Tag: Heart

  • Sedentary time in childhood associated with premature vascular damage

    Sedentary time in childhood associated with premature vascular damage

    [ad_1]

    Increase in sedentary time from childhood is associated with worsening arterial stiffness, a surrogate for premature vascular damage, a new study shows. However, light physical activity could reduce the risk. The study was conducted in collaboration between Oxford University, the Universities of Bristol and Exeter, and the University of Eastern Finland, and the results were published in Acta Physiologica.

    An earlier study from the same data showed an increase in sedentary time between childhood and young adulthood from approximately 6 hours to 9 hours per day, which in turn increased the risk of fat obesity, dyslipidemia, inflammation, and an enlarged heart. The researchers also identified arterial stiffness as a novel causal factor for childhood and adolescent obesity, insulin resistance, hypertension, metabolic syndrome, and premature heart damage.

    Aging also worsens arterial stiffness. Adult studies suggest that high arterial stiffness as opposed to natural stiffening increases the risk of premature death by 47%. So far it has remained unclear if sedentariness increases arterial stiffness independent of aging and known cardiometabolic risk factors.

    Light physical activity (LPA) is now emerging as an effective approach to reversing the deleterious effect of childhood sedentariness. However, whether long-term exposure to LPA from childhood reduces arterial stiffness has not been examined. This is because only a few studies have repeatedly measured arterial stiffness on a large scale in healthy young populations.

    The current study is the largest and the longest follow-up accelerometer-measured movement behavior and arterial stiffness study in the world using the University of Bristol’s Children of the 90s data. The study included 1339 children followed up from 11 to 24 years of age. They wore accelerometer devices on their waist at ages 11, 15, and 24 years for 4-7 days and had arterial stiffness measurements at ages 17 and 24 years. Their fasting blood samples were repeatedly measured for glucose, insulin, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, triglyceride, and high-sensitivity C-reactive protein. Blood pressure, heart rate, smoking status, socio-economic status, and family history of cardiovascular disease were controlled for in the analyses.

    Arterial stiffness is determined by carotid-femoral pulse wave velocity. During the 13-year follow-up, increased sedentary time from 6 to 9 hours per day accelerated this velocity by 10 percent indicating increased stiffness, and one in a thousand adolescents was estimated to have severe vascular damage. On the other hand, engaging in LPA of at least 3 hours per day reversed arterial stiffness and vascular damage. Moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (MVPA) did not reduce arterial stiffness, but slightly increased it, due to the physiological vascular wall adaptation caused by an increase in muscle mass. However, the MVPA-induced increase in arterial stiffness was at least three times less than that caused by sedentary time.

    Our recent studies appear to emphasize that childhood sedentariness is more dangerous to health than previously thought.”

    Andrew Agbaje, award-winning physician and associate professor (docent) of clinical epidemiology and child health, University of Eastern Finland

    “Sedentariness is the root cause of several disease risk factors such as fat obesity, high lipid levels, inflammation, and arterial stiffness. These intermediate risk factors and actual diseases can be combatted by engaging in at least 3 – 4 hours of LPA per day. Although the World Health Organization’s physical activity guideline does not yet cover LPA, nonetheless, public health experts, health policymakers, health journalists and bloggers, paediatricians, and parents should encourage kids to participate in LPA daily.”

    Prof. Agbaje’s research group (urFIT-child) is supported by research grants from Jenny and Antti Wihuri Foundation, the Finnish Cultural Foundation Central Fund, the Finnish Cultural Foundation North Savo Regional Fund, the Orion Research Foundation, the Aarne Koskelo Foundation, the Antti and Tyyne Soininen Foundation, the Paulo Foundation, the Yrjö Jahnsson Foundation, the Paavo Nurmi Foundation, the Finnish Foundation for Cardiovascular Research, Ida Montin Foundation, Eino Räsänen Fund, Matti and Vappu Maukonen Fund, Foundation for Pediatric Research, and Alfred Kordelin Foundation.

    Source:

    Journal reference:

    Agbaje, A. O., et al. (2024). Accelerometer‐based sedentary time, light physical activity, and moderate‐to‐vigorous physical activity from childhood with arterial stiffness and carotid IMT progression: A 13‐year longitudinal study of 1339 children. Acta Physiologica. doi.org/10.1111/apha.14132.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Statins show promise in reducing gum disease inflammation

    Statins show promise in reducing gum disease inflammation

    [ad_1]

    Could taking statins benefit your mouth in addition to your arteries? A new study conducted in cell cultures showed that cholesterol-lowering drugs help to dampen the inflammation associated with periodontal disease by altering the behavior of macrophages, a type of immune cell.

    Statins are the most common type of prescription medication in the United States today, taken by over 40 million Americans to lower cholesterol. The study suggests these drugs improve gum health and reduce the risk of heart disease.

    Subramanya Pandruvada, an assistant professor in the College of Dental Medicine at the Medical University of South Carolina, oversaw the work.

    During our study, we replicated specific conditions in periodontal disease and demonstrated that introducing statins to our in vitro model modifies macrophage response. This allowed us to explore how medication like statins can help us treat inflammatory conditions such as periodontal disease.”


    Subramanya Pandruvada, Assistant Professor, College of Dental Medicine, Medical University of South Carolina

    Pandruvada will present the new research at Discover BMB, the annual meeting of the American Society for Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, which is being held March 23–26 in San Antonio. The study’s lead authors are Waleed Alkakhan, a graduate dental resident in periodontology, and Nico Farrar, a dental student at the Medical University of South Carolina.

    Periodontal disease occurs when the growth of bacteria in the gums causes the immune system to mount an inflammatory response, contributing to symptoms such as swelling, bleeding and bone degradation. Untreated, it can lead to tooth loss. Nearly half of adults over age 30 have some form of periodontal disease, according to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

    Current treatments for advanced periodontal disease include antibiotics, deep cleanings of tooth and root surfaces, and various surgical procedures. Researchers have sought new ways to calm gum disease through less invasive treatment strategies.

    Some previous studies have shown that people taking statins tend to show fewer signs of periodontitis than people who do not take statins. The new study is the first to trace the biochemical pathways through which statins appear to reduce periodontal inflammation.

    “Recent periodontal literature has shown the beneficial effects of statins when used with traditional periodontal therapy,” Pandruvada said. “However, our study highlights a novel approach in which statins affect macrophages specifically, which, through this mechanism, can help treat periodontal disease.”

    Macrophages play an important role in helping the body fight infections; however, they can also worsen inflammation depending on the form they take at different phases of the immune response. The researchers grew macrophages and gum cells together for the study and exposed them to various conditions. They found that exposure to simvastatin, a common statin drug, suppressed the macrophage inflammatory response.

    As a next step, the researchers plan to study the impacts of statins on periodontal disease in animal models, a step toward determining whether this strategy might be a safe and effective approach for future periodontal therapies.

