Category: 8. Health

  • Simmonds P, Adriaenssens EM, Lefkowitz EJ, Oksanen HM, Siddell SG, Zerbini FM, et al. Changes to virus taxonomy and the ICTV statutes ratified by the international committee on taxonomy of viruses (2024). Arch Virol. 2024;169:236.

    Article 
    CAS 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 

  • Lambert AJ, Hughes HR. Clinically important phleboviruses and their detection in human samples. Viruses. 2021;13:1500.

    Article 
    CAS 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 

  • Calisher CH, Calzolari M. Taxonomy of phleboviruses, emphasizing those that are sandfly-borne. Viruses. 2021;13:918.

    Article 
    CAS 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 

  • Maroli M, Feliciangeli MD, Bichaud L, Charrel RN, Gradoni L. Phlebotomine sandflies and the spreading of leishmaniases and other diseases of public health concern. Med Vet Entomol. 2013;27:123–47.

    Article 
    CAS 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 

  • Konstantinou GN, Papa A, Antoniadis A. Sandfly-fever outbreak in Cyprus: are phleboviruses still a health problem? Travel Med Infect Dis. 2007;5:239–42.

    Article 
    CAS 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 

  • Mendoza-Montero J, Gámez-Rueda MI, Navarro-Marí JM, De La Rosa-Fraile M, Oyonarte-Gómez S. Infections due to sandfly fever virus serotype Toscana in Spain. Clin Inf Dis. 1998;27:434–6.

    Article 
    CAS 

    Google Scholar 

  • Ortuño M, Muñoz C, Spitzová T, Sumova P, Iborra MA, Pérez-Cutillas P, et al. Exposure to Phlebotomus perniciosus sandfly vectors is positively associated with Toscana virus and Leishmania infantum infection in human blood donors in Murcia Region, southeast Spain. Transbound Emerg Dis. 2022;69:e1854–64.

    Article 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 

  • Bichaud L, Piarroux RP, Izri A, Ninove L, Mary C, de Lamballerie X, et al. Low seroprevalence of sandfly fever Sicilian virus antibodies in humans Marseille France. Clin Microbiol Inf. 2011;17:1189–90.

    Article 
    CAS 

    Google Scholar 

  • Masse S, Ayhan N, Capai L, Bosseur F, de Lamballerie X, Charrel R, et al. Circulation of Toscana virus in a sample population of Corsica, France. Viruses. 2019;11:817.

    Article 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 

  • Calamusa G, Valenti RM, Vitale F, Mammina C, Romano N, Goedert JJ, et al. Seroprevalence of and risk factors for Toscana and Sicilian virus infection in a sample population of Sicily (Italy). J Inf. 2012;64:212–7.

    Article 

    Google Scholar 

  • Cusi MG, Gandolfo C, Valentini M, Savellini GG. Seroprevalence of antibodies to sandfly fever Sicilian virus in a sample population in Tuscany Italy. Vector-Borne Zoo Dis. 2013;13:345.

    Article 

    Google Scholar 

  • Polat C, Ayhan N, Saygan MB, Karahan S, Charrel R, Ergünay K. Comprehensive cross-sectional evaluation of human sandfly-borne Phlebovirus exposure in an endemic region. Viruses. 2023;15:1902.

    Article 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 

  • Ayari R, Chaouch H, Findlay-Wilson S, Hachfi W, Ben Lasfar N, Bellazreg F, et al. Seroprevalence and risk factors associated with phleboviruses and Crimean-Congo hemorrhagic fever virus among blood donors in central Tunisia. Pathogens. 2024;13:348.

    Article 
    CAS 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 

  • Maia C, Ayhan N, Cristóvão JM, Pereira A, Charrel R. Human seroprevalence of Toscana virus and Sicilian phlebovirus in the southwest of Portugal. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis. 2022;41:137–41.

    Article 
    CAS 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 

  • Bento Guerra A, Gouveia C, Zé-Zé L, Amaro F, Cordeiro Ferreira G, Brito MJ. Prolonged febrile illness caused by Sicilian virus infection in Portugal. Sweden: Malmo; 2018.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pereira A, Ayhan N, Cristóvão JM, Vilhena H, Martins Â, Cachola P, et al. Antibody response to Toscana virus and sandfly fever Sicilian virus in cats naturally exposed to phlebotomine sand fly bites in Portugal. Microorganisms. 2019;7:339.

    Article 
    CAS 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 

  • Maia C, Alwassouf S, Cristóvão JM, Ayhan N, Pereira A, Charrel RN, et al. Serological association between Leishmania infantum and sand fly fever Sicilian (but not Toscana) virus in sheltered dogs from southern Portugal. Parasit Vectors. 2017;10:92.

    Article 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 

  • Alwassouf S, Maia C, Ayhan N, Coimbra M, Cristovao JM, Richet H, et al. Neutralization-based seroprevalence of Toscana virus and sandfly fever Sicilian virus in dogs and cats from Portugal. J Gen Virol. 2016;97:2816–23.

    Article 
    CAS 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 

  • Xhekaj B, Kurum E, Stefanovska J, Cvetkovikj A, Sherifi K, Rexhepi A, et al. Neutralization-based seroprevalence of Toscana virus and sandfly fever Sicilian virus in dogs in the Republic of Kosovo. Parasit Vectors. 2025;18:48.

    Article 
    CAS 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 

  • Alwassouf S, Christodoulou V, Bichaud L, Ntais P, Mazeris A, Antoniou M, et al. Seroprevalence of sandfly-borne phleboviruses belonging to three serocomplexes (sandfly fever Naples, sandfly fever Sicilian and Salehabad) in dogs from Greece and Cyprus using neutralization test. PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2016;10:e0005063.

    Article 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 

  • Ayhan N, Sherifi K, Taraku A, Bërxholi K, Charrel RN. High rates of neutralizing antibodies to Toscana and sandfly fever Sicilian viruses in livestock. Kosovo Emerg Infect Dis. 2017;23:989–92.

    Article 
    CAS 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 

  • Horton KC, Wasfy M, Samaha H, Abdel-Rahman B, Safwat S, Abdel Fadeel M, et al. Serosurvey for zoonotic viral and bacterial pathogens among slaughtered livestock in Egypt. Vector-Borne and Zoonotic Diseases. 2014;14:633–9.

    Article 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 

  • Ayhan N, Rodríguez-Teijeiro JD, López-Roig M, Vinyoles D, Ferreres JA, Monastiri A, et al. High rates of antibodies against Toscana and Sicilian phleboviruses in common quail Coturnix coturnix birds. Front Microbiol. 2022;13:1091908.

    Article 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 

  • Muñoz C, Ayhan N, Ortuño M, Ortiz J, Gould EA, Maia C, et al. Experimental infection of dogs with Toscana virus and sandfly fever Sicilian virus to determine their potential as possible vertebrate hosts. Microorganisms. 2020;8:596.

    Article 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 

  • Ayhan N, Charrel NR. Sandfly-borne viruses of demonstrated/relevant medical importance. London: IntechOpen; 2019.

