Impact of the government's restrictions and guidance in relation to "social distancing" on the lives of ethnic minority populations: A mixed methods study.

Background and Aims: The impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic have not been equal, with a disproportionate impact among ethnic minority communities. Structural inequalities in social determinants of health such as housing and employment have contributed to COVID-19's impact on deprived communities, including many ethnic minority communities. To compare (1) how the UK government's "social distancing" restrictions and guidance were perceived and implemented by ethnic minority populations compared to white populations, (2) the impact of restrictions and guidance upon these groups. Methods: An explanatory sequential mixed methods study incorporated a quantitative survey and qualitative semi-structured interviews to explore individual perceptions and experiences of COVID-19 and the national restrictions. Survey participants (n = 1587) were recruited from North West England; 60 (4%) participants were from ethnic minority communities. Forty-nine interviews were conducted; 19 (39%) participants were from ethnic minority communities. Interviews were transcribed verbatim and analysed using a thematic approach. Data collection was between April and August 2020. Results: Significant differences in demographics and household overcrowding were observed between white vs ethnic minority survey respondents, who were also significantly less confident in their knowledge of COVID-19, less likely to be high-risk drinkers, and marginally more likely to have experienced job loss and/or reduced household income. There were no group differences in wellbeing, perceptions, or nonfinancial impacts. Two inter-related themes included: (1) government guidance, incorporating people's knowledge and understanding of the guidance and their confusion/frustration over messaging; (2) the impacts of restrictions on keyworkers, home-schooling, working from home and changes in lifestyle/wellbeing. Conclusions: Further research is needed on the long-term impacts of COVID-19 on ethnic minority communities. If policy responses to COVID-19 are to benefit ethnic minority communities, there is a need for future studies to consider fundamental societal issues, such as the role of housing and economic disadvantage.

Characterization of industry relationships in oncology.

BACKGROUND: Collaborative relationships between academic oncology and industry (pharmaceutical, biotechnology, "omic," and medical device companies) are essential for therapeutic development in oncology; however, limited research on engagement in and perceptions of these relationships has been done. METHODS: Survey questions were developed to evaluate relationships between academic oncology and industry. An electronic survey was delivered to 1000 randomly selected members of the American Society of Clinical Oncology, a professional organization for oncologists, eliciting respondents' views around oncology-industry collaborations. The responses were analyzed according to prespecified plans. RESULTS: There were 225 survey respondents. Most were from the United States (70.0%), worked at an academic institution (60.1%), worked in medical oncology (81.2%), and had an active relationship with industry (85.8%). One quarter (26.7%) of respondents reported difficulty establishing a relationship with industry collaborators, and most respondents (75%) did not report having had mentorship in developing these relationships. The majority (85.3%) of respondents considered these collaborations important to their careers. Respondents generally thought that scientific integrity was preserved (92%), and most respondents (95%) had little concern over the quality of the collaborative product. Many (60%) shared concerns over potential conflict of interest if an individual with a compensated relationship promoted an industry product for clinical care/research, yet most respondents (67%) stated these relationships did not shape their interactions with patients. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides novel data characterizing the nature of collaborative relationships between clinicians, researchers, and industry in oncology. Although respondents considered these collaborations an important part of clinical and academic oncology, formal education or mentorship around these relationships was rare. Conflicting findings around conflict of interest highlight the importance of more dedicated research in this area. PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY: Business enterprises in health care play a central role in cancer research and care, driving the development of new medical testing, drugs, and devices. Effective working relationships among clinicians, researchers, and these industry partners can promote innovative research and enhance patient care. Study of these collaborations has been limited to date. Through distribution of a questionnaire to cancer clinicians and researchers, we found that most participants consider these relationships valuable, though they find establishing such relationships challenging partly because of gaps in educational programs in this area. Our findings also highlight the need for further policy around the potential bias these relationships can introduce.

Radiofrequency ablation compared with argon plasma coagulation after endoscopic resection of high-grade dysplasia or stage T1 adenocarcinoma in Barrett's esophagus: a randomized pilot study (BRIDE).