    The new findings build upon the group’s initial results, which were published last year in the journal Cells.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • How was her baby’s air-ambulance ride not medically necessary?

    How was her baby’s air-ambulance ride not medically necessary?

    [ad_1]

    Sara England was putting together Ghostbusters costumes for Halloween when she noticed her baby wasn’t doing well.

    Her 3-month-old son, Amari Vaca, had undergone open-heart surgery two months before, so she called his cardiologist, who recommended getting him checked out. England assigned Amari’s grandparents to trick-or-treat duty with his three older siblings and headed to the local emergency room.

    Once England and the baby arrived at Natividad Medical Center in Salinas, California, she said, doctors could see Amari was struggling to breathe and told her that he needed specialized care immediately, from whichever of two major hospitals in the region had an opening first.

    Even as they talked, Amari was declining rapidly, his mother said. Doctors put a tube down his throat and used a bag to manually push air into his lungs for over an hour to keep his oxygen levels up until he was stable enough to switch to a ventilator.

    According to England, late that night, when doctors said the baby was stable enough to travel, his medical team told her that a bed had opened up at the University of California-San Francisco Medical Center and that staffers there were ready to receive him.

    She, her son, and an EMT boarded a small plane around midnight. Ground ambulances carried them between the hospitals and airports.

    Amari was diagnosed with respiratory syncytial virus, or RSV, and spent three weeks in the hospital before recovering and returning home.

    Then the bill came.

    The Patient: Amari Vaca, now 1, who was covered by a Cigna policy sponsored by his father’s employer at the time.

    Medical Services: An 86-mile air-ambulance flight from Salinas to San Francisco.

    Service Provider: Reach Medical Holdings, which is part of Global Medical Response, an industry giant backed by private equity investors. Global Medical Response operates in all 50 states and has said it has a total of 498 helicopters and airplanes. It is out-of-network with Amari’s Cigna plan.

    Total Bill: $97,599. Cigna declined to cover any part of the bill.

    What Gives: Legal safeguards are in place to protect patients from big bills for some out-of-network care, including air-ambulance rides.

    Medical billing experts said the No Surprises Act, a federal law enacted in 2022, could have protected Amari’s family from receiving the $97,000 “balance bill,” leaving the insurer and the air-ambulance provider to determine fair payment according to the law. But the protections apply only to care that health plans determine is “medically necessary” — and insurers get to define what that means in each case.

    According to its coverage denial letter, Cigna determined that Amari’s air-ambulance ride was not medically necessary. The insurer cited its reasoning: He could have taken a ground ambulance instead of a plane to cover the nearly 100 roadway miles between Salinas and San Francisco.

    “I thought there must have been a mistake,” England said. “There’s no way we can pay this. Is this a real thing?”

    In the letter, Cigna said Amari’s records did not show that other methods of transportation were “medically contraindicated or not feasible.” The health plan also noted the absence of documentation that he could not be reached by a ground ambulance for pickup or that a ground ambulance would be unfeasible because of “great distances or other obstacles.”

    Lastly, it said records did not show a ground ambulance “would impede timely and appropriate medical care.”

    When KFF Health News asked Cigna what records were referenced when making this decision, a spokesperson declined to respond.

    Caitlin Donovan, a spokesperson for the National Patient Advocate Foundation, said that even though Amari’s bill isn’t technically in violation of the No Surprises Act, the situation is exactly what the law was designed to avoid.

    “What they’re basically saying is that the parents should have opted against the advice of the physician,” Donovan said. “That’s insane. I know ‘medical necessity’ is this nebulous term, but it seems like it’s becoming a catch-all for turning down patients.”

    On Feb. 5, the National Association of Emergency Medical Services Physicians said that since the No Surprises Act was enacted two years ago, it has seen a jump in claim denials based on “lack of medical necessity,” predominantly for air-ambulance transports between facilities.

    In a letter to federal health officials, the group cited reasons commonly given for inappropriate medical-necessity denials observed by some of its 2,000 members, such as “the patient should have been taken elsewhere” or “the patient could have been transported by ground ambulance.”

    The association urged the government to require that health plans presume medical necessity for inter-facility air transports ordered by a physician at a hospital, subject to a retrospective review.

    Such decisions are often “made under dire circumstances — when a hospital is not capable of caring for or stabilizing a particular patient or lacks the clinical resources to stabilize a patient with a certain clinical diagnosis,” the group’s president, José Cabañas, wrote in the letter. “Clinical determinations made by a referring physician (or another qualified medical professional) should not be second-guessed by a plan.”

    Patricia Kelmar, a health policy expert and senior director with the U.S. Public Interest Research Groups, noted, however, that hospitals could familiarize themselves with local health plans, for example, and establish protocol, so that before they call an air ambulance, they know if there are in-network alternatives and, if not, what items the plan needs to justify the claim and provide payment.

    “The hospitals who live and breathe and work in our communities should be considering the individuals who come to them every day,” Kelmar said. “I understand in emergency situations you generally have a limited amount of time, but, in most situations, you should be familiar with the plans so you can work within the confines of the patient’s health insurance.”

    England said Cigna’s denial particularly upset her.

    “As parents, we did not make any of the decisions other than to say, yes, we’ll do that,” she said. “I don’t know how else it could have gone.”

    The Resolution: England twice appealed the air-ambulance charge to the insurer, but both times Cigna rejected the claim, maintaining that “medical necessity” had not been established.

    The final step of the appeals process is an external review, in which a third party evaluates the case. England said staff members at Natividad Medical Center in Salinas — which arranged Amari’s transport — declined to write an appeal letter on his behalf, explaining to her that doing so is against the facility’s policy.

    Using her son’s medical records, which the Natividad staff provided, England said she is writing a letter herself to assert why the air ambulance was medically necessary.

    Andrea Rosenberg, a spokesperson for Natividad Medical Center, said the hospital focuses on “maintaining the highest standards of health care and patient well-being.”

    Despite receiving a waiver from England authorizing the medical center to discuss Amari’s case, Rosenberg did not respond to questions from KFF Health News, citing privacy issues. A Cigna spokesperson told KFF Health News that the insurer has in-network alternatives to the out-of-network ambulance provider, but — despite receiving a waiver authorizing Cigna to discuss Amari’s case — declined to answer other questions.

    “It is disappointing that CALSTAR/REACH is attempting to collect this egregious balance from the patient’s family,” the Cigna spokesperson, Justine Sessions, said in an email, referring to the air-ambulance provider. “We are working diligently to try to resolve this for the family.”

    On March 13, weeks after being contacted by KFF Health News, England said, a Cigna representative contacted her and offered assistance with her final appeal, the one reviewed by a third party. The representative also told her the insurer had attempted to contact the ambulance provider but had been unable to resolve the bill with them.

    Global Medical Response, the ambulance provider, declined to comment.

    England said she and her husband have set aside two hours each week for him to take care of their four kids while she shuts herself in her room and makes calls about their medical bills.