    Book 

    Google Scholar 

  • Centro de Estudos de Vetores e Doenças Infeciosas Doutor Francisco Cambournac. Relatório REVIVE 2023—Culicídeos, Ixodídeos e Flebótomos: Rede de Vigilância de Vetores. 2024.

  • de Freitas MT, Maia C. Phlebotomus perniciosus. Trends Parasitol. 2024;40:649–50.

    Article 

    Google Scholar 

  • Rocha R, Gonçalves L, Conceição C, Andrade P, Cristóvão JM, Condeço J, et al. Prevalence of asymptomatic Leishmania infection and knowledge, perceptions, and practices in blood donors in mainland Portugal. Parasit Vectors. 2023;16:357.

    Article 
    CAS 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 

  • Instituto Nacional de Estatística (INE). Resultados Provisórios. 2021. Resultados Provisórios—Censos 2021.

  • Nurtop E, Villarroel PMS, Pastorino B, Ninove L, Drexler JF, Roca Y, et al. Combination of ELISA screening and seroneutralisation tests to expedite Zika virus seroprevalence studies. Virol J. 2018;15:192.

    Article 
    CAS 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 

  • Rocha R, Kurum E, Ayhan N, Charrel R, Maia C. Seroprevalence of Toscana virus in blood donors in mainland Portugal. Parasit Vectors. 2025;18:82.

    Article 
    CAS 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 

  • Fagerland MW, Hosmer DW. A generalized Hosmer-Lemeshow goodness-of-fit test for multinomial logistic regression models. Stata J. 2012;12:447.

    Article 

    Google Scholar 

  • Amaro F, Zé-Zé L, Alves MJ. Sandfly-Borne phleboviruses in Portugal: four and still counting. viruses. 2022;14:1768.

    Article 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 

  • Al-numaani SA, Al-Nemari AT, El-Kafrawy SA, Hassan AM, Tolah AM, Alghanmi M, et al. Seroprevalence of Toscana and sandfly fever Sicilian viruses in humans and livestock animals from western Saudi Arabia. One Health. 2023;17:100601.

    Article 
    CAS 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 

  • Becker M, Zielen S, Schwarz T, Linde R, Hofmann D. Pappataci-Fieber. Klin Padiatr. 1997;209:377–9.

    Article 
    CAS 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 

  • Orshan L, Szekely D, Khalfa Z, Bitton S. Distribution and seasonality of Phlebotomus sand flies in cutaneous leishmaniasis foci, Judean Desert. Israel J Med Entomol. 2010;47:319–28.

    Article 
    CAS 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 

  • Dantas-Torres F, Latrofa M, Otranto D. Occurrence and genetic variability of Phlebotomus papatasi in an urban area of southern Italy. Parasit Vectors. 2010;3:77.

    Article 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 

  • Zé-Zé L, Amaro F, Osório HC, Giovanetti M, Lourenço J, Alves MJ. Molecular identification and ecology of Portuguese wild-caught phlebotomine sandfly specimens. Zoo Dis. 2022;2:19–31.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ergünay K, Litzba N, Lo MM, Aydoğan S, Saygan MB, Us D, et al. Performance of various commercial assays for the detection of Toscana virus antibodies. Vector-Borne Zoonotic Dis. 2011;11:781–7.

    Article 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 

Continue Reading

  • Immunogenicity and safety of the domestic and imported live-attenuated varicella vaccine in healthy Chinese populations: a systematic review and meta-analysis | BMC Infectious Diseases

    Immunogenicity and safety of the domestic and imported live-attenuated varicella vaccine in healthy Chinese populations: a systematic review and meta-analysis | BMC Infectious Diseases

  • Andrei G, Snoeck R. Advances and perspectives in the management of Varicella-Zoster virus infections. Molecules. 2021;26:1132.

    CAS 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 

  • Arvin AM. Creating the dew drop on a Rose petal: the molecular pathogenesis of Varicella-Zoster virus skin lesions. Microbiol Mol Biol Rev. 2023;87:e0011622.

    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 

  • World Health Organization. Varicella and herpes Zoster vaccines: WHO position paper, June 2014. Wkly Epidemiol Rec. 2014;89:265–87.

    Google Scholar 

  • Williame I, George M, Shah HA, et al. Healthcare resource use and costs of varicella and its complications: A systematic literature review. Hum Vaccin Immunother. 2023;19:2266225.

    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 

  • Sui H, Li J, Wang M, et al. Varicella epidemiology in china, 2005–2015. Chin J Vaccin Immuniz. 2019;25:155–9.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dong P, Wang M, Liu Y. Epidemiological characteristics of varicella in china, 2016–2019. Chin J Vaccin Immuniz. 2020;26:403–6.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wang M, Zeng X, Zhang Y, et al. Epidemiological characteristics of varicella public health emergency events in china, 2007–2021. Chin J Vaccin Immuniz. 2023;29:274–9.

    Google Scholar 

  • Otani N, Shima M, Yamamoto T et al. Effect of routine varicella immunization on the epidemiology and immunogenicity of varicella and shingles. Viruses. 2022;14:588.

  • Lopez AS, Zhang J, Brown C, et al. Varicella-related hospitalizations in the united states, 2000–2006: the 1-dose varicella vaccination era. Pediatrics. 2011;127:238–45.

    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 

  • Marin M, Lopez AS, Melgar M, et al. Decline in severe varicella disease during the united States varicella vaccination program: hospitalizations and deaths, 1990–2019. J Infect Dis. 2022;226:S407–15.

    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 

  • Huang L, Chen Z, Song Y, et al. Immunogenicity and safety of a live-attenuated varicella vaccine in a healthy population aged 13 years and older: A randomized, double-blind, controlled study. Vaccine. 2024;42:396–401.

    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 

  • Liu A, Sun T. Meta-analysis of varicella vaccine coverage among Chinese children. Chin J Vaccin Immuniz. 2017;23:698–704.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gil-Prieto R, Garcia-Garcia L, San-Martin M, et al. Varicella vaccination coverage inverse correlation with varicella hospitalizations in Spain. Vaccine. 2014;32:7043–6.

    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 

  • Siedler A, Dettmann M. Hospitalization with varicella and shingles before and after introduction of childhood varicella vaccination in Germany. Hum Vaccin Immunother. 2014;10:3594–600.

    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 

  • Hu Y, Luo X, Lv M, et al. A Meta-analysis on varicella-zoster virus antibody levels in healthy population in China. Chin J Epidemiol. 2021;42:1650–61.

    CAS 

    Google Scholar 

  • Marin M, Marti M, Kambhampati A, et al. Global varicella vaccine effectiveness: A Meta-analysis. Pediatrics. 2016;137:e20153741.

    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 

  • Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, et al. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. BMJ. 2009;339:b2535.

    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 

  • Liu Q, Zhai W, Tan YQ, et al. Analysis on evaluation tool for literature quality in clinical study. Chin Acupunct Mox. 2014;3:919–22.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jadad AR, Moore RA, Carroll D, et al. Assessing the quality of reports of randomized clinical trials: is blinding necessary? Control Clin Trials. 1996;17:1–12.

