Genetic Correlates of Biological Aging and the Influence on Prediction of Mortality.

Longevity and disease-free survival are influenced by a combination of genetics and lifestyle. Biological age (BioAge), a measure of aging based on composite biomarkers, may outperform chronological age in predicting health and longevity. This study investigated the relationship between genetic risks, lifestyle factors, and delta age (Δage), estimated as the difference between biological and chronological age. BioAge and Δage were calculated for 52 418 participants from the population-based Lifelines cohort. We computed 2 independent polygenic risk scores (PRS) for health span and DNA methylation-based aging clock to characterize genetic risks. The capacity of BioAge to predict all-cause mortality when adjusted for chronological age and genetic risks for aging, was assessed. Obesity, lifestyle, socioeconomic status, sex, and genetic variations in a population contributed to the differences in the rates of accelerated aging. The overall risk of death for a 1-year increase in BioAge for a given chronological age and sex among the genotyped participants was 11% (HR = 1.11; 95% CI: 1.09, 1.13). After adjusting for genetic factors, BioAge maintained its sensitivity for predicting mortality. Findings from this study ascertain that BioAge can be a useful tool for risk stratification in research and aging interventions.

Lessons learned from the Alberta Border Testing Pilot Program.

Background: During the Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic, countries implemented border control and quarantine measures to reduce transmission. The Alberta Border Testing Pilot Program (ABTPP) allowed international travellers entering Alberta to reduce their quarantine period following two negative COVID-19 tests. We evaluated participant experiences with the ABTPP and implementation. Method: We used a parallel convergent mixed-methods design to explore participant experiences through electronic web-based questionnaires (n = 21,089; n = 13,839) and semi-structured telephone interviews (n = 30). We evaluated implementation through three staff focus groups (n = 11). We analysed questionnaires using descriptive statistics and analysed interviews using inductive and deductive thematic analysis. We deductively coded focus group data using the 2009 Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). Results: Questionnaires indicated minimal issues with registration forms (91.7%), symptom reports (95.5%), and COVID-19 testing (95.7%). Most respondents (95.1%) expressed willingness to participate in the ABTPP again. Interviews revealed three themes related to participant experience: program efficiency, clarity of information, and requisite effort. Focus groups identified key implementation facilitators including the single health information system, strong stakeholder partnerships, and good communication across partnerships. Barriers included program complexity, implementation timeline, and evolving external context. Discussion: Participants reported high satisfaction with the ABTPP. Border testing programs should have high efficiency, require low effort, and use messaging that is clear and consistent. The effective implementation of border testing programs may be facilitated by strong leadership, adaptability, automated components, good communication, and simple technology. Learnings from participants and staff may help improve the implementation of border control programs for future pandemics or other emergencies. Conclusions: The ABTTP was a novel border control measure during the COVID-19 pandemic. Our evaluation of both participant and staff experiences demonstrated high levels of traveller satisfaction and identified areas for improvement that can inform the development of future border control measures.

A Qualitative Systematic Review of Facilitators of and Barriers to Community Pharmacists-Led Anticoagulation Management Service.

OBJECTIVE: To identify the facilitators of and barriers to the implementation of Community Pharmacists-Led Anticoagulation Management Services (CPAMS). DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and Cochrane CENTRAL Register of Controlled Trials were searched from inception until August 20, 2021. STUDY SELECTION AND DATA EXTRACTION: All abstracts proceeded to full-text review, which was completed by 2 reviewers. Data extraction was completed by a single reviewer and verified. Analysis was completed using best-fit framework synthesis. DATA SYNTHESIS: A total of 17 articles reporting on CPAMS from 6 jurisdictions were included: 2 Canadian provincial programs (Nova Scotia, Alberta), a national program (New Zealand), and 3 cities in the United Kingdom (Whittington and Brighton and Hove) and Australia (Sydney). Facilitators of CPAMS included convenience for patients, accessibility for patients, professional satisfaction for pharmacists, increased efficiency in anticoagulation management, improved outcomes, enhanced collaboration, and scalability. Barriers included perceived poor quality of care by patients, resistance by general practitioners, organizational limits, capping of the number of eligible patients, and cost. RELEVANCE TO PATIENT CARE AND CLINICAL PRACTICE: The barriers and facilitators identified in this review will inform health policy makers on the implementation and improvement of CPAMS for patients and health care practitioners. CONCLUSION AND RELEVANCE: CPAMS has been implemented in 6 jurisdictions across 4 countries, with reported benefits and challenges. The programs were structurally similar in most jurisdictions, with minor variations in implementation. New anticoagulation management programs should consider adapting existing frameworks to local needs.