    “It’s just another stress,” she said. “Another thing to get in the way of us being able to enjoy our family.”

    The Takeaway: Kelmar said she encourages patients to appeal bills that seem inaccurate. Even if the plan denies it internally, push forward to an external review so someone outside the company has a chance to review, she said.

    In the case of “medical necessity” denials, Kelmar recommended patients work with the medical provider to provide more information to the insurance company to underscore why an emergency transport was required.

    Doctors who write a letter or make a call to a patient’s insurer explaining a decision can also ask for a “peer-to-peer review,” meaning they would discuss the case with a medical expert in their field.

    Kelmar said patients with employer-sponsored health plans can ask their employer’s human resources department to advocate for them with the health plan. It’s in the employers’ best interest since they often pay a lot for these health plans, she said.

    No matter what, Kelmar said, patients shouldn’t let fear stop them from appealing a medical bill. Patients who appeal have a high likelihood of winning, she said.

    Patients with government health coverage can further appeal insurance denials by filing a complaint with the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. Those who believe they have received an inappropriate bill from an out-of-network provider can call the No Surprises Act help desk at 1-800-985-3059.

    Bill of the Month is a crowdsourced investigation by KFF Health News and NPR that dissects and explains medical bills. Do you have an interesting medical bill you want to share with us? Tell us about it!

    This article was produced by KFF Health News, which publishes California Healthline, an editorially independent service of the California Health Care Foundation. 




    Kaiser Health NewsThis article was reprinted from khn.org, a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues and is one of the core operating programs at KFF – the independent source for health policy research, polling, and journalism.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • A paramedic was skeptical about this Rx for stopping repeat opioid overdoses. Then he saw it help.

    A paramedic was skeptical about this Rx for stopping repeat opioid overdoses. Then he saw it help.

    [ad_1]

    Fire Capt. Jesse Blaire steered his SUV through the mobile home park until he spotted the little beige house with white trim and radioed to let dispatchers know he’d arrived.

    There, Shawnice Slaughter waited on the steps, wiping sleep from her eyes.

    “Good morning, Shawnice,” Blaire said. “How are you feeling today?”

    “I’ve been good, I’ve been good,” Slaughter said. “Much better.”

    Three days earlier, Blaire — a paramedic who leads the fire department’s emergency medical team — met Slaughter at a nearby hospital. She had overdosed on opioids. It took four vials of an overdose reversal medication and dozens of chest compressions to get her breathing again.

    At the hospital, Blaire told Slaughter about a free program that could help. It wouldn’t just connect her with a recovery center but would also get her doctors’ appointments, plus rides there. More important, she would get medicine to alleviate withdrawal symptoms so she wouldn’t search for drugs to ease the sickness. Blaire would bring that medication, daily, to her home.

    “I have a son,” Slaughter, 31, told Blaire. “I need to be alive for him.”

    Every morning since, Blaire had driven over for a check-in. He reminded Slaughter of appointments and took note of what she needed: clothes, food, help with bills.

    And at the end of each visit, from a lockbox in the back of his car, he dispensed to her a couple of tiny, lifesaving tablets.

    Those tablets — a medicine called buprenorphine — represent a tidal change in the way counties in Florida and other states are addressing the opioid crisis. The idea: Get addiction medication to people who need it by meeting them where they are. Sometimes, that’s on the street. Sometimes, it’s in the driveway of a big house with a swimming pool. Sometimes on the steps of a modest home like Slaughter’s.

    ********

    For a long time, many people who could benefit from buprenorphine, commonly known by the brand name Subutex, couldn’t get it.

    Until recently, doctors needed a federal waiver to prescribe it to treat opioid use disorder. Amid misconceptions about treating opioid use disorder with medication, only about 5% of doctors nationally underwent the training to qualify. And in 2021, only 1 in 5 people who could have benefited from opioid addiction medication were receiving buprenorphine or another drug therapy.

    But as evidence supporting the drug’s efficacy grew and the urgency mounted to curb opioid deaths, Congress axed the waiver requirement in late 2022, clearing the way for greater availability.

    And in rare cases, such as in Ocala, medics on the front lines began bringing treatment to patients’ front doors.

    In Florida, the state-run Coordinated Opioid Recovery Network, known as the CORE Network, provides guidelines on medicine distribution to areas hit hard by overdoses. Services through the network are free for patients, funded by money from the state’s opioid settlement.

    The network looks different in each of its 13 counties. Not all hand-deliver buprenorphine. But the common goal is to create a single entry point for services that have typically been siloed and difficult for patients to navigate, such as mental health care and housing support.

    In a recovery landscape rife with shoddy facilities and prohibitive price tags, simplifying the path for patients stands to make a meaningful difference.

    “We know that the more people are in contact with services, the more they’re treated with respect, the more likely they are to reduce or cease drug use,” said Susan Sherman, a public health professor at Johns Hopkins University.

    As opioid settlement dollars continue to come in, state officials have said they hope to expand to more counties.

    ********

    Becoming a firefighter and paramedic satisfied Blaire’s craving for adrenaline and his conviction, informed in part by his Christian background, that he was put on this Earth to help others.

    At 20, he imagined responding to car crashes and heart attacks, broken bones and punctured flesh. But after years on the job with Ocala Fire Rescue, the calls began to change.

    At first, Blaire felt some resentment toward the people overdosing. His team was suddenly responding to hundreds of such calls a year. He viewed drug use as a moral failure. What if a grandmother had a heart attack or a kid drowned while his team was on an overdose call?

    Unlike with other emergencies, he never really felt he was saving a life when responding to an overdose. It was more like delaying death.

    Over and over, he’d pump a patient full of naloxone, an overdose reversal medication often known by one of its brand names, Narcan, and drop them at the hospital, only to find they’d overdosed again after being discharged. One Christmas, he said, he responded to the same person overdosing five times on a single shift.

    “I didn’t understand it. I thought that they wanted to die,” said Blaire, 47. “I’m embarrassed to say that now.”

    About a decade ago, the scope of the epidemic had already come into full view to Blaire’s crew. It seemed the team was responding to overdoses at big houses in wealthy neighborhoods nearly as often as they were in the park and under the bridge.

    One week, his team went to a home on a cul-de-sac with two kids and a swing set — the kind of place families take their children trick-or-treating.

    The dad had overdosed. The next week, it was the mom.

    “Money can mask any problem, but we’ve seen it from the top to the bottom,” Blaire said.

    Over time, Blaire began to understand addiction as the disease it is: a physiological change to someone’s brain that traps them in a dangerous cycle. Maybe it started with a prescription painkiller after surgery, or an indulgence at a party, but the majority of people weren’t using drugs to get high, he realized. They were using them to avoid being sick.

    “Imagine the worst flu you’ve ever had, then make it a lot worse,” Blaire said.