    CAS 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 

  • Wells G, Shea B, O’Connell D et al. The Newcastle Ottawa Scale (NOS) for assessing the quality of nonrandomised studies in meta-analyses. 2016. Available from: http://www.ohri.ca/programs/clinicalepidemiology/oxford.asp

  • Piché-Renaud PP, Yue Lee E, Ji C, et al. Safety and immunogenicity of the live-attenuated varicella vaccine in pediatric solid organ transplant recipients: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Am J Transpl. 2023;23:1757–70.

    Google Scholar 

  • Egger M, Smith GD, Schneider M, et al. Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple, graphical test. BMJ. 1997;315:629–34.

    CAS 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 

  • Balshem H, Helfand M, Schünemann HJ, et al. GRADE guidelines. GRADE guidelines: 3. Rating the quality of evidence. J Clin Epidemiol. 2011;64:401–6.

    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 

  • Bai Y, Yang L, Guo L, et al. Safety and immunogenicity of Gelatin-free Freeze-dried live attenuated varicella vaccine. Chin J Biol. 2011;24:1336–8.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bian G, Tang X, Shi H, et al. Study on safety and immunogenicity of imported and domestic varicella attenuated live vaccine (Freeze-dried) for children. Chin J Vaccin Immuniz. 2012;18:435–768.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cai Z. Observation on reaction and immune effect of lyophilized live attenuated varicella vaccine. Med Inf. 2012;25:279–80.

    CAS 

    Google Scholar 

  • Chen E, Jiang Z, Li Q, et al. Safety and immunogenicity of lyophilized live attenuated domestic varicella vaccine. Chin J Vaccin Immuniz. 2009;15:435–7.

    CAS 

    Google Scholar 

  • Dai W, Pang H, Jiang Y, et al. Study on immune effects of the second dose of varicella vaccine. Sh J Prev Med. 2017;29:194–6.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gao Z, Wu Z, Ye X, et al. Evaluation of safety and immune efficacy of domestic lyophilized live attenuated varicella vaccine in childrenaged 1–12 years. Inter J Epidemiol Infect Dis. 2021;48:296–301.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hu H. Evaluation of safety and immunogenicity of lyophilized live attenuated varicella vaccine. Med Inf. 2015;28:311.

    Google Scholar 

  • Huang T, Si G, Li C, et al. Safety and immunogenicity of domestic and imported freeze-dried live attenuated varicella vaccine inoculated by a two-dose schedule in healthy population at ages of more than 12 years in China. Chin J Biol. 2016;29:610–5.

    Google Scholar 

  • Huang Z, Zhang J, Tang Y, et al. Immunogenicity and safety of 2 doses of live attenuated varicella vaccine in children under 3 years of age. South China J Prev Med. 2018;44:265–8.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jiang F, Zhang R, Guan Q, et al. Immunogenicity and safety of a live attenuated varicella vaccine in children 1–12 years of age: A randomized, blinded, controlled, non-inferiority phase 3 clinical trial. Contemp Clin Trials. 2021;107:106489.

    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 

  • Jiang Z, Chen E, Li Q, et al. Observation on side effect of the domestic lyophilized live attenuated varicella vaccine. Zh Prev Med. 2009;21:12–3.

    CAS 

    Google Scholar 

  • Li Y, Fang H, Nong Y, et al. Study on safety and immunogenicity of domestic freeze-dried live attenuated varicella vaccine. Appl Prev Med. 2008;14:371–3.

    Google Scholar 

  • Li Y, Gao Z, Tao H, et al. Safety of freeze-dried live attenuated varicella vaccine. Chin J Biol. 2012;25:1667–70.

    Google Scholar 

  • Li Y. Immunogenicity analysis of domestic varicella vaccine after booster immunization. China Prac Med. 2019;14:41–3.

    Google Scholar 

  • Liu X, Yang H, Li H, et al. Immunogenicity and safety of two doses of domestic varicella attenuated live vaccine among ≥ 13-year-old healthy population in a non-inferiority trial. Chin J Vaccin Immuniz. 2019;25:63–7.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lu M, Liu Z, Li Y, et al. Evaluation on safety and immunogenicity of live attenuated varicella vaccine. Med Innov Chin. 2010;7:9–11.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lu X, Zhou W, Gu K, et al. Safety and immunogenicity of Changsheng technology freeze-dried live attenuated varicella vaccine. J Southeast Univ (Medical Sci Edition). 2008;27:207–11.

    CAS 

    Google Scholar 

  • Luo L, Liu X, Ma Y, et al. Safety and immunogenicity of freeze-dried live attenuated varicella vaccine. Chin J Biol. 2016;29:1298–300.

    Google Scholar 

  • Luo S, Jiang D, Huang Y, et al. Immunogenicity and safety of two-dose and booster immunization schedules of domestic varicella vaccine. Chin J Biol. 2019;32:1381–5.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ma R, Xu G, Pan X, et al. Observation on immunogenicity of domestic freeze-dried live attenuated varicella vaccine and immunity persistence one year after vaccination. Dis Surveill. 2012;27:601–3.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mo ZJ, Huang SJ, Qiu LX, et al. Safety and immunogenicity of a skin- and neuro-attenuated live vaccine for varicella: a randomized, double-blind, controlled, dose-escalation and age de-escalation phase 1 clinical trial. Lancet Reg Health West Pac. 2023;34:100707.

    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 

  • Peng S, Liao Z, Wan X, et al. Safety of Chinese freeze – dried varicella attenuated live vaccine. J Med Pest Control. 2018;34:428–31.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shen Y, Jiang X, Gu X, et al. Inoculation reaction and immune effect of domestic freeze-dried live attenuated varicella vaccine. Chin J Biol. 2003;16:314–5.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shen Y, Lu J, Chen H. Observation on the level of varicella immunity in children in kindergarten and the effect of domestic varicella vaccine. Chin J Public Health Manage. 2007;23:72–3.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sun H, Yuan J, Liu X. Immunogenicity and cost-effectiveness analysis of domestic varicella vaccine. Sh J Prev Med. 2003;15:445–7.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sun H, Fang H, Li R, et al. Adverse reaction and immunogenicity induced by Freeze-dried live attenuated varicella vaccine. Chin J Biol. 2009;22:702–4.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tang Y, Su J, Xia Y, et al. Safety and immunogenicity of domestic gelatin-free freeze-dried live attenuated varicella vaccine. Chin J Biol. 2012;25:1516–9.

    CAS 

    Google Scholar 

  • Tang Y, Du F, Chen H, et al. Post-Marketing immunogenicity and safety of two different live attemuatal varicella vaccine. Chin J Vaccin Immuniz. 2014;20:241–4.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wang F, Chen Z, Chen X. Observation on efficacy of live attenuated varicella vaccine in Weifang City. Med Anim Control. 2006;22:813–4.

