a final coverage policy for aducanumab. It is expected the agency’s final decision will be announced on April 11.
 

Ongoing debate

The comments submitted to CMS reflect ongoing debate about whether the evidence proves aducanumab provides significant clinical benefit.

The Food and Drug Administration’s unusual approach to clearing the drug for U.S. sales triggered a review of its management of the accelerated approval process by the Office of Inspector General for the Department of Health & Human Services.

The FDA granted an accelerated approval for aducanumab in June based on evidence that the drug clears amyloid in the brain. However, it is unclear whether clearing the protein from the brain results in clinical benefit.

Usually, accelerated approvals precede the completion of phase 3 drug trials, with the FDA allowing early access to a medicine while awaiting confirmatory trials.

In the case of aducanumab, results of the phase 3 confirmatory trials ENGAGE and EMERGE were available at the time of FDA approval. However, interpretation of the findings is controversial.

Biogen contends that the amyloid-clearing effect of the higher dose of aducanumab shown in EMERGE indicates the drug has clinical potential. However, others argue that amyloid clearance does not indicate clinical benefit.

Limiting Medicare coverage of aducanumab for treatment of AD means “the progression of disease, for nearly all beneficiaries, would continue unabated,” Biogen wrote in its comment to CMS.
 

Conflicting data

Supporters of the CMS plan have a different view of the trial data. They note the failure of aducanumab in the companion ENGAGE trial, while also questioning the magnitude of benefit suggested by even the most positive data cited for the drug in the EMERGE trial.

Both studies used the Clinical Dementia Rating-Sum of Boxes (CDR-SB) score, an 18-point scale measuring cognition and function.

In his comment to CMS, MedPAC chairman Michael E. Chernew, PhD, noted the change in CDR-SB score of 0.39 in EMERGE’s high-dose aducanumab group. CMS has described this as being “less than the 1-2 point change that has been suggested as a minimal clinically important difference,” Dr. Chernew wrote.

MedPAC does not normally comment on Medicare coverage decisions, but did so in this case because of its significance and because of the potential fiscal implications, he noted.

“Though there is only limited, conflicting data on Aduhelm’s clinical effectiveness, Medicare would pay a high price for the product,” Dr. Chernew wrote, pointing out the $28,200 annual U.S. price of the drug.

MedPAC thus endorsed the coverage-with-evidence-development (CED) pathway. Under this approach, Medicare would pay for these drugs when used in clinical trials that meet certain criteria.
 

Legal challenge?

In its comment to CMS, Biogen questioned the agency’s legal grounds for limiting coverage of aducanumab. A mandate on clinical trials as part of the CED proposal “runs afoul of the Administrative Procedure Act’s prohibition against arbitrary and capricious agency action,” Biogen said.

The drug company argued that its own planned follow-on studies would provide the kind of data Medicare officials want to see. It also argued for greater use of observational data, including real-world evidence, and of information from Medicare claims.

Roche’s Genentech, which is also developing antiamyloid drugs for AD, echoed some of Biogen’s concerns about the aducanumab plan.

CMS’ CED plan would be “unnecessarily restrictive and discouraging for patients living with this destructive disease,” David Burt, executive director for federal government affairs at Genentech, wrote in a comment to CMS.

CMS should clarify that the CED requirement would not apply to cases of FDA-approved antiamyloid therapies that have demonstrated “clinically meaningful improvement,” Mr. Burt added. He noted there are phase 3 trials of drugs in this class that could soon produce data.

CMS should “fully consider the broad ramifications and significant unintended consequences of prematurely placing unduly severe restrictions on the entire class of antiamyloid monoclonal antibodies,” Mr. Burt wrote.
 

Health care inequity

In its comment to CMS, Biogen also noted the Medicare proposal would “compound the already pervasive inequities in access to treatment and will ultimately prove highly detrimental to health equity.”

There are already concerns about the access of Black and Latinx patients to clinical trials. The planned CED approach would tightly restrict access to aducanumab, as well as expected follow-ons in the amyloid-directed monoclonal antibody (mAb) drug class, the company said.

“Many of the trial sites for Aduhelm, as well as for other amyloid-directed [monoclonal antibodies] are not hospital-based outpatient settings, but include infusion centers, private practices, and medical research centers,” Biogen wrote.

Patient groups such as UsAgainstAlzheimer’s told CMS the CED approach would worsen disparities, despite the aim of Medicare officials to increase participation of Black and Latinx patients in future testing.

“CMS will be hard-pressed to achieve diversity if such hospitals are the only locations where Medicare beneficiaries are able to access mAbs,” USAgainstAlzheimer’s wrote in a Feb. 10 comment.

In contrast, the nonprofit National Center for Health Research praised CMS for what it described as an effort to address a lack of representation of Black and Latinx patients in earlier aducanumab research.

However, the NCHR also suggested CMS revise its plan to mandate that clinical trials include patients who are representative of the national population diagnosed with AD.

“Rather than being concerned about the percentage of patients in specific racial and ethnic groups, we propose that CMS include sufficient numbers of patients in different racial, ethnic, and age groups to ensure that there is enough statistical power for subgroup analyses to determine safety and efficacy for each of the major demographic groups,” the NCHR wrote.
 

Patient health, Medicare at risk

On Feb. 8, a group of House Republican lawmakers asked CMS to reverse its stance. In a publicly released letter, Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers of Washington state, the ranking Republican on the House Energy and Commerce Committee, and colleagues urged broader coverage of aducanumab.

In the letter, the group emphasized the idea of aducanumab as a potential treatment for patients with Down syndrome who are at risk for AD.

“The link between Down Syndrome and AD is still being researched by scientists,” Rep. Rodgers and colleagues wrote.

“However, there appears to be a correlation between the additional 21st chromosome present in people with Down Syndrome and the chromosome’s gene that makes amyloid precursor proteins and can cause a build-up of the beta-amyloid plaques common amongst those with AD,” they add.

On the other hand, CMS garnered earlier support from influential Democrats. On Jan. 13, House Energy and Commerce Chairman Frank Pallone Jr (D-N.J.) and House Oversight and Reform Chairwoman Carolyn B. Maloney (D-N.Y.) released a letter praising CMS for its plan for covering aducanumab.

In addition to the HHS-OIG review of the FDA’s approval of the drug, the two House committees are in the midst of their own investigation of the agency’s decision to clear the drug.

“Any broader coverage determination before there is clarity on Aduhelm’s approval process and findings from the myriad ongoing investigations may put the health of millions of Alzheimer’s patients on the line and the financial stability of the nation’s health insurance program for American seniors at risk,” Rep. Pallone and Rep. Maloney wrote.

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

Medicare has received a key endorsement of its plan to restrict payment for the controversial Alzheimer’s disease (AD) drug aducanumab (Aduhelm) – but also drew pleas from other groups for more generous reimbursement of the drug, as well as expected similar medications currently in development.

The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services received more than 9,900 comments on its plan, according to the current tally posted on its website. However, it is unclear when the final count will be available.

CMS intends to limit federal payment for monoclonal antibodies that target amyloid to clinical trials. Among supporters of this approach is the influential Medicare Payment Advisory Commission, an expert panel that helps Congress and CMS manage the federal health program.

Opponents of the CMS plan include several pharmaceutical companies. Patient and consumer groups, individuals, and lawmakers had mixed views.

CMS officials will weigh the feedback provided in the comments when setting a final coverage policy for aducanumab. It is expected the agency’s final decision will be announced on April 11.
 

Ongoing debate

The comments submitted to CMS reflect ongoing debate about whether the evidence proves aducanumab provides significant clinical benefit.

The Food and Drug Administration’s unusual approach to clearing the drug for U.S. sales triggered a review of its management of the accelerated approval process by the Office of Inspector General for the Department of Health & Human Services.

The FDA granted an accelerated approval for aducanumab in June based on evidence that the drug clears amyloid in the brain. However, it is unclear whether clearing the protein from the brain results in clinical benefit.

Usually, accelerated approvals precede the completion of phase 3 drug trials, with the FDA allowing early access to a medicine while awaiting confirmatory trials.

In the case of aducanumab, results of the phase 3 confirmatory trials ENGAGE and EMERGE were available at the time of FDA approval. However, interpretation of the findings is controversial.

Biogen contends that the amyloid-clearing effect of the higher dose of aducanumab shown in EMERGE indicates the drug has clinical potential. However, others argue that amyloid clearance does not indicate clinical benefit.

Limiting Medicare coverage of aducanumab for treatment of AD means “the progression of disease, for nearly all beneficiaries, would continue unabated,” Biogen wrote in its comment to CMS.
 

Conflicting data

Supporters of the CMS plan have a different view of the trial data. They note the failure of aducanumab in the companion ENGAGE trial, while also questioning the magnitude of benefit suggested by even the most positive data cited for the drug in the EMERGE trial.

Both studies used the Clinical Dementia Rating-Sum of Boxes (CDR-SB) score, an 18-point scale measuring cognition and function.

In his comment to CMS, MedPAC chairman Michael E. Chernew, PhD, noted the change in CDR-SB score of 0.39 in EMERGE’s high-dose aducanumab group. CMS has described this as being “less than the 1-2 point change that has been suggested as a minimal clinically important difference,” Dr. Chernew wrote.

MedPAC does not normally comment on Medicare coverage decisions, but did so in this case because of its significance and because of the potential fiscal implications, he noted.

“Though there is only limited, conflicting data on Aduhelm’s clinical effectiveness, Medicare would pay a high price for the product,” Dr. Chernew wrote, pointing out the $28,200 annual U.S. price of the drug.

MedPAC thus endorsed the coverage-with-evidence-development (CED) pathway. Under this approach, Medicare would pay for these drugs when used in clinical trials that meet certain criteria.
 

Legal challenge?

In its comment to CMS, Biogen questioned the agency’s legal grounds for limiting coverage of aducanumab. A mandate on clinical trials as part of the CED proposal “runs afoul of the Administrative Procedure Act’s prohibition against arbitrary and capricious agency action,” Biogen said.

The drug company argued that its own planned follow-on studies would provide the kind of data Medicare officials want to see. It also argued for greater use of observational data, including real-world evidence, and of information from Medicare claims.

Roche’s Genentech, which is also developing antiamyloid drugs for AD, echoed some of Biogen’s concerns about the aducanumab plan.

CMS’ CED plan would be “unnecessarily restrictive and discouraging for patients living with this destructive disease,” David Burt, executive director for federal government affairs at Genentech, wrote in a comment to CMS.

CMS should clarify that the CED requirement would not apply to cases of FDA-approved antiamyloid therapies that have demonstrated “clinically meaningful improvement,” Mr. Burt added. He noted there are phase 3 trials of drugs in this class that could soon produce data.

CMS should “fully consider the broad ramifications and significant unintended consequences of prematurely placing unduly severe restrictions on the entire class of antiamyloid monoclonal antibodies,” Mr. Burt wrote.
 

Health care inequity

In its comment to CMS, Biogen also noted the Medicare proposal would “compound the already pervasive inequities in access to treatment and will ultimately prove highly detrimental to health equity.”

There are already concerns about the access of Black and Latinx patients to clinical trials. The planned CED approach would tightly restrict access to aducanumab, as well as expected follow-ons in the amyloid-directed monoclonal antibody (mAb) drug class, the company said.

“Many of the trial sites for Aduhelm, as well as for other amyloid-directed [monoclonal antibodies] are not hospital-based outpatient settings, but include infusion centers, private practices, and medical research centers,” Biogen wrote.

Patient groups such as UsAgainstAlzheimer’s told CMS the CED approach would worsen disparities, despite the aim of Medicare officials to increase participation of Black and Latinx patients in future testing.

“CMS will be hard-pressed to achieve diversity if such hospitals are the only locations where Medicare beneficiaries are able to access mAbs,” USAgainstAlzheimer’s wrote in a Feb. 10 comment.

In contrast, the nonprofit National Center for Health Research praised CMS for what it described as an effort to address a lack of representation of Black and Latinx patients in earlier aducanumab research.

However, the NCHR also suggested CMS revise its plan to mandate that clinical trials include patients who are representative of the national population diagnosed with AD.

“Rather than being concerned about the percentage of patients in specific racial and ethnic groups, we propose that CMS include sufficient numbers of patients in different racial, ethnic, and age groups to ensure that there is enough statistical power for subgroup analyses to determine safety and efficacy for each of the major demographic groups,” the NCHR wrote.
 

Patient health, Medicare at risk

On Feb. 8, a group of House Republican lawmakers asked CMS to reverse its stance. In a publicly released letter, Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers of Washington state, the ranking Republican on the House Energy and Commerce Committee, and colleagues urged broader coverage of aducanumab.

In the letter, the group emphasized the idea of aducanumab as a potential treatment for patients with Down syndrome who are at risk for AD.

“The link between Down Syndrome and AD is still being researched by scientists,” Rep. Rodgers and colleagues wrote.

“However, there appears to be a correlation between the additional 21st chromosome present in people with Down Syndrome and the chromosome’s gene that makes amyloid precursor proteins and can cause a build-up of the beta-amyloid plaques common amongst those with AD,” they add.

On the other hand, CMS garnered earlier support from influential Democrats. On Jan. 13, House Energy and Commerce Chairman Frank Pallone Jr (D-N.J.) and House Oversight and Reform Chairwoman Carolyn B. Maloney (D-N.Y.) released a letter praising CMS for its plan for covering aducanumab.

In addition to the HHS-OIG review of the FDA’s approval of the drug, the two House committees are in the midst of their own investigation of the agency’s decision to clear the drug.

“Any broader coverage determination before there is clarity on Aduhelm’s approval process and findings from the myriad ongoing investigations may put the health of millions of Alzheimer’s patients on the line and the financial stability of the nation’s health insurance program for American seniors at risk,” Rep. Pallone and Rep. Maloney wrote.

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

The CDC will soon update its COVID-19 guidance – including masking recommendations – as cases continue to drop, CDC Director Rochelle P. Walensky, MD, said on Feb. 16.

“As we consider future metrics, which will be updated soon, we recognize the importance of not just cases … but critically, medically severe disease that leads to hospitalizations,” Dr. Walensky said at a White House news briefing. “We must consider hospital capacity as an additional important barometer.”

She later added, “We are looking at an overview of much of our guidance, and masking in all settings will be a part of that.”

Coronavirus cases continue to drop nationwide. This week’s 7-day daily average of cases is 147,000, a decrease of 40%. Hospitalizations have dropped 28% to 9,500, and daily deaths are 2,200, a decrease of 9%.

“Omicron cases are declining, and we are all cautiously optimistic about the trajectory we’re on,” Dr. Walensky said. “Things are moving in the right direction, but we want to remain vigilant to do all we can so this trajectory continues.”

Dr. Walensky said public masking remains especially important if someone is symptomatic or not feeling well, or if there has been a COVID-19 exposure. Those who are within 10 days of being diagnosed with the virus should also remain masked in public.

“We all share the same goal: to get to a point where COVID-19 is no longer disrupting our daily lives. A time when it won’t be a constant crisis,” Dr. Walensky said. “Moving from this pandemic will be a process led by science and epidemiological trends, and one that relies on the powerful tools we already have.”
 

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

The CDC will soon update its COVID-19 guidance – including masking recommendations – as cases continue to drop, CDC Director Rochelle P. Walensky, MD, said on Feb. 16.

“As we consider future metrics, which will be updated soon, we recognize the importance of not just cases … but critically, medically severe disease that leads to hospitalizations,” Dr. Walensky said at a White House news briefing. “We must consider hospital capacity as an additional important barometer.”

She later added, “We are looking at an overview of much of our guidance, and masking in all settings will be a part of that.”

Coronavirus cases continue to drop nationwide. This week’s 7-day daily average of cases is 147,000, a decrease of 40%. Hospitalizations have dropped 28% to 9,500, and daily deaths are 2,200, a decrease of 9%.

“Omicron cases are declining, and we are all cautiously optimistic about the trajectory we’re on,” Dr. Walensky said. “Things are moving in the right direction, but we want to remain vigilant to do all we can so this trajectory continues.”

