Comparison of management options for specific antibody deficiency.

Background: Specific antibody deficiency is a primary immunodeficiency characterized by normal immunoglobulins with an inadequate response to polysaccharide antigen vaccination. This disease can result in recurrent infections, the most common being sinopulmonary infections. Treatment options include clinical observation, prophylactic antibiotic therapy, and immunoglobulin supplementation therapy, each with limited clinical data about their efficacy. Objective: This study aimed to identify whether there was a statistically significant difference in the rate of infections for patients who were managed with clinical observation, prophylactic antibiotics, or immunoglobulin supplementation therapy. Methods: A retrospective chart review was conducted. Patients were eligible for the study if they had normal immunoglobulin levels, an inadequate antibody response to polysaccharide antigen-based vaccination, and no other known causes of immunodeficiency. Results: A total of 26 patients with specific antibody deficiency were identified. Eleven patients were managed with immunoglobulin supplementation, ten with clinical observation, and five with prophylactic antibiotic therapy. The frequency of antibiotic prescriptions was assessed for the first year after intervention. A statistically significant rate of decreased antibiotic prescriptions after intervention was found for patients treated with immunoglobulin supplementation (n = 11; p = 0.0004) and for patients on prophylactic antibiotics (n = 5; p = 0.01). There was no statistical difference in antibiotic prescriptions for those patients treated with immunoglobulin supplementation versus prophylactic antibiotics (p = 0.21). Conclusion: Prophylactic antibiotics seemed to be equally effective as immunoglobin supplementation therapy for the treatment of specific antibody deficiency. Further studies are needed in this area.

Factor structure and measurement invariance of the Revised Brief Addiction Monitor.

There are currently 2 versions of the Brief Addiction Monitor (BAM) being widely used within Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) medical centers and other treatment settings: the BAM, which entails use of discrete response options for all items, and the revised version, the BAM-R, which consists of the same items but uses continuous response options for several of the items. There is also conflicting evidence about the factor structure of the original BAM, with a 4-factor structure proposed by 1 study that refutes a 3-factor structure proposed from the original study of the measure. The BAM-R is widely administered in substance use treatment settings across the country and is overtaking the discrete BAM as the preferred instrument, although little research has examined the factor structure or longitudinal performance of this version of the measure. The purpose of this study is to examine the factor structure and temporal stability of the BAM-R among a large national sample of veterans across multiple treatment settings (i.e., all VA veterans with at least 2 complete BAM-R administrations reflected in the medical record; N = 22,453). Findings suggest that the 4-factor structure is superior to the commonly used 3-factor structure for both model fit and stability over two occasions of measurement and should be the factor structure used for clinical and research purposes pending further measure revisions. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).

Self-reported hearing difficulty and its association with general, cognitive, and psychosocial health in the state of Arizona, 2015.

BACKGROUND: Hearing loss is among the leading causes of disability in persons 65 years and older worldwide and is known to have an impact on quality of life as well as social, cognitive, and physical functioning. Our objective was to assess statewide prevalence of self-reported hearing ability in Arizona adults and its association with general health, cognitive decline, diabetes and poor psychosocial health. METHODS: A self-report question on hearing was added to the 2015 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS), a telephone-based survey among community-dwelling adults aged > 18 years (n = 6462). Logistic and linear regression were used to estimate the associations between self-reported hearing loss and health outcomes. RESULTS: Approximately 1 in 4 adults reported trouble hearing (23.2, 95% confidence interval: 21.8, 24.5%), with responses ranging from "a little trouble hearing" to being "deaf." Adults reporting any trouble hearing were at nearly four times higher odds of reporting increased confusion and memory loss (OR 3.92, 95% CI: 2.94, 5.24) and decreased odds of reporting good general health (OR = 0.50, 95% CI: 0.40, 0.64) as compared to participants reporting no hearing difficulty. Those reporting any trouble hearing also reported an average 2.5 more days of poor psychosocial health per month (ß = 2.52, 95% CI: 1.64, 3.41). After adjusting for sex, age, questionnaire language, race/ethnicity, and income category the association between diabetes and hearing loss was no longer significant. CONCLUSIONS: Self-reported hearing difficulty was associated with report of increased confusion and memory loss and poorer general and psychosocial health among Arizona adults. These findings support the feasibility and utility of assessing self-reported hearing ability on the BRFSS. Results highlight the need for greater inclusion of the full range of hearing disability in the planning process for public health surveillance, programs, and services at state and local levels.

Reducing Breast Cancer-Related Lymphedema (BCRL) Through Prospective Surveillance Monitoring Using Bioimpedance Spectroscopy (BIS) and Patient Directed Self-Interventions.

BACKGROUND: Breast cancer-related lymphedema (BCRL) is a chronic progressive disease that results from breast cancer treatment and nodal surgery. NCCN guidelines support baseline measurements with prospective assessment for early diagnosis and treatment. We sought to determine if baseline measurement with bioimpedance spectroscopy (BIS) and serial postoperative evaluations provide early detection amenable to conservative interventions that reduce BCRL. METHODS: Breast cancer patients with unilateral disease high-risk for BCRL from a single institution were evaluated from November 2014 to December 2017. High risk was defined as axillary lymph node dissection with radiation and/or taxane chemotherapy. Patients received preoperative baseline BIS measurements followed by postoperative measurements with at least two follow-ups. Patients with BIS results that were 2 standard deviations above baseline (10 + points) started home conservative interventions for 4-6 weeks. Postintervention measurements were taken to assess improvement. RESULT: A total of 146 patients high-risk for BCRL were included. Forty-nine patients (34%) developed early BCRL and started self-directed treatment. Forty patients (82%) had elevated BIS measurements return to normal baseline range. Nine (6%) patients had persistent BCRL requiring referral for advanced therapy. Patients with persistent BCRL had significant nodal burden on surgical pathology; eight (89%) had N2/N3 disease. Six (76%) with BCRL refractory to conservative measures died of their breast cancer. CONCLUSION: Our results demonstrated that early conservative intervention for breast cancer patients high risk for BCRL who were prospectively monitored by utilizing BIS significantly lowers rates of BCRL. These findings support early prospective screening and intervention for BCRL. Early detection with patient-directed interventions improves patient outcomes and decreases the risk of persistent BCRL.