    CAS 

    Google Scholar 

  • Wang L, Liu Y, Li L, et al. Observation on immune effect of domestic freeze-dried live attenuated varicella vaccine. South China J Prev Med. 2003;29:30–1.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wang Q, Li Y, Wang L. Safety and immunogenicity of lyophilized live attenuated varicella vaccine in children aged 1–6 years. Prev Med. 2017;29:711–3.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wang Z, Xiao Q, Li F, et al. Safety and immunological effect of domestic varicella attenuated live vaccine (Freeze-dried). Chin J Vaccin Immuniz. 2011;17:531–4.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhang Q, Fei J, Zhong P, et al. Study on safety and immunogenicity of domestic freeze-dried live attenuated varicella vaccine with 2 doses. Sh Prev Med. 2017;29:59–61.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shinefield HR, Black SB, Staehle BO, et al. Vaccination with measles, mumps and Rubella vaccine and varicella vaccine: safety, tolerability, immunogenicity, persistence of antibody and duration of protection against varicella in healthy children. Pediatr Infect Dis J. 2002;21:555–61.

    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 

  • National Advisory Committee on Immunization (NACI). Varicella (chicken pox) vaccine: Canadian Immunization Guide [internet]. https://www.canada.ca/en/public-health/services/publications/healthy-living/canadian-immunization-guide-part-4-active-vaccines/page-24-varicella-chickenpox-vaccine.html

  • Shi X. Comparative study on immune effect of domestic and imported varicella vaccine. Electron J Clin Med Literature. 2019;6:176.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carta V, Mangeri L, Tiecco G, et al. Immunogenicity and safety of live attenuated and recombinant/inactivated varicella Zoster vaccines in people living with HIV: A systematic review. Hum Vaccin Immunother. 2024;20:2341456.

    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 

  • Yin M, Xu X, Liang Y, et al. Effectiveness, immunogenicity and safety of one vs. two-dose varicella vaccination: a meta-analysis. Expert Rev Vaccines. 2018;17:351–62.

    CAS 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 

  • Su JR, Leroy Z, Lewis PW et al. Safety of Second-Dose Single-Antigen varicella vaccine. Pediatrics. 2017;139:e20162536.

  • Kuter BJ, Brown M, Wiedmann RT, et al. Safety and immunogenicity of M-M-RII (Combination Measles-Mumps-Rubella Vaccine) in clinical trials of healthy children conducted between 1988 and 2009. Pediatr Infect Dis J. 2016;35:1011–20.

    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 

  • Continue Reading

  • 5 Health Benefits of Drinking Tea Every Day

    5 Health Benefits of Drinking Tea Every Day

    Far beyond a comforting ritual, your daily cup of tea might be doing more than keeping you hydrated. Enjoyed around the world for centuries, tea is packed with nutrient compounds that may support everything from heart health to brain function. Here’s what nutrition experts say about the health benefits of drinking tea every day.

    • Avery Zenker, RD, MAN, registered dietitian at MyHealthTeam
    • Meghan Laszlo, MS, RD, CSO, clinical nutrition coordinator at Cedars-Sinai Hospital in Los Angeles

    Supports Heart Health

    “Regular tea consumption has been associated with possible reductions in blood pressure, LDL (‘lousy’) cholesterol, and triglycerides, which are all biomarkers linked to cardiovascular disease,” says Avery Zenker, RD, MAN, registered dietitian at MyHealthTeam. Much of this benefit comes from polyphenols, particularly EGCG, which is found in the highest amounts in green tea and, to a lesser extent, in black tea, and has shown promising protective effects for heart health.

    “Green tea has been associated with decreased risk of death from cardiovascular disease of all kinds, where three cups per day was linked to a 26% lower risk of death,” says Zenker. “It’s also associated with reduced risks of cardiovascular complications, including coronary artery disease, heart attack, and stroke.”

    Black tea also delivers a dose of flavonoids. “Flavonoids may help support vasodilation, the relaxing of blood vessels, which may help reduce blood pressure,” Zenker explains. There’s also some evidence that hibiscus tea may help reduce blood pressure and cholesterol, possibly due to its anthocyanin content, which are antioxidants with anti-inflammatory properties.

    Boosts Cognitive Function

    When it comes to cognitive function, one of the most studied compounds in tea is caffeine, found in green, black, and oolong varieties, which has been shown to enhance performance during long, demanding cognitive tasks and improve alertness, arousal, and vigor.

    “L-theanine, another compound in tea, promotes relaxation, reduces tension, and increases calmness,” says Zenker. “When combined, caffeine and L-theanine have been found to improve attention-switching and alertness, though less than caffeine alone.” This duo may also support better focus, memory, and distraction control. Found in both green and black tea, L-theanine can help take the edge off caffeine, reducing overstimulation and helping you stay calm but alert.

    Green tea’s anti-inflammatory and antioxidant properties may also play a role in supporting brain health. “The antioxidant properties of tea compounds, particularly L-theanine, may help protect brain cells from oxidative stress, potentially slowing cognitive decline,” says Zenker.

    Helps Your Gut Microbiome

    The polyphenols in tea also feed the good bacteria in your gut, helping support the growth of beneficial microbes like Firmicutes and Bacteroidetes, Zenker points out. An optimal ratio of these is linked to a lower risk of obesity and metabolic disorders.

    “Tea has been found to decrease the amount of inflammatory compounds produced by gut bacteria, like lipopolysaccharides,” says Zenker. Tea also helps fuel the production of short-chain fatty acids, beneficial compounds that gut microbes make during digestion, supporting a more balanced gut microbiome overall. “Green tea in particular has been found to support the growth of helpful bacteria and decrease the growth of harmful bacteria,” says Zenker. “This finding was associated with intake of four to five cups of green tea per day.”

    Regulates Your Metabolism

    Green tea, especially, contains bioactive compounds that can help regulate metabolism. While the size of the effect can vary, Zenker says EGCG has been found to boost fat burning and improve insulin sensitivity.

    Drinking tea in general has been linked to a lower risk of type 2 diabetes, with about two cups per day showing benefits, and a 15% reduced risk observed at four cups per day, Zenker points out.

    “Many chronic diseases, such as type 2 diabetes, are closely related to metabolic dysfunction, inflammation, and insulin resistance. By influencing inflammatory processes, tea consumption may indirectly support metabolic health and insulin sensitivity,” Zenker says.

    Supports Blood Sugar Control

    Black tea, which contains about 269 milligrams of flavan-3-ols per 8-ounce cup, is linked to better blood sugar control. The American Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics recommends a daily intake of 400 to 600 milligrams of flavan-3-ols from food sources to help reduce risks associated with cardiovascular disease and diabetes. “Flavan-3-ols have been found to reduce blood pressure, improve cholesterol and blood sugar control. The higher the intake, the lower the risk of CVD,” says Meghan Laszlo, MS, RD, CSO, clinical nutrition coordinator at Cedars-Sinai Hospital in Los Angeles. “Flavan-3-ols lower LDL cholesterol, triglycerides, A1C, and raise HDL cholesterol.”

    Regular tea drinking is also associated with a reduced risk of cardiovascular disease mortality, coronary heart disease, stroke, and type 2 diabetes.