Dr. Walensky said public masking remains especially important if someone is symptomatic or not feeling well, or if there has been a COVID-19 exposure. Those who are within 10 days of being diagnosed with the virus should also remain masked in public.

“We all share the same goal: to get to a point where COVID-19 is no longer disrupting our daily lives. A time when it won’t be a constant crisis,” Dr. Walensky said. “Moving from this pandemic will be a process led by science and epidemiological trends, and one that relies on the powerful tools we already have.”
 

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

The CDC will soon update its COVID-19 guidance – including masking recommendations – as cases continue to drop, CDC Director Rochelle P. Walensky, MD, said on Feb. 16.

“As we consider future metrics, which will be updated soon, we recognize the importance of not just cases … but critically, medically severe disease that leads to hospitalizations,” Dr. Walensky said at a White House news briefing. “We must consider hospital capacity as an additional important barometer.”

She later added, “We are looking at an overview of much of our guidance, and masking in all settings will be a part of that.”

Coronavirus cases continue to drop nationwide. This week’s 7-day daily average of cases is 147,000, a decrease of 40%. Hospitalizations have dropped 28% to 9,500, and daily deaths are 2,200, a decrease of 9%.

“Omicron cases are declining, and we are all cautiously optimistic about the trajectory we’re on,” Dr. Walensky said. “Things are moving in the right direction, but we want to remain vigilant to do all we can so this trajectory continues.”

Dr. Walensky said public masking remains especially important if someone is symptomatic or not feeling well, or if there has been a COVID-19 exposure. Those who are within 10 days of being diagnosed with the virus should also remain masked in public.

“We all share the same goal: to get to a point where COVID-19 is no longer disrupting our daily lives. A time when it won’t be a constant crisis,” Dr. Walensky said. “Moving from this pandemic will be a process led by science and epidemiological trends, and one that relies on the powerful tools we already have.”
 

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

Junk (germs) in the trunk

It’s been a long drive, and you’ve got a long way to go. You pull into a rest stop to use the bathroom and get some food. Quick, which order do you do those things in?

If you’re not a crazy person, you’d use the bathroom and then get your food. Who would bring food into a dirty bathroom? That’s kind of gross. Most people would take care of business, grab food, then get back in the car, eating along the way. Unfortunately, if you’re searching for a sanitary eating environment, your car may not actually be much better than that bathroom, according to new research from Aston University in Birmingham, England.

Robert Couse-Baker/PxHere

Let’s start off with the good news. The steering wheels of the five used cars that were swabbed for bacteria were pretty clean. Definitely cleaner than either of the toilet seats analyzed, likely thanks to increased usage of sanitizer, courtesy of the current pandemic. It’s easy to wipe down the steering wheel. Things break down, though, once we look elsewhere. The interiors of the five cars all contained just as much, if not more, bacteria than the toilet seats, with fecal matter commonly appearing on the driver’s seat.

The car interiors were less than sanitary, but they paled in comparison with the real winner here: the trunk. In each of the five cars, bacteria levels there far exceeded those in the toilets, and included everyone’s favorites – Escherichia coli and Staphylococcus aureus.

So, snacking on a bag of chips as you drive along is probably okay, but the food that popped out of its bag and spent the last 5 minutes rolling around the back? Perhaps less okay. You may want to wash it. Or burn it. Or torch the entire car for good measure like we’re about to do. Next time we’ll buy a car without poop in it.
 

Shut the lid when you flush

Maybe you’ve never thought about this, but it’s actually extremely important to shut the toilet lid when you flush. Just think of all those germs flying around from the force of the flush. Is your toothbrush anywhere near the toilet? Ew. Those pesky little bacteria and viruses are everywhere, and we know we can’t really escape them, but we should really do our best once we’re made aware of where to find them.

Marco Verch/ccnull.de/CC by 2.0

It seems like a no-brainer these days since we’ve all been really focused on cleanliness during the pandemic, but according to a poll in the United Kingdom, 55% of the 2,000 participants said they don’t put the lid down while flushing.

The OnePoll survey commissioned by Harpic, a company that makes toilet-cleaning products, also advised that toilet water isn’t even completely clean after flushed several times and can still be contaminated with many germs. Company researchers took specialized pictures of flushing toilets and they looked like tiny little Fourth of July fireworks shows, minus the sparklers. The pictures proved that droplets can go all over the place, including on bathroom users.

“There has never been a more important time to take extra care around our homes, although the risks associated with germ spread in unhygienic bathrooms are high, the solution to keeping them clean is simple,” a Harpic researcher said. Since other studies have shown that coronavirus can be found in feces, it’s become increasingly important to keep ourselves and others safe. Fireworks are pretty, but not when they come out of your toilet.
 

The latest in MRI fashion

Do you see that photo just below? Looks like something you could buy at the Lego store, right? Well, it’s not. Nor is it the proverbial thinking cap come to life.

(Did someone just say “come to life”? That reminds us of our favorite scene from Frosty the Snowman.)

Cydney Scott/Boston University

Anywaaay, about the photo. That funny-looking chapeau is what we in the science business call a metamaterial.

Nope, metamaterials have nothing to do with Facebook parent company Meta. We checked. According to a statement from Boston University, they are engineered structures “created from small unit cells that might be unspectacular alone, but when grouped together in a precise way, get new superpowers not found in nature.”

Superpowers, eh? Who doesn’t want superpowers? Even if they come with a funny hat.

The unit cells, known as resonators, are just plastic tubes wrapped in copper wiring, but when they are grouped in an array and precisely arranged into a helmet, they can channel the magnetic field of the MRI machine during a scan. In theory, that would create “crisper images that can be captured at twice the normal speed,” Xin Zhang, PhD, and her team at BU’s Photonics Center explained in the university statement.

In the future, the metamaterial device could “be used in conjunction with cheaper low-field MRI machines to make the technology more widely available, particularly in the developing world,” they suggested. Or, like so many other superpowers, it could fall into the wrong hands. Like those of Lex Luthor. Or Mark Zuckerberg. Or Frosty the Snowman.
 

The highway of the mind

How fast can you think on your feet? Well, according to a recently published study, it could be a legitimate measure of intelligence. Here’s the science.

Epifantsev/Thinkstock

Researchers from the University of Würzburg in Germany and Indiana University have suggested that a person’s intelligence score measures the ability, based on certain neuronal networks and their communication structures, to switch between resting state and different task states.

The investigators set up a study to observe almost 800 people while they completed seven tasks. By monitoring brain activity with functional magnetic resonance imaging, the teams found that subjects who had higher intelligence scores required “less adjustment when switching between different cognitive states,” they said in a separate statement.

It comes down to the network architecture of their brains.

Kirsten Hilger, PhD, head of the German group, described it in terms of highways. The resting state of the brain is normal traffic. It’s always moving. Holiday traffic is the task. The ability to handle the increased flow of commuters is a function of the highway infrastructure. The better the infrastructure, the higher the intelligence.

So the next time you’re stuck in traffic, think how efficient your brain would be with such a task. The quicker, the better.

Junk (germs) in the trunk

It’s been a long drive, and you’ve got a long way to go. You pull into a rest stop to use the bathroom and get some food. Quick, which order do you do those things in?

If you’re not a crazy person, you’d use the bathroom and then get your food. Who would bring food into a dirty bathroom? That’s kind of gross. Most people would take care of business, grab food, then get back in the car, eating along the way. Unfortunately, if you’re searching for a sanitary eating environment, your car may not actually be much better than that bathroom, according to new research from Aston University in Birmingham, England.

Robert Couse-Baker/PxHere

Let’s start off with the good news. The steering wheels of the five used cars that were swabbed for bacteria were pretty clean. Definitely cleaner than either of the toilet seats analyzed, likely thanks to increased usage of sanitizer, courtesy of the current pandemic. It’s easy to wipe down the steering wheel. Things break down, though, once we look elsewhere. The interiors of the five cars all contained just as much, if not more, bacteria than the toilet seats, with fecal matter commonly appearing on the driver’s seat.

The car interiors were less than sanitary, but they paled in comparison with the real winner here: the trunk. In each of the five cars, bacteria levels there far exceeded those in the toilets, and included everyone’s favorites – Escherichia coli and Staphylococcus aureus.

So, snacking on a bag of chips as you drive along is probably okay, but the food that popped out of its bag and spent the last 5 minutes rolling around the back? Perhaps less okay. You may want to wash it. Or burn it. Or torch the entire car for good measure like we’re about to do. Next time we’ll buy a car without poop in it.
 

Shut the lid when you flush

Maybe you’ve never thought about this, but it’s actually extremely important to shut the toilet lid when you flush. Just think of all those germs flying around from the force of the flush. Is your toothbrush anywhere near the toilet? Ew. Those pesky little bacteria and viruses are everywhere, and we know we can’t really escape them, but we should really do our best once we’re made aware of where to find them.

Marco Verch/ccnull.de/CC by 2.0

It seems like a no-brainer these days since we’ve all been really focused on cleanliness during the pandemic, but according to a poll in the United Kingdom, 55% of the 2,000 participants said they don’t put the lid down while flushing.

The OnePoll survey commissioned by Harpic, a company that makes toilet-cleaning products, also advised that toilet water isn’t even completely clean after flushed several times and can still be contaminated with many germs. Company researchers took specialized pictures of flushing toilets and they looked like tiny little Fourth of July fireworks shows, minus the sparklers. The pictures proved that droplets can go all over the place, including on bathroom users.

“There has never been a more important time to take extra care around our homes, although the risks associated with germ spread in unhygienic bathrooms are high, the solution to keeping them clean is simple,” a Harpic researcher said. Since other studies have shown that coronavirus can be found in feces, it’s become increasingly important to keep ourselves and others safe. Fireworks are pretty, but not when they come out of your toilet.
 

The latest in MRI fashion

Do you see that photo just below? Looks like something you could buy at the Lego store, right? Well, it’s not. Nor is it the proverbial thinking cap come to life.

(Did someone just say “come to life”? That reminds us of our favorite scene from Frosty the Snowman.)

Cydney Scott/Boston University

Anywaaay, about the photo. That funny-looking chapeau is what we in the science business call a metamaterial.

Nope, metamaterials have nothing to do with Facebook parent company Meta. We checked. According to a statement from Boston University, they are engineered structures “created from small unit cells that might be unspectacular alone, but when grouped together in a precise way, get new superpowers not found in nature.”

Superpowers, eh? Who doesn’t want superpowers? Even if they come with a funny hat.

The unit cells, known as resonators, are just plastic tubes wrapped in copper wiring, but when they are grouped in an array and precisely arranged into a helmet, they can channel the magnetic field of the MRI machine during a scan. In theory, that would create “crisper images that can be captured at twice the normal speed,” Xin Zhang, PhD, and her team at BU’s Photonics Center explained in the university statement.

In the future, the metamaterial device could “be used in conjunction with cheaper low-field MRI machines to make the technology more widely available, particularly in the developing world,” they suggested. Or, like so many other superpowers, it could fall into the wrong hands. Like those of Lex Luthor. Or Mark Zuckerberg. Or Frosty the Snowman.
 

The highway of the mind

How fast can you think on your feet? Well, according to a recently published study, it could be a legitimate measure of intelligence. Here’s the science.

Epifantsev/Thinkstock

Researchers from the University of Würzburg in Germany and Indiana University have suggested that a person’s intelligence score measures the ability, based on certain neuronal networks and their communication structures, to switch between resting state and different task states.

The investigators set up a study to observe almost 800 people while they completed seven tasks. By monitoring brain activity with functional magnetic resonance imaging, the teams found that subjects who had higher intelligence scores required “less adjustment when switching between different cognitive states,” they said in a separate statement.

It comes down to the network architecture of their brains.

Kirsten Hilger, PhD, head of the German group, described it in terms of highways. The resting state of the brain is normal traffic. It’s always moving. Holiday traffic is the task. The ability to handle the increased flow of commuters is a function of the highway infrastructure. The better the infrastructure, the higher the intelligence.

So the next time you’re stuck in traffic, think how efficient your brain would be with such a task. The quicker, the better.

Junk (germs) in the trunk

It’s been a long drive, and you’ve got a long way to go. You pull into a rest stop to use the bathroom and get some food. Quick, which order do you do those things in?

If you’re not a crazy person, you’d use the bathroom and then get your food. Who would bring food into a dirty bathroom? That’s kind of gross. Most people would take care of business, grab food, then get back in the car, eating along the way. Unfortunately, if you’re searching for a sanitary eating environment, your car may not actually be much better than that bathroom, according to new research from Aston University in Birmingham, England.

Robert Couse-Baker/PxHere

Let’s start off with the good news. The steering wheels of the five used cars that were swabbed for bacteria were pretty clean. Definitely cleaner than either of the toilet seats analyzed, likely thanks to increased usage of sanitizer, courtesy of the current pandemic. It’s easy to wipe down the steering wheel. Things break down, though, once we look elsewhere. The interiors of the five cars all contained just as much, if not more, bacteria than the toilet seats, with fecal matter commonly appearing on the driver’s seat.

The car interiors were less than sanitary, but they paled in comparison with the real winner here: the trunk. In each of the five cars, bacteria levels there far exceeded those in the toilets, and included everyone’s favorites – Escherichia coli and Staphylococcus aureus.

So, snacking on a bag of chips as you drive along is probably okay, but the food that popped out of its bag and spent the last 5 minutes rolling around the back? Perhaps less okay. You may want to wash it. Or burn it. Or torch the entire car for good measure like we’re about to do. Next time we’ll buy a car without poop in it.
 

Shut the lid when you flush

Maybe you’ve never thought about this, but it’s actually extremely important to shut the toilet lid when you flush. Just think of all those germs flying around from the force of the flush. Is your toothbrush anywhere near the toilet? Ew. Those pesky little bacteria and viruses are everywhere, and we know we can’t really escape them, but we should really do our best once we’re made aware of where to find them.

Marco Verch/ccnull.de/CC by 2.0

It seems like a no-brainer these days since we’ve all been really focused on cleanliness during the pandemic, but according to a poll in the United Kingdom, 55% of the 2,000 participants said they don’t put the lid down while flushing.

The OnePoll survey commissioned by Harpic, a company that makes toilet-cleaning products, also advised that toilet water isn’t even completely clean after flushed several times and can still be contaminated with many germs. Company researchers took specialized pictures of flushing toilets and they looked like tiny little Fourth of July fireworks shows, minus the sparklers. The pictures proved that droplets can go all over the place, including on bathroom users.

“There has never been a more important time to take extra care around our homes, although the risks associated with germ spread in unhygienic bathrooms are high, the solution to keeping them clean is simple,” a Harpic researcher said. Since other studies have shown that coronavirus can be found in feces, it’s become increasingly important to keep ourselves and others safe. Fireworks are pretty, but not when they come out of your toilet.
 

The latest in MRI fashion

Do you see that photo just below? Looks like something you could buy at the Lego store, right? Well, it’s not. Nor is it the proverbial thinking cap come to life.

(Did someone just say “come to life”? That reminds us of our favorite scene from Frosty the Snowman.)

Cydney Scott/Boston University

Anywaaay, about the photo. That funny-looking chapeau is what we in the science business call a metamaterial.

Nope, metamaterials have nothing to do with Facebook parent company Meta. We checked. According to a statement from Boston University, they are engineered structures “created from small unit cells that might be unspectacular alone, but when grouped together in a precise way, get new superpowers not found in nature.”

Superpowers, eh? Who doesn’t want superpowers? Even if they come with a funny hat.

The unit cells, known as resonators, are just plastic tubes wrapped in copper wiring, but when they are grouped in an array and precisely arranged into a helmet, they can channel the magnetic field of the MRI machine during a scan. In theory, that would create “crisper images that can be captured at twice the normal speed,” Xin Zhang, PhD, and her team at BU’s Photonics Center explained in the university statement.

