Dying is the Most Grown-Up Thing We Ever Do: But Do Health Care Professionals Prevent Us from Taking It Seriously?

This paper takes a somewhat slant perspective on flourishing and care in the context of suffering, death and dying, arguing that care in this context consists principally of ‘acts of work and courage that enable flourishing’. Starting with the perception that individuals, society and health care professionals have become dulled to death and the process of dying in Western advanced health systems, it suggests that for flourishing to occur, both of these aspects of life need to be faced more directly. The last days of life need to be ‘undulled’. Reflections upon the experiences of the author as carer and daughter in the face of her mother’s experience of death are used as basis for making suggestions about how care systems and professionals might better assist people in dealing with ‘the most grown up thing’ humans ever do, which is to die.     

Nanomedicines: From Bench to Bedside and Beyond

Advancing nanomedicines from concept to clinic requires integration of new science with traditional pharmaceutical development. The medical and commercial success of nanomedicines is greatly facilitated when those charged with developing nanomedicines are cognizant of the unique opportunities and technical challenges that these products present. These individuals must also be knowledgeable about the processes of clinical and product development, including regulatory considerations, to maximize the odds for successful product registration. This article outlines these topics with a goal to accelerate the combination of academic innovation with collaborative industrial scientists who understand pharmaceutical development and regulatory approval requirements—only together can they realize the full potential of nanomedicines for patients.     

Reciprocal Peer Support for Post-partum Patients with Diabetes: A Needs Assessment for the Diabetes Buddy Program

While peer support has been investigated in multiple clinical contexts, its application to the postpartum setting is unknown. The aim was to assess acceptability of a postpartum peer support program for women with diabetes. Observational survey-based needs assessment of forty low-income women with diabetes, receiving care at a major medical institution. Mean age and gravidity were 30.7 years and 3.15 ± 1.67 respectively. 45 % expressed interest in a “buddy.” There was no significant difference between groups desiring and not desiring this program. A majority of respondents desired telephone, text messaging, and in-person contacts (79.2, 72.1, 83.8 %), with 72.5 % of patients desiring diabetes-related activities during clinic waiting time. Many women desire a postpartum diabetes reciprocal peer program for support outside of clinician visits. Patients are receptive to educational services during their wait and outside of clinic time, a potentially valuable opportunity to share important health information.     

Accuracy of MRI-guided Versus Systematic Prostate Biopsy in Patients Under Active Surveillance: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

This meta-analysis focuses on the accuracy of upgrading to clinically significant prostate cancer (PCa) by multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging-targeted biopsy (MRI-TB) versus systematic biopsy (SB). We searched the Medline, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Web of Science, Scopus, and Literatura Latino Americana em Ciências da Saúde databases through January 2020 for comparative, retrospective/prospective, paired-cohort, and randomized clinical trials with paired comparisons. The population consisted of patients with low-risk PCa in active surveillance with at least 1 index lesion on imaging. We evaluated the quality of evidence by using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 score. Group comparisons considered the differences between the area under the curve summary receiver operating characteristic curve in a 2-tailed method. We also compared the positive predictive value of the best single method (MRI-TB or SB) and the referral study test (combined biopsy, a combination of MRI-TB and SB). The meta-analysis included 6 studies enrolling 741 patients. The pooled sensitivity for the 2 groups was 0.79 (95% confidence interval, 0.74-0.83; I² = 75%) and 0.67 (95% confidence interval, 0.63-0.74; I² = 55.4%), respectively. The area under the curve for the MRI-TB and SB groups were 0.99 and 0.92 (P < .001), respectively. The positive predictive value for the MRI-TB and combined biopsy groups were similar. The accumulated evidence suggests better results for MRI-TB compared with SB. Therefore, use of MRI-TB alone may be preferable in patients in active surveillance harboring low-risk PCa.