The impact of transcutaneous electrical acustimulation (TEA) on rectal distension-induced pain in patients with irritable bowel syndrome (IBS)-A study to determine the optimal TEA delivery modalities and effects on rectal sensation and autonomic function.

BACKGROUND: Treatment options for abdominal pain in IBS are inadequate. TEA was reported effective treatment of disorders of gut-brain interaction but its mechanism of action and optimal delivery method for treating pain in IBS are unknown. This study aims to determine the most effective TEA parameter and location to treat abdominal pain in patients with IBS-Constipation and delineate the effect of TEA on rectal sensation and autonomic function. METHODS: Nineteen IBS-C patients underwent TEA at acupoints ST36 (leg), PC6 (wrist), or sham-acupoint. Each patient was studied in five randomized sessions on separate days: (1) TEA/ST36-100 Hz; (2) TEA/ST36-25 Hz; (3) TEA/PC6-100 Hz; (4) TEA/PC6-25 Hz; (5) TEA/Sham-25 Hz. In each session, barostat-guided rectal distention (RD) was performed before and after TEA. Patients graded the RD-induced pain and recorded three rectal sensation thresholds. A heart rate variability (HRV) signal was derived from the electrocardiogram for autonomic function assessment. KEY RESULTS: Studied patients were predominantly female, young, and Caucasian. Compared with baseline, patients treated with TEA/ST36-100 Hz had significantly decreased pain scores at RD pressure-points 20-50 mmHg (p < 0.04). The average pain reduction was 40%. Post-treatment scores did not change significantly with other TEA modalities except with sham-TEA (lesser degree compared to ST36-100 Hz, p = 0.04). TEA/ST36-100, but not other modalities, increased the rectal sensation threshold (first sensation: p = 0.007; urge to defecate: p < 0.026). TEA/ST36-100 Hz was the only treatment that significantly decreased sympathetic activity and increased parasympathetic activity with and without RD (p < 0.04). CONCLUSIONS & INFERENCES: TEA at ST36-100 Hz is superior stimulation point/parameter, compared to TEA at PC-6/sham-TEA, to reduce rectal distension-induced pain in IBS-C patients. This therapeutic effect appears to be mediated through rectal hypersensitivity reduction and autonomic function modulation.

Use of Impedance Planimetry in the Diagnosis of Gastric Sleeve Stenosis: The Establishment of New Benchmark Values.

INTRODUCTION: Gastric sleeve stenosis (GSS) is an increasingly common adverse event following sleeve gastrectomy for which objective diagnostic criteria are lacking. Impedance planimetry measurements show promise in characterizing GSS, though normal and abnormal benchmark values have never been established. METHODS: This was a retrospective analysis of upper endoscopies performed with impedance planimetry for suspected GSS. A bariatric endoscopist, blind to impedance planimetry measurements, assessed gastric sleeve anatomy and graded GSS severity. Impedance planimetry of diameter and distensibility index (DI) were obtained using 3 different balloon volumes (30, 40, and 50 mL). RESULTS: A total of 110 upper endoscopies were included. Distribution of GSS was graded as none, mild, moderate, and severe in 19 (17%), 27 (25%), 34 (31%), and 30 (27%) procedures, respectively. In normal gastric sleeve anatomy, mean (±SD) diameter and DI measurements using consecutive balloon volumes ranged from 19.1 (±5.5) to 23.2 (±1.7) and 16.8 (±4.9) to 23.1 (±10.9), respectively. In severe GSS, mean diameter and DI measurements ranged from 10.3 (±3.0) to 16.6 (±2.1) and 7.5 (±2.4) to 7.7 (±2.4), respectively. When stratified by severity, impedance planimetry measurements of diameter and DI were significantly lower with each subsequent increase in GSS grade regardless of balloon fill volumes ( P ≤ 0.001). DISCUSSION: Impedance planimetry measurements provide objective assessment in the diagnosis of GSS and correlate with luminal narrowing. A diameter ≥20 mm and a DI ≥15 mm 2 /mm Hg, as measured by impedance planimetry, are predictive of normal gastric sleeve anatomy. This study provides new benchmark values for the diagnosis and severity of GSS.

Buildout and integration of an automated high-throughput CLIA laboratory for SARS-CoV-2 testing on a large urban campus.