In the future, the metamaterial device could “be used in conjunction with cheaper low-field MRI machines to make the technology more widely available, particularly in the developing world,” they suggested. Or, like so many other superpowers, it could fall into the wrong hands. Like those of Lex Luthor. Or Mark Zuckerberg. Or Frosty the Snowman.
 

The highway of the mind

How fast can you think on your feet? Well, according to a recently published study, it could be a legitimate measure of intelligence. Here’s the science.

Epifantsev/Thinkstock

Researchers from the University of Würzburg in Germany and Indiana University have suggested that a person’s intelligence score measures the ability, based on certain neuronal networks and their communication structures, to switch between resting state and different task states.

The investigators set up a study to observe almost 800 people while they completed seven tasks. By monitoring brain activity with functional magnetic resonance imaging, the teams found that subjects who had higher intelligence scores required “less adjustment when switching between different cognitive states,” they said in a separate statement.

It comes down to the network architecture of their brains.

Kirsten Hilger, PhD, head of the German group, described it in terms of highways. The resting state of the brain is normal traffic. It’s always moving. Holiday traffic is the task. The ability to handle the increased flow of commuters is a function of the highway infrastructure. The better the infrastructure, the higher the intelligence.

So the next time you’re stuck in traffic, think how efficient your brain would be with such a task. The quicker, the better.

Engaging with a “chatbot,” a computer program that simulates human conversation, helps prevent eating disorders (EDs) in at-risk individuals, new research suggests.

Results of a randomized trial show that at-risk women who interacted with the chatbot showed lower concern about their weight and body shape compared to a wait-list control group.

“Chatbots are widely used in industry and have begun to be used in medical settings, although few studies have examined their effectiveness for mental health issues and none address EDs or ED prevention,” senior investigator C. Barr Taylor, MD, a research faculty member at Palo Alto (Calif.) University, said in a press release.

“We found that the group with access to the chatbot had a greater reduction in weight and shape concerns, both right after using it at 3 months and at the 6-month follow-up. The effects had sustainability over time, and we also found indication that the chatbot may reduce ED onset more so than the control group, where there was a greater incidence of EDs,” Dr. Taylor told this news organization.

The study was published online Dec. 28, 2021, in the International Journal of Eating Disorders.
 

Deadly disorders

“EDs are a common problem with huge risk factors; and, given how widespread they are, we need scalable tools that can reach a lot of people at low cost, reduce risk factors for developing an ED – which is the second most deadly of all psychiatric illnesses – so prevention is of the utmost importance,” Dr. Taylor said.

The investigators developed a targeted Internet-based preventive program called StudentBodies that utilizes cognitive-behavioral therapy approaches. The program was successful in reducing weight/shape concerns in women at high risk for the onset of an ED, and it reduced ED onset in the highest-risk women.

However, it required trained moderators who spent over 45 minutes with participants. Given the large number of people at risk for an ED who might benefit, the researchers noted that it is unlikely that a human-moderated version would be widely disseminated.

A chatbot may represent a “possible solution to reducing delivery costs” because it mimics aspects of human moderation in simulating conversations, the investigators noted.

“We wanted to take the earlier program we developed into this century and program it for delivery in this new format that would allow for bite-size pieces of information for the chatbot to communicate to the user,” lead author Ellen Fitzsimmons-Craft, PhD, assistant professor of psychiatry, Washington University, St. Louis, told this news organization.

“Our ED prevention online version was more effective when there was guidance from a human moderator who could provide feedback on progress, encourage you to go on, and apply the skills in daily life. But that’s not the most scalable. So we thought that a chatbot, in addition to providing content in this perhaps more engaging format, could also provide some aspect of human moderation, although the person is chatting with a robot,” added Dr. Fitzsimmons-Craft, associate director of the Center for Healthy Weight and Wellness.
 

Tessa will speak to you now

Participants (n = 700 women; mean [SD] age, 21.08 [3.09] years; 84.6% White; 53.8% heterosexual; 31.08% bisexual), were randomized to an intervention group or a wait-list control group (n = 352 and 348, respectively). There were no significant differences between groups in age, race, ethnicity, education, or sexual orientation.

The StudentBodies program was adapted for delivery via a chatbot named Tessa “while retaining the core intervention principles” and referred to as “Body Positive.”

It consisted of several components programmed into the chatbot, which initiated each conversation in a predetermined order. Participants were encouraged to engage in two conversations weekly. The program included an introduction and eight sessions as well as a crisis module that provided users with a referral to a crisis hotline in case of emergency. Referral was triggered on the basis of “recognized keywords,” such as “hurting myself.”

The researchers used the Weight Concerns Scale questionnaire to assess weight and shape concerns and the Internalization: Thin/Low Body Fat subscale of the Sociocultural Attitudes Toward Appearance Questionnaire–4 to “assess the cognitive aspect of thin-ideal internalization.”

Secondary outcomes tested the hypothesis that the chatbot would be more likely to reduce clinical outcomes (ED psychopathology, depression, and anxiety) and prevent ED onset, compared to the control condition.
 

Ready for prime time

At 3- and 6-month follow-up, there was significantly greater reduction in the intervention group compared with the control group in weight/shape concerns (d = -.20, P = .03 and d = -.19, P = .04, respectively), although there were no differences in thin-ideal internalization change.

The chatbot intervention was associated with significantly greater reductions in overall ED psychopathology at 3 months (d = -.29, P = .003) compared to the control condition, but not at 6 months.

Notably, the intervention group had significantly higher odds than the control group of remaining nonclinical for EDs at 3- and 6-month follow-up (OR, 2.37 [95% confidence interval, 1.37-4.11] and OR, 2.13 [95% CI,1.26-3.59], respectively).

“We were very excited about the study, and frankly, I was surprised by the effectiveness [of the chatbot intervention] because I didn’t think it would have as much of an impact as it did,” said Dr. Taylor. “Prevention gets short shrift everywhere, and I think we succeeded very well.”

Dr. Fitzsimmons-Craft added that the National Eating Disorders Association (NEDA) has agreed to make the chatbot available on its website for people who screen positive for having an ED or for being at high risk, and so their group is working with their industry partner, a company called X2AI, which developed the chatbot, to make this happen.

“This is definitely the fastest research-to-practice translation I’ve ever seen, where we can so quickly show that it works and make it available to tens of thousands almost immediately.”

Dr. Fitzsimmons-Craft is optimistic that it will be available to launch the week of Feb. 21, which is National Eating Disorders Week.
 

Innovative, creative research

Commenting on the research, Evelyn Attia, MD, professor of psychiatry, Columbia University Medical Center, and director of the Columbia Center for Eating Disorders New York–Presbyterian Hospital, New York, described the study as “innovative and creative.”

New York-Presbyterian Hospital

Dr. Attia, a member of the Research Advisory Council of the NEDA, noted that the structure of the study is “very preliminary” and that the comparison to a wait-list control makes it hard to know whether this is an effective intervention compared with other types of interventions, rather than compared with no intervention.

“But I’m sure that when the researchers are set up and primed to study this more robustly, they will consider a more active control intervention to see whether this preliminary finding holds up,” she said.

Also commenting on the study, Deborah R. Glasofer, PhD, associate professor of clinical medical psychology (in psychiatry), Columbia Center for Eating Disorders, said, “Higher-than-average concern about appearance – body shape, size, or weight – and a tightly held belief that it is ideal to be thin are known risk factors for the development of an eating disorder.

“This study offers an indication that technology can be leveraged to fill a gap and help folks before unhelpful and sometimes misguided thoughts about food, eating, and appearance evolve into a full-blown eating disorder,” said Dr. Glasofer, who was not involved with the study.

The study was supported by the NEDA Feeding Hope Fund, the National Institute of Mental Health, the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, and the Swedish Research Council. The authors and Dr. Glasofer have disclosed no relevant financial relationships. Dr. Attia is on the board and the Research Advisory Council of NEDA.

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

Engaging with a “chatbot,” a computer program that simulates human conversation, helps prevent eating disorders (EDs) in at-risk individuals, new research suggests.

Results of a randomized trial show that at-risk women who interacted with the chatbot showed lower concern about their weight and body shape compared to a wait-list control group.

“Chatbots are widely used in industry and have begun to be used in medical settings, although few studies have examined their effectiveness for mental health issues and none address EDs or ED prevention,” senior investigator C. Barr Taylor, MD, a research faculty member at Palo Alto (Calif.) University, said in a press release.

“We found that the group with access to the chatbot had a greater reduction in weight and shape concerns, both right after using it at 3 months and at the 6-month follow-up. The effects had sustainability over time, and we also found indication that the chatbot may reduce ED onset more so than the control group, where there was a greater incidence of EDs,” Dr. Taylor told this news organization.

The study was published online Dec. 28, 2021, in the International Journal of Eating Disorders.
 

Deadly disorders

“EDs are a common problem with huge risk factors; and, given how widespread they are, we need scalable tools that can reach a lot of people at low cost, reduce risk factors for developing an ED – which is the second most deadly of all psychiatric illnesses – so prevention is of the utmost importance,” Dr. Taylor said.

The investigators developed a targeted Internet-based preventive program called StudentBodies that utilizes cognitive-behavioral therapy approaches. The program was successful in reducing weight/shape concerns in women at high risk for the onset of an ED, and it reduced ED onset in the highest-risk women.

However, it required trained moderators who spent over 45 minutes with participants. Given the large number of people at risk for an ED who might benefit, the researchers noted that it is unlikely that a human-moderated version would be widely disseminated.

A chatbot may represent a “possible solution to reducing delivery costs” because it mimics aspects of human moderation in simulating conversations, the investigators noted.

“We wanted to take the earlier program we developed into this century and program it for delivery in this new format that would allow for bite-size pieces of information for the chatbot to communicate to the user,” lead author Ellen Fitzsimmons-Craft, PhD, assistant professor of psychiatry, Washington University, St. Louis, told this news organization.

“Our ED prevention online version was more effective when there was guidance from a human moderator who could provide feedback on progress, encourage you to go on, and apply the skills in daily life. But that’s not the most scalable. So we thought that a chatbot, in addition to providing content in this perhaps more engaging format, could also provide some aspect of human moderation, although the person is chatting with a robot,” added Dr. Fitzsimmons-Craft, associate director of the Center for Healthy Weight and Wellness.
 

Tessa will speak to you now

Participants (n = 700 women; mean [SD] age, 21.08 [3.09] years; 84.6% White; 53.8% heterosexual; 31.08% bisexual), were randomized to an intervention group or a wait-list control group (n = 352 and 348, respectively). There were no significant differences between groups in age, race, ethnicity, education, or sexual orientation.

The StudentBodies program was adapted for delivery via a chatbot named Tessa “while retaining the core intervention principles” and referred to as “Body Positive.”

It consisted of several components programmed into the chatbot, which initiated each conversation in a predetermined order. Participants were encouraged to engage in two conversations weekly. The program included an introduction and eight sessions as well as a crisis module that provided users with a referral to a crisis hotline in case of emergency. Referral was triggered on the basis of “recognized keywords,” such as “hurting myself.”

The researchers used the Weight Concerns Scale questionnaire to assess weight and shape concerns and the Internalization: Thin/Low Body Fat subscale of the Sociocultural Attitudes Toward Appearance Questionnaire–4 to “assess the cognitive aspect of thin-ideal internalization.”

Secondary outcomes tested the hypothesis that the chatbot would be more likely to reduce clinical outcomes (ED psychopathology, depression, and anxiety) and prevent ED onset, compared to the control condition.
 

Ready for prime time

At 3- and 6-month follow-up, there was significantly greater reduction in the intervention group compared with the control group in weight/shape concerns (d = -.20, P = .03 and d = -.19, P = .04, respectively), although there were no differences in thin-ideal internalization change.

The chatbot intervention was associated with significantly greater reductions in overall ED psychopathology at 3 months (d = -.29, P = .003) compared to the control condition, but not at 6 months.

Notably, the intervention group had significantly higher odds than the control group of remaining nonclinical for EDs at 3- and 6-month follow-up (OR, 2.37 [95% confidence interval, 1.37-4.11] and OR, 2.13 [95% CI,1.26-3.59], respectively).

“We were very excited about the study, and frankly, I was surprised by the effectiveness [of the chatbot intervention] because I didn’t think it would have as much of an impact as it did,” said Dr. Taylor. “Prevention gets short shrift everywhere, and I think we succeeded very well.”

Dr. Fitzsimmons-Craft added that the National Eating Disorders Association (NEDA) has agreed to make the chatbot available on its website for people who screen positive for having an ED or for being at high risk, and so their group is working with their industry partner, a company called X2AI, which developed the chatbot, to make this happen.

“This is definitely the fastest research-to-practice translation I’ve ever seen, where we can so quickly show that it works and make it available to tens of thousands almost immediately.”

Dr. Fitzsimmons-Craft is optimistic that it will be available to launch the week of Feb. 21, which is National Eating Disorders Week.
 

Innovative, creative research

Commenting on the research, Evelyn Attia, MD, professor of psychiatry, Columbia University Medical Center, and director of the Columbia Center for Eating Disorders New York–Presbyterian Hospital, New York, described the study as “innovative and creative.”

New York-Presbyterian Hospital

Dr. Attia, a member of the Research Advisory Council of the NEDA, noted that the structure of the study is “very preliminary” and that the comparison to a wait-list control makes it hard to know whether this is an effective intervention compared with other types of interventions, rather than compared with no intervention.

“But I’m sure that when the researchers are set up and primed to study this more robustly, they will consider a more active control intervention to see whether this preliminary finding holds up,” she said.

Also commenting on the study, Deborah R. Glasofer, PhD, associate professor of clinical medical psychology (in psychiatry), Columbia Center for Eating Disorders, said, “Higher-than-average concern about appearance – body shape, size, or weight – and a tightly held belief that it is ideal to be thin are known risk factors for the development of an eating disorder.

“This study offers an indication that technology can be leveraged to fill a gap and help folks before unhelpful and sometimes misguided thoughts about food, eating, and appearance evolve into a full-blown eating disorder,” said Dr. Glasofer, who was not involved with the study.

The study was supported by the NEDA Feeding Hope Fund, the National Institute of Mental Health, the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, and the Swedish Research Council. The authors and Dr. Glasofer have disclosed no relevant financial relationships. Dr. Attia is on the board and the Research Advisory Council of NEDA.

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

Engaging with a “chatbot,” a computer program that simulates human conversation, helps prevent eating disorders (EDs) in at-risk individuals, new research suggests.

Results of a randomized trial show that at-risk women who interacted with the chatbot showed lower concern about their weight and body shape compared to a wait-list control group.

“Chatbots are widely used in industry and have begun to be used in medical settings, although few studies have examined their effectiveness for mental health issues and none address EDs or ED prevention,” senior investigator C. Barr Taylor, MD, a research faculty member at Palo Alto (Calif.) University, said in a press release.

“We found that the group with access to the chatbot had a greater reduction in weight and shape concerns, both right after using it at 3 months and at the 6-month follow-up. The effects had sustainability over time, and we also found indication that the chatbot may reduce ED onset more so than the control group, where there was a greater incidence of EDs,” Dr. Taylor told this news organization.

The study was published online Dec. 28, 2021, in the International Journal of Eating Disorders.
 

Deadly disorders

“EDs are a common problem with huge risk factors; and, given how widespread they are, we need scalable tools that can reach a lot of people at low cost, reduce risk factors for developing an ED – which is the second most deadly of all psychiatric illnesses – so prevention is of the utmost importance,” Dr. Taylor said.

The investigators developed a targeted Internet-based preventive program called StudentBodies that utilizes cognitive-behavioral therapy approaches. The program was successful in reducing weight/shape concerns in women at high risk for the onset of an ED, and it reduced ED onset in the highest-risk women.

However, it required trained moderators who spent over 45 minutes with participants. Given the large number of people at risk for an ED who might benefit, the researchers noted that it is unlikely that a human-moderated version would be widely disseminated.

A chatbot may represent a “possible solution to reducing delivery costs” because it mimics aspects of human moderation in simulating conversations, the investigators noted.