    Continue Reading

  • Epstein-Barr Virus-Induced Minimal Change Disease: A Cause of Nephrotic Syndrome in Infectious Mononucleosis

    Epstein-Barr Virus-Induced Minimal Change Disease: A Cause of Nephrotic Syndrome in Infectious Mononucleosis


    Continue Reading

  • Hot European summers raise health risks from mosquito-borne diseases – Euronews.com

    1. Hot European summers raise health risks from mosquito-borne diseases  Euronews.com
    2. Warning as surge in organ-destroying virus hits popular summer hotspot  dailymail.co.uk
    3. Public health guidance for assessing and mitigating the risk of locally-acquired Aedes-borne viral diseases in the EU/EEA  European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC)
    4. Are tiger mosquitoes coming to Ireland?  RTE.ie
    5. Chikungunya: Mosquito-borne virus plagues holiday hotspots in the South of France  The Telegraph

    Continue Reading

  • The Effect of Minimal-dose S-ketamine on Opioids Consumption in Postop

    The Effect of Minimal-dose S-ketamine on Opioids Consumption in Postop

    Introduction

    Thoracic surgery is frequently associated with acute postoperative pain, with a prevalence of moderate-to-severe pain reported to be as high as 62.9%.1,2 Inadequate perioperative pain management following thoracoscopy can worsen respiratory function, potentially leading to postoperative pulmonary complications, chronic post-thoracotomy pain syndrome (CPTPS), and delayed recovery in patients.3 Among thoracic surgeries, radical resection of esophageal cancer is known to cause severe acute postoperative pain due to the extensive trauma of the procedure.

    Opioids have traditionally served as the primary treatment for moderate to severe acute postoperative pain.4 Current recommendations advocate for the implementation of multimodal analgesic regimens and non-opioid interventions to minimize perioperative opioid consumption and mitigate opioid-related adverse effects, such as nausea, vomiting, over sedation, ileus, pruritus, and respiratory depression, enhancing and expediting patients’ postoperative recovery.5

    (R,S)-ketamine, an N-methyl-D-aspartate receptor (NMDAR) antagonist, is a racemic mixture of equal amounts of (R)-ketamine (arketamine) and (S)-ketamine (S-ketamine).6,7 S-ketamine is used as an anesthetic in several countries, including China. The 2018 guideline “Intravenous Ketamine for Acute Pain Treatment”, jointly issued by the American Society of Regional Anesthesia (ASRA), the American Academy of Pain Medicine (AAPM) and the American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA), advocates for integrating subanesthetic ketamine doses (not exceeding 0.35 mg/kg or 1 mg/kg/h) into postoperative PCIA for surgeries anticipating severe acute postoperative pain in patients. The guidelines suggest that subanesthetic ketamine doses could lead to a 20% reduction in opioid usage for acute postoperative pain management.8 Nevertheless, the effect of S-ketamine, which exhibits a higher affinity for NMDAR than (R,S)-ketamine and R-ketamine, on opioid consumption for managing acute postoperative pain in patients undergoing radical esophageal cancer resection remains uncertain. The study by Bornemann-Cimenti in 2016 indicated that the dosage of S-ketamine (0.015 mg/kg/h×48h) was similar to that of (R, S)-ketamine (0.25 mg/kg/h×48h) for managing acute postoperative pain.9 This study aims to investigate the effect of minimal-dose S-ketamine (0.015 mg/kg/h×48h) for acute postoperative pain management on reducing opioid consumption, enhancing analgesic quality, and facilitating postoperative recovery in patients undergoing radical esophageal cancer resection.

    Materials and Methods

    Study Design

    This randomized double-blinded controlled trial was conducted at Zhongda Hospital affiliated with Southeast University. The study protocol was approved by the Ethics Committee of Zhongda Hospital affiliated with Southeast University (No. 2022ZDSYLL138-P01) and registered in the Chinese Clinical Trial Register (ChiCTR2100048311, http://www.chictr.org.cn/). Written informed consent was obtained from all participants or their legal representatives before recruitment. This study complies with the Declaration of Helsinki and adhered to the 2010 Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT).10

    Participants

    The investigators screened eligible patients the day before surgery (or on Friday if they underwent surgery the following Monday). Patients who met the following criteria were included: aged 18–80 years, ASA status I–III and were scheduled to undergo minimally invasive radical resection of esophageal cancer. Patients who met any of the following criteria were excluded: allergy to S-ketamine or oxycodone, unstable ischemic cardiac disease, increased intracranial or intraocular pressure, untreated or poorly treated hyperthyroidism, psychiatric disease, severe hepatic dysfunction (Child–Pugh grade C), renal failure (requiring renal replacement therapy), severe respiratory dysfunction (respiratory failure type I or type II), previous long-term use of analgesics, previous basic pain (chronic pain), conversion to thoracotomy, transfer to the intensive care unit (ICU), unwillingness or inability to use a PCIA device, and cognitive impairment or inability to communicate.

    Randomization and Blinding

    This study included 216 patients who underwent minimally invasive radical resection of esophageal cancer under general anesthesia. Participants were numbered sequentially based on their enrollment order. A nurse used IBM SPSS Statistics 27 to generate random numbers and randomly allocate participants to one of the two groups in a 1:1 ratio. The randomization sequence was generated and placed in sequentially numbered sealed radiopaque envelopes. Once the investigator confirmed eligibility, the envelopes were opened sequentially and participants were assigned to their respective groups by the designated nurse who performed numerical randomization. Intravenous pumps of the drugs were used by the coded PCIA device (with a fixed background infusion rate of 2 mL/h) delivered to the operating rooms by a pharmacist and were started at the end of surgery: Group E, S-ketamine 0.015 mg/kg (diluted to 96 mL with 0.9% NS); Group C, 96 mL with 0.9% NS. This study was double blinded. The patients, researchers who performed data collection and postoperative follow-up, and clinical staff were blinded to group allocation throughout the study.

    Intervention

    Intraoperative Management

    General anesthesia was standardized, and no premedication was administered. Anesthesia was induced intravenously with midazolam (0.03–0.05 mg/kg), propofol (1.5–2.5 mg/kg), sufentanil (0.3–0.5 μg/kg), and rocuronium (0.6–0.9 mg/kg). Mechanical ventilation was performed after tracheal intubation, and the respiratory rate and tidal volume were adjusted to maintain the PETCO2 at 35–45 mmHg. Intravenous Ketorolac 30 mg was administered to the patients before the surgical procedure. Anesthesia depth was adjusted by target-controlled infusion of propofol and inhalation of a sevoffurane/oxygen/air mix to maintain a bispectral index value between 40 and 60. The remifentanil infusion rate was adjusted based on the mean arterial pressure and heart rate (within 20% of the baseline values).

    Postoperative Management

    The coded PCA with a fixed background dose of 2 mL/h were started at the end of surgery: Group E, S-ketamine 0.015 mg/kg (diluted to 96 mL with 0.9% NS); Group C, 96 mL 0.9% NS. All the patients were transferred to the post-anesthesia care unit (PACU) for extubation.