In 2019, the first cases of SARS-CoV-2 were detected in Wuhan, China, and by early 2020 the first cases were identified in the United States. SARS-CoV-2 infections increased in the US causing many states to implement stay-at-home orders and additional safety precautions to mitigate potential outbreaks. As policies changed throughout the pandemic and restrictions lifted, there was an increase in demand for COVID-19 testing which was costly, difficult to obtain, or had long turn-around times. Some academic institutions, including Boston University (BU), created an on-campus COVID-19 screening protocol as part of a plan for the safe return of students, faculty, and staff to campus with the option for in-person classes. At BU, we put together an automated high-throughput clinical testing laboratory with the capacity to run 45,000 individual tests weekly by Fall of 2020, with a purpose-built clinical testing laboratory, a multiplexed reverse transcription PCR (RT-qPCR) test, robotic instrumentation, and trained staff. There were many challenges including supply chain issues for personal protective equipment and testing materials in addition to equipment that were in high demand. The BU Clinical Testing Laboratory (CTL) was operational at the start of Fall 2020 and performed over 1 million SARS-CoV-2 PCR tests during the 2020-2021 academic year.

Assessment of a COVID-19 Control Plan on an Urban University Campus During a Second Wave of the Pandemic.

Importance: The COVID-19 pandemic has severely disrupted US educational institutions. Given potential adverse financial and psychosocial effects of campus closures, many institutions developed strategies to reopen campuses in the fall 2020 semester despite the ongoing threat of COVID-19. However, many institutions opted to have limited campus reopening to minimize potential risk of spread of SARS-CoV-2. Objective: To analyze how Boston University (BU) fully reopened its campus in the fall of 2020 and controlled COVID-19 transmission despite worsening transmission in Boston, Massachusetts. Design, Setting, and Participants: This multifaceted intervention case series was conducted at a large urban university campus in Boston, Massachusetts, during the fall 2020 semester. The BU response included a high-throughput SARS-CoV-2 polymerase chain reaction testing facility with capacity to deliver results in less than 24 hours; routine asymptomatic screening for COVID-19; daily health attestations; adherence monitoring and feedback; robust contact tracing, quarantine, and isolation in on-campus facilities; face mask use; enhanced hand hygiene; social distancing recommendations; dedensification of classrooms and public places; and enhancement of all building air systems. Data were analyzed from December 20, 2020, to January 31, 2021. Main Outcomes and Measures: SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis confirmed by reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction of anterior nares specimens and sources of transmission, as determined through contact tracing. Results: Between August and December 2020, BU conducted more than 500 000 COVID-19 tests and identified 719 individuals with COVID-19, including 496 students (69.0%), 11 faculty (1.5%), and 212 staff (29.5%). Overall, 718 individuals, or 1.8% of the BU community, had test results positive for SARS-CoV-2. Of 837 close contacts traced, 86 individuals (10.3%) had test results positive for COVID-19. BU contact tracers identified a source of transmission for 370 individuals (51.5%), with 206 individuals (55.7%) identifying a non-BU source. Among 5 faculty and 84 staff with SARS-CoV-2 with a known source of infection, most reported a transmission source outside of BU (all 5 faculty members [100%] and 67 staff members [79.8%]). A BU source was identified by 108 of 183 undergraduate students with SARS-CoV-2 (59.0%) and 39 of 98 graduate students with SARS-CoV-2 (39.8%); notably, no transmission was traced to a classroom setting. Conclusions and Relevance: In this case series of COVID-19 transmission, BU used a coordinated strategy of testing, contact tracing, isolation, and quarantine, with robust management and oversight, to control COVID-19 transmission in an urban university setting.

Costs and Effectiveness of Interventions to Reduce Motor Vehicle-Related Injuries and Deaths: Supplement to Tool Documentation.

Motor vehicle crashes account for a large number of deaths and injuries. In the United States, in 2015, more than 35,000 people were killed and approximately 2.44 million were injured in motor vehicle crashes. In 2010, the economic costs associated with motor vehicle crashes in the United States were substantial, estimated to be $242 billion. Fortunately, a wide range of evidence-based interventions, including both policies and programs, can help prevent motor vehicle-related injuries and deaths. In 2014, RAND researchers developed an online tool, the Motor Vehicle Prioritizing Interventions and Cost Calculator for States (MV PICCS), to help determine the costs and effectiveness of various interventions to reduce injuries and deaths from motor vehicle crashes and what interventions together generate the largest reductions in injuries and deaths for a given implementation budget. A 2015 update added two new interventions and produced a series of reports about allocating traffic safety funds. The 2017 update, MV PICCS 3.0, determined whether to add new interventions, updated information on the interventions' effectiveness and costs, and redesigned the tool's user interface to be more user-friendly.