“We wanted to take the earlier program we developed into this century and program it for delivery in this new format that would allow for bite-size pieces of information for the chatbot to communicate to the user,” lead author Ellen Fitzsimmons-Craft, PhD, assistant professor of psychiatry, Washington University, St. Louis, told this news organization.

“Our ED prevention online version was more effective when there was guidance from a human moderator who could provide feedback on progress, encourage you to go on, and apply the skills in daily life. But that’s not the most scalable. So we thought that a chatbot, in addition to providing content in this perhaps more engaging format, could also provide some aspect of human moderation, although the person is chatting with a robot,” added Dr. Fitzsimmons-Craft, associate director of the Center for Healthy Weight and Wellness.
 

Tessa will speak to you now

Participants (n = 700 women; mean [SD] age, 21.08 [3.09] years; 84.6% White; 53.8% heterosexual; 31.08% bisexual), were randomized to an intervention group or a wait-list control group (n = 352 and 348, respectively). There were no significant differences between groups in age, race, ethnicity, education, or sexual orientation.

The StudentBodies program was adapted for delivery via a chatbot named Tessa “while retaining the core intervention principles” and referred to as “Body Positive.”

It consisted of several components programmed into the chatbot, which initiated each conversation in a predetermined order. Participants were encouraged to engage in two conversations weekly. The program included an introduction and eight sessions as well as a crisis module that provided users with a referral to a crisis hotline in case of emergency. Referral was triggered on the basis of “recognized keywords,” such as “hurting myself.”

The researchers used the Weight Concerns Scale questionnaire to assess weight and shape concerns and the Internalization: Thin/Low Body Fat subscale of the Sociocultural Attitudes Toward Appearance Questionnaire–4 to “assess the cognitive aspect of thin-ideal internalization.”

Secondary outcomes tested the hypothesis that the chatbot would be more likely to reduce clinical outcomes (ED psychopathology, depression, and anxiety) and prevent ED onset, compared to the control condition.
 

Ready for prime time

At 3- and 6-month follow-up, there was significantly greater reduction in the intervention group compared with the control group in weight/shape concerns (d = -.20, P = .03 and d = -.19, P = .04, respectively), although there were no differences in thin-ideal internalization change.

The chatbot intervention was associated with significantly greater reductions in overall ED psychopathology at 3 months (d = -.29, P = .003) compared to the control condition, but not at 6 months.

Notably, the intervention group had significantly higher odds than the control group of remaining nonclinical for EDs at 3- and 6-month follow-up (OR, 2.37 [95% confidence interval, 1.37-4.11] and OR, 2.13 [95% CI,1.26-3.59], respectively).

“We were very excited about the study, and frankly, I was surprised by the effectiveness [of the chatbot intervention] because I didn’t think it would have as much of an impact as it did,” said Dr. Taylor. “Prevention gets short shrift everywhere, and I think we succeeded very well.”

Dr. Fitzsimmons-Craft added that the National Eating Disorders Association (NEDA) has agreed to make the chatbot available on its website for people who screen positive for having an ED or for being at high risk, and so their group is working with their industry partner, a company called X2AI, which developed the chatbot, to make this happen.

“This is definitely the fastest research-to-practice translation I’ve ever seen, where we can so quickly show that it works and make it available to tens of thousands almost immediately.”

Dr. Fitzsimmons-Craft is optimistic that it will be available to launch the week of Feb. 21, which is National Eating Disorders Week.
 

Innovative, creative research

Commenting on the research, Evelyn Attia, MD, professor of psychiatry, Columbia University Medical Center, and director of the Columbia Center for Eating Disorders New York–Presbyterian Hospital, New York, described the study as “innovative and creative.”

New York-Presbyterian Hospital

Dr. Attia, a member of the Research Advisory Council of the NEDA, noted that the structure of the study is “very preliminary” and that the comparison to a wait-list control makes it hard to know whether this is an effective intervention compared with other types of interventions, rather than compared with no intervention.

“But I’m sure that when the researchers are set up and primed to study this more robustly, they will consider a more active control intervention to see whether this preliminary finding holds up,” she said.

Also commenting on the study, Deborah R. Glasofer, PhD, associate professor of clinical medical psychology (in psychiatry), Columbia Center for Eating Disorders, said, “Higher-than-average concern about appearance – body shape, size, or weight – and a tightly held belief that it is ideal to be thin are known risk factors for the development of an eating disorder.

“This study offers an indication that technology can be leveraged to fill a gap and help folks before unhelpful and sometimes misguided thoughts about food, eating, and appearance evolve into a full-blown eating disorder,” said Dr. Glasofer, who was not involved with the study.

The study was supported by the NEDA Feeding Hope Fund, the National Institute of Mental Health, the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, and the Swedish Research Council. The authors and Dr. Glasofer have disclosed no relevant financial relationships. Dr. Attia is on the board and the Research Advisory Council of NEDA.

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

In clinical management of depression, combining a reuptake inhibitor with presynaptic alpha2-autoreceptors significantly improves treatment outcomes, compared with monotherapy, a meta-analysis found. Clinicians should consider this approach as a viable first-line treatment for severe depression and for nonresponders, a team of German researchers concluded.

The findings were published online Feb. 16 in JAMA Psychiatry.

Combining antidepressants is often the next step if a patient with acute depression fails to respond to a monotherapy. In a previous meta-analysis, first author Jonathan Henssler, MD, and colleagues reported on the merits of combining monoamine reuptake inhibitors (selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor, serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor [SNRI], or tricyclic antidepressant) and antagonists of presynaptic alpha2-autoreceptors (mianserin, mirtazapine, trazodone).

Studies that followed yielded mixed results. One randomized controlled trial (RCT) showed signs of substantial superiority when antidepressants were combined; another report from Japan only demonstrated a modest effect, said Christopher Baethge, MD, senior author of the meta-analysis, in an interview. Another recent trial showed better efficacy with monotherapy.

“In our view, this diverse field of trials suggested a reassessment. Specifically, we wanted to find out whether certain combinations are effective whereas others are not,” said Dr. Baethge, a professor of psychiatry at the University of Cologne (Germany).

Combing through Embase, PsycINFO, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, the investigators selected RCTs that compared combinations versus monotherapy antidepressants in adult patients with acute depression. The meta-analysis did not include studies on bipolar depression or maintenance therapy. It also didn’t include comorbid medical conditions and concomitant diagnoses of other psychiatric disorders as exclusion criteria.

Separate investigations of combinations using presynaptic alpha2-autoreceptor antagonists or bupropion also took place.

Treatment efficacy measured as standardized mean difference (SMD) between combination and monotherapy was the primary outcome. Other outcomes included the percent of patients in remission after either treatment course or the percentage of patients stopping drug therapy.
 

Combination treatments yield better outcomes

Among 39 trials and 6,751 patients included in the analysis, 38 of the trials provided data on the primary outcome.

Combination treatments yielded more superior outcomes, compared with monotherapy (SMD, 0.31; 95% confidence interval, 0.19-0.44). Greater efficacy in the combination approach was indicated in 82% of the studies. This finding also held up when the analysis was restricted to low risk of bias trials, applied as a first-line treatment, and among nonresponders.
 

Potential advantages of presynaptic alpha2-autoreceptors

In the separate analysis, presynaptic alpha2-autoreceptors did a better job than monotherapy as a first-line treatment and when applied to nonresponder populations. In comparison, bupropion combinations did not outperform monotherapy.

It’s possible that in combinations, “alpha2-autoreceptors effectively counteract, through sedation, the restlessness and  agitation that many patients find troublesome when taking monoamine-reuptake inhibitors. Similarly, they may help against sexual dysfunction associated with reuptake inhibitors,” Dr. Baethge suggested.

Presynaptic alpha2-autoreceptors might also boost monoaminergic neurotransmission “by interrupting the inhibition feedback loop initiated when reuptake inhibitors increase neurotransmitter concentrations in the synaptic cleft,” he added.

Whether or not bupropion combinations help patients with treatment-resistant depression is inconclusive, noted Dr. Baethge. “More studies will likely help us get a clearer picture. So far, we can only say that we have not enough evidence to positively recommend bupropion combinations to that group of patients.”

Combining treatments did not yield more dropouts or adverse events than monotherapy. “It may thus be a safe treatment alternative when compared with other second-step strategies in treatment-resistant depression, such as augmenting monotherapy with lithium or atypical psychotic,” the investigators concluded.

Looking at this study’s limitations, the multiple clinical trials examined in a meta-analysis often have different designs, definitions of response and control groups, and use different rating scales, noted Henry A. Nasrallah, MD, professor of psychiatry, neurology, and neuroscience at the University of Cincinnati, who was not involved in the study.

Some publication bias was found but overall the results kept their integrity across secondary outcomes and subgroup and sensitivity analyses.
 

Guidance for choosing more effective therapies

The hope is these results will help clinicians choose more promising combinations, such as presynaptic alpha2-autoreceptor antagonists with SSRIs or SNRIs, as opposed to combinations that are less helpful or haven’t gone through an RCT, said Dr. Baethge.

The findings on tolerability may also encourage some clinicians to consider these combinations, especially if they’ve favored less evidence-based approaches such as switching drugs or increasing the dose, he said.

Polypharmacy is often viewed as undesirable or leading to more side effects, noted Dr. Nasrallah. However, “the combination of a reuptake inhibitor plus an alpha2–presynaptic receptor antagonist like mirtazapine, can actually improve tolerability compared to monotherapy antidepressant because their mechanisms of action offset the side effects while increasing efficacy,” he said.

“Finally, although sedation is a side effect of both mirtazapine and trazodone, that can be helpful for patients with difficulty falling asleep, which is common in major depression,” added Dr. Nasrallah.

Dr. Baethge and Dr. Nasrallah had no disclosures. Dr. Henssler received a research grant from the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research.

In clinical management of depression, combining a reuptake inhibitor with presynaptic alpha2-autoreceptors significantly improves treatment outcomes, compared with monotherapy, a meta-analysis found. Clinicians should consider this approach as a viable first-line treatment for severe depression and for nonresponders, a team of German researchers concluded.

The findings were published online Feb. 16 in JAMA Psychiatry.

Combining antidepressants is often the next step if a patient with acute depression fails to respond to a monotherapy. In a previous meta-analysis, first author Jonathan Henssler, MD, and colleagues reported on the merits of combining monoamine reuptake inhibitors (selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor, serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor [SNRI], or tricyclic antidepressant) and antagonists of presynaptic alpha2-autoreceptors (mianserin, mirtazapine, trazodone).

Studies that followed yielded mixed results. One randomized controlled trial (RCT) showed signs of substantial superiority when antidepressants were combined; another report from Japan only demonstrated a modest effect, said Christopher Baethge, MD, senior author of the meta-analysis, in an interview. Another recent trial showed better efficacy with monotherapy.

“In our view, this diverse field of trials suggested a reassessment. Specifically, we wanted to find out whether certain combinations are effective whereas others are not,” said Dr. Baethge, a professor of psychiatry at the University of Cologne (Germany).

Combing through Embase, PsycINFO, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, the investigators selected RCTs that compared combinations versus monotherapy antidepressants in adult patients with acute depression. The meta-analysis did not include studies on bipolar depression or maintenance therapy. It also didn’t include comorbid medical conditions and concomitant diagnoses of other psychiatric disorders as exclusion criteria.

Separate investigations of combinations using presynaptic alpha2-autoreceptor antagonists or bupropion also took place.

Treatment efficacy measured as standardized mean difference (SMD) between combination and monotherapy was the primary outcome. Other outcomes included the percent of patients in remission after either treatment course or the percentage of patients stopping drug therapy.
 

Combination treatments yield better outcomes

Among 39 trials and 6,751 patients included in the analysis, 38 of the trials provided data on the primary outcome.

Combination treatments yielded more superior outcomes, compared with monotherapy (SMD, 0.31; 95% confidence interval, 0.19-0.44). Greater efficacy in the combination approach was indicated in 82% of the studies. This finding also held up when the analysis was restricted to low risk of bias trials, applied as a first-line treatment, and among nonresponders.
 

Potential advantages of presynaptic alpha2-autoreceptors

In the separate analysis, presynaptic alpha2-autoreceptors did a better job than monotherapy as a first-line treatment and when applied to nonresponder populations. In comparison, bupropion combinations did not outperform monotherapy.

It’s possible that in combinations, “alpha2-autoreceptors effectively counteract, through sedation, the restlessness and  agitation that many patients find troublesome when taking monoamine-reuptake inhibitors. Similarly, they may help against sexual dysfunction associated with reuptake inhibitors,” Dr. Baethge suggested.

Presynaptic alpha2-autoreceptors might also boost monoaminergic neurotransmission “by interrupting the inhibition feedback loop initiated when reuptake inhibitors increase neurotransmitter concentrations in the synaptic cleft,” he added.

Whether or not bupropion combinations help patients with treatment-resistant depression is inconclusive, noted Dr. Baethge. “More studies will likely help us get a clearer picture. So far, we can only say that we have not enough evidence to positively recommend bupropion combinations to that group of patients.”

Combining treatments did not yield more dropouts or adverse events than monotherapy. “It may thus be a safe treatment alternative when compared with other second-step strategies in treatment-resistant depression, such as augmenting monotherapy with lithium or atypical psychotic,” the investigators concluded.

Looking at this study’s limitations, the multiple clinical trials examined in a meta-analysis often have different designs, definitions of response and control groups, and use different rating scales, noted Henry A. Nasrallah, MD, professor of psychiatry, neurology, and neuroscience at the University of Cincinnati, who was not involved in the study.

Some publication bias was found but overall the results kept their integrity across secondary outcomes and subgroup and sensitivity analyses.
 

Guidance for choosing more effective therapies

The hope is these results will help clinicians choose more promising combinations, such as presynaptic alpha2-autoreceptor antagonists with SSRIs or SNRIs, as opposed to combinations that are less helpful or haven’t gone through an RCT, said Dr. Baethge.

The findings on tolerability may also encourage some clinicians to consider these combinations, especially if they’ve favored less evidence-based approaches such as switching drugs or increasing the dose, he said.

Polypharmacy is often viewed as undesirable or leading to more side effects, noted Dr. Nasrallah. However, “the combination of a reuptake inhibitor plus an alpha2–presynaptic receptor antagonist like mirtazapine, can actually improve tolerability compared to monotherapy antidepressant because their mechanisms of action offset the side effects while increasing efficacy,” he said.

“Finally, although sedation is a side effect of both mirtazapine and trazodone, that can be helpful for patients with difficulty falling asleep, which is common in major depression,” added Dr. Nasrallah.

Dr. Baethge and Dr. Nasrallah had no disclosures. Dr. Henssler received a research grant from the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research.

In clinical management of depression, combining a reuptake inhibitor with presynaptic alpha2-autoreceptors significantly improves treatment outcomes, compared with monotherapy, a meta-analysis found. Clinicians should consider this approach as a viable first-line treatment for severe depression and for nonresponders, a team of German researchers concluded.

The findings were published online Feb. 16 in JAMA Psychiatry.

Combining antidepressants is often the next step if a patient with acute depression fails to respond to a monotherapy. In a previous meta-analysis, first author Jonathan Henssler, MD, and colleagues reported on the merits of combining monoamine reuptake inhibitors (selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor, serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor [SNRI], or tricyclic antidepressant) and antagonists of presynaptic alpha2-autoreceptors (mianserin, mirtazapine, trazodone).

Studies that followed yielded mixed results. One randomized controlled trial (RCT) showed signs of substantial superiority when antidepressants were combined; another report from Japan only demonstrated a modest effect, said Christopher Baethge, MD, senior author of the meta-analysis, in an interview. Another recent trial showed better efficacy with monotherapy.

“In our view, this diverse field of trials suggested a reassessment. Specifically, we wanted to find out whether certain combinations are effective whereas others are not,” said Dr. Baethge, a professor of psychiatry at the University of Cologne (Germany).

