Ketamine as an Anesthetic for Patients with Acute Brain Injury: A Systematic Review

Neurocritical Care - For years, the use of ketamine as an anesthetic to patients suffering from acute brain injury has been debated because of its possible deleterious effects on the cerebral...     

Communication Between HIV Patients and Their Providers: A Qualitative Preference Match Analysis

Since the introduction of cART (combination antiretroviral therapy), HIV has evolved into a chronic disease such that it requires lifelong medical treatment to which patients must adhere. Communication with health care providers is pivotal in supporting patients to adapt to having HIV and adhering to treatment, in order to maintain health and quality of life. Previous research indicates that communication is optimal when it matches patient preferences for information exchange, relationship establishment, and involvement in treatment decisions. The aim of the present study is to explore HIV patient communication preferences as well as patient experiences with their providers (not) matching their preferences. A second aim is to explore provider beliefs about patient preferences and provider views on optimal communication. Data were collected through interviews with 28 patients and 11 providers from two academic hospitals. Results indicate that patient preferences reflect their cognitive, emotional, and practical needs such that patients look to increase their sense of control over their HIV. Patients aim to further increase their sense of control (by proxy) through their relationship with their providers and through their decisional involvement preferences. Providers are well aware of patient communication preferences but do not explicate underlying control needs. Implications for clinical practice are discussed.     

Low-dose hydrocortisone in patients with COVID-19 and severe hypoxia (COVID STEROID) trial—Protocol and statistical analysis plan

Introduction

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 has caused a pandemic of coronavirus disease (COVID-19) with many patients developing hypoxic respiratory failure. Corticosteroids reduce the time on mechanical ventilation, length of stay in the intensive care unit and potentially also mortality in similar patient populations. However, corticosteroids have undesirable effects, including longer time to viral clearance. Clinical equipoise on the use of corticosteroids for COVID-19 exists.

Methods

The COVID STEROID trial is an international, randomised, stratified, blinded clinical trial. We will allocate 1000 adult patients with COVID-19 receiving ≥10 L/min of oxygen or on mechanical ventilation to intravenous hydrocortisone 200 mg daily vs placebo (0.9% saline) for 7 days. The primary outcome is days alive without life support (ie mechanical ventilation, circulatory support, and renal replacement therapy) at day 28. Secondary outcomes are serious adverse reactions at day 14; days alive without life support at day 90; days alive and out of hospital at day 90; all-cause mortality at day 28, day 90, and 1 year; and health-related quality of life at 1 year. We will conduct the statistical analyses according to this protocol, including interim analyses for every 250 patients followed for 28 days. The primary outcome will be compared using the Kryger Jensen and Lange test in the intention to treat population and reported as differences in means and medians with 95% confidence intervals.

Discussion

The COVID STEROID trial will provide important evidence to guide the use of corticosteroids in COVID-19 and severe hypoxia.

     

Epitope load identifies kidney transplant recipients at risk of allosensitization following minimization of immunosuppression

1. Download : Download high-res image (301KB)
2. Download : Download full-size image

     

Systematic overview of drug interactions with antidepressant medications.

OBJECTIVE: Antidepressants are commonly used drugs with potential for numerous drug interactions. This study aims to systematically review the literature on drug interactions with antidepressants. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE (1966 to November 2003) and EMBASE (1980 to 2003), using the heading drug interactions combined with individual antidepressant names. We restricted searches to English-language articles and human studies. We screened drug interaction texts and review articles for relevant studies. We included articles reporting original human data on drug interactions with antidepressants commonly used in North America. Articles were independently evaluated by 2 reviewers on clinical effect, clinical significance, and quality of evidence. Discrepancies were resolved by consensus. RESULTS: There were 904 eligible interactions, involving 9509 patients, for a total of 598 summary interactions. Of these, 439 (73%) demonstrated an interaction, 148 (25%) had no effect, and 11 (2%) had conflicting evidence. For 510 interactions (85%), the quality of evidence was poor. It was fair for 67 (11%) interactions and good for 10 (2%) interactions. There were no interactions with excellent quality of evidence. There were 145 (24%) interactions of major clinical significance. These were predominantly hypertensive emergencies and serotonin syndrome. Most interacting drugs had central nervous system (CNS) activity. As expected, monoamine oxidase inhibitors (MAOIs) appear to be the most problematic family in terms of potential for serious drug interactions. CONCLUSIONS: Drug interactions with antidepressants are an important cause for concern, but this concern is based primarily on poor evidence. We recommend caution when combining antidepressants with other CNS drugs, particularly when coadministering MAOIs with other substances.