    When a person dependent on opioids stops taking them, their body goes into withdrawal, often accompanied by shakes, nausea, fever, sweating, and chills. Though rare, people can die from opioid withdrawal syndrome. Still, historically, the emergency health care system has focused on reversing overdoses, rather than treating the withdrawal side effects that keep people returning to drugs.

    In the past, Blaire said, he saw patients released from the hospital with little more than a phone number for a recovery center. Getting an appointment could be challenging, not only because of wait times or insurance complications, but because the patients weren’t stable — they were in withdrawal. To make it through the day, Blaire said, they’d often use again.

    “‘Good luck, you’re on your own,’” Blaire said. “That’s how it was. And that doesn’t work for somebody who is sick.”

    Under Blaire’s leadership, Ocala Fire Rescue sought to stop the revolving door by launching its Community Paramedicine program and the Ocala Recovery Project in 2020.

    They modeled it after overdose quick-response teams around the country, which vary in makeup. These mobile teams, typically helmed by paramedics like Blaire, connect people who have overdosed with services aimed at stabilizing them long-term. On some, a registered nurse embeds with paramedics in an ambulance or SUV. Others have a therapist or peer recovery coach on board. Some are bare-bones: a single responder with a phone on 24 hours a day. Some get in touch with patients through a call or a home visit after a reported overdose.

    Others, like Blaire’s team, intercept patients at the hospital.

    Blaire likens the system to that of a trauma alert — a message sent to medical centers to ready a response to near-fatal car wrecks or shootings. When a trauma alert goes out, operating tables are cleared, CT scanners are prepped, and responders stand by for arrival.

    “We set the same system up for overdoses,” Blaire said.

    Now, when somebody in Ocala overdoses, whether it’s on opioids, alcohol, meth, or cocaine, an alert goes out, notifying Blaire and his team, a peer recovery coach, a behavioral health specialist, and a local recovery center.

    His team usually beats the ambulance to the hospital.

    The next day, team members follow up at the patient’s home.

    Then, last May, under the guidance of the EMS medical director, Blaire’s team started offering addiction medication to opioid users, too.

    Since then, Blaire said, his team has connected 149 patients with treatment. Only 28 of them have needed additional intervention, he said.

    ********

    When Blaire first heard about buprenorphine, he was skeptical.

    How could giving somebody with an addiction more narcotics help?

    That common response misunderstands the reality of addiction, said Nora Volkow, director of the National Institute on Drug Abuse.

    People perceive that one drug is being substituted for another, Volkow said. Instead, the use of medications like buprenorphine is more akin to those that treat other psychiatric conditions, like mood disorders or depression.

    Research shows that opioid addiction medication — including drugs like methadone — can greatly reduce the risk of overdose deaths, and increase a person’s retention in treatment. But a study out of the New York University Grossman School of Medicine found that nearly 87% of people with opioid use disorders don’t receive any.

    Such addiction medications work by stimulating opioid receptors in the brain.

    Opioids — like oxycodone or fentanyl — are what experts refer to as “full agonists.” Imagine an opioid receptor as a rounded bowl. A full agonist — like fentanyl — fits perfectly in that bowl and latches tightly to the receptor.

    Buprenorphine is a “partial agonist.” It fits in the bowl — and satiates a craving — but doesn’t completely bind like a full agonist. Instead, it eliminates withdrawal symptoms so people won’t get sick or crave illicit drugs, without producing a high. Second, it counteracts the effects of other drugs, so a person can’t overdose on other opioids like fentanyl or heroin while taking it.

    And for somebody who already uses opioids, overdosing from buprenorphine is nearly impossible.

    “They help a person regain control of their everyday life,” Volkow said.

    ********

    On this Monday in January, Blaire pulled into Beacon Point, a local treatment center, just past 2 p.m.

    He’d spent his morning calling on people like Slaughter, but now he was meeting paramedics from his team. After nearly three weeks of home visits, a man in the recovery network program was set to have his first appointment with a doctor.

    Blaire has found that once people are stable on buprenorphine, more often than not they want to get into a treatment program.

    While Blaire waited, a woman walking out of the center approached, smiling.

    “I just got my first clean urine analysis,” she said. “I’m doing great, I’m so excited.”

    “That’s awesome news,” Blaire said, a smile stretched across his face. He’s often stoic, straight-laced, with combed hair and aviators. But when he lights up, his all-business exterior gives way to gentleness.

    Jacqueline Luciano is sober for the first time in 30 years. She’s proud, glowing, and Blaire is proud, too.

    Luciano first came to Blaire through a referral when she was living at a women’s shelter. She said she had $20 in her pocket and wanted to get high — needed to.

    Fentanyl withdrawal had left her shaky and cold. Her stomach was seizing, her muscles spasming. To quell the agony that day in early January, she went on the hunt.

    Luciano said she had first used drugs when she was 9. Her family had been torn apart by pills and powders, she said, a sickness she’d inherited.

    But this time, a woman — “like an angel” — passed her a number for someone who she promised could guide her into a brighter future, blame-free. Luciano, 39, paused, skeptical.

    Then she gave Blaire a call.

    For about a week, Blaire delivered her a daily dose of buprenorphine using a Safe RX bottle — essentially a trackable pill bottle with a lock code to limit who can open it. He helped connect her with food and clothing donations.

    And as Luciano started to feel more like herself, absent of cravings, she began to hope.

    Blaire got her an appointment with doctors at Beacon Point, then drove her to her first screening. Now, in the parking lot, she thanked him for everything.

    “It made all the difference in the world,” Luciano told Blaire. “I really didn’t think that I could get better. I didn’t. But I am.”

    As a tear rolled down Luciano’s face, Blaire’s phone rang.

    ********

    The call came from the health department. A man in his 40s or 50s had come some 40 miles from Gainesville, Florida, for help, steered through word of mouth.

    He’d tried to get into a recovery center there but said he was turned away. Something about insurance and a criminal record had stood in the way.

    It’s a pattern that drives Blaire crazy. He’d seen it a lot before his team was formed. People would get a moment of courage or clarity, only to be told “not yet.”

    “Your first answer has to be ‘yes,’” he said. “‘Yes, I can help you.’”

    He knew about a woman who had come from 25 miles out of town, then was told to come back days later. She didn’t have a car or a home to return to.

    “They didn’t even offer her a ride,” Blaire said. “Sometimes you only have one shot.”

    Blaire has learned that building trust starts with a small offering. A car ride. A sandwich. Help getting a government ID. Anything to show that you care, that you’re useful. That you see someone trying.

    Outside the health department, a man in muddied jeans and a frayed T-shirt stood waiting on the curb. He introduced himself as Jetson and didn’t give a last name. Blaire shook his hand before they loaded into the car.

    “So what brings you this way?” Blaire asked, once both were buckled in.

    “I heard there were services here,” Jetson said, his voice gruff, quivering. “I’ve tried to stop using so many times, but I keep messing it up.”

    Jetson shook his head.

    “Well, I’m glad you found us,” Blaire said. He asked the man if he wanted to go to the recovery center for a screening. He did.

