Showing posts with label Cause. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Cause. Show all posts

Saturday, 22 June 2013

Clinical Notes: Cause of Death Often False

Register Today

Earn Free CME Credits by reading the latest medical news in your specialty.

Sign Up
By John Gever, Deputy Managing Editor, MedPage Today

Causes of death listed on official records have long been suspect, and a survey of medical residents in New York City found good reason for that. Also this week: a promising lymphoma drug fails.

Resident Survey: Don't Believe Official Cause of Death

Half of medical residents in New York City said in a survey that they had written a diagnosis of death they believed was false, researchers said.

Led by Keith Rose, MD, of St. Luke's-Roosevelt Hospital Center in New York City, the survey was completed by 521 residents in internal medicine, general surgery, and emergency medicine at 26 institutions across the city.

One problem appeared to be that septic shock was not accepted as a cause of death in the record system used in New York -- 70% of respondents said they had listed an alternative cause of death because septic shock was not an option, according to the researchers' report in May 9 issue of the the CDC's Preventing Chronic Disease publication.

Some 40% indicated that personnel in the admitting office had instructed them to record a cause of death other than what the respondents considered to be true, and about 30% said the medical examiner told them what to put.

Also of note, only 20% of residents knew they could use terms such as "probable," "presumed", or "undetermined" on the death certificate, and only 3% had ever amended a death certificate on the basis of later information.

Lilly Pulls Plug on Lymphoma Drug

Eli Lilly and Co. said it would stop development of enzastaurin, after a phase III study in diffuse large B-cell lymphoma patients failed to show a benefit against placebo.

The firm had tested the drug in a variety of cancers. An earlier study in ovarian cancer was also negative, but it had shown promise for other diseases including lymphoma.

Enzastaurin is a serine-threonine kinase inhibitor that inhibits tumor angiogenesis by targeting protein kinase C-beta and the PI3K/AKT pathway.

The lymphoma trial had enrolled patients at high risk of relapse after chemotherapy including rituximab (Rituxan). Lilly had hoped the drug would prevent or delay relapses relative to the placebo group.

You Could Put Your Eye Out

Following a Consumers Union report slamming eyelash extensions as unsafe, the American Academy of Ophthalmology issued a statement largely agreeing.

The academy "cautions consumers about the dangers of cosmetic eyelash extensions and the adhesives used to apply them to eyelids," according to the statement.

Infections of the cornea or eyelid, swelling of the eyelid, and potentially permanent loss of eyelashes are the specific risks, the statement indicated.

Consumers should make sure that salon workers practice good hand hygiene and should also "check the eyelash adhesive ingredients before use." However, the statement did not indicate what consumers should specifically look for.

FDA Approves Computerized Propofol System

A computer-assisted, personalized sedation system for delivering intravenous propofol, sold under the name Sedasys by an Ethicon Endo-Surgery division of the same name, was approved by the FDA, the firm said.

The device is designed to "enabl[e] physician-led teams to administer minimal-to-moderate propofol sedation, personalized to the needs of each patient, by precisely integrating drug delivery and comprehensive patient monitoring," Sedasys said in a statement.

It is indicated for delivering 1% propofol solutions to patients undergoing colonoscopy and upper GI endoscopy procedures. Sedasys estimated that 15 million patients would be candidates for such sedation annually in the U.S.

Actual product launch is slated for early 2014, the company said.

Treat Asian Bird Markets Like Hospital Rooms?

Researchers in Great Britain and Vietnam suggested that transmission of avian influenza -- whether H5N1, H7N9, or others yet to emerge -- could be stemmed by targeting certain live bird markets for daily disinfection.

Guillaume Fournie, DVM, MSc, PhD, of the Royal Veterinary College in Hatfield, England, and colleagues performed a computer analysis indicating that a relatively small number of live bird markets serve as local hubs for the Asian poultry industry. These can be identified by interviewing sellers to determine their travel habits and where they buy and sell birds.

After-hours disinfection of these hub markets on a daily basis would go a long way toward keeping bird flu outbreaks from spreading to other regions, as has been the case with H5N1 strains.

However, the effectiveness of such interventions is uncertain, and the researchers did not attempt to test it themselves. Their report appeared in the May 6 Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

FDA Warns on Kadcyla Name

Nothing is known to be wrong with the new breast cancer drug sold as Kadcyla, but its generic name could cause confusion, the FDA said.

The officially approved generic name is ado-trastuzumab emtansine, the FDA said, but many electronic records systems, medical publishers, and other third-party information sources have called it simply trastuzumab emtansine without the ado- prefix.

This could lead to errors in prescribing, with patients given trastuzumab (Herceptin) instead of the newer drug, the FDA said.

"It is important for drug information content publishers to identify drug products by the FDA-approved proprietary (brand) and nonproprietary names that are used in FDA-approved drug labels. This will help prevent medication errors and ensure adverse events are reported for the correct product," an FDA statement said.

Product Recalls

The FDA announced several drug and device recalls last week, including these:

As always, the FDA urged healthcare professionals to report adverse events associated with medical products to the agency's MedWatch system.