Combing through Embase, PsycINFO, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, the investigators selected RCTs that compared combinations versus monotherapy antidepressants in adult patients with acute depression. The meta-analysis did not include studies on bipolar depression or maintenance therapy. It also didn’t include comorbid medical conditions and concomitant diagnoses of other psychiatric disorders as exclusion criteria.

Separate investigations of combinations using presynaptic alpha2-autoreceptor antagonists or bupropion also took place.

Treatment efficacy measured as standardized mean difference (SMD) between combination and monotherapy was the primary outcome. Other outcomes included the percent of patients in remission after either treatment course or the percentage of patients stopping drug therapy.
 

Combination treatments yield better outcomes

Among 39 trials and 6,751 patients included in the analysis, 38 of the trials provided data on the primary outcome.

Combination treatments yielded more superior outcomes, compared with monotherapy (SMD, 0.31; 95% confidence interval, 0.19-0.44). Greater efficacy in the combination approach was indicated in 82% of the studies. This finding also held up when the analysis was restricted to low risk of bias trials, applied as a first-line treatment, and among nonresponders.
 

Potential advantages of presynaptic alpha2-autoreceptors

In the separate analysis, presynaptic alpha2-autoreceptors did a better job than monotherapy as a first-line treatment and when applied to nonresponder populations. In comparison, bupropion combinations did not outperform monotherapy.

It’s possible that in combinations, “alpha2-autoreceptors effectively counteract, through sedation, the restlessness and  agitation that many patients find troublesome when taking monoamine-reuptake inhibitors. Similarly, they may help against sexual dysfunction associated with reuptake inhibitors,” Dr. Baethge suggested.

Presynaptic alpha2-autoreceptors might also boost monoaminergic neurotransmission “by interrupting the inhibition feedback loop initiated when reuptake inhibitors increase neurotransmitter concentrations in the synaptic cleft,” he added.

Whether or not bupropion combinations help patients with treatment-resistant depression is inconclusive, noted Dr. Baethge. “More studies will likely help us get a clearer picture. So far, we can only say that we have not enough evidence to positively recommend bupropion combinations to that group of patients.”

Combining treatments did not yield more dropouts or adverse events than monotherapy. “It may thus be a safe treatment alternative when compared with other second-step strategies in treatment-resistant depression, such as augmenting monotherapy with lithium or atypical psychotic,” the investigators concluded.

Looking at this study’s limitations, the multiple clinical trials examined in a meta-analysis often have different designs, definitions of response and control groups, and use different rating scales, noted Henry A. Nasrallah, MD, professor of psychiatry, neurology, and neuroscience at the University of Cincinnati, who was not involved in the study.

Some publication bias was found but overall the results kept their integrity across secondary outcomes and subgroup and sensitivity analyses.
 

Guidance for choosing more effective therapies

The hope is these results will help clinicians choose more promising combinations, such as presynaptic alpha2-autoreceptor antagonists with SSRIs or SNRIs, as opposed to combinations that are less helpful or haven’t gone through an RCT, said Dr. Baethge.

The findings on tolerability may also encourage some clinicians to consider these combinations, especially if they’ve favored less evidence-based approaches such as switching drugs or increasing the dose, he said.

Polypharmacy is often viewed as undesirable or leading to more side effects, noted Dr. Nasrallah. However, “the combination of a reuptake inhibitor plus an alpha2–presynaptic receptor antagonist like mirtazapine, can actually improve tolerability compared to monotherapy antidepressant because their mechanisms of action offset the side effects while increasing efficacy,” he said.

“Finally, although sedation is a side effect of both mirtazapine and trazodone, that can be helpful for patients with difficulty falling asleep, which is common in major depression,” added Dr. Nasrallah.

Dr. Baethge and Dr. Nasrallah had no disclosures. Dr. Henssler received a research grant from the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research.

Tennessee’s Board of Medical Examiners unanimously adopted in September 2021 a statement that said doctors spreading COVID misinformation – such as suggesting that vaccines contain microchips – could jeopardize their license to practice.

“I’m very glad that we’re taking this step,” Dr. Stephen Loyd, MD, the panel’s vice president, said at the time. “If you’re spreading this willful misinformation, for me it’s going to be really hard to do anything other than put you on probation or take your license for a year. There has to be a message sent for this. It’s not okay.”

The board’s statement was posted on a government website.

But before any physicians could be reprimanded for spreading falsehoods about COVID-19 vaccines or treatments, Republican lawmakers threatened to disband the medical board.

The growing tension in Tennessee between conservative lawmakers and the state’s medical board may be the most prominent example in the country. But the Federation of State Medical Boards, which created the language adopted by at least 15 state boards, is tracking legislation introduced by Republicans in at least 14 states that would restrict a medical board’s authority to discipline doctors for their advice on COVID.

Humayun Chaudhry, DO, the federation’s CEO, called it “an unwelcome trend.” The nonprofit association, based in Euless, Tex., said the statement is merely a COVID-specific restatement of an existing rule: that doctors who engage in behavior that puts patients at risk could face disciplinary action.

Although doctors have leeway to decide which treatments to provide, the medical boards that oversee them have broad authority over licensing. Often, doctors are investigated for violating guidelines on prescribing high-powered drugs. But physicians are sometimes punished for other “unprofessional conduct.” In 2013, Tennessee’s board fined U.S. Rep. Scott DesJarlais for separately having sexual relations with two female patients more than a decade earlier.

Still, stopping doctors from sharing unsound medical advice has proved challenging. Even defining misinformation has been difficult. And during the pandemic, resistance from some state legislatures is complicating the effort.

A relatively small group of physicians peddle COVID misinformation, but many of them associate with America’s Frontline Doctors. Its founder, Simone Gold, MD, has claimed patients are dying from COVID treatments, not the virus itself. Sherri Tenpenny, DO, said in a legislative hearing in Ohio that the COVID vaccine could magnetize patients. Stella Immanuel, MD, has pushed hydroxychloroquine as a COVID cure in Texas, although clinical trials showed that it had no benefit. None of them agreed to requests for comment.

The Texas Medical Board fined Dr. Immanuel $500 for not informing a patient of the risks associated with using hydroxychloroquine as an off-label COVID treatment.

KHN (Kaiser Health News) is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues. Together with Policy Analysis and Polling, KHN is one of the three major operating programs at KFF (Kaiser Family Foundation). KFF is an endowed nonprofit organization providing information on health issues to the nation. This story is part of a partnership that includes Nashville Public Radio, NPR, and KHN.

Tennessee’s Board of Medical Examiners unanimously adopted in September 2021 a statement that said doctors spreading COVID misinformation – such as suggesting that vaccines contain microchips – could jeopardize their license to practice.

“I’m very glad that we’re taking this step,” Dr. Stephen Loyd, MD, the panel’s vice president, said at the time. “If you’re spreading this willful misinformation, for me it’s going to be really hard to do anything other than put you on probation or take your license for a year. There has to be a message sent for this. It’s not okay.”

The board’s statement was posted on a government website.

But before any physicians could be reprimanded for spreading falsehoods about COVID-19 vaccines or treatments, Republican lawmakers threatened to disband the medical board.

The growing tension in Tennessee between conservative lawmakers and the state’s medical board may be the most prominent example in the country. But the Federation of State Medical Boards, which created the language adopted by at least 15 state boards, is tracking legislation introduced by Republicans in at least 14 states that would restrict a medical board’s authority to discipline doctors for their advice on COVID.

Humayun Chaudhry, DO, the federation’s CEO, called it “an unwelcome trend.” The nonprofit association, based in Euless, Tex., said the statement is merely a COVID-specific restatement of an existing rule: that doctors who engage in behavior that puts patients at risk could face disciplinary action.

Although doctors have leeway to decide which treatments to provide, the medical boards that oversee them have broad authority over licensing. Often, doctors are investigated for violating guidelines on prescribing high-powered drugs. But physicians are sometimes punished for other “unprofessional conduct.” In 2013, Tennessee’s board fined U.S. Rep. Scott DesJarlais for separately having sexual relations with two female patients more than a decade earlier.

Still, stopping doctors from sharing unsound medical advice has proved challenging. Even defining misinformation has been difficult. And during the pandemic, resistance from some state legislatures is complicating the effort.

A relatively small group of physicians peddle COVID misinformation, but many of them associate with America’s Frontline Doctors. Its founder, Simone Gold, MD, has claimed patients are dying from COVID treatments, not the virus itself. Sherri Tenpenny, DO, said in a legislative hearing in Ohio that the COVID vaccine could magnetize patients. Stella Immanuel, MD, has pushed hydroxychloroquine as a COVID cure in Texas, although clinical trials showed that it had no benefit. None of them agreed to requests for comment.

The Texas Medical Board fined Dr. Immanuel $500 for not informing a patient of the risks associated with using hydroxychloroquine as an off-label COVID treatment.

KHN (Kaiser Health News) is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues. Together with Policy Analysis and Polling, KHN is one of the three major operating programs at KFF (Kaiser Family Foundation). KFF is an endowed nonprofit organization providing information on health issues to the nation. This story is part of a partnership that includes Nashville Public Radio, NPR, and KHN.

Tennessee’s Board of Medical Examiners unanimously adopted in September 2021 a statement that said doctors spreading COVID misinformation – such as suggesting that vaccines contain microchips – could jeopardize their license to practice.

“I’m very glad that we’re taking this step,” Dr. Stephen Loyd, MD, the panel’s vice president, said at the time. “If you’re spreading this willful misinformation, for me it’s going to be really hard to do anything other than put you on probation or take your license for a year. There has to be a message sent for this. It’s not okay.”

The board’s statement was posted on a government website.

But before any physicians could be reprimanded for spreading falsehoods about COVID-19 vaccines or treatments, Republican lawmakers threatened to disband the medical board.

The growing tension in Tennessee between conservative lawmakers and the state’s medical board may be the most prominent example in the country. But the Federation of State Medical Boards, which created the language adopted by at least 15 state boards, is tracking legislation introduced by Republicans in at least 14 states that would restrict a medical board’s authority to discipline doctors for their advice on COVID.

Humayun Chaudhry, DO, the federation’s CEO, called it “an unwelcome trend.” The nonprofit association, based in Euless, Tex., said the statement is merely a COVID-specific restatement of an existing rule: that doctors who engage in behavior that puts patients at risk could face disciplinary action.

Although doctors have leeway to decide which treatments to provide, the medical boards that oversee them have broad authority over licensing. Often, doctors are investigated for violating guidelines on prescribing high-powered drugs. But physicians are sometimes punished for other “unprofessional conduct.” In 2013, Tennessee’s board fined U.S. Rep. Scott DesJarlais for separately having sexual relations with two female patients more than a decade earlier.

Still, stopping doctors from sharing unsound medical advice has proved challenging. Even defining misinformation has been difficult. And during the pandemic, resistance from some state legislatures is complicating the effort.

A relatively small group of physicians peddle COVID misinformation, but many of them associate with America’s Frontline Doctors. Its founder, Simone Gold, MD, has claimed patients are dying from COVID treatments, not the virus itself. Sherri Tenpenny, DO, said in a legislative hearing in Ohio that the COVID vaccine could magnetize patients. Stella Immanuel, MD, has pushed hydroxychloroquine as a COVID cure in Texas, although clinical trials showed that it had no benefit. None of them agreed to requests for comment.

The Texas Medical Board fined Dr. Immanuel $500 for not informing a patient of the risks associated with using hydroxychloroquine as an off-label COVID treatment.

KHN (Kaiser Health News) is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues. Together with Policy Analysis and Polling, KHN is one of the three major operating programs at KFF (Kaiser Family Foundation). KFF is an endowed nonprofit organization providing information on health issues to the nation. This story is part of a partnership that includes Nashville Public Radio, NPR, and KHN.

Medicinal and recreational marijuana use has become common across the country, warranting greater awareness among clinicians about any potential adverse effects of marijuana on brain health, a new American Heart Association scientific statement concludes.

The existing evidence base of preclinical and clinical research suggests that marijuana use may have a harmful effect on the brain, although the specific adverse effects have not been well defined, the statement authors said.

Smithore

Fernando D. Testai, MD, PhD, professor of neurology and rehabilitation at the University of Illinois at Chicago, led the writing panel for the statement, published online Feb. 10, 2022, in Stroke.

Numerous research studies challenge the idea that marijuana use is harmless, and instead demonstrate that cannabis, especially tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), has adverse effects on brain health, Dr. Testai and colleagues noted.

“Social media tends to overemphasize the beneficial effects of marijuana. However, its ultimate effect on brain health is still to be established. Physicians should provide periodic and unbiased education to their patients about the known and unknown ramifications of consuming cannabinoids,” Dr. Testai said.

Findings collected from animal studies demonstrate that THC interferes with normal development of signaling pathways and hinders synaptic plasticity. The authors also pointed out that these studies show connections between neurons are affected in the short term, whereas in the long haul, this contributes to changes in how neuronal networks work.

“Personally, the most striking point is the epidemiological data that indicate that the use of marijuana is widespread in the general population, and this starts early in life, particularly during adolescence,” Dr. Testai told this news organization.

Dr. Testai also noted that pregnant women are using cannabis for nausea and vomiting. Other data on prenatal exposure to cannabis show that THC hinders the signaling mechanism of the endocannabinoid system during development and ontogenesis, which ultimately leads to abnormal neurotransmission.

“Prenatal THC affects neuroanatomic areas associated with cognition and emotional regulation, including the prefrontal cortex, limbic system, and ventral tegmentum of the midbrain,” the researchers added.

The writing panel also found that marijuana use had effects on human cognition:
 

• Acute marijuana use affects impulsivity, memory, and behavioral disinhibition, they noted, that “can affect performance in real-world activities,” such as driving. The long-term effects of cannabis on cognition are “less well established.”
• Neuroimaging research has highlighted structural changes in the brain, but these data are inconsistent.
• Functional MRI studies show cannabis users may experience functional changes in regions of the brain that play a role in cognition, particularly with prolonged use.

The statement also addresses studies assessing the effects of marijuana use on cerebrovascular risk and disease, which show:

• A relation between cannabis use and increased risk for stroke.
• Frequency and other trends of cannabis use may raise stroke risk.
• Cannabis users often smoke cigarettes, which is an important factor in the association between cannabis use and stroke risk.

Looking ahead, public health initiatives are needed to increase awareness among the public about the negative effects of marijuana use. Other efforts may include setting standards regarding the concentrations of biologically active ingredients and warning notices on available formulations, the group concluded.

The document was prepared on behalf of the AHA Stroke Brain Health Science Subcommittee of the Stroke Council; Council on Arteriosclerosis, Thrombosis, and Vascular Biology; Council on Cardiovascular and Stroke Nursing; Council on Lifestyle and Cardiometabolic Health; and Council on Peripheral Vascular Disease.

The American Academy of Neurology “affirms the value of this statement as an educational tool for neurologists,” the document notes.

Dr. Testai reported no relevant financial relationships.

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

Medicinal and recreational marijuana use has become common across the country, warranting greater awareness among clinicians about any potential adverse effects of marijuana on brain health, a new American Heart Association scientific statement concludes.

The existing evidence base of preclinical and clinical research suggests that marijuana use may have a harmful effect on the brain, although the specific adverse effects have not been well defined, the statement authors said.

Smithore

Fernando D. Testai, MD, PhD, professor of neurology and rehabilitation at the University of Illinois at Chicago, led the writing panel for the statement, published online Feb. 10, 2022, in Stroke.

Numerous research studies challenge the idea that marijuana use is harmless, and instead demonstrate that cannabis, especially tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), has adverse effects on brain health, Dr. Testai and colleagues noted.

“Social media tends to overemphasize the beneficial effects of marijuana. However, its ultimate effect on brain health is still to be established. Physicians should provide periodic and unbiased education to their patients about the known and unknown ramifications of consuming cannabinoids,” Dr. Testai said.