Prevalence and risk factors for antimicrobial resistance among newborns with gram-negative sepsis.

INTRODUCTION: Newborn sepsis accounts for more than a third of neonatal deaths globally and one in five neonatal deaths in Ethiopia. The first-line treatment recommended by WHO is the combination of gentamicin with ampicillin or benzylpenicillin. Gram-negative bacteria (GNB) are increasingly resistant to previously effective antibiotics. OBJECTIVES: Our goal was to estimate the prevalence of antibiotic-resistant gram-negative bacteremia and identify risk factors for antibiotic resistance, among newborns with GNB sepsis. METHODS: At a tertiary hospital in Ethiopia, we enrolled a cohort pregnant women and their newborns, between March and December 2017. Newborns who were followed up until 60 days of life for clinical signs of sepsis. Among the newborns with clinical signs of sepsis, blood samples were cultured; bacterial species were identified and tested for antibiotic susceptibility. We described the prevalence of antibiotic resistance, identified newborn, maternal, and environmental factors associated with multidrug resistance (MDR), and combined resistance to ampicillin and gentamicin (AmpGen), using multivariable regression. RESULTS: Of the 119 newborns with gram-negative bacteremia, 80 (67%) were born preterm and 82 (70%) had early-onset sepsis. The most prevalent gram-negative species were Klebsiella pneumoniae 94 (79%) followed by Escherichia coli 10 (8%). Ampicillin resistance was found in 113 cases (95%), cefotaxime 104 (87%), gentamicin 101 (85%), AmpGen 101 (85%), piperacillin-tazobactam 47 (39%), amikacin 10 (8.4%), and Imipenem 1 (0.8%). Prevalence of MDR was 88% (n = 105). Low birthweight and late-onset sepsis (LOS) were associated with higher risks of AmpGen-resistant infections. All-cause mortality was higher among newborns treated with ineffective antibiotics. CONCLUSION: There was significant resistance to current first-line antibiotics and cephalosporins. Additional data are needed from primary care and community settings. Amikacin and piperacillin-tazobactam had lower rates of resistance; however, context-specific assessments of their potential adverse effects, their local availability, and cost-effectiveness would be necessary before selecting a new first-line regimen to help guide clinical decision-making.

COVID-19 vaccine acceptance among pregnant women and mothers of young children: results of a survey in 16 countries.

With the development of multiple effective vaccines, reducing the global morbidity and mortality of COVID-19 will depend on the distribution and acceptance of COVID-19 vaccination. Estimates of global vaccine acceptance among pregnant women and mothers of young children are yet unknown. An understanding of the challenges and correlates to vaccine acceptance will aid the acceleration of vaccine administration within these populations. Acceptance of COVID-19 vaccination among pregnant women and mothers of children younger than 18-years-old, as well as potential predictors, were assessed through an online survey, administered by Pregistry between October 28 and November 18, 2020. 17,871 total survey responses from 16 countries were obtained. Given a 90% COVID-19 vaccine efficacy, 52.0% of pregnant women (n = 2747/5282) and 73.4% of non-pregnant women (n = 9214/12,562) indicated an intention to receive the vaccine. 69.2% of women (n = 11,800/17,054), both pregnant and non-pregnant, indicated an intention to vaccinate their children. Vaccine acceptance was generally highest in India, the Philippines, and all sampled countries in Latin America; it was lowest in Russia, the United States and Australia. The strongest predictors of vaccine acceptance included confidence in vaccine safety or effectiveness, worrying about COVID-19, belief in the importance of vaccines to their own country, compliance to mask guidelines, trust of public health agencies/health science, as well as attitudes towards routine vaccines. COVID-19 vaccine acceptance and its predictors among women vary globally. Vaccination campaigns for women and children should be specific for each country in order to attain the largest impact.