    Postoperative Multimodal Analgesia

    After extubation in the PACU, a fixed anesthesiologist performed ultrasound-guided paravertebral nerve block and another PCIA device (oxycodone 50 mg diluted to 100 mL with 0.9% NS) was administered to all patients. An ultrasound-guided paravertebral nerve block was performed by a specialized anesthesiologist with expertise in acute pain management. The ultrasound probe was positioned perpendicularly to the dorsal midline at the spinous processes of the target thoracic vertebrae (T5 and T8), with the inner end of the probe aligned on the dorsal midline. The imaging demonstrated the spinous process of the target thoracic vertebra and the transverse process of the adjacent thoracic vertebra. The probe was then adjusted cephalad to avoid interference with the transverse process of the adjacent thoracic vertebra, ensuring its placement between the two transverse processes and parallel to them. The paravertebral space of the thoracic vertebrae was identified as the region enclosed by the deep portion of the articular process, approximately 1 cm lateral to it, and bounded externally by the pleura. A needle was inserted lateral to the probe, carefully avoiding contact with the pleura, and advanced into the space between the articular process and the pleura. After confirming the absence of blood or cerebrospinal fluid upon aspiration, 10 mL of 0.187% ropivacaine was administered to the paravertebral regions of the target thoracic vertebrae. Oxycodone PCIA was programmed at a background dose of 0–2 mL/h and a single bolus dose of 4 mL, followed by a 10-min interval lockout. All patients received ketorolac (30 mg) intravenously daily. How to use oxycodone PCIA, postoperative follow-up and the adjustment of the PCIA were performed by a fixed nurse and a fixed anesthesiologist: if the NRS pain scores at rest was 0, the background dose would be reduced; otherwise, if the NRS pain scores at rest was > 3, the background dose would be increased until the score was ≤ 3. If the FAS was still grade C after one bolus injection, a bolus dose would be administered again 10 min later and so on until the FAS decreased to grade A/B. The PONV was treated with intravenous tropisetron (2 mg). When the liquid in the pump box of the oxycodone PCIA was exhausted, the original concentration of the medical solution could be added under aseptic conditions. If delirium occurred, dexmedetomidine (0.5 μg/kg) was pumped intravenously within 15 minutes and then infused at a rate of 0.2 to 0.7 μg/kg/h until the symptoms were controlled.

    Outcomes

    The primary outcome was cumulative opioid consumption in the first 48 h postoperatively. The main secondary outcomes included FAS scores (after one bolus administration) at postoperative hour 12 (T3), postoperative hour 24 (T4), postoperative hour 48 (T5), postoperative hour 72 (T6), NRS pain scores (at rest and when coughing) at postoperative hour 2 (T1), postoperative hour 6 (T2), T3,T4,T5,T6, and the cumulative opioid consumption in different periods (postoperative 0–24 hours, 24–48 hours, 48–72 hours). Other pre-specified secondary outcomes included LOS scores at T2 – T6, time of first postoperative flatulation, BI, incidence of PONV, postoperative delirium, pulmonary complications and other complications, duration of chest tube use, length of postoperative hospital stay, and satisfaction of medical workers and patients. Postoperative pain was evaluated using the NRS (11- point scale: 0 [no pain], 0 < NRS < 4 [mild pain], 4 ≤ NRS < 7 [moderate pain], 7 ≤ NRS < 10 [severe pain], 10 [worst pain imaginable]). Patients regularly used an external vibration expectoration machine (one bolus administration would be given in advance) from postoperative hour 12 and FAS scores (Grade A: no limitation [pain does not limit functional activity at all]; Grade B: mild limitation [pain slightly limits functional activity]; Grade C: Severe limitation [pain severely limits functional activity]) were used to evaluate the effect. Postoperative sedation was assessed using LOS scores (Grade 0: awake and responsive; Grade 1: slightly drowsy, but easy to wake up [Grade 1S: normal sleep state]; Grade 2: frequent drowsiness, easy to wake up, but not continuously awake; Grade 3: difficult to awaken). Activities of daily living were assessed using the Barthel Index (BI), with a total score of 100 points (≥ 60 points, can take care of themselves; 41–59 points, moderate dysfunction, need assistance in daily life; 21–40 points, severe dysfunction, requiring assistance in daily life, and ≤ 20 points requiring assistance in daily life). Postoperative delirium was diagnosed based on the Intensive Care Delirium Screening Checklist (ICDSC) (total scores ≥ 4). Pulmonary complications include pulmonary infection, atelectasis, pulmonary edema and pneumothorax. Other complications include anastomotic leakage and abnormal bleeding. The satisfaction levels of the medical staff and patients were assessed using NRS scores from 0 to 10 points (the higher the score, the better the satisfaction).

    Sample Size Calculation

    Oxycodone consumption after minimally invasive radical resection of esophageal cancer in the previous year was calculated for the control group. We calculated the standard deviation (29.6 mg) and mean oxycodone consumption (66.5 mg) (postoperative 0–48 h). The guideline “Intravenous Ketamine for the treatment of Acute Pain” suggested that the addition of subanesthetic doses of ketamine can reduce opioid use by 20%.8 So the expected reduction in oxycodone consumption would be 13.3 mg (66.5 mg × 20%). With the power set at 90% and a one-sided significance level of 0.05, 172 patients were required to detect differences. Owing to the 20% dropout rate, 216 patients were enrolled in the trial.

    Statistical Analysis

    Statistical analyses were performed using a modified intention-to-treat approach, which excluded patients deemed ineligible after enrollment. All data were checked for normal distribution using the Kolmogorov–Smirnov test. Continuous variables are presented as mean (standard deviation, SD) or median (interquartile range, IQR), and Student’s t-test or Mann–Whitney U-test was performed to compare the difference between the two groups according to the Kolmogorov–Smirnov test. Categorical variables are presented as numbers (percentages) and were compared using Pearson’s χ2 test or Fisher’s exact test as appropriate.

    For the primary outcome, cumulative opioid consumption at postoperative 0–48 hours, Mann–Whitney U-tests were performed to compare the difference between the two groups and the median difference and its 95% CI were estimated using the Hodges-Lehmann estimator. Generalized estimating equations (GEEs) with robust standard error estimates were used to account for repeated measures of pain and FAS scores.

    Statistical significance was set at P < 0.05. Statistical analyses were performed using IBM SPSS version 27 or GraphPad Prism 10.0.

    Results

    Study Population

    A total of 325 patients were assessed for eligibility between January 1, 2022, and October 30, 2024. Of these, 216 were eligible and randomized. The final intention-to-treat analysis included 202 patients (Figure 1). Overall, the patient demographics and surgical and anesthetic characteristics were balanced between the groups (Table 1).

    Table 1 Demographic and Clinical Characteristics at Baseline

    Figure 1 CONSORT diagram for the study.

    Abbreviations: ICU, intensive care unit; Group E, S-ketamine group; Group C, control group.

    Primary Outcome Analysis

    The postoperative opioid consumption within 48 hours in S-ketamine group was significantly lower than those in placebo group (P <0.001) (Table 2, Figure 2), and the difference between the two groups was 40% (mean: 44.5 mg vs 74.8 mg).