Findings collected from animal studies demonstrate that THC interferes with normal development of signaling pathways and hinders synaptic plasticity. The authors also pointed out that these studies show connections between neurons are affected in the short term, whereas in the long haul, this contributes to changes in how neuronal networks work.

“Personally, the most striking point is the epidemiological data that indicate that the use of marijuana is widespread in the general population, and this starts early in life, particularly during adolescence,” Dr. Testai told this news organization.

Dr. Testai also noted that pregnant women are using cannabis for nausea and vomiting. Other data on prenatal exposure to cannabis show that THC hinders the signaling mechanism of the endocannabinoid system during development and ontogenesis, which ultimately leads to abnormal neurotransmission.

“Prenatal THC affects neuroanatomic areas associated with cognition and emotional regulation, including the prefrontal cortex, limbic system, and ventral tegmentum of the midbrain,” the researchers added.

The writing panel also found that marijuana use had effects on human cognition:
 

• Acute marijuana use affects impulsivity, memory, and behavioral disinhibition, they noted, that “can affect performance in real-world activities,” such as driving. The long-term effects of cannabis on cognition are “less well established.”
• Neuroimaging research has highlighted structural changes in the brain, but these data are inconsistent.
• Functional MRI studies show cannabis users may experience functional changes in regions of the brain that play a role in cognition, particularly with prolonged use.

The statement also addresses studies assessing the effects of marijuana use on cerebrovascular risk and disease, which show:

• A relation between cannabis use and increased risk for stroke.
• Frequency and other trends of cannabis use may raise stroke risk.
• Cannabis users often smoke cigarettes, which is an important factor in the association between cannabis use and stroke risk.

Looking ahead, public health initiatives are needed to increase awareness among the public about the negative effects of marijuana use. Other efforts may include setting standards regarding the concentrations of biologically active ingredients and warning notices on available formulations, the group concluded.

The document was prepared on behalf of the AHA Stroke Brain Health Science Subcommittee of the Stroke Council; Council on Arteriosclerosis, Thrombosis, and Vascular Biology; Council on Cardiovascular and Stroke Nursing; Council on Lifestyle and Cardiometabolic Health; and Council on Peripheral Vascular Disease.

The American Academy of Neurology “affirms the value of this statement as an educational tool for neurologists,” the document notes.

Dr. Testai reported no relevant financial relationships.

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

Medicinal and recreational marijuana use has become common across the country, warranting greater awareness among clinicians about any potential adverse effects of marijuana on brain health, a new American Heart Association scientific statement concludes.

The existing evidence base of preclinical and clinical research suggests that marijuana use may have a harmful effect on the brain, although the specific adverse effects have not been well defined, the statement authors said.

Smithore

Fernando D. Testai, MD, PhD, professor of neurology and rehabilitation at the University of Illinois at Chicago, led the writing panel for the statement, published online Feb. 10, 2022, in Stroke.

Numerous research studies challenge the idea that marijuana use is harmless, and instead demonstrate that cannabis, especially tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), has adverse effects on brain health, Dr. Testai and colleagues noted.

“Social media tends to overemphasize the beneficial effects of marijuana. However, its ultimate effect on brain health is still to be established. Physicians should provide periodic and unbiased education to their patients about the known and unknown ramifications of consuming cannabinoids,” Dr. Testai said.

Findings collected from animal studies demonstrate that THC interferes with normal development of signaling pathways and hinders synaptic plasticity. The authors also pointed out that these studies show connections between neurons are affected in the short term, whereas in the long haul, this contributes to changes in how neuronal networks work.

“Personally, the most striking point is the epidemiological data that indicate that the use of marijuana is widespread in the general population, and this starts early in life, particularly during adolescence,” Dr. Testai told this news organization.

Dr. Testai also noted that pregnant women are using cannabis for nausea and vomiting. Other data on prenatal exposure to cannabis show that THC hinders the signaling mechanism of the endocannabinoid system during development and ontogenesis, which ultimately leads to abnormal neurotransmission.

“Prenatal THC affects neuroanatomic areas associated with cognition and emotional regulation, including the prefrontal cortex, limbic system, and ventral tegmentum of the midbrain,” the researchers added.

The writing panel also found that marijuana use had effects on human cognition:
 

• Acute marijuana use affects impulsivity, memory, and behavioral disinhibition, they noted, that “can affect performance in real-world activities,” such as driving. The long-term effects of cannabis on cognition are “less well established.”
• Neuroimaging research has highlighted structural changes in the brain, but these data are inconsistent.
• Functional MRI studies show cannabis users may experience functional changes in regions of the brain that play a role in cognition, particularly with prolonged use.

The statement also addresses studies assessing the effects of marijuana use on cerebrovascular risk and disease, which show:

• A relation between cannabis use and increased risk for stroke.
• Frequency and other trends of cannabis use may raise stroke risk.
• Cannabis users often smoke cigarettes, which is an important factor in the association between cannabis use and stroke risk.

Looking ahead, public health initiatives are needed to increase awareness among the public about the negative effects of marijuana use. Other efforts may include setting standards regarding the concentrations of biologically active ingredients and warning notices on available formulations, the group concluded.

The document was prepared on behalf of the AHA Stroke Brain Health Science Subcommittee of the Stroke Council; Council on Arteriosclerosis, Thrombosis, and Vascular Biology; Council on Cardiovascular and Stroke Nursing; Council on Lifestyle and Cardiometabolic Health; and Council on Peripheral Vascular Disease.

The American Academy of Neurology “affirms the value of this statement as an educational tool for neurologists,” the document notes.

Dr. Testai reported no relevant financial relationships.

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

At the center of the emerging science on the unintended consequences of daily long-term use of marijuana lies a paradox.

For years, medical marijuana has been used to ease nausea from cancer chemotherapy and GI conditions. Now, with greater legalization comes growing awareness that chronic use of marijuana – also known as cannabis – can trigger a condition where, ironically, a person has hard-to-control vomiting and nausea.

Doug Menuez/thinkstock

Some people with the disorder, known as “cannabinoid hyperemesis syndrome,” also report crippling belly pain.

Linda can relate. The 33-year-old Oregon resident, who asked to remain anonymous to protect her privacy, refers to a medieval spiky metal ball on a chain when describing the pain.

“Picture a mace inside your stomach, pushing up inside your chest and, at the same time, exploding out,” she said.

To seek relief, she gets down on her knees, adopts a child’s yoga pose, and runs hot water in the bathroom for hours on end, a trick many with the disorder says has provided relief. She also occasionally goes outside and tries walking it off.

“I would just wander around my neighborhood, a lot of times at like 4 or 5 in the morning,” she said. “The fresh air helps a little bit. I just keep walking down the street, take about 10 steps, stop, vomit – walk a little bit more, stop, vomit.”

Her first experience with the disorder began in the middle of one night in 2017 while she was at a conference in Las Vegas.

“We went out to eat the night before, and I woke up about 4 in the morning with just the most intense pain I’ve ever had,” she said. “I found myself in a really hot shower in between throwing up everything and trying to say get some water down. I was sharing an Airbnb with my colleagues, so it was less than ideal.”

Many people with cannabinoid hyperemesis syndrome find relief from hot baths or showers. Researchers believe that hot water helps because temperature sensors in the skin send signals to the brain that can help ease the symptoms, at least for a while.

The problem is that people with this syndrome “can’t live in the water,” said emergency doctor and medical cannabis expert Leigh Vinocur, MD.

Fast-forward 6 months to another event in Boulder, Colo. Again, Linda woke up and could not stop vomiting.

“I was not feeling any better. Showering wasn’t helping. I ended up in the hospital,” she said.

She received opioids for her pain. But neither she nor the ED staff were quite sure what was happening. Her discharge paperwork read “cannabis allergy.”

Cannabinoid hyperemesis syndrome “shatters that image of cannabis only being a good thing. It’s a bold statement, but, you know, once you start to think about it, it’s like a little too much of anything isn’t good,” Linda said.

Experts suggest greater awareness is needed to identify this syndrome earlier, by both cannabinoid users and doctors. The bouts of vomiting, in particular, can get so severe that people can end up hospitalized with dehydration, electrolyte disorders, and weight loss.

The severe electrolyte imbalances “can really be life-threatening,” said David Johnson, MD, a professor of medicine and chief of gastroenterology at Eastern Virginia Medical School, Norfolk.

“By the time they come into emergency care, they’re in bad shape,” Dr. Vinocur agreed. “Many try to ignore it, but they continue to vomit.”
 

Genetic risk factors?

One mystery is why some regular marijuana users get this syndrome while others do not.

“I can say that not everybody gets this, thank goodness,” said Ethan Russo, MD. “But there has to be a reason that certain people are susceptible and others are not.”

Interestingly, a new study from Dr. Russo and colleagues suggests that genes play a role. They identified five genetic changes that could make a chronic marijuana user more likely to have cannabinoid hyperemesis syndrome in a study published July 5, 2021, in the journal Cannabis and Cannabinoid Research.

They compared 28 people with the disorder with 12 other high-frequency marijuana users without these symptoms.

The results are not final but could help guide future research, Dr. Russo said.

“What we’ve discovered – and it was far more than we expected – is that there’s a lot more to this than a hypersensitivity to cannabis,” said Dr. Russo, a neurologist and founder/CEO of CReDO Science, a firm that promotes cannabis research and develops commercial products.

Also, he said, those affected by cannabinoid hyperemesis syndrome could be at higher risk for other conditions, such as addiction to alcohol or other substances, dementia, diabetes, and heart disease.

“Most people with [cannabinoid hyperemesis syndrome] are going to be younger,” he said. “What we’ve demonstrated is there is a risk for more serious problems for decades to come. So someone who has these symptoms really deserves a look at this genetic screening.”
 

Battling disbelief

Getting back to the paradox, many users don’t believe marijuana can trigger serious vomiting and nausea because of its reputation for doing the opposite.

“Folks that have this are just uniquely resistant to the concept that cannabis is actually the problem and not the solution,” Dr. Russo said.

“It’s kind of counterintuitive because people think: ‘Oh, cannabis helps with nausea,’ so they use more of it,” said Dr. Vinocur, who is also a spokesperson for the American College of Emergency Physicians and runs a medical cannabis practice.

Most kinds of marijuana act in this way – doing opposite things at different doses. Once a certain threshold is passed, people with cannabinoid hyperemesis syndrome are “just uniquely susceptible and really can’t tolerate any significant amount of THC,” Dr. Russo said, referring to tetrahydrocannabinol, the substance that gets marijuana users high.

Once diagnosed, quitting is the most effective strategy. But it can be tough to persuade someone to stop using marijuana.

“You do have to try and convince them ... to try abstinence and to watch and see what happens,” Dr. Vinocur said.

People should “realize the root cause of this is its cannabinoid ingestion, and the treatment is really best directed at absolute avoidance,” Dr. Johnson said.

Unfortunately, evidence also shows that once a person stops using marijuana and gets relief, going back to marijuana or other forms of cannabinoids can cause the syndrome to start all over again.

“We’ve had people that quit for a month, a year, 2 years and upon resumption, almost invariably, they’re back into bouts of the hyperemesis along with all the other [symptoms],” Dr. Russo said.

Marijuana and cannabinoids can cause digestive problems, Dr. Johnson said, which may cause more problems.
 

What recent research reveals

Cannabinoid hyperemesis syndrome is a relatively young disorder – first described in 2004 – and early reports and case studies are giving way now to studies looking into potential treatments.

So far, the strongest evidence suggests a role for an over-the-counter cream called capsaicin to help manage symptoms, but more studies are needed.

Similar to hot showers, this ingredient from chili peppers can warm the skin and trigger the temperature-sensitive skin sensors to lessen the symptoms, Dr. Johnson said.

An October 2021 study in Spain looked at 54 ED visits among 29 people with cannabinoid hyperemesis syndrome. For the 75% treated with capsaicin, vomiting stopped after an average of 18 minutes.

Lead author Guillermo Burillo-Putze, MD, PhD, said he is most surprised by the growing number of new cases of the disorder.

“This should be of concern given the increase in cannabis use due to its legalization and permissiveness,” said Dr. Burillo-Putze, an emergency doctor at Hospital Universitario de Canarias, Santa Cruz de Tenerife, Spain.

Cannabinoid hyperemesis syndrome appears not to discriminate across racial and ethic groups. Although most studies to date include White participants, a July 2021 study of 29 people, 90% of whom were Black, found repeat visits to the ED were common.

The study found that 16 people returned 42 times to the ED and accounted for 10 hospital admissions, for example.
 

Cannabis conspiracy theories

“Unfortunately, this condition has become the subject of great speculation hinging on conspiracy theories as its true cause,” Dr. Russo noted in a September 2021 letter to the editor in the American Journal of Emergency Medicine.

Some “myth busting” is in order, he said.

For example, cannabinoid hyperemesis syndrome does not happen because of exposure to products from a tree called neem or from pesticides applied to marijuana plants during cultivation, Dr. Russo said. It can also occur with high-dose synthetic cannabinoids.
 

The state of recreational and medical marijuana

Recreational marijuana is legal in 18 states, Washington, D.C., and Guam as of January 2022, according to a report in U.S. News. More states permit medical marijuana use – 37 in total, plus Washington, D.C., according to Britannica ProCon.

One of the states where only medicinal use is legal is Maryland, which is where Dr. Vinocur practices.

“We are seeing increasing numbers of cases” of cannabinoid hyperemesis syndrome, she said.

In addition to chronic use or higher doses, it’s likely that the higher potency levels of THC in the legal marijuana industry trigger the syndrome in some people as well.

Linda estimates she ended up in emergency rooms at least a half-dozen times in the last 5 years. In April 2021, she had a “pretty serious event.” She blames it on traveling a lot for work, not eating right, and not getting enough sleep. She broke her 2-year abstinence with alcohol.

“I basically didn’t listen to my body and paid a pretty significant price for it,” she said.

Linda did not stop altogether but said she “drastically changed the types and form of the cannabis I was using.”

“I can tell you on the record that I would be a hundred percent dead without this plant,” she said.

“The prospect of living without it was more detrimental to me than all of those things I just described to you, because addiction runs in my family and I had opiate problems myself that I overcame with cannabis.”

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

At the center of the emerging science on the unintended consequences of daily long-term use of marijuana lies a paradox.

For years, medical marijuana has been used to ease nausea from cancer chemotherapy and GI conditions. Now, with greater legalization comes growing awareness that chronic use of marijuana – also known as cannabis – can trigger a condition where, ironically, a person has hard-to-control vomiting and nausea.

Doug Menuez/thinkstock

Some people with the disorder, known as “cannabinoid hyperemesis syndrome,” also report crippling belly pain.

Linda can relate. The 33-year-old Oregon resident, who asked to remain anonymous to protect her privacy, refers to a medieval spiky metal ball on a chain when describing the pain.

“Picture a mace inside your stomach, pushing up inside your chest and, at the same time, exploding out,” she said.

To seek relief, she gets down on her knees, adopts a child’s yoga pose, and runs hot water in the bathroom for hours on end, a trick many with the disorder says has provided relief. She also occasionally goes outside and tries walking it off.

“I would just wander around my neighborhood, a lot of times at like 4 or 5 in the morning,” she said. “The fresh air helps a little bit. I just keep walking down the street, take about 10 steps, stop, vomit – walk a little bit more, stop, vomit.”

Her first experience with the disorder began in the middle of one night in 2017 while she was at a conference in Las Vegas.

“We went out to eat the night before, and I woke up about 4 in the morning with just the most intense pain I’ve ever had,” she said. “I found myself in a really hot shower in between throwing up everything and trying to say get some water down. I was sharing an Airbnb with my colleagues, so it was less than ideal.”

Many people with cannabinoid hyperemesis syndrome find relief from hot baths or showers. Researchers believe that hot water helps because temperature sensors in the skin send signals to the brain that can help ease the symptoms, at least for a while.

The problem is that people with this syndrome “can’t live in the water,” said emergency doctor and medical cannabis expert Leigh Vinocur, MD.