    Over the 10-minute drive to Beacon Point, Blaire and Jetson talked, not about drugs or meds, but life. Baseball. Cabbage (good when fried).

    When they pulled up, Blaire handed Jetson a card.

    “Please call me,” Blaire said. “If you need anything. We can get you help.”

    For a moment, the men sat there. Jetson pulling at his fingers. Taking deep breaths.

    Then, he got out of the car — Blaire’s card in hand — and walked through the glass door.

    This article was produced in partnership with the Tampa Bay Times.




    Kaiser Health NewsThis article was reprinted from khn.org, a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues and is one of the core operating programs at KFF – the independent source for health policy research, polling, and journalism.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Inflammatory responses fuel cardiovascular complications

    Inflammatory responses fuel cardiovascular complications

    [ad_1]

    In a recent study published in the journal Circulation, researchers investigate the inflammatory response to acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) within the heart.

    Study: Virus-Induced Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome Causes Cardiomyopathy Through Eliciting Inflammatory Responses in the Heart. Image Credit: Kateryna Kon / ShutterstockStudy: Virus-Induced Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome Causes Cardiomyopathy Through Eliciting Inflammatory Responses in the Heart. Image Credit: Kateryna Kon / Shutterstock

    The link between respiratory viral infections and CVD

    Seasonal viral infections can range in severity from mild flu-like symptoms to potentially lethal ARDS. For example, despite being primarily a respiratory tract infection, coronavirus disease of 2019 (COVID-19) can lead to ARDS and other severe cardiovascular disease outcomes with high mortality rates.

    Circulating immune cells may respond to COVID-19 by upregulating cytokine release, which can lead to myocardial injury. Cardiac macrophages, immune cells responsible for the myocardial inflammatory response, are increasingly being investigated for their role in ARDS. Recent evidence indicates that macrophage expansion, which can be accompanied by changes in the population size and relative abundances of various cardiac macrophages, is a characteristic feature of ARDS.

    The main two types of cardiac macrophages include C-C chemokine receptor type 2 negative (CCR2) and CCR2+ macrophages. Further research is needed to determine the viral-induced contributions of these macrophages to adverse cardiac outcomes.

    These data would allow clinicians to make informed intervention decisions and elucidate whether these outcomes are COVID-19-induced or if observed inflammation is a systemic immune response to viral infection. Furthermore, this information could support the development of future therapies to prevent cardiovascular disease (CVD) following recovery from COVID-19.

    About the study

    In the present study, researchers investigate the role of viral- and non-viral-induced ARDS-associated immune signals in altering cardiac macrophage populations, thereby impacting CVD parameters, including systemic inflammation.

    This study was conducted at Massachusetts General Hospital and involved 33 control samples obtained from patients who died between September and December 2019, prior to the onset of COVID-19, as well as 21 samples obtained between May and July 2020 from patients who died from COVID-19-associated complications. Samples consisted of autopsy tissue excised from the left ventricular or septal region.

    Simultaneously, in vivo studies involved a daily intratracheal administration of an ARDS cocktail of immunostimulatory agents to mice, which included resiquimod, imiquimod, lipopolysaccharide (LPS), and angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) inhibitor MLN-4760. This model allowed the researchers to reproduce clinical ARDS features in mice without the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2).

    Patient data included results obtained from electrocardiogram (ECG), echocardiography, lung computed tomography (CT) scan, blood gas analyses, body temperature evaluation, bronchoalveolar lavage fluid (BALF) characterization, blood pressure measurements, and flow cytometry. Both human and murine autopsy samples were processed using ribonucleic acid (RNA) isolation, real-time polymerase chain reaction (PCR) assay, and enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays (ELISAs) for protein and gene expression determinations.

    Similar immune responses in non-viral- and SARS-CoV-2-associated ARDS

    In the absence of viral infection, mice treated with the ARDS cocktail exhibited significant weight loss over the five-day cocktail treatment period. This was accompanied by hypothermia, a common feature of both ARDS and septic shock, as well as a mortality rate of over 40% by day five.

    Mice with ARDS exhibited bilateral opacities and immune cell infiltrations within their lungs, as well as reduced blood oxygenation. Furthermore, increased D-dimer, neutrophil, and monocyte levels were observed, as well as reduced blood pressure and lower heart rates in ARDS mice. Other inflammatory pathways that were activated in ARDS mice included increased levels of interleukin 6 (IL-6), IL-1ß, tumor-necrosis factor α (TNF-α), and interferon y (IFN-y), all of which are also associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection.

    In both non-infected ARDS and SARS-CoV-2-infected mice, an increased infiltration of interstitial macrophages and reduced levels of alveolar macrophages were observed. Although both mouse models exhibited increased levels of cardiac macrophages, this immune response was more pronounced in infected mice. Nevertheless, both models’ subsets of cardiac macrophages were altered to similar levels.

    Upon comparison of control and COVID-19 patient myocardium samples, SARS-CoV-2 infection recruited a more significant number of CCR2+ CD68+ macrophages, thus indicating that a robust immune response is elicited after severe infection compared to other life-threatening diseases.

    “Our findings indicate that systemic and myocardial inflammatory signals elicited by virally induced ARDS may contribute to the cardiovascular complications and high mortality rates of this condition. In addition, our study confirms previous reports that SARS-CoV-2 infection increases overall macrophage numbers in hearts.”

    The cardiac benefits of TNF-α immune therapy

    TNF-α neutralizing antibodies were also administered to mice to evaluate their effects on immune activation during ARDS. To this end, TNF-α immune therapy reduced weight loss, improved body temperature, increased blood oxygenation, and led to better survival rates. Histological analysis indicated that ARDS mice receiving anti-TNF-α therapy exhibited reduced macrophages, Cxcl2, IL-1ß, and IL-6 expression within the lungs.

    TNF-α therapy also improved systolic dysfunction, cardiomyocyte apoptosis, and monocyte infiltration in ARDS mice. Total cardiac macrophage counts and reduced expression of IL-1ß, IL-6, and TNF-α within the myocardium were also observed, thus demonstrating the anti-inflammatory benefits associated with TNF-α immune therapy in the lungs and hearts of mice with ARDS.

    Conclusions

    The study findings demonstrate that SARS-CoV-2 infection leads to significant alterations in cardiac macrophage subset levels, particularly increased levels of CCR2+ macrophages, in both mice and humans. Even in the absence of SARS-CoV-2 or another virus, the immune response to ARDS-like injury is capable of inducing significant alterations in heart macrophage levels, which may increase the risk of cardiovascular complications and mortality associated with ARDS.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Study suggests treating anxiety and depression significantly reduces ER visits and rehospitalizations among heart disease patients

    Study suggests treating anxiety and depression significantly reduces ER visits and rehospitalizations among heart disease patients

    [ad_1]

    Ischemic heart disease (IHD) is a major cause of illness and death in developed countries. While advanced technology has boosted survival and rehabilitation odds, not much is known about the impact of anxiety or depression on the eventual outcomes. The prevalence of heart failure (HF) is predicted to increase by half in 2030. This will mean that eight million adults with HF, with almost $31 billion being required to treat them.