    Table 2 Comparison of Oxycodone Consumption (Mg) Between the Two Groups

    Figure 2 Comparison of indicators of the analgesic efficacy between the two groups. (A). Oxycodone Consumption; (B). Probability of FAS A/B after 1 bolus; (C). NRS score for pain at Rest; (D) NRS of pain when coughing.

    Abbreviations: Group E, S-ketamine group; Group C, control group; POD 1, postoperative 0–24 h; POD 2; postoperative 24–48 hours; POD 3: postoperative 48–72 hours; T1, postoperative hour 2; T2, postoperative hour 6; T3, postoperative hour 12; T4, postoperative hour 24; T5, postoperative hour 48; T6, postoperative hour 72.

    Notes: Compared with T1 in the same group, #P <0.05; compared with Group C at the same time point, *P <0.05, **P <0.01, ***P<0.001.

    Secondary Outcomes Analyses

    The NRS pain scores at rest were all ≤ 3, and the FAS (after 1–3 bolus dose administrations) was grade A/B in both groups, which met the requirements for postoperative analgesia. At T3,T4, T5, and T6, the proportion of FAS (after one bolus dose administration) with grade A/B in group E was significantly higher than that in group C (P < 0.001, P= 0.007, P < 0.001, P < 0.001, respectively) (Table 3, Figure 2). The NRS pain scores at rest at T5 in group E were lower than those in group C (P = 0.001) and the NRS pain scores when coughing at T3 in group E were larger than those in group C (P = 0.011) with mean differences of −0.3 and 0.4 respectively (Table 3, Figure 2). The AUC of the NRS pain scores at rest in group E was smaller than that in group C within 72 hours after surgery (P = 0.027) (Table 3). Oxycodone consumption in group E was significantly lower than that in group C within 24, 24–48 and 48–72 hours after surgery (P < 0.001, P < 0.001, P < 0.001, respectively) (Table 2, Figure 2), and the differences between the two groups were 40%, 41% and 47% respectively (mean: 23.6 mg vs 39.4 mg, 21.0 mg vs 35.4 mg, 16.9 mg vs 31.8 mg).

    Table 3 Comparison of Postoperative Pain Between the Two Groups

    Safety and Other Outcomes Analyses

    The proportion of flatulation within 48 h postoperatively in group E was higher than that in group C (P = 0.029), the BI at 48 h postoperatively in group E was higher than that in group C (P = 0.008) and the postoperative hospital stay in group E was shorter than that in group C (P = 0.044) (Table 4). There was no statistically significant difference in postoperative pulmonary complications between the two groups; however, the incidence of postoperative pulmonary complications in group E (3.7%) was lower than that in group C (10.2%). The LOS scores were all grade 0 or 1 in the two groups, which met the requirements for postoperative analgesia and did not differ significantly between the two groups (Table 4). There were no significant differences in incidence of PONV, other complications, duration of chest tube placement, and satisfaction levels of medical staff and patients between two groups (Table 4).

    Table 4 Comparison of Safety and Other Outcomes Between the Two Groups

    Discussion

    The main findings of the study are as follows. First, Opioid consumption within the first 48 h postoperatively for acute pain management was significantly lower in the S-ketamine group than in the control group in patients undergoing radical resection for esophageal cancer. Second, the FAS and BI scores were notably higher in the S-ketamine group than in the control group. Moreover, there was a statistically significant difference in the NRS pain scores between the two groups of patients; however, the score differences were less than 1 point. Given that the minimum unit of the NRS score is 1 point and prior studies have demonstrated that a decrease of at least 1.3 points in the NRS pain score relative to baseline pain intensity is required for clinically meaningful pain relief, the observed differences in this study lacked clinical significance despite being statistically significant.12–14 Time to first postoperative flatulence and length of postoperative hospital stay were lower in the S-ketamine group than in the control group. There were no significant differences in the incidence of PONV, LOS, postoperative delirium, pulmonary and other complications, duration of chest tube placement, or satisfaction levels of medical staff and patients between the two groups.

    Selection of the Study Population

    The addition of subanesthetic doses of ketamine is supported by the guidelines for patients undergoing thoracic surgery expected to cause severe postoperative pain.8 Postoperative pain following thoracic surgery, particularly radical resection of esophageal cancer, is known to be severe, with incidence rates of moderate to severe pain reaching 62.9%.2 Given the high demand for analgesia observed in patients undergoing minimally invasive radical resection of esophageal cancer, often necessitating patient-controlled analgesia (PCIA) for over 72 h post-surgery, this study focused on this specific patient population to enhance postoperative pain management.

    Selection of the Primary Outcome and the Secondary Outcome FAS

    The perioperative analgesia guidelines aim to achieve postoperative pain tolerance or a pain level of NRS ≤ 3.15–17 Our department implemented artificial intelligence patient-controlled analgesia (Ai-PCA) in 2012 and established the Acute Pain Service (APS) in 2017. Due to clinical and ethical considerations, to ensure adherence to the analgesic goal, we strived for homogeneity in pain scores: NRS scores at rest were ≤ 3 and FAS levels were grade A or B. Therefore, the primary outcome of this study was opioid consumption, which served as an indirect indicator of analgesic efficacy.

    In this study, all patients achieved FAS levels of grade A/B following 1–3 bolus administrations and we chose the FAS levels obtained after one bolus administration as the secondary outcome to assess the difference in functional exercise between the two groups. Conventional clinical studies frequently integrate both S-ketamine and opioids into PCIA.18–20 Moreover, unlike typical clinical studies, we did not incorporate S-ketamine into PCIA because it would result in discrepancies in the bolus between the two groups.

    Selection of S-Ketamine Dosage

    S-ketamine, being more potent and less prone to adverse effects than racemic ketamine, is a viable alternative during the perioperative period. A recent meta-analysis by Wang et al21 indicates that intravenous S-ketamine, when used as an adjunct to general anesthesia, effectively enhanced analgesia, reduced postoperative pain intensity, and minimized opioid requirements in the short term. However, it may also increase the incidence of psychotomimetic adverse events. Notably, the risk of such adverse events is significantly higher in the intra- and postoperative group compared to the intraoperative-only group, possibly due to higher postoperative infusion rates (doses ranged from 0.075 to 0.5 mg/kg for boluses and 1.25 to 10 μg/kg/min for infusions).21 Studies by Bornemann-Cimenti9 and Zhang20 have shown that minimal-dose S-ketamine (0.015 mg/kg/h for 48 hours) yields comparable analgesic effects to conventional low-dose S-ketamine regimens, while also demonstrating similar outcomes to a placebo in terms of postoperative delirium and sedation. Therefore, in light of the literature and the outcomes of preliminary experiments, the minimum dose of S-ketamine (0.015 mg/kg/h for 48 h) was selected for this study to achieve the desired therapeutic effect while minimizing the dosage.

