Inconsistencies Between Actual and Estimated Blood Alcohol Concentrations in a Field Study of College Students: Do Students Really Know How Much They Drink?

BACKGROUND: Alcohol use by college students is commonly measured through the use of surveys. The validity of such data hinge on the assumption that students are aware of how much alcohol they actually consume. Recent studies call this assumption into question. Students tend to overestimate the appropriate sizes of standard drinks, suggesting that they might underestimate how much alcohol they consume. If this is true, then students' actual blood alcohol concentrations (BACs) should be higher than BACs estimated based on self-report data. The present study examined this issue METHODS: Breathalyzer readings and self-reported drinking data were collected from 152 college students during the fall of 2004. Estimated BACs were calculated by means of a standard formula, and the relation between actual and estimated BACs was examined. Factors contributing to discrepancies between the two values were identified RESULTS: Estimated BAC levels were significantly higher, not lower, than breath BAC measures. The accuracy of estimated BACs decreased as the number of drinks and amount of time spent drinking increased. Being male and drinking only beer predicted greater accuracy of estimated BACs CONCLUSIONS: Although laboratory data suggest that students underestimate how much they drink, the hypothesis was not supported by data collected in the field. It appears that students might actually overestimate rather than underestimate their levels of consumption when surveyed in the midst of a night of drinking. The findings corroborate observations made by other researchers and suggest that the findings of laboratory studies on college drinking do not necessarily extend to real-world settings.     

Prevalence of Noncardiac Multimorbidity in Patients Admitted to Two Cardiac Intensive Care Units and Their Association with Mortality

BackgroundCurrent cardiac intensive care unit (CICU) practice has seen an increase in patient complexity, including an increase in noncardiac organ failure, critical care therapies, and comorbidities. We sought to describe the changing epidemiology of noncardiac multimorbidity in the CICU population.MethodsWe analyzed consecutive unique patient admissions to 2 geographically distant tertiary care CICUs (n = 16,390). We assessed for the prevalence of 0, 1, 2, and ≥3 noncardiac comorbidities (diabetes, chronic lung, liver, and kidney disease, cancer, and stroke/transient ischemic attack) and their associations with hospital and postdischarge 1-year mortality using multivariable logistic regression.ResultsThe prevalence of 0, 1, 2, and ≥3 noncardiac comorbidities was 37.7%, 31.4%, 19.9%, and 11.0%, respectively. Increasing noncardiac comorbidities were associated with a stepwise increase in mortality, length of stay, noncardiac indications for ICU admission, and increased utilization of critical care therapies. After multivariable adjustment, compared with those without noncardiac comorbidities, there was an increased hospital mortality for patients with 1 (odds ratio [OR] 1.30; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.10-1.54, P = .002), 2 (OR 1.47; 95% CI, 1.22-1.77, P < .001), and ≥3 (OR 1.79; 95% CI, 1.44-2.22, P < .001) noncardiac comorbidities. Similar trends for each additional noncardiac comorbidity were seen for postdischarge 1-year mortality (P < .001, all).ConclusionsIn 2 large contemporary CICU populations, we found that noncardiac multimorbidity was highly prevalent and a strong predictor of short- and long-term adverse clinical outcomes. Further study is needed to define the best care pathways for CICU patients with acute cardiac illness complicated by noncardiac multimorbidity.     

Designing a Primary Care–Based Deprescribing Intervention for Patients with Dementia and Multiple Chronic Conditions: a Qualitative Study

BackgroundPatients with dementia and multiple chronic conditions (MCC) frequently experience polypharmacy, increasing their risk of adverse drug events.ObjectivesTo elucidate patient, family, and physician perspectives on medication discontinuation and recommended language for deprescribing discussions in order to inform an intervention to increase awareness of deprescribing among individuals with dementia and MCC, family caregivers and primary care physicians. We also explored participant views on culturally competent approaches to deprescribing.DesignQualitative approach based on semi-structured interviews with patients, caregivers, and physicians.ParticipantsPatients aged ≥ 65 years with claims-based diagnosis of dementia, ≥ 1 additional chronic condition, and ≥ 5 chronic medications were recruited from an integrated delivery system in Colorado and an academic medical center in Maryland. We included caregivers when present or if patients were unable to participate due to severe cognitive impairment. Physicians were recruited within the same systems and through snowball sampling, targeting areas with large African American and Hispanic populations.ApproachWe used constant comparison to identify and compare themes between patients, caregivers, and physicians.Key ResultsWe conducted interviews with 17 patients, 16 caregivers, and 16 physicians. All groups said it was important to earn trust before deprescribing, frame deprescribing as routine and positive, align deprescribing with goals of dementia care, and respect caregivers’ expertise. As in other areas of medicine, racial, ethnic, and language concordance was important to patients and caregivers from minority cultural backgrounds. Participants favored direct-to-patient educational materials, support from pharmacists and other team members, and close follow-up during deprescribing. Patients and caregivers favored language that explained deprescribing in terms of altered physiology with aging. Physicians desired communication tips addressing specific clinical situations.ConclusionsCulturally sensitive communication within a trusted patient-physician relationship supplemented by pharmacists, and language tailored to specific clinical situations may support deprescribing in primary care for patients with dementia and MCC.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1007/s11606-020-06063-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.KEY WORDS: deprescribing, patient-physician communication, dementia     

Safety and tolerability of linaclotide for the treatment of chronic idiopathic constipation and irritable bowel syndrome with constipation: pooled Phase 3 analysis

Background: Linaclotide is approved for treating irritable bowel syndrome with constipation (IBS-C; 290 µg QD) and chronic idiopathic constipation (CIC; 145 µg or 72 µg QD). These analyses aimed to assess linaclotide safety in a large, pooled Phase 3 population.

