Patient Preferences for Preventive Healthcare During the COVID-19 Pandemic in a Large Integrated Health System.

The COVID-19 pandemic caused healthcare systems and patients to cancel or postpone healthcare services, particularly preventive care. Many patients still have not received these services raising concerns about the potential for preventable morbidity and mortality. At Sutter Health, a large integrated healthcare system in Northern California, we conducted a population-based email survey in August 2020 to evaluate perceptions and preferences about where, when, and how healthcare is delivered during the COVID-19 pandemic. In total, 3351 patients completed surveys, and 42.6% reported that they would "wait until they felt safe" before receiving a colonoscopy as compared to 22.4% for a mammogram. The doctor's office was the most common preferred location for receiving vaccines/shots (79.9%), though many also reported preferring an outdoor setting or in a car (63.7%). With over 40% of patients reporting that they would "wait until they feel safe" for a colonoscopy, healthcare systems could focus on promoting other evidence-based options such a fecal-occult blood test to ensure timely colon cancer screening.

Recruitment of participants to a multiple sclerosis trial: the CombiRx experience.

BACKGROUND: and purpose Participant recruitment is central to all clinical trials. Any delay in recruitment affects the completion and ultimate success of the trial. We report our experience with patient screening and randomization in CombiRx, which may inform the design of other trials. CombiRx was a multicenter, phase III, double-blind, randomized clinical trial comparing the combined use of interferon beta-1a and glatiramer acetate to either agent alone in patients with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS). This trial was launched in January 2005 in 69 centers in the United States and Canada under a co-operative agreement with the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (NINDS). The goal was to recruit 1000 patients over 1.5 years after a 6-month start-up period. Instead, the investigators required 4.25 years to enroll 1008 patients. METHODS: During this trial, we assessed the effectiveness of various recruitment strategies, utility of rescreening prior screen failures, and potential factors and strategies used in study conduct, research, and infrastructure, all of which affected recruitment of participants and ultimately time to completion of CombiRx. We particularly were interested in the variability in time to site initiation between academic centers and private practice sites. RESULTS: Physicians who were directly involved in the medical care of patients with RRMS were the primary source of patients recruited to CombiRx. A flexible study design that allowed for rescreening of the initial screen failures after a period of time was useful due to the relapsing/remitting course of the disease. Academic centers took longer to implement the trial than the private practice centers, but once sites were approved for enrollment, there was no important difference in the number of participants enrolled. LIMITATIONS: The CombiRx trial was conducted during a period when multiple new medications were being tested, thus affecting the pace of recruitment and limiting ability to generalize our experiences. However, the lessons we learned about process are relevant. CONCLUSION: Participants can be enrolled successfully in a clinical trial for RRMS, but factors affecting the time to achieve the requirements needed to start screening can be unpredictable and problematic. Prospective planning by the sponsors and investigators, use of central institutional review boards (IRBs), master trial agreements and secure remote desktop access to the trial database may expedite trial implementation and participant recruitment. A good scientific research question with flexible study design and active involvement of the clinicians are important factors driving recruitment. Clinical trials can be implemented successfully both in private practices and at academic centers, a consideration when selecting sites.

Human herpes 6 virus encephalitis complicating allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the presentation and management of encephalitis due to human herpes 6 virus (HHV-6) in patients who underwent allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplant (alloHSCT), via retrospective chart review. METHODS: Of the 243 patients who underwent alloHSCT at the NIH Clinical Center during 2009 to 2011, we retrospectively analyzed 9 diagnosed with HHV-6 encephalitis post-alloHSCT. RESULTS: Eight men and 1 woman (aged 19-60 years) met diagnostic criteria for study inclusion. The median time from HSCT to initial symptoms was 21 days. All patients presented with altered mental status and headaches. Seven patients had amnesia and 2 presented with fever of unknown etiology. Four patients had clinical seizures during the disease course. Brain MRI within 7 days was normal in all patients. Repeat MRI after 7 days showed hyperintensity in the limbic area in 3 patients. On initial testing, CSF analysis indicated acellularity and normal or minimally elevated protein; presence of HHV-6 was detected by PCR. After 7 days, mildly elevated protein and minimal pleocytosis were noted. Ganciclovir, foscarnet, or valganciclovir alone or in combination was initiated with subsequent improvement. Four patients remained alive at 1 year posttransplant; 2 had persistent memory deficits. Presence of encephalitis was associated with higher mortality post-alloHSCT. CONCLUSION: High clinical suspicion and CSF PCR testing are important for early diagnosis of HHV-6 encephalitis post-HSCT. Abnormalities on brain MRI or CSF testing may be minimal and delayed. Diagnosis and management of HHV-6 encephalitis is challenging, and a larger prospective study is needed for further research.

