Maximal dietary responsiveness after tetrahydrobiopterin (BH4) in 19 phenylalanine hydroxylase deficiency patients: What super-responders can expect.

Background: Inherited phenylalanine hydroxylase deficiency, also known as phenylketonuria (PKU), causes poor growth and neurologic deficits in the untreated state. After ascertainment through newborn screen and dietary phenylalanine (Phe) restriction to achieve plasma Phe in the range of 120-360 µmol/L, these disease manifestations can be prevented. Poor compliance with protein restricted diets supported by medical food is typical in later years, beginning in the late toddler and teenage years. Pharmacologic doses of oral tetrahydrobiopterin (BH4; sapropterin dihydrochloride) is effective in reducing plasma Phe in about 40-50% of PKU patients but effectiveness is highly variable. Objective: To assess the maximal responsiveness to 20 mg/kg/day oral BH4 as it affects plasma Phe and dietary Phe allowance in PKU patients. Materials and methods: This was a single-center, retrospective observational study, combining case reports of individual patients. We reported an outcome of 85 patients with PKU who were trialed on BH4. Phe levels and dietary records of 19 BH4 "super-responders" were analyzed. Results: Overall, 63.5% of the patients (54/85) were considered BH4 responders. However, we quantitated the dietary liberalization of 19 of our responsive patients (35%), those with at least a 2-fold increase in dietary Phe and maintenance of plasma Phe in treatment range. In these "super-responders", the mean plasma Phe at baseline was 371 ± 237 µmol/L and decreased to 284 ± 273 µmol/L after 1 year on BH4. Mean dietary Phe tolerance increased significantly from 595 ± 256 to 2260 ± 1414 mg/day (p ≤0.0001), while maintaining mean plasma Phe levels within treatment range. Four patients no longer required dietary Phe restriction and could discontinue medical food. The majority of patients had at least one BH4-responsive genotype. Conclusion: This cohort demonstrates the maximally achievable dietary liberalization which some PKU patients may expect with BH4 therapy. Health benefits are considered to accrue in patients with increased intact protein.

Comparing "Meaningful Use" of Health Information Technology in Pennsylvania: Electronic Prescription Rates of Metropolitan and Rural Counties.

The Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health Act incentivized the adoption of electronic health records (EHRs). Health systems looked to leverage technology to assist in serving populations in health professional shortage areas. Qualitative research points to EHR usability as a source of health inequities in rural settings, making the challenges of EHR usage a subject of interest. Pennsylvania offers a model for investigating rural health infrastructure with it having the third largest rural population in the United States. This study analyzed the adoption of Electronic Prescribing in the 67 Pennsylvania (PA) counties. Physician adoption and usage data for PA and the United States were compared using a t-test to establish a basis for comparison. PA counties were categorized using the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA)'s Rural-Urban Commuting Areas (RUCAs) system. Surescript use percentages were plotted against the RUCA scores of each PA county to create a polynomial regression model. PA office-based physicians, on average, utilize e-prescription tools at the same rate as the national average with 59% of practices utilizing Surescripts as of 2013. There was no significant correlation between Surescript usage and the rural/urban classification of counties in Pennsylvania (R-squared value of 0.06). Pennsylvania was able to adopt health information technology (HIT) infrastructure at the same rate as the national average. Rural and metropolitan definitions do not correlate to meaningful use of HIT, thus usability of HIT cannot be tied to health outcomes. Future studies looking at specific forms of HIT and their ability to decrease the burden of administrative work for clinicians.

"Once I take that one bite": the consideration of harm reduction as a strategy to support dietary change for patients with diabetes.

BACKGROUND: Despite well-established guidelines to treat diabetes, many people with diabetes struggle to manage their disease. For many, this struggle is related to challenges achieving nutrition-related lifestyle changes. We examined how people with diabetes describe barriers to maintaining a healthy diet and considered the benefits of using a harm reduction approach to assist patients to achieve nutrition-related goals. METHODS: This is a secondary analysis of 89 interviews conducted with adults who had type 1 or type 2 diabetes. Interviews were analyzed using a content analysis approach. Themes regarding food or diet were initially captured in a "food" node. Data in the food node were then sub-coded for this analysis, again using a content analysis approach. RESULTS: Participants frequently used addiction language to talk about their relationship with food, at times referring to themselves as "an addict" and describing food as "their drug." Participants perceived their unhealthy food choices either as a sign of weakness or as "cheating." They also identified food's ability to comfort them and an unwillingness to change as particular challenges to sustaining a healthier diet. CONCLUSION: Participants often described their relationship with food through an addiction lens. A harm reduction approach has been associated with positive outcomes among those with substance abuse disorder. Patient-centered communication incorporating the harm reduction model may improve the patient-clinician relationship and thus improve patient outcomes and quality-of-life while reducing health-related stigma in diabetes care. Future work should explore the effectiveness of this approach in patients with diabetes. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Registered on ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02792777. Registration information submitted 02/06/2016, with the registration first posted on the ClinicalTrials.gov website 08/06/2016. Data collection began on 29/04/2016.