Methods: In six randomized controlled trials (RCTs), patients received linaclotide (72 µg, 145 µg, 290 µg) or placebo daily for 12–26 weeks; in two long-term safety (LTS) studies, patients received open-label linaclotide for ≤78 additional weeks. Laboratory values, vital signs, and treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were assessed.

Results: Overall, 3853 patients received ≥1 dose of linaclotide. The most common TEAE was diarrhea (majority [90.5% in RCTs] mild/moderate). Linaclotide patients experienced 1.1 diarrhea TEAE per patient-year in the RCTs (0.2 in placebo), and 0.3 in the LTS studies. In RCTs, 6.9% linaclotide and 3.0% placebo patients discontinued due to any adverse event (AE); 4.0% linaclotide and 0.3% placebo patients discontinued due to diarrhea. In LTS studies, 9.4% patients discontinued due to any AE, and 3.8% due to diarrhea. Serious AEs (SAEs) were rare and similar across treatment groups; there were no SAEs of diarrhea.

Conclusion: These pooled analyses of patients treated for ≤104 weeks confirm linaclotide’s overall safety.     

Familial leucine-sensitive hypoglycemia of infancy due to a dominant mutation of the beta-cell sulfonylurea receptor

Familial leucine-sensitive hypoglycemia of infancy was described in 1956 as a condition in which symptomatic hypoglycemia was provoked by protein meals or the amino acid, leucine. The purpose of this study was to determine the genetic basis for hypoglycemia in a family diagnosed with leucine-sensitive hypoglycemia in 1960. Recently diagnosed family members showed a dominantly transmitted pattern of diazoxide-responsive hyperinsulinism (HI). However, they did not fit the characteristics of HI caused by glutamate dehydrogenase gene mutations, previously felt to explain leucine-sensitive hypoglycemia. Islet function was examined using acute insulin response (AIR) tests to calcium, leucine, glucose, and tolbutamide as well as oral protein tolerance tests. Five of five affected family members showed an abnormal positive calcium AIR, and two of five showed a positive leucine AIR. Protein-induced hypoglycemia was demonstrated in five of six affected subjects. Mutation analysis of four known HI genes (sulfonylurea receptor 1, Kir6.2, glutamate dehydrogenase, and glucokinase) in family members identified an R1353H missense mutation in exon 33 of SUR1. (86)Rb(+) efflux and electrophysiological studies of R1353H SUR1 coexpressed with wild-type Kir6.2 in COSm6 cells demonstrated partially impaired ATP-dependent potassium channel function. Leucine-sensitive hypoglycemia in this family was found to result from a dominantly expressed SUR1 mutation.     

Single-dose azithromycin microspheres vs clarithromycin extended release for the treatment of mild-to-moderate community-acquired pneumonia in adults

BACKGROUND: Community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) is a major cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide. The inability or failure of many subjects to adhere to standard antibiotic regimens, which may last up to 10 days, results in suboptimal antibiotic treatment. Treatment with a single-dose antibiotic regimen may improve compliance with prescribed therapy. A novel microsphere formulation of azithromycin provides a single-dose regimen while maintaining tolerability. STUDY OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy and safety of a single 2.0-g dose of azithromycin microspheres to that of an extended-release formulation of clarithromycin (1.0 g/d for 7 days) for the treatment of adults with mild-to-moderate CAP. DESIGN: A phase III, multinational, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, double-dummy study, comparing single-dose azithromycin microspheres to extended-release clarithromycin, both administered orally. METHODS: Subjects with mild-to-moderate CAP (Fine class I and II) were included. The primary end point was clinical response at the test-of-cure (TOC) visit (days 14 to 21) in the clinical per protocol (CPP) population. The bacteriologic response at the TOC visit was assessed in subjects with a baseline pathogen. RESULTS: A total of 501 subjects were randomized, and 499 were treated. Clinical cure rates at the TOC visit in the CPP population were 92.6% (187 of 202 subjects) for azithromycin microspheres and 94.7% (198 of 209 subjects) for extended-release clarithromycin. Overall pathogen eradication rates were 91.8% (123 of 134 subjects) for azithromycin microspheres and 90.5% (153 of 169 subjects) for extended-release clarithromycin. Both agents were well tolerated. The incidence of treatment-related adverse events was 26.3% with azithromycin microspheres and 24.6% with extended-release clarithromycin. Most adverse events were mild to moderate in severity. CONCLUSION: A single 2.0-g dose of azithromycin microspheres was as effective and well tolerated as a 7-day course of extended-release clarithromycin in the treatment of adults with mild-to-moderate CAP.