Assurance for Endurance? Introducing a Novel Ergonomics Curriculum to Reduce Pain and Enhance Physical Well-Being Among GI Fellows.

Musculoskeletal pain and injuries (MSKPI) are common among gastroenterologists (GI) and GI fellows. Common areas of pain include the back, neck, hands/fingers, shoulders, and elbows. Although the prevalence of career-related pain and injuries among GIs is high, few endoscopists receive training in how to prevent MSKPI. We developed an ergonomics curriculum for our GI fellows that consisted of two modules that were led by physical therapists. Twelve out of 15 GI fellows, and one out of two hepatology fellows, participated in Module 1. Prior to the first module, 77% of participants reported pain in one or more body parts. Of those who reported pain, 100% of the fellows stated that this pain occurred during procedures, and 50% indicated this pain was performance-limiting. After completing Module 1, 100% of fellows reported that this was a valuable topic and 100% of the participants felt that this information would both help them feel and perform better. All fellows stated they had an immediate decrease in physical discomfort after engaging in the exercises that were included in Module 1. Eight fellows participated in Module 2. At the end of this module, 100% of fellows reported that this ergonomics training would likely help them to "physically perform better during procedures" and 100% of fellows indicated a reduction of physical discomfort (pain, aching) immediately after completing these exercises. Preliminary data indicated that this novel curriculum was perceived as valuable by GI fellows and that practicing these exercises reduced pain, particularly in the neck and the lower back.

Correlation of ELISA-detected IgG and IgA anti-HLA antibodies in pretransplant sera with renal allograft rejection.

The present study compared the occurrence of rejection episodes during the first twelve posttransplant (Tx) months and the 1-, 2-, and 3-year graft survivals among recipients stratified by the percent panel reactive antibody (% PRA) of pre-Tx sera as detected using either an antihuman globulin determined PRA (AHG-% PRA) or an ELISA methodology detecting IgG reactive against soluble HLA class I antigens (% PRA-STAT). There was a significant correlation between AHG-PRA greater than or equal to 10% and a PRA-STAT greater than or equal to 10% (P<0.001). However, among 200 sera displaying an AHG-PRA greater than or equal to 10% (mean 57 +/- 2l%), only 69% (138/200) displayed a PRA-STAT greater than or equal to 10%. With further study the discrepant finding, of 62 sera that were AHG-PRA greater than or equal to 10% but PRA-STAT <10%, was due to the presence of IgM and/or IgG non-MHC reactivity. In contrast, among 293 sera displaying an AHG-PRA < 100% (mean 3 +/- 2%), 15% (43/293) displayed a PRA-STAT greater than or equal to 10%. There was no correlation between AHG-% PRA and rejection episodes occurring during the first twelve post Tx months. In contrast, however, there was a highly significant correlation between PRA-STAT greater than or equal to 10% and the occurrence of rejection episodes during the first twelve post-Tx months (P < 0.001). Patients with PRA-STAT greater than of equal to 10% experienced a 70% rejection frequency compared with the 35% rejection frequency for patients with PRA-STAT sera < 10% (P<0.001). A significant correlation was observed between the presence of IgG-1 and rejection (P<0.01) but not IgG-subclasses 2, 3, or 4. Of particular interest was the observation in 11 patients that the presence of ELISA-detected IgA anti-HLA class I antigen (ELISA-IgA PRA greater than or equal to 10%) was associated with a significantly reduced rejection risk compared with sera where only PRA-STAT greater than or equal to 10% was present (27% vs. 70% incidence of rejection episodes, P<0.01). Finally, patients displaying pretransplant PRA-STAT results < 10% experienced significantly improved l-, 2-, and 3- year graft survivals of 85% vs. 74%, 82% vs. 70% and 81% vs. 67%, respectively (P<0.01 for each time point), compared with patients displaying PRA-STAT results greater than or equal to 10%. These data suggest that the use of the ELISA methodology to detect IgG reactivity against soluble HLA class I antigens (PRA-STAT) may allow for the determination of a more clinically informative % PRA than the AHG-% PRA. Moreover, the presence of ELISA-detected IgA anti-HLA may act to inhibit rejection mechanisms associated with ELISA-detected IgG anti-HLA greater than or equal to 10%.

Comparison of PRA-STAT, sHLA-EIA, and anti-human globulin-panel reactive antibody to identify alloreactivity in pretransplantation sera of heart transplant recipients: correlation to rejection and posttransplantation coronary artery disease.

BACKGROUND: Screening pretransplantation recipient sera for percent panel reactive antibodies (%PRA) by an anti-human globulin (AHG) assay may identify recipients who are at risk for graft rejection or development of posttransplantation coronary artery disease. However, the pretransplantation AHG-%PRA does not always correlate with the occurrence of graft rejection or coronary artery disease. METHODS: We compared the predictive capacity of the AHG-%PRA with that of an enzyme-linked immunoassay (EIA)-based PRA assay that identifies immunoglobulin G bound to soluble human leukocyte antigen (sHLA) class I molecules from pooled platelets of 240 random donors (sHLA-EIA), and that of an EIA-based assay that detects immunoglobulin G anti-HLA class I antibodies bound to sHLA derived from individual HLA-typed cell cultures (PRA-STAT). The pretransplantation sera from 130 cardiac allograft recipients were comparatively tested and results evaluated. RESULTS: Although AHG-%PRA- and sHLA-EIA-determined PRA results were comparable, neither assay discriminated potential recipients at risk for rejection or coronary artery disease. However, cardiac allograft recipients with pretransplantation PRA-STAT sera > 10% were at risk for (1) graft rejection (77% vs 56%, p < .05); (2) more rejections/recipient (1.9 vs 1.0, p < .02); (3) graft rejection within 30 days (92% vs 38%, p < .001); or (4) development of coronary artery disease (48% vs 23%, p < .05) than recipients with pretransplantation PRA-STAT sera < 10%. CONCLUSIONS: PRA-STAT analysis of pretransplantation sera from potential cardiac allograft recipients may be more clinically informative about HLA alloimmunity and a better predictor of adverse clinical events than either AHG-%PRA- or sHLA-EIA-determined PRA.