Peripheral neuropathy: differential diagnosis and management.

Peripheral neuropathy has a variety of systemic, metabolic, and toxic causes. The most common treatable causes include diabetes mellitus, hypothyroidism, and nutritional deficiencies. The diagnosis requires careful clinical assessment, judicious laboratory testing, and electrodiagnostic studies or nerve biopsy if the diagnosis remains unclear. A systematic approach begins with localization of the lesion to the peripheral nerves, identification of the underlying etiology, and exclusion of potentially treatable causes. Initial blood tests should include a complete blood count, comprehensive metabolic profile, and measurement of erythrocyte sedimentation rate and fasting blood glucose, vitamin B12, and thyroid-stimulating hormone levels; specialized tests should be ordered if clinically indicated. Lumbar puncture and cerebrospinal fluid analysis may be helpful in the diagnosis of Guillain-Barré syndrome and chronic inflammatory demyelinating neuropathy. Electrodiagnostic studies, including nerve conduction studies and electromyography, can help in the differentiation of axonal versus demyelinating or mixed neuropathy. Treatment should address the underlying disease process, correct any nutritional deficiencies, and provide symptomatic treatment.

Treatment of ocular symptoms in myasthenia gravis.

BACKGROUND: The choice between acetyl-cholinesterase inhibitors (AChE-Is) and steroids as symptomatic therapy for ocular symptoms in myasthenia is controversial. METHODS: Thirty-five patients with myasthenia and ocular symptoms were evaluated by a single investigator. The ocular-quantitative myasthenia gravis (QMG) score was determined at each visit. The longitudinal construct validity of the ocular-QMG was assessed. Treatment epochs on AChE-I therapy alone or on steroids were defined for each patient. Changes in ocular-QMG scores between the start and end of each treatment epoch as well as the proportion of subjects achieving remission of symptoms were documented. The frequency of steroid-induced side effects was documented. RESULTS: The longitudinal construct validity was favorable and comparable to that for the total QMG score. Eight patients were treated with AChE-I therapy alone, 6 were initially treated with AChE-I followed by steroids, and 21 received steroids ab initio. There were 14 epochs of AChE-I treatment and 27 epochs of steroid treatment. The mean improvement in ocular-QMG score was greater during the steroid epoch (3.6 +/- 2.4) than during the AChE-I epoch (1.1 +/- 1.9) (p = 0.0021). Complete resolution of ocular symptoms occurred in 29% of AChE-I treatment epochs and in 70% of steroid treatment epochs. The most common steroid-induced side effects observed were impaired glucose tolerance (67%) and reduced bone mineral density (20%). CONCLUSION: The ocular-quantitative myasthenia gravis score may be a useful tool for monitoring ocular symptom severity in myasthenia. Steroids appear to be more effective than acetyl-cholinesterase inhibitors. These findings warrant a more formal evaluation in a randomized controlled trial.

The evaluation and management of patients with neuroleptic malignant syndrome.

NMS is a rare but fatal syndrome that needs to be considered in the perioperative period. Although many aspects remain unexplored and controversial, with greater awareness of the condition, new concepts are coming into light. Definitive treatment guidelines remain an important issue to be addressed. Efforts have been initiated in that direction and all cases can be reported on a toll-free hotline ( 1-888-667-8367) or online (www.nmsis.org).