John Gever

Senior Editor

John Gever, Senior Editor, has covered biomedicine and medical technology for 30 years. He holds a B.S. from the University of Michigan and an M.S. from Boston University. Now based in Pittsburgh, he is the daily assignment editor for MedPage Today as well as general factotum on the reporting side. Go Pirates/Penguins/Steelers!

Thursday, 20 June 2013

AMD Remains Leading Cause of Vision Loss (CME/CE)

Register Today

Earn Free CME Credits by reading the latest medical news
in your specialty.

Sign Up
By Cole Petrochko, Staff Writer, MedPage Today Reviewed by Robert Jasmer, MD; Associate Clinical Professor of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco and Dorothy Caputo, MA, BSN, RN, Nurse PlannerAge-related macular degeneration remained the most common cause of severe visual impairment over a 20-year period.Note that the incidence of visual impairment increased with age.

Age-related macular degeneration (AMD) remained the most common cause of severe visual impairment over a 20-year period, researchers found.

In a study of nearly 5,000 people, of the 184 eyes with severe visual impairment at the patient's first visit and the 256 eyes in which severe visual impairment developed between visits, late age-related macular degeneration was the primary cause in 44% of eyes, followed by branch or central retinal vein occlusion in 8% and cataract in 10%, according to Ronald Klein, MD, of the University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health in Madison, and colleagues.

Rates of the condition "changed little over the 20 years of the study," they wrote online in the journal Ophthalmology.

However, the overall odds of incidence of visual impairment decreased from the first 5-year period studied to the last by 47% (OR 0.53, 95% CI 0.32 to 0.87, P=0.01), the authors noted.

Little research has been done to track trends in incidence of visual impairment over long periods of time and these details may be important because of an aging U.S. population, "who are most vulnerable to loss of vision resulting from age-related diseases," the investigators wrote in their introduction.

They analyzed 20-year trends in visual impairment and associations with age-related eye diseases and socioeconomic factors as found in the Beaver Dam Eye Study, a population-based cohort study.

The study included a baseline population of 4,926 participants ages 43 to 86 who were followed from 1988 to 1990, 3,721 participants who were followed up from 1993 to 1995, 2,962 participants followed up from 1998 to 2000, 2,375 participants followed up from 2003 to 2005, and 1,913 participants followed up from 2008 to 2010. The main reason for nonparticipation in the follow-up visits was death.

Outcomes included incidence of visual impairment and severe visual impairment. Visual impairment was defined as best-corrected visual acuity of poorer than 20/40 in the better eye among participants whose eyes both measured 20/40 or better at the beginning of a 5-year interval. Severe visual impairment was similarly defined using a measure of 20/200.

Mean participant age from the beginning to the end of the study increased from 62 years at baseline to 75.4. The study population included a great increase in the proportion of participants ages 85 and older, from 1% at baseline to 15% at the end of the fifth 5-year interval.

Of 9,548 person-visits, visual impairment developed in 1.4% (95% CI 1.1% to 1.6%) and severe visual impairment developed in 0.4% (95% CI 0.2% to 0.5%) of person-visits. Incidence was associated with age and ranged from 01.% among patients ages 50 to 54 to 14.6% among patients age 85 and older.

There were no statistically significant interactions between time period and age, nor was there a statistically significant difference in visual impairment between time periods, except with a comparison of periods 1 and 2 with periods 4 and 5, when incidence dropped by nearly half.

Additionally, a significant interaction between age, income, and age-related macular degeneration with incident visual impairment, cataract status, and cataract-age interaction was observed, though data on this interaction were not reported.

Overall incidence of severe visual impairment was associated with age, with no patients ages 50 to 54 and 60 to 64 reporting severe visual impairment, compared with 0.2% of patients ages 70 to 74, 1.6% of patients ages 80 to 84, and 6.9% of patients ages 85 and older. Age and age-related macular degeneration were associated with severe visual impairment incidence.

"Although the decline in incidence of impairment is not statistically significant after adjustment for age-related macular degeneration, the suggestions of a period effect may have public health implications," they concluded. "Age-related macular degeneration remained the leading cause of severe visual impairment in the [study], affecting a similar proportion of eyes throughout the 20 years."

The authors suggested that continued surveillance of visual impairment is needed to monitor changes in incidence and prevalence of impairment and the diseases associated with it in order to derive a cost-benefit analysis of new interventions.

They added that the study was limited by selective survival and visual acuity measures tainted by cognitive decline and comorbidities.

The study was funded by the National Institutes of Health, Research to Prevent Blindness, and the National Eye Institute.

The authors declared no conflicts of interest.

Primary source: Ophthalmology
Source reference:
Klein R, et al "Incidence of visual impairment over a 20-year period" Ophthalmology 2013; DOI: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2013.11.041.

Cole Petrochko

Staff Writer

Cole Petrochko started his journalism career at MedPage Today in 2009, after graduating from New York University with B.A.s in Journalism and Psychology. When not writing for MedPage Today, he blogs about nerd culture, designs websites, and buys and sells collectible card game cards. He is based out of MedPage Today's Little Falls, N.J. Headquarters.