Fast-forward 6 months to another event in Boulder, Colo. Again, Linda woke up and could not stop vomiting.

“I was not feeling any better. Showering wasn’t helping. I ended up in the hospital,” she said.

She received opioids for her pain. But neither she nor the ED staff were quite sure what was happening. Her discharge paperwork read “cannabis allergy.”

Cannabinoid hyperemesis syndrome “shatters that image of cannabis only being a good thing. It’s a bold statement, but, you know, once you start to think about it, it’s like a little too much of anything isn’t good,” Linda said.

Experts suggest greater awareness is needed to identify this syndrome earlier, by both cannabinoid users and doctors. The bouts of vomiting, in particular, can get so severe that people can end up hospitalized with dehydration, electrolyte disorders, and weight loss.

The severe electrolyte imbalances “can really be life-threatening,” said David Johnson, MD, a professor of medicine and chief of gastroenterology at Eastern Virginia Medical School, Norfolk.

“By the time they come into emergency care, they’re in bad shape,” Dr. Vinocur agreed. “Many try to ignore it, but they continue to vomit.”
 

Genetic risk factors?

One mystery is why some regular marijuana users get this syndrome while others do not.

“I can say that not everybody gets this, thank goodness,” said Ethan Russo, MD. “But there has to be a reason that certain people are susceptible and others are not.”

Interestingly, a new study from Dr. Russo and colleagues suggests that genes play a role. They identified five genetic changes that could make a chronic marijuana user more likely to have cannabinoid hyperemesis syndrome in a study published July 5, 2021, in the journal Cannabis and Cannabinoid Research.

They compared 28 people with the disorder with 12 other high-frequency marijuana users without these symptoms.

The results are not final but could help guide future research, Dr. Russo said.

“What we’ve discovered – and it was far more than we expected – is that there’s a lot more to this than a hypersensitivity to cannabis,” said Dr. Russo, a neurologist and founder/CEO of CReDO Science, a firm that promotes cannabis research and develops commercial products.

Also, he said, those affected by cannabinoid hyperemesis syndrome could be at higher risk for other conditions, such as addiction to alcohol or other substances, dementia, diabetes, and heart disease.

“Most people with [cannabinoid hyperemesis syndrome] are going to be younger,” he said. “What we’ve demonstrated is there is a risk for more serious problems for decades to come. So someone who has these symptoms really deserves a look at this genetic screening.”
 

Battling disbelief

Getting back to the paradox, many users don’t believe marijuana can trigger serious vomiting and nausea because of its reputation for doing the opposite.

“Folks that have this are just uniquely resistant to the concept that cannabis is actually the problem and not the solution,” Dr. Russo said.

“It’s kind of counterintuitive because people think: ‘Oh, cannabis helps with nausea,’ so they use more of it,” said Dr. Vinocur, who is also a spokesperson for the American College of Emergency Physicians and runs a medical cannabis practice.

Most kinds of marijuana act in this way – doing opposite things at different doses. Once a certain threshold is passed, people with cannabinoid hyperemesis syndrome are “just uniquely susceptible and really can’t tolerate any significant amount of THC,” Dr. Russo said, referring to tetrahydrocannabinol, the substance that gets marijuana users high.

Once diagnosed, quitting is the most effective strategy. But it can be tough to persuade someone to stop using marijuana.

“You do have to try and convince them ... to try abstinence and to watch and see what happens,” Dr. Vinocur said.

People should “realize the root cause of this is its cannabinoid ingestion, and the treatment is really best directed at absolute avoidance,” Dr. Johnson said.

Unfortunately, evidence also shows that once a person stops using marijuana and gets relief, going back to marijuana or other forms of cannabinoids can cause the syndrome to start all over again.

“We’ve had people that quit for a month, a year, 2 years and upon resumption, almost invariably, they’re back into bouts of the hyperemesis along with all the other [symptoms],” Dr. Russo said.

Marijuana and cannabinoids can cause digestive problems, Dr. Johnson said, which may cause more problems.
 

What recent research reveals

Cannabinoid hyperemesis syndrome is a relatively young disorder – first described in 2004 – and early reports and case studies are giving way now to studies looking into potential treatments.

So far, the strongest evidence suggests a role for an over-the-counter cream called capsaicin to help manage symptoms, but more studies are needed.

Similar to hot showers, this ingredient from chili peppers can warm the skin and trigger the temperature-sensitive skin sensors to lessen the symptoms, Dr. Johnson said.

An October 2021 study in Spain looked at 54 ED visits among 29 people with cannabinoid hyperemesis syndrome. For the 75% treated with capsaicin, vomiting stopped after an average of 18 minutes.

Lead author Guillermo Burillo-Putze, MD, PhD, said he is most surprised by the growing number of new cases of the disorder.

“This should be of concern given the increase in cannabis use due to its legalization and permissiveness,” said Dr. Burillo-Putze, an emergency doctor at Hospital Universitario de Canarias, Santa Cruz de Tenerife, Spain.

Cannabinoid hyperemesis syndrome appears not to discriminate across racial and ethic groups. Although most studies to date include White participants, a July 2021 study of 29 people, 90% of whom were Black, found repeat visits to the ED were common.

The study found that 16 people returned 42 times to the ED and accounted for 10 hospital admissions, for example.
 

Cannabis conspiracy theories

“Unfortunately, this condition has become the subject of great speculation hinging on conspiracy theories as its true cause,” Dr. Russo noted in a September 2021 letter to the editor in the American Journal of Emergency Medicine.

Some “myth busting” is in order, he said.

For example, cannabinoid hyperemesis syndrome does not happen because of exposure to products from a tree called neem or from pesticides applied to marijuana plants during cultivation, Dr. Russo said. It can also occur with high-dose synthetic cannabinoids.
 

The state of recreational and medical marijuana

Recreational marijuana is legal in 18 states, Washington, D.C., and Guam as of January 2022, according to a report in U.S. News. More states permit medical marijuana use – 37 in total, plus Washington, D.C., according to Britannica ProCon.

One of the states where only medicinal use is legal is Maryland, which is where Dr. Vinocur practices.

“We are seeing increasing numbers of cases” of cannabinoid hyperemesis syndrome, she said.

In addition to chronic use or higher doses, it’s likely that the higher potency levels of THC in the legal marijuana industry trigger the syndrome in some people as well.

Linda estimates she ended up in emergency rooms at least a half-dozen times in the last 5 years. In April 2021, she had a “pretty serious event.” She blames it on traveling a lot for work, not eating right, and not getting enough sleep. She broke her 2-year abstinence with alcohol.

“I basically didn’t listen to my body and paid a pretty significant price for it,” she said.

Linda did not stop altogether but said she “drastically changed the types and form of the cannabis I was using.”

“I can tell you on the record that I would be a hundred percent dead without this plant,” she said.

“The prospect of living without it was more detrimental to me than all of those things I just described to you, because addiction runs in my family and I had opiate problems myself that I overcame with cannabis.”

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

At the center of the emerging science on the unintended consequences of daily long-term use of marijuana lies a paradox.

For years, medical marijuana has been used to ease nausea from cancer chemotherapy and GI conditions. Now, with greater legalization comes growing awareness that chronic use of marijuana – also known as cannabis – can trigger a condition where, ironically, a person has hard-to-control vomiting and nausea.

Doug Menuez/thinkstock

Some people with the disorder, known as “cannabinoid hyperemesis syndrome,” also report crippling belly pain.

Linda can relate. The 33-year-old Oregon resident, who asked to remain anonymous to protect her privacy, refers to a medieval spiky metal ball on a chain when describing the pain.

“Picture a mace inside your stomach, pushing up inside your chest and, at the same time, exploding out,” she said.

To seek relief, she gets down on her knees, adopts a child’s yoga pose, and runs hot water in the bathroom for hours on end, a trick many with the disorder says has provided relief. She also occasionally goes outside and tries walking it off.

“I would just wander around my neighborhood, a lot of times at like 4 or 5 in the morning,” she said. “The fresh air helps a little bit. I just keep walking down the street, take about 10 steps, stop, vomit – walk a little bit more, stop, vomit.”

Her first experience with the disorder began in the middle of one night in 2017 while she was at a conference in Las Vegas.

“We went out to eat the night before, and I woke up about 4 in the morning with just the most intense pain I’ve ever had,” she said. “I found myself in a really hot shower in between throwing up everything and trying to say get some water down. I was sharing an Airbnb with my colleagues, so it was less than ideal.”

Many people with cannabinoid hyperemesis syndrome find relief from hot baths or showers. Researchers believe that hot water helps because temperature sensors in the skin send signals to the brain that can help ease the symptoms, at least for a while.

The problem is that people with this syndrome “can’t live in the water,” said emergency doctor and medical cannabis expert Leigh Vinocur, MD.

Fast-forward 6 months to another event in Boulder, Colo. Again, Linda woke up and could not stop vomiting.

“I was not feeling any better. Showering wasn’t helping. I ended up in the hospital,” she said.

She received opioids for her pain. But neither she nor the ED staff were quite sure what was happening. Her discharge paperwork read “cannabis allergy.”

Cannabinoid hyperemesis syndrome “shatters that image of cannabis only being a good thing. It’s a bold statement, but, you know, once you start to think about it, it’s like a little too much of anything isn’t good,” Linda said.

Experts suggest greater awareness is needed to identify this syndrome earlier, by both cannabinoid users and doctors. The bouts of vomiting, in particular, can get so severe that people can end up hospitalized with dehydration, electrolyte disorders, and weight loss.

The severe electrolyte imbalances “can really be life-threatening,” said David Johnson, MD, a professor of medicine and chief of gastroenterology at Eastern Virginia Medical School, Norfolk.

“By the time they come into emergency care, they’re in bad shape,” Dr. Vinocur agreed. “Many try to ignore it, but they continue to vomit.”
 

Genetic risk factors?

One mystery is why some regular marijuana users get this syndrome while others do not.

“I can say that not everybody gets this, thank goodness,” said Ethan Russo, MD. “But there has to be a reason that certain people are susceptible and others are not.”

Interestingly, a new study from Dr. Russo and colleagues suggests that genes play a role. They identified five genetic changes that could make a chronic marijuana user more likely to have cannabinoid hyperemesis syndrome in a study published July 5, 2021, in the journal Cannabis and Cannabinoid Research.

They compared 28 people with the disorder with 12 other high-frequency marijuana users without these symptoms.

The results are not final but could help guide future research, Dr. Russo said.

“What we’ve discovered – and it was far more than we expected – is that there’s a lot more to this than a hypersensitivity to cannabis,” said Dr. Russo, a neurologist and founder/CEO of CReDO Science, a firm that promotes cannabis research and develops commercial products.

Also, he said, those affected by cannabinoid hyperemesis syndrome could be at higher risk for other conditions, such as addiction to alcohol or other substances, dementia, diabetes, and heart disease.

“Most people with [cannabinoid hyperemesis syndrome] are going to be younger,” he said. “What we’ve demonstrated is there is a risk for more serious problems for decades to come. So someone who has these symptoms really deserves a look at this genetic screening.”
 

Battling disbelief

Getting back to the paradox, many users don’t believe marijuana can trigger serious vomiting and nausea because of its reputation for doing the opposite.

“Folks that have this are just uniquely resistant to the concept that cannabis is actually the problem and not the solution,” Dr. Russo said.

“It’s kind of counterintuitive because people think: ‘Oh, cannabis helps with nausea,’ so they use more of it,” said Dr. Vinocur, who is also a spokesperson for the American College of Emergency Physicians and runs a medical cannabis practice.

Most kinds of marijuana act in this way – doing opposite things at different doses. Once a certain threshold is passed, people with cannabinoid hyperemesis syndrome are “just uniquely susceptible and really can’t tolerate any significant amount of THC,” Dr. Russo said, referring to tetrahydrocannabinol, the substance that gets marijuana users high.

Once diagnosed, quitting is the most effective strategy. But it can be tough to persuade someone to stop using marijuana.

“You do have to try and convince them ... to try abstinence and to watch and see what happens,” Dr. Vinocur said.

People should “realize the root cause of this is its cannabinoid ingestion, and the treatment is really best directed at absolute avoidance,” Dr. Johnson said.

Unfortunately, evidence also shows that once a person stops using marijuana and gets relief, going back to marijuana or other forms of cannabinoids can cause the syndrome to start all over again.

“We’ve had people that quit for a month, a year, 2 years and upon resumption, almost invariably, they’re back into bouts of the hyperemesis along with all the other [symptoms],” Dr. Russo said.

Marijuana and cannabinoids can cause digestive problems, Dr. Johnson said, which may cause more problems.
 

What recent research reveals

Cannabinoid hyperemesis syndrome is a relatively young disorder – first described in 2004 – and early reports and case studies are giving way now to studies looking into potential treatments.

So far, the strongest evidence suggests a role for an over-the-counter cream called capsaicin to help manage symptoms, but more studies are needed.

Similar to hot showers, this ingredient from chili peppers can warm the skin and trigger the temperature-sensitive skin sensors to lessen the symptoms, Dr. Johnson said.

An October 2021 study in Spain looked at 54 ED visits among 29 people with cannabinoid hyperemesis syndrome. For the 75% treated with capsaicin, vomiting stopped after an average of 18 minutes.

Lead author Guillermo Burillo-Putze, MD, PhD, said he is most surprised by the growing number of new cases of the disorder.

“This should be of concern given the increase in cannabis use due to its legalization and permissiveness,” said Dr. Burillo-Putze, an emergency doctor at Hospital Universitario de Canarias, Santa Cruz de Tenerife, Spain.

Cannabinoid hyperemesis syndrome appears not to discriminate across racial and ethic groups. Although most studies to date include White participants, a July 2021 study of 29 people, 90% of whom were Black, found repeat visits to the ED were common.

The study found that 16 people returned 42 times to the ED and accounted for 10 hospital admissions, for example.
 

Cannabis conspiracy theories

“Unfortunately, this condition has become the subject of great speculation hinging on conspiracy theories as its true cause,” Dr. Russo noted in a September 2021 letter to the editor in the American Journal of Emergency Medicine.

Some “myth busting” is in order, he said.

For example, cannabinoid hyperemesis syndrome does not happen because of exposure to products from a tree called neem or from pesticides applied to marijuana plants during cultivation, Dr. Russo said. It can also occur with high-dose synthetic cannabinoids.
 

The state of recreational and medical marijuana

Recreational marijuana is legal in 18 states, Washington, D.C., and Guam as of January 2022, according to a report in U.S. News. More states permit medical marijuana use – 37 in total, plus Washington, D.C., according to Britannica ProCon.

One of the states where only medicinal use is legal is Maryland, which is where Dr. Vinocur practices.

“We are seeing increasing numbers of cases” of cannabinoid hyperemesis syndrome, she said.

In addition to chronic use or higher doses, it’s likely that the higher potency levels of THC in the legal marijuana industry trigger the syndrome in some people as well.

Linda estimates she ended up in emergency rooms at least a half-dozen times in the last 5 years. In April 2021, she had a “pretty serious event.” She blames it on traveling a lot for work, not eating right, and not getting enough sleep. She broke her 2-year abstinence with alcohol.

“I basically didn’t listen to my body and paid a pretty significant price for it,” she said.

Linda did not stop altogether but said she “drastically changed the types and form of the cannabis I was using.”

“I can tell you on the record that I would be a hundred percent dead without this plant,” she said.

“The prospect of living without it was more detrimental to me than all of those things I just described to you, because addiction runs in my family and I had opiate problems myself that I overcame with cannabis.”

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

It is a tough time to be a doctor. With the stresses of the pandemic, the continued unfettered rise of insurance company BS, and so many medical groups being bought up that we often don’t even know who makes the decisions, the patient can sometimes be hidden in the equation.

What are ways that we can connect well with our patients so that both the patient and the physician are lifted up by the relationship?

Be curious

When physicians are curious about why patients have symptoms, how those symptoms will affect their lives, and how worried the patient is about them, patients feel cared about.