    Study: Impact of Mental Health Treatment on Outcomes in Patients With Heart Failure and Ischemic Heart Disease. Image Credit: sitthiphong/Shutterstock.com
    Study: Impact of Mental Health Treatment on Outcomes in Patients With Heart Failure and Ischemic Heart Disease. Image Credit: sitthiphong/Shutterstock.com

    A new study looks at this area in order to provide evidence for key recommendations in the treatment of such patients.

    Mental health and heart disease outcomes

    Several previous studies have reported that anxiety and depression are independent risk factors for IHD and HF. Anxiety increases the incidence of IHD and HF by 41% and 35%, respectively, while increasing IHD-related mortality by 41%. Since anxiety and depression may originate in common factors, further research on their cross-linkage with cardiovascular disease and its outcomes is necessary.

    Moreover, anxiety and depression both increase the odds of rehospitalizations and Emergency Department (ED) visits, pushing up healthcare costs. However, there is contradictory evidence for the benefits of treating anxiety or depression in IHD or HF, including recent trials like the SADHEART (Sertraline Antidepressant Heart Attack Randomized Trial).

    Yet these mental and physical conditions reduce the quality of life, acting synergistically with the others due to their shared pathways. For instance, “coexistence of depression results in perception of symptom severity that exceed measures of actual functional impairment.”

    About the study

    The aim of the current study, published online in the Journal of the American Heart Association, aimed to examine the effect of treatment for anxiety or depression on the odds of repeated hospital admissions, ED visits, or mortality.

    The researchers used a population-based cohort from the Ohio Medicaid database, exploring data retrospectively to assess the link between being treated for these conditions and future outcomes. All participants had ischemic heart disease (IHD) or heart failure, along with anxiety or depression.

    There were ~1,500 participants, over 80% being White, with a mean age of 50 years. The upper age limit was 64 since people older than this are not eligible for Medicaid.

    Treatment of anxiety and depression in the cohort

    Over 92% were diagnosed with anxiety and 56% with depression. About half were disabled, a similar number had a history of substance use, and almost 60% had lung disease.

    They were treated medically with antidepressant medication, or with psychotherapy, or both. About a quarter were on both courses of treatment, while ~30% were on antidepressants only and 15% on psychotherapy alone.

    Anxiety was diagnosed in 90% of those on both therapies and depression in 70%. In the antidepressant group, 93% were anxious, and 53% were depressed. The corresponding figures in the psychotherapy group were similar.

    The majority of those on treatment with antidepressants, alone or in combination with psychotherapy, were on benzodiazepines, antipsychotics, or mood stabilizers. Tricyclic antidepressants were used by a small proportion of patients.

    About half the patients were on beta-blockers for their heart conditions, 36% on angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs), and 26% on calcium channel blockers. 

    How did treatment affect outcomes?

    For all outcomes except mortality from IHD, “those who received some form of mental health treatment were significantly less likely to experience the outcome than those who received no mental health treatment.”

    Those who received both psychotherapy and antidepressant therapy showed the greatest benefit in all three outcomes compared to no treatment and also when compared to either therapeutic modality alone.

    The group treated with both modalities was 75% less likely to require another hospitalization or ED visit. After compensating for all known confounding factors, the risk of all-cause mortality dropped by 65% compared to those not treated for their mental ill-health.

    With psychotherapy alone, there was a 40% reduction in mortality from all causes. There was no significant difference in the antidepressant-only group. None of the treatments resulted in a difference in the risk of IHD mortality, perhaps because the study was underpowered to detect this effect.

    ED visits were reduced with all treatments. The combination therapy group showed a reduction of 74% compared to the no-treatment group. Psychotherapy alone, or antidepressants alone, was linked to a reduction in risk by 50%.

    Hospital readmissions were also lower with combined therapy, at ~75% below the no-treatment group. With psychotherapy alone or antidepressants alone, the risk was approximately 50% and 60% lower, respectively.

    Future implications

    This article is the first to show that mental health treatment may be associated with reduced risk for relevant outcomes.”

    The unequivocal findings indicate the need to screen heart patients for anxiety and depression. If these conditions are diagnosed, providing appropriate treatment markedly improves the risk of rehospitalization and ED visits. Strategies must be optimized to diagnose and treat anxiety and depression in this group of patients to improve their quality of life.

    Sympathetic activation occurs with anxiety and depression, along with heart disease. This results in the release of pro-inflammatory cytokines, promoting the progression of all three conditions. This may explain in part why treatment of mental ill-health improves the incidence of cardiovascular events.

    This marks an advance from earlier studies that focused mostly on the safety of administering such medications to patients with IHD or HF and fills this research gap. Treating anxiety and depression in heart patients not only improves their health outcomes but may significantly reduce their healthcare costs, with a positive cost-benefit ratio.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • LungVax vaccine uses DNA technology to prevent lung cancer

    LungVax vaccine uses DNA technology to prevent lung cancer

    [ad_1]

    Developed by scientists from the University of Oxford, the Francis Crick Institute and University College London, the LungVax vaccine uses technology similar to the highly successful Oxford/AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine.

    The team will receive funding for the study over the next 2 years to support lab research and initial manufacturing of 3,000 doses of the vaccine at the Oxford Clinical BioManufacturing Facility.

    Lung cancer cells look different from normal cells due to having “red flag” proteins called neoantigens. Neoantigens appear on the surface of the cell because of cancer-causing mutations within the cell’s DNA.

    The LungVax vaccine will carry a strand of DNA which trains the immune system to recognize these neoantigens on abnormal lung cells. The LungVax vaccine will then activate the immune system to kill these cells and stop lung cancer.

    In this study, the scientists are developing this vaccine in the lab to show that it successfully triggers an immune response. If this work is successful, the vaccine will move straight into a clinical trial. If the subsequent early trial delivers promising results, the vaccine could then be scaled up to bigger trials for people at high risk of lung cancer. This could include people aged 55-74 who are current smokers, or have previously smoked, and currently qualify for targeted lung health checks in some parts of the UK.

    There are around 48,500 cases of lung cancer every year in the UK. 72% of lung cancers are caused by smoking, which is the biggest preventable cause of cancer worldwide.

    Kidani Professor of Immuno-oncology at the University of Oxford and research lead for the LungVax project, Professor Tim Elliott, said:

    “Cancer is a disease of our own bodies and it’s hard for the immune system to distinguish between what’s normal and what’s cancer. Getting the immune system to recognize and attack cancer is one of the biggest challenges in cancer research today.

    “This research could deliver an off-the-shelf vaccine based on Oxford’s vaccine technology, which proved itself in the COVID-19 pandemic. If we can replicate the kind of success seen in trials during the pandemic, we could save the lives of tens of thousands of people every year in the UK alone.”