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Endoscopic resection (ER) is safe and effective for Barrett's esophagus (BE) containing high-grade dysplasia (HGD) or mucosal adenocarcinoma (T1A). The risk of metachronous neoplasia is reduced by ablation of residual BE by using radiofrequency ablation (RFA) or argon plasma coagulation (APC). These have not been compared directly. We aimed to recruit up to 100 patients with BE and HGD or T1A confirmed by ER over 1 year in 6 centers in a randomized pilot study. METHODS: Randomization was 1:1 to RFA or APC (4 treatments allowed at 2-month intervals). Recruitment, retention, dysplasia clearance, clearance of benign BE, adverse events, healthcare costs, and quality of life by using EQ-5D, EORTC QLQ-C30, or OES18 were assessed up to the end of the trial at 12 months. RESULTS: Of 171 patients screened, 76 were randomized to RFA (n = 36) or APC (n = 40). The mean age was 69.7 years, and 82% were male. BE was <5 cm (n = 27), 5 to 10 cm (n = 45), and >10 cm (n = 4). Sixty-five patients completed the trial. At 12 months, dysplasia clearance was RFA 79.4% and APC 83.8% (odds ratio [OR] 0.7; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.2-2.6); BE clearance was RFA 55.8%, and APC 48.3% (OR 1.4; 95% CI, 0.5-3.6). A total of 6.1% (RFA) and 13.3% (APC) had buried BE glands. Adverse events (including stricture rate after starting RFA 3/36 [8.3%] and APC 3/37 [8.1%]) and quality of life scores were similar, but RFA cost $27491 more per case than APC. CONCLUSION: This pilot study suggests similar efficacy and safety but a cost difference favoring APC. A fully powered non-inferiority trial is appropriate to confirm these findings. (Clinical trial registration number: NCT01733719.).

Esomeprazole and aspirin in Barrett's oesophagus (AspECT): a randomised factorial trial.

BACKGROUND: Oesophageal adenocarcinoma is the sixth most common cause of cancer death worldwide and Barrett's oesophagus is the biggest risk factor. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy of high-dose esomeprazole proton-pump inhibitor (PPI) and aspirin for improving outcomes in patients with Barrett's oesophagus. METHODS: The Aspirin and Esomeprazole Chemoprevention in Barrett's metaplasia Trial had a 2 × 2 factorial design and was done at 84 centres in the UK and one in Canada. Patients with Barrett's oesophagus of 1 cm or more were randomised 1:1:1:1 using a computer-generated schedule held in a central trials unit to receive high-dose (40 mg twice-daily) or low-dose (20 mg once-daily) PPI, with or without aspirin (300 mg per day in the UK, 325 mg per day in Canada) for at least 8 years, in an unblinded manner. Reporting pathologists were masked to treatment allocation. The primary composite endpoint was time to all-cause mortality, oesophageal adenocarcinoma, or high-grade dysplasia, which was analysed with accelerated failure time modelling adjusted for minimisation factors (age, Barrett's oesophagus length, intestinal metaplasia) in all patients in the intention-to-treat population. This trial is registered with EudraCT, number 2004-003836-77. FINDINGS: Between March 10, 2005, and March 1, 2009, 2557 patients were recruited. 705 patients were assigned to low-dose PPI and no aspirin, 704 to high-dose PPI and no aspirin, 571 to low-dose PPI and aspirin, and 577 to high-dose PPI and aspirin. Median follow-up and treatment duration was 8·9 years (IQR 8·2-9·8), and we collected 20 095 follow-up years and 99·9% of planned data. 313 primary events occurred. High-dose PPI (139 events in 1270 patients) was superior to low-dose PPI (174 events in 1265 patients; time ratio [TR] 1·27, 95% CI 1·01-1·58, p=0·038). Aspirin (127 events in 1138 patients) was not significantly better than no aspirin (154 events in 1142 patients; TR 1·24, 0·98-1·57, p=0·068). If patients using non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs were censored at the time of first use, aspirin was significantly better than no aspirin (TR 1·29, 1·01-1·66, p=0·043; n=2236). Combining high-dose PPI with aspirin had the strongest effect compared with low-dose PPI without aspirin (TR 1·59, 1·14-2·23, p=0·0068). The numbers needed to treat were 34 for PPI and 43 for aspirin. Only 28 (1%) participants reported study-treatment-related serious adverse events. INTERPRETATION: High-dose PPI and aspirin chemoprevention therapy, especially in combination, significantly and safely improved outcomes in patients with Barrett's oesophagus. FUNDING: Cancer Research UK, AstraZeneca, Wellcome Trust, and Health Technology Assessment.

"Always paracetamol, they give them paracetamol for everything": a qualitative study examining Eastern European migrants' experiences of the UK health service.

BACKGROUND: The enlargement of the European Union since 2004 has led to an increase in the number of Eastern European migrants living in the UK. The health of this group is under-researched though some mixed evidence shows they are at higher risk of certain physical health conditions such as heart attacks, strokes, HIV and alcohol use and have poorer mental health. This is compounded by poor or insecure housing, low pay, isolation and prejudice. We aimed to understand the health needs and health service experiences of the Eastern European population in a town in Northern England. METHODS: Five semi structured one-to-one and small group interviews and five focus groups were conducted with 42 Eastern European participants between June and September 2014. The majority of participants were Polish and other participants were from Belarus, Hungary, Latvia, Russia, Slovakia and Ukraine. The data were analysed using thematic framework analysis. RESULTS: Key findings included a good understanding the UK health service structure and high registration and use of general practice/primary care services. However, overall, there were high levels of dissatisfaction, frustration and distrust in General Practitioners (GP). The majority of participants viewed the GP as unhelpful and dismissive; a barrier to secondary/acute care; reluctant to prescribe antibiotics; and that GPs too often advised them to take paracetamol (acetaminophen) and rest. CONCLUSIONS: Overwhelmingly participants had strong opinions about access to primary care and the role of the general practitioners. Although the design of the UK health service was well understood, participants were unhappy with the system of GP as gatekeeper and felt it inferior to the consumer-focused health systems in their country of origin. More work is needed to promote the importance of self-care, reduce antibiotic and medication use, and to increase trust in the GP.