Ascertaining how concerned patients are about their symptoms will help you make decisions on whether symptoms you are not concerned about actually need to be treated.
 

Limit use of EHRs when possible

Use of the electronic health record during visits is essential, but focusing on it too much can put a barrier between the physician and the patient.

Marmor and colleagues found there is an inverse relationship between time spent on the EHR by a patient’s physician and the patient’s satisfaction.¹

Eye contact with the patient is important, especially when patients are sharing concerns they are scared about and upsetting experiences. There can be awkward pauses when looking things up on the EHR. Fill those pauses by explaining to the patient what you are doing, or chatting with the patient.
 

Consider teaching medical students

When a medical student works with you, it doubles the time the patient gets with a concerned listener. Students also can do a great job with timely follow-up and checking in with worried patients.

By having the student present in the clinic room, with the patient present, the patient can really feel heard. The student shares all the details the patient shared, and now their physician is hearing an organized, thoughtful report of the patients concerns.

In fact, I was involved in a study that showed that patients preferred in room presentations, and that they were more satisfied when students presented in the room.²
 

Use healing words

Some words carry loaded emotions. The word chronic, for example, has negative connotations, whereas the term persisting does not.

I will often ask patients how long they have been suffering from a symptom to imply my concern for what they are going through. The term “chief complaint” is outdated, and upsets patients when they see it in their medical record.

As a patient of mine once said to me: “I never complained about that problem, I just brought it to your attention.” No one wants to be seen as a complainer. Substituting the word concern for complaint works well.
 

Explain as you examine

People love to hear the term normal. When you are examining a patient, let them know when findings are normal.

I also find it helpful to explain to patients why I am doing certain physical exam maneuvers. This helps them assess how thorough we are in our thought process.

When patients feel their physicians are thorough, they have more confidence in them.
 

In summary

• Be curious.
• Do not overly focus on the EHR.
• Consider teaching a medical student.
• Be careful of word choice.
• “Overexplain” the physical exam.

Dr. Paauw is professor of medicine in the division of general internal medicine at the University of Washington, Seattle, and serves as 3rd-year medical student clerkship director at the University of Washington. He is a member of the editorial advisory board of Internal Medicine News. Dr. Paauw has no conflicts to disclose. Contact him at [email protected].

References

1. Marmor RA et al. Appl Clin Inform. 2018 Jan;9(1):11-4.

2. Rogers HD et al. Acad Med. 2003 Sep;78(9):945-9.

It is a tough time to be a doctor. With the stresses of the pandemic, the continued unfettered rise of insurance company BS, and so many medical groups being bought up that we often don’t even know who makes the decisions, the patient can sometimes be hidden in the equation.

What are ways that we can connect well with our patients so that both the patient and the physician are lifted up by the relationship?

Be curious

When physicians are curious about why patients have symptoms, how those symptoms will affect their lives, and how worried the patient is about them, patients feel cared about.

Ascertaining how concerned patients are about their symptoms will help you make decisions on whether symptoms you are not concerned about actually need to be treated.
 

Limit use of EHRs when possible

Use of the electronic health record during visits is essential, but focusing on it too much can put a barrier between the physician and the patient.

Marmor and colleagues found there is an inverse relationship between time spent on the EHR by a patient’s physician and the patient’s satisfaction.¹

Eye contact with the patient is important, especially when patients are sharing concerns they are scared about and upsetting experiences. There can be awkward pauses when looking things up on the EHR. Fill those pauses by explaining to the patient what you are doing, or chatting with the patient.
 

Consider teaching medical students

When a medical student works with you, it doubles the time the patient gets with a concerned listener. Students also can do a great job with timely follow-up and checking in with worried patients.

By having the student present in the clinic room, with the patient present, the patient can really feel heard. The student shares all the details the patient shared, and now their physician is hearing an organized, thoughtful report of the patients concerns.

In fact, I was involved in a study that showed that patients preferred in room presentations, and that they were more satisfied when students presented in the room.²
 

Use healing words

Some words carry loaded emotions. The word chronic, for example, has negative connotations, whereas the term persisting does not.

I will often ask patients how long they have been suffering from a symptom to imply my concern for what they are going through. The term “chief complaint” is outdated, and upsets patients when they see it in their medical record.

As a patient of mine once said to me: “I never complained about that problem, I just brought it to your attention.” No one wants to be seen as a complainer. Substituting the word concern for complaint works well.
 

Explain as you examine

People love to hear the term normal. When you are examining a patient, let them know when findings are normal.

I also find it helpful to explain to patients why I am doing certain physical exam maneuvers. This helps them assess how thorough we are in our thought process.

When patients feel their physicians are thorough, they have more confidence in them.
 

In summary

• Be curious.
• Do not overly focus on the EHR.
• Consider teaching a medical student.
• Be careful of word choice.
• “Overexplain” the physical exam.

Dr. Paauw is professor of medicine in the division of general internal medicine at the University of Washington, Seattle, and serves as 3rd-year medical student clerkship director at the University of Washington. He is a member of the editorial advisory board of Internal Medicine News. Dr. Paauw has no conflicts to disclose. Contact him at [email protected].

References

1. Marmor RA et al. Appl Clin Inform. 2018 Jan;9(1):11-4.

2. Rogers HD et al. Acad Med. 2003 Sep;78(9):945-9.

It is a tough time to be a doctor. With the stresses of the pandemic, the continued unfettered rise of insurance company BS, and so many medical groups being bought up that we often don’t even know who makes the decisions, the patient can sometimes be hidden in the equation.

What are ways that we can connect well with our patients so that both the patient and the physician are lifted up by the relationship?

Be curious

When physicians are curious about why patients have symptoms, how those symptoms will affect their lives, and how worried the patient is about them, patients feel cared about.

Ascertaining how concerned patients are about their symptoms will help you make decisions on whether symptoms you are not concerned about actually need to be treated.
 

Limit use of EHRs when possible

Use of the electronic health record during visits is essential, but focusing on it too much can put a barrier between the physician and the patient.

Marmor and colleagues found there is an inverse relationship between time spent on the EHR by a patient’s physician and the patient’s satisfaction.¹

Eye contact with the patient is important, especially when patients are sharing concerns they are scared about and upsetting experiences. There can be awkward pauses when looking things up on the EHR. Fill those pauses by explaining to the patient what you are doing, or chatting with the patient.
 

Consider teaching medical students

When a medical student works with you, it doubles the time the patient gets with a concerned listener. Students also can do a great job with timely follow-up and checking in with worried patients.

By having the student present in the clinic room, with the patient present, the patient can really feel heard. The student shares all the details the patient shared, and now their physician is hearing an organized, thoughtful report of the patients concerns.

In fact, I was involved in a study that showed that patients preferred in room presentations, and that they were more satisfied when students presented in the room.²
 

Use healing words

Some words carry loaded emotions. The word chronic, for example, has negative connotations, whereas the term persisting does not.

I will often ask patients how long they have been suffering from a symptom to imply my concern for what they are going through. The term “chief complaint” is outdated, and upsets patients when they see it in their medical record.

As a patient of mine once said to me: “I never complained about that problem, I just brought it to your attention.” No one wants to be seen as a complainer. Substituting the word concern for complaint works well.
 

Explain as you examine

People love to hear the term normal. When you are examining a patient, let them know when findings are normal.

I also find it helpful to explain to patients why I am doing certain physical exam maneuvers. This helps them assess how thorough we are in our thought process.

When patients feel their physicians are thorough, they have more confidence in them.
 

In summary

• Be curious.
• Do not overly focus on the EHR.
• Consider teaching a medical student.
• Be careful of word choice.
• “Overexplain” the physical exam.

Dr. Paauw is professor of medicine in the division of general internal medicine at the University of Washington, Seattle, and serves as 3rd-year medical student clerkship director at the University of Washington. He is a member of the editorial advisory board of Internal Medicine News. Dr. Paauw has no conflicts to disclose. Contact him at [email protected].

References

1. Marmor RA et al. Appl Clin Inform. 2018 Jan;9(1):11-4.

2. Rogers HD et al. Acad Med. 2003 Sep;78(9):945-9.

Seizure phobia occurs in nearly one-third of people with epilepsy (PWE), but was mainly associated with variables not related to epilepsy, based on data from 69 adults.

Anxiety and depression are known to affect quality of life in epilepsy patients, and previous studies have shown that anticipatory anxiety of epileptic seizures (AAS) was present in 53% of patients with focal epilepsy, wrote lead author Aviva Weiss of Psychiatric Hostels affiliated with Kidum Rehabilitation Projects, Jerusalem, and colleagues.

“Although recognized by the epilepsy and the psychiatric communities, seizure phobia as a distinct anxiety disorder among PWE is insufficiently described in the medical literature,” they said.

Seizure phobia has been defined as an anxiety disorder in which patients experience fear related to anticipation of seizures in certain situations.

In a study published in Seizure: European Journal of Epilepsy, the researchers recruited 69 PWE who were treated at an outpatient clinic. Data were collected from interviews, questionnaires, and medical records. The average age of the participants was 36.8 years, 41 were women, and 41 were married.

Overall, 19 individuals (27.5%) were diagnosed with seizure phobia. Compared with PWE without seizure phobia, the seizure phobia patients were significantly more likely to be women (84.2% vs. 44.2%; P = .005) and to have comorbid anxiety disorders (84.2% vs. 34.9%; P = .01). Individuals with seizure phobia also were significantly more likely than those without seizure phobia to have a past major depressive episode (63.2% vs. 20.9%; P = .003), and posttraumatic stress disorder (26.3% vs. 7%; P = .05).

Seizure phobia was significantly associated with comorbid psychogenic nonepileptic seizures (PNES) (36.8% vs. 11.6%; P = .034). PNES have been significantly associated with panic attacks, and “all patients with both panic attacks and comorbid PNES were diagnosed with seizure phobia,” the researchers noted. However, no significant association was found with epilepsy-related variables, they said.

A multivariate logistic regression model to predict seizure phobia showed that anxiety and a past MDE were significant predictors; the odds of seizure phobia were 10.45 times higher if a patient reported any anxiety disorder, and 6.85 times higher if the patient had a history of MDE.

The study findings were limited by several factors, including the use of semistructured interviews to diagnose seizure phobia, which are subject to interviewer bias, and by the small study population with a high proportion of comorbid PNES and epilepsy, the researchers noted. However, the results support seizure phobia as a distinct clinical entity worthy of management with education, psychosocial interventions, and potential medication changes, they said.

“Development of appropriate screening tools and implementation of effective treatment interventions is warranted for individual patients, combined with large-scale population-targeted psychoeducation, aimed to mitigate the risk of developing seizure phobia in PWE,” they concluded.

The study received no outside funding. The researchers had no financial conflicts to disclose.
 

Seizure phobia occurs in nearly one-third of people with epilepsy (PWE), but was mainly associated with variables not related to epilepsy, based on data from 69 adults.

Anxiety and depression are known to affect quality of life in epilepsy patients, and previous studies have shown that anticipatory anxiety of epileptic seizures (AAS) was present in 53% of patients with focal epilepsy, wrote lead author Aviva Weiss of Psychiatric Hostels affiliated with Kidum Rehabilitation Projects, Jerusalem, and colleagues.

“Although recognized by the epilepsy and the psychiatric communities, seizure phobia as a distinct anxiety disorder among PWE is insufficiently described in the medical literature,” they said.

Seizure phobia has been defined as an anxiety disorder in which patients experience fear related to anticipation of seizures in certain situations.

In a study published in Seizure: European Journal of Epilepsy, the researchers recruited 69 PWE who were treated at an outpatient clinic. Data were collected from interviews, questionnaires, and medical records. The average age of the participants was 36.8 years, 41 were women, and 41 were married.

Overall, 19 individuals (27.5%) were diagnosed with seizure phobia. Compared with PWE without seizure phobia, the seizure phobia patients were significantly more likely to be women (84.2% vs. 44.2%; P = .005) and to have comorbid anxiety disorders (84.2% vs. 34.9%; P = .01). Individuals with seizure phobia also were significantly more likely than those without seizure phobia to have a past major depressive episode (63.2% vs. 20.9%; P = .003), and posttraumatic stress disorder (26.3% vs. 7%; P = .05).

Seizure phobia was significantly associated with comorbid psychogenic nonepileptic seizures (PNES) (36.8% vs. 11.6%; P = .034). PNES have been significantly associated with panic attacks, and “all patients with both panic attacks and comorbid PNES were diagnosed with seizure phobia,” the researchers noted. However, no significant association was found with epilepsy-related variables, they said.

A multivariate logistic regression model to predict seizure phobia showed that anxiety and a past MDE were significant predictors; the odds of seizure phobia were 10.45 times higher if a patient reported any anxiety disorder, and 6.85 times higher if the patient had a history of MDE.

The study findings were limited by several factors, including the use of semistructured interviews to diagnose seizure phobia, which are subject to interviewer bias, and by the small study population with a high proportion of comorbid PNES and epilepsy, the researchers noted. However, the results support seizure phobia as a distinct clinical entity worthy of management with education, psychosocial interventions, and potential medication changes, they said.

“Development of appropriate screening tools and implementation of effective treatment interventions is warranted for individual patients, combined with large-scale population-targeted psychoeducation, aimed to mitigate the risk of developing seizure phobia in PWE,” they concluded.

The study received no outside funding. The researchers had no financial conflicts to disclose.
 

Seizure phobia occurs in nearly one-third of people with epilepsy (PWE), but was mainly associated with variables not related to epilepsy, based on data from 69 adults.

Anxiety and depression are known to affect quality of life in epilepsy patients, and previous studies have shown that anticipatory anxiety of epileptic seizures (AAS) was present in 53% of patients with focal epilepsy, wrote lead author Aviva Weiss of Psychiatric Hostels affiliated with Kidum Rehabilitation Projects, Jerusalem, and colleagues.

“Although recognized by the epilepsy and the psychiatric communities, seizure phobia as a distinct anxiety disorder among PWE is insufficiently described in the medical literature,” they said.

Seizure phobia has been defined as an anxiety disorder in which patients experience fear related to anticipation of seizures in certain situations.

In a study published in Seizure: European Journal of Epilepsy, the researchers recruited 69 PWE who were treated at an outpatient clinic. Data were collected from interviews, questionnaires, and medical records. The average age of the participants was 36.8 years, 41 were women, and 41 were married.

Overall, 19 individuals (27.5%) were diagnosed with seizure phobia. Compared with PWE without seizure phobia, the seizure phobia patients were significantly more likely to be women (84.2% vs. 44.2%; P = .005) and to have comorbid anxiety disorders (84.2% vs. 34.9%; P = .01). Individuals with seizure phobia also were significantly more likely than those without seizure phobia to have a past major depressive episode (63.2% vs. 20.9%; P = .003), and posttraumatic stress disorder (26.3% vs. 7%; P = .05).

Seizure phobia was significantly associated with comorbid psychogenic nonepileptic seizures (PNES) (36.8% vs. 11.6%; P = .034). PNES have been significantly associated with panic attacks, and “all patients with both panic attacks and comorbid PNES were diagnosed with seizure phobia,” the researchers noted. However, no significant association was found with epilepsy-related variables, they said.

A multivariate logistic regression model to predict seizure phobia showed that anxiety and a past MDE were significant predictors; the odds of seizure phobia were 10.45 times higher if a patient reported any anxiety disorder, and 6.85 times higher if the patient had a history of MDE.

The study findings were limited by several factors, including the use of semistructured interviews to diagnose seizure phobia, which are subject to interviewer bias, and by the small study population with a high proportion of comorbid PNES and epilepsy, the researchers noted. However, the results support seizure phobia as a distinct clinical entity worthy of management with education, psychosocial interventions, and potential medication changes, they said.

“Development of appropriate screening tools and implementation of effective treatment interventions is warranted for individual patients, combined with large-scale population-targeted psychoeducation, aimed to mitigate the risk of developing seizure phobia in PWE,” they concluded.

The study received no outside funding. The researchers had no financial conflicts to disclose.