    When given to people with cancer at its earliest stages, anti-cancer treatments are more likely to be successful.

    We are developing a vaccine to stop the formation of lung cancer in people at high risk. This is an important step forward in preventing this devastating disease.”

    Professor Sarah Blagden, Professor of Experimental Oncology at the University of Oxford and founder of the LungVax project

    Professor Mariam Jamal-Hanjani of University College London and the Francis Crick Institute, who will be leading the LungVax clinical trial, said:

    “Fewer than 10% of people with lung cancer survive their disease for 10 years or more. That must change. This research complements existing efforts through lung health checks to detect lung cancer earlier in people who are at greatest risk.

    “We think the vaccine could cover around 90% of all lung cancers, based on our computer models and previous research, and this funding will allow us to take the vital first steps towards trials in patients.

    “LungVax will not replace stopping smoking as the best way to reduce your risk of lung cancer. But it could offer a viable route to preventing some of the earliest stage cancers from emerging in the first place.”

    Chief Executive of Cancer Research UK, Michelle Mitchell, said:

    “The science that successfully steered the world out of the pandemic could soon be guiding us toward a future where people can live longer, better lives free from the fear of cancer.

    “Projects like LungVax are a really important step forward into an exciting future, where cancer is much more preventable. We’re in a golden age of research and this is one of many projects which we hope will transform lung cancer survival.” 

    President of CRIS Cancer Foundation, Lola Manterola, said:

    “We are at a crucial moment in the history of cancer research and treatment. For the first time, technology and knowledge of the immune system are allowing us to take the first steps towards preventing cancer.

    “This groundbreaking study represents a firm step in that direction, and we at CRIS consider it essential to support it.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Smoking linked to increased abdominal fat

    Smoking linked to increased abdominal fat

    [ad_1]

    The worry of gaining weight is a common excuse for smokers not to quit. A new study published today in the scientific journal Addiction has found that both starting smoking and lifetime smoking may increase abdominal fat, especially visceral fat: the unhealthy fat deep inside the abdomen that is linked to a higher risk of heart disease, diabetes, stroke, and dementia.

    Smokers tend to have lower body weights than non-smokers, but they also have more abdominal fat, and more abdominal visceral fat. Visceral fat is hard to see; you can have a flat stomach and still have unhealthy amounts of it, raising your risk of serious illness. This new study offers supportive evidence that smoking may cause that type of fat to increase.

    Researchers at the NNF Center for Basic Metabolic Research, University of Copenhagen used a form of statistical analysis called Mendelian randomization (MR) to determine whether smoking causes an increase in abdominal fat. MR combines the results from different genetic studies to look for causal relationships between an exposure (in this case, smoking) and outcome (increased abdominal fat). This new study combined multiple genetic results from European ancestry studies of smoking exposures and measures of body fat distribution (e.g., waist-hip ratio and waist and hip circumferences).

    First, the researchers used previous genetic studies to identify which genes are linked to smoking habits and body fat distribution. Second, they used this genetic information to determine whether people with genes associated with smoking tend to have different body fat distributions. Finally, they accounted for other influences, such as alcohol consumption or socioeconomic background, to ensure that any connections they found between smoking and body fat distribution were truly due to smoking itself and not other factors.

    This study found that starting to smoke and smoking over a lifetime might cause an increase in belly fat, as seen by measurements of waist-to-hip ratio. In a further analysis, we also found that the type of fat that increases is more likely the visceral fat, rather than the fat just under the skin.”


    Dr. Germán D. Carrasquilla, Lead Author

    “Previous studies have been prone to confounding, which happens when an independent variable affects the results. Because our study design uses genetic variations, it does a better job of reducing or controlling for those variables. The influence of smoking on belly fat seems to happen regardless of other factors such as socioeconomic status, alcohol use, ADHD, or how much of a risk-taker someone is.”

    “From a public health point of view, these findings reinforce the importance of large-scale efforts to prevent and reduce smoking in the general population, as this may also help to reduce abdominal visceral fat and all the chronic diseases that are related to it. Reducing one major health risk in the population will, indirectly, reduce another major health risk.”

    The researchers determined that excess abdominal fat in smokers was predominantly visceral fat by studying how DNA variants linked to smoking habits and belly fat relate to fat compartments in different parts of the body. The key finding is that these genetic factors are more strongly linked to increased visceral adipose tissue-;the deep fat that wraps around the abdominal organs-;than to subcutaneous fat that is stored under the skin.

    The two underlying European ancestry studies were large in scale: the smoking study looked at 1.2 million people who started smoking and over 450,000 lifetime smokers, and the body fat distribution study included over 600,000 people. 

    Source:

    Journal reference:

    Carrasquilla, G. D., et al. (2024) Estimating causality between smoking and abdominal obesity by Mendelian randomization. Addiction. doi.org/10.1111/add.16454.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Transforming cardiovascular health through diet and education

    Transforming cardiovascular health through diet and education

    [ad_1]

    In a recent study published in BMJ Nutrition, Prevention, and Health, researchers evaluated the effectiveness of the Get Heart Smart (GHS) program in improving cardiovascular health.

    Study: Evaluation of a 4-week interdisciplinary primary care cardiovascular health programme: impact on knowledge, Mediterranean Diet adherence and biomarkers. Image Credit: Sven Hansche/Shutterstock.comStudy: Evaluation of a 4-week interdisciplinary primary care cardiovascular health programme: impact on knowledge, Mediterranean Diet adherence and biomarkers. Image Credit: Sven Hansche/Shutterstock.com

    Background

    Cardiovascular disease is Canada’s second-leading cause of mortality. Lifestyle changes can boost cardiovascular health by improving the lipid profile and blood pressure.

    Limiting alcohol use, lowering stress, increasing physical activity, managing weight, stopping smoking, and eating a well-balanced, nutrient-dense diet, such as the Mediterranean diet, can optimize cardiovascular health.

    The Mediterranean Diet promotes a high diet of unsaturated fats, fruits, leafy greens, wholegrain cereals, seeds, nuts, plant-origin proteins, moderate animal-based protein consumption, and minimal sweet intake.

    A two-point rise in the Mediterranean Diet score is associated with better health, including lower mortality, CVD risk, neoplastic illness, and depression. Health education and motive planning can improve cardiovascular outcomes.

    According to the Planned Behavior Theory, knowledge can robustly estimate involvement, which impacts intentions and subsequent behavior change.

    About the study

    In the present pragmatic, longitudinal cohort study, researchers explored the impact of the GHS program on cardiovascular outcomes.

    The researchers enrolled 31 adults in the four-week GHS program formulated by the East Elgin Family Health Team dieticians based on referrals from healthcare practitioners or by themselves. Due to COVID-19, 16 participants attended the program virtually.