Features of successful academic hospitalist programs: Insights from the SCHOLAR (SuCcessful HOspitaLists in academics and research) project.

BACKGROUND: As clinical demands increase, understanding the features that allow academic hospital medicine programs (AHPs) to thrive has become increasingly important. OBJECTIVE: To develop and validate a quantifiable definition of academic success for AHPs. METHODS: A working group of academic hospitalists was formed. The group identified grant funding, academic promotion, and scholarship as key domains reflective of success, and specific metrics and approaches to assess these domains were developed. Self-reported data on funding and promotion were available from a preexisting survey of AHP leaders, including total funding/group, funding/full-time equivalent (FTE), and number of faculty at each academic rank. Scholarship was defined in terms of research abstracts presented over a 2-year period. Lists of top performers in each of the 3 domains were constructed. Programs appearing on at least 1 list (the SCHOLAR cohort [SuCcessful HOspitaLists in Academics and Research]) were examined. We compared grant funding and proportion of promoted faculty within the SCHOLAR cohort to a sample of other AHPs identified in the preexisting survey. RESULTS: Seventeen SCHOLAR programs were identified, with a mean age of 13.2 years (range, 6-18 years) and mean size of 36 faculty (range, 18-95). The mean total grant funding/program was $4 million (range, $0-$15 million), with mean funding/FTE of $364,000 (range, $0-$1.4 million); both were significantly higher than the comparison sample. The majority of SCHOLAR faculty (82%) were junior, a lower percentage than the comparison sample. The mean number of research abstracts presented over 2 years was 10.8 (range, 9-23). DISCUSSION: Our approach effectively identified a subset of successful AHPs. Despite the relative maturity and large size of the programs in the SCHOLAR cohort, they were comprised of relatively few senior faculty members and varied widely in the quantity of funded research and scholarship. Journal of Hospital Medicine 2016;11:708-713. © 2016 Society of Hospital Medicine.

Post stroke pain: identification, assessment, and therapy.

BACKGROUND: Pain is a common complication after stroke and is associated with the presence of depression, cognitive dysfunction, and impaired quality of life. It remains underdiagnosed and undertreated, despite evidence that effective treatment of pain may improve function and quality of life. SUMMARY: We provide an overview of the means for clinical assessment and risk factors for the development of post-stroke pain, then review the newest available literature regarding the commonest post-stroke pain syndromes, including central post-stroke pain, complex regional pain syndrome, musculoskeletal pain including shoulder subluxation, spasticity-related pain, and post-stroke headache, as well as the available epidemiology and current treatment options. Key Messages: In the best interests of optimizing quality of life and function after stroke, clinicians should be aware of pain as a common complication after stroke, identify those patients at highest risk, directly inquire as to the presence and characteristics of pain, and should be aware of the options for treatment for the various pain syndromes.

Infectious disease and red wolf conservation: assessment of disease occurrence and associated risks.

Infectious diseases pose a significant threat to global biodiversity and may contribute to extinction. As such, establishing baseline disease prevalence in vulnerable species where disease could affect persistence is important to conservation. We assessed potential disease threats to endangered red wolves (Canis rufus) by evaluating regional (southeastern United States) disease occurrences in mammals and parasite prevalence in red wolves and sympatric coyotes (Canis latrans) in North Carolina. Common viral pathogens in the southeast region, such as canine distemper and canine parvovirus, and numerous widespread endoparasites could pose a threat to the red wolf population. The most prevalent parasites in red wolves and sympatric coyotes were heartworm (Dirofilaria immitis), hookworm (Ancylostoma caninum), and Ehrlichia spp.; several red wolves and coyotes were also positive for bacteria causing Lyme disease (Borrelia burgdorferi). Coyotes had a more species-rich parasite community than red wolves, suggesting they could harbor more parasites and act as a disease reservoir. Species identity and sex did not significantly affect parasite loads, but young canids were less likely to have heartworm and more likely to have high levels of endoparasites. Continued disease monitoring is important for red wolf recovery because low levels of genetic variability may compromise the wolves' abilities to combat novel pathogens from closely related species, such as domestic dogs and coyotes.