    Exploratory Outcomes Analyses

    Exploratory Primary Outcome Analysis

    Our findings indicate that the addition of a minimum dose of S-ketamine to postoperative analgesia reduces the postoperative opioid requirements. Our study showed an approximate 40% decrease in postoperative opioid requirements in the S-ketamine group compared to the control group, consistent with previous research and surpassing the anticipated 20% reduction, confirming the study’s statistical power to detect differences between groups.9,22

    Exploratory Main Secondary Outcomes Analyses

    Multimodal pain management, a key element in Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) protocols, often includes the NMDA receptor antagonist ketamine because of its efficacy in reducing opioid consumption and pain levels.5,21,23,24 The primary aim of analgesia is to enhance postoperative rehabilitation, as indicated by the FAS assessment. Our findings revealed significantly improved FAS scores in the S-ketamine group compared to the control group, highlighting the superior analgesic efficacy of S-ketamine in functional exercises.

    Safety and Other Outcomes

    The time to first postoperative flatulence, bowel movements, and length of hospital stay were significantly better in the S-ketamine group than in the control group, possibly because of the reduced postoperative opioid use and enhanced mobilization. No significant differences were observed in LOS scores or postoperative delirium between the groups, consistent with previous studies.9,20 The incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting did not differ between the groups, aligning with conflicting findings in the literature.21,25 Although a decrease in pulmonary complications was noted, it was not statistically significant, nor were other complications. Previous studies suggest that perioperative administration of S-ketamine or ketamine in various surgeries may confer anti-inflammatory and immunoprotective effects with efficacy potentially dose-dependent.26–29 Inconclusive results may be attributed to inadequate power analysis for this outcome, limiting the study’s ability to detect differences.

    Limitations

    First, continuous constant-rate intravenous infusion was selected to ensure that the hourly dosage of S-ketamine remained at its minimum level. Nonetheless, incorporating S-ketamine into the PCIA may offer greater clinical convenience. Further studies and design improvements are necessary to build this foundation. Second, this trial was conducted at a single center. Therefore, the generalizability of our findings to other patient populations remains unclear. Third, we did not design multiple dosage groups to determine the optimal dose. The minimal-dose of S-ketamine used in this protocol was based on previous studies. Given the relatively small number of patients undergoing esophageal cancer surgery, it took approximately three years to complete this study. Comparing multiple groups would have further prolonged the research period. Clinically, treatment modalities for various diseases and postoperative analgesia management are continually evolving. A protracted research timeline may introduce potential biases into the results. These limitations could be addressed through multicenter collaboration in future studies. Fourth, no quantitative indicators of hyperalgesia were used in this study. In the pilot study, von fair silk was used to measure the area of pain sensitivity. However, the patients refused because they used a band to fix their chest to relieve pain after surgery, and the process of removing the band was complicated and inconvenient. This limitation should be fully considered in future studies, and alternative methods such as the pressure pain threshold (PPT) assessment are recommended. Fifth, the sample size was calculated based on the primary outcomes. Therefore, it is highly likely that our relatively small sample size underpowered the secondary outcomes (such as the incidence of pulmonary complications and PONV). Large-scale randomized controlled trials should be conducted to address these limitations.

    Conclusion

    In conclusion, the minimum dose of S-ketamine for managing acute postoperative pain in patients undergoing radical resection of esophageal cancer leads to a 40% reduction in opioid use and promotes postoperative functional exercise and rehabilitation, which is worthy of clinical promotion.

    Data Sharing Statement

    All data generated or analyzed during this study have been included in the published article. Further inquiries regarding the datasets can be directed to the corresponding author upon reasonable request.

    Funding

    This work was supported by the Nanjing Health Science and Technology Development Special Fund Project (Grant No.: YKK21264) and Beijing Medical Award Foundation (Grant No.: YXJL-2021-0307-0737).

    Disclosure

    The authors declare no conflicts of interest in this work.

    References

    1. Feray S, Lubach J, Joshi GP, Bonnet F, de Velde M V. PROSPECT working group of the European Society of regional anaesthesia and pain therapy. PROSPECT guidelines for video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery: a systematic review and procedure-specific postoperative, pain management recommendations. Anaesthesia. 2022;77:3):311–325.

    2. Liu YH, Xiao SS, Yang HK, et al. Postoperative pain-related outcomes and perioperative pain management in China: a population-based Study. Lancet Regional Health – Western Pacific. 2023;39(6):100822. doi:10.1016/j.lanwpc.2023.100822

    3. Batchelor TJP, Rasburn NJ, Abdelnour-Berchtold E, et al. Guidelines for enhanced recovery after lung surgery: recommendations of the Enhanced Recovery after Surgery (ERAS®) society and the European Society of Thoracic Surgeons (ESTS). Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2019;55(1):91–115. doi:10.1093/ejcts/ezy301

    4. Small C, Laycock H. Acute postoperative pain management. Br J Surg. 2020;107(2):e70–e80. doi:10.1002/bjs.11477

    5. Wick EC, Grant MC, Wu CL. Postoperative multimodal analgesia pain management with nonopioid analgesics and techniques: a review. JAMA Surg. 2017;152(7):691–697. doi:10.1001/jamasurg.2017.0898

    6. Hashimoto K. Molecular mechanisms of the rapid-acting and long-lasting antidepressant actions of (R)-ketamine. Biochem Pharmacol. 2020;177(7):113935. doi:10.1016/j.bcp.2020.113935

    7. Wei Y, Chang LJ, Hashimoto K. Molecular mechanisms underlying the antidepressant actions of arketamine: beyond the NMDA receptor. Mol Psychiatry. 2022;27(1):559–573. doi:10.1038/s41380-021-01121-1

    8. Schwenk ES, Viscusi ER, Buvanendran A, et al. Consensus guidelines on the use of intravenous ketamine infusions for acute pain management from the American Society of Regional Anesthesia and Pain Medicine, the American Academy of Pain Medicine, and the American Society of Anesthesiologists. Reg Anesth Pain Med. 2018;43(5):456–466. doi:10.1097/AAP.0000000000000806

    9. Bornemann-Cimenti H, Wejbora M, Michaeli K, et al. The effects of minimal-dose versus low-dose S-ketamine on opioid consumption, hyperalgesia, and postoperative delirium: a triple-blinded, randomized, active- and placebo-controlled clinical trial. Minerva Anestesiol. 2016;82(10):1069–1076.

    10. Schulz KF, Altman DG, Moher D, Group CONSORT. CONSORT 2010 statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials. BMJ. 2010;23(3):340.

    11. Kao SC, Tsai HI, Cheng CW, et al. The association between frequent alcohol drinking and opioid consumption after abdominal surgery: a retrospective analysis. PLoS One. 2017;12(3):e0171275. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0171275

    12. ShiW C, Zhang MQ, Zhang M-Q, et al. Effects of methylprednisolone on early postoperative pain and recovery in patients undergoing thoracoscopic lung surgery: a randomized controlled trial. J Clin Anesth. 2021;75(12):110526. doi:10.1016/j.jclinane.2021.110526

    13. De Oliveira GS Jr, Almeida MD, Benzon HT, et al. Perioperative single dose systemic dexamethasone for