    The program comprised four weekly educational sessions of 75 minutes each to improve participant awareness of BP and cholesterol management.

    In addition, the program educated the participants on grocery store navigation from a cardiovascular perspective and reviewed diets that improve cardiovascular health [like the Mediterranean Diet, Portfolio Diet, and Dietary Approaches to Stopping Hypertension (DASH) diet].

    In one session, a physician answered questions concerning cardiovascular medications. After each session, participants developed their SMART (specific, measurable, achievable, realistic, and timely) goals.

    The team conducted in-person sessions between May 2019 and March 2020 and provided educational handouts to the participants.

    They obtained blood samples from the participants for metabolic profile analysis and used the GHS knowledge questionnaire to assess participant awareness. The primary outcome was a change in Mediterranean Diet adherence after four weeks and six months of follow-up.

    Secondary study outcomes included changes in glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c), blood pressure (BP), lipid profile [total cholesterol, high-density lipoprotein (HDL), low-density lipoprotein (LDL), and triglycerides], and an improved understanding of cardiovascular health after four weeks and six months.

    In addition, the team compared cardiovascular outcomes between those attending in-person and virtually during COVID-19.

    They performed two-way repeated-measures analyses of variance (RM-ANOVAs) to investigate GHS program effectiveness using data obtained between May 2019 and March 2023.

    Results

    The study population was primarily comprised of healthy female Caucasians, with a mean age of 61 years. GHS program participation was strong, with participants attending an average of 3.5 out of 4 sessions, with no significant differences between in-person and virtual attendance.

    Knowledge ratings differed significantly between groups at baseline and after four weeks. Over six months, the team noted significantly higher Mediterranean Diet adherence and knowledge ratings in the in-person, virtual, and pooled samples. None of the biomarker alterations, except triglycerides, were statistically significant.

    Following the four-week GHS course, the virtual group’s Mediterranean Diet adherence improved significantly. After a six-month follow-up, adherence to the Mediterranean Diet was remarkably higher in the virtual and in-person groups.

    The effect on Mediterranean Diet adherence increased considerably with time (partial eta squared for time: 0.4).

    After four-week and six-month follow-ups, the pooled, virtual, and in-person groups showed significantly higher knowledge scores than at study initiation.

    After four weeks, knowledge levels differed considerably between the virtual and in-person groups; however, the team found no statistically significant difference between groups after six months. As time passed, they found a considerable influence on participant knowledge (partial eta squared for time, 0.5).

    The study found that the four-week cardiovascular health program significantly increased Mediterranean diet adherence, as seen by an increase in the mean Mediterranean Diet score from 7.0 to 9.2 after six months.

    Significant gains in knowledge ratings were observed in both the virtual and in-person groups, showing the adoption of virtual programs.

    Future research, however, must assess the program’s effectiveness in larger sample sizes with higher gender and ethnic diversity and poor cardiovascular health to increase the generalizability and validity of the study findings.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Treatment for anxiety and depression associated with improved heart disease outcomes

    Treatment for anxiety and depression associated with improved heart disease outcomes

    [ad_1]

    Treating anxiety and depression reduced emergency room visits and rehospitalizations among people with heart disease, according to new research published today in the Journal of the American Heart Association, an open access, peer-reviewed journal of the American Heart Association.

    For patients who had been hospitalized for coronary artery disease or heart failure and who had diagnoses of anxiety or depression, treatment with psychotherapy, pharmacotherapy or a combination of the two was associated with as much as a 75% reduction in hospitalizations or emergency room visits. In some cases, there was a reduction in death.”


    Philip Binkley, M.D., M.P.H., lead study author, executive vice chair of the department of internal medicine and emeritus professor of internal medicine and public health at The Ohio State University in Columbus, Ohio

    Binkley noted that anxiety and depression are common in people with heart failure, and mental health can have a significant impact on an individual’s risk of other health conditions, disability and death.

    In this study, Binkley and colleagues examined the association of mental health treatment with antidepressant medication or psychotherapy, also known as talk therapy or a combination of the two in relation to, emergency room visits, hospitalizations and death in people with blocked arteries or heart failure and with a formal diagnosis of anxiety or depression before hospitalization.

    The analysis found using three different statistical models that adjusted for different variables and compared to patients not receiving treatment for anxiety or depression:

    • For people who received both medication and talk therapy for anxiety or depression the risk of hospitalization was reduced by 68% to 75% the risk of being seen in the emergency department was reduced by 67% to 74%, and the risk of death from any cause was reduced by 65% to 67%.
    • Psychotherapy treatment alone was associated with a 46% to 49% reduction of risk for hospital readmission and a 48% to 53% reduction in emergency room visits.
    • Medication treatment alone reduced hospital readmission by 47% to 58% and reduced ER visits by 41% to 49%.
    • Follow-up time was variable based on the needs of each patient.

    “Heart disease and anxiety/depression interact such that each promotes the other,” Binkley said. “There appear to be psychologic mechanisms that link heart disease with anxiety and depression that are currently under investigation. Both heart disease and anxiety/depression are associated with activation of the sympathetic nervous system. This is part of the so-called involuntary nervous system that increases heart rate, blood pressure and can also contribute to anxiety and depression.”

    Binkley considers the large number of people with heart disease and the marked reduction in hospitalizations and emergency room visits and the drop in death to be the strength of the study.

    “I hope the results of our study motivate cardiologists and health care professionals to screen routinely for depression and anxiety and demonstrate that collaborative care models are essential for the management of cardiovascular and mental health. I would also hope these findings inspire additional research regarding the mechanistic connections between mental health and heart disease,” he said.

    Study details and background:

    • 1,563 adults ages 22 to 64 over a three-year period were included, and all participants had a first hospital admission for blocked arteries or heart failure and had two or more health insurance claims for an anxiety disorder or depression.
    • Sixty-eight percent of participants were women, and 81% were noted as white race. All were enrolled in Ohio’s Medicaid program during the six months prior to the hospital admission. Health data was from two sources: Ohio Medicaid claims and Ohio death certificate files from July 1, 2009, to June 30, 2012.
    • Participants were followed through the end of 2014 or until death or the end of Medicaid enrollment.
    • About 23% of participants received both antidepressant medications and psychotherapy; nearly 15 percent received psychotherapy alone; 29% took antidepressants alone; and 33% received no mental health treatment.
    • About 92% of participants in the study were diagnosed with anxiety and 55.5% with depression prior to hospitalization.

    The study was limited to people enrolled in Medicaid, therefore, it may not be representative of people covered by commercial health insurance plans. In addition, the majority of participants were noted as white race, therefore, these finding are not applicable to people of other races, ethnicities or communities.

    Source:

    Journal reference:

    Carmin, C. N., et al. (2024) Impact of Mental Health Treatment on Outcomes in Patients With Heart Failure and Ischemic Heart Disease. Journal of the American Heart Association. doi.org/10.1161/JAHA.123.031117.

    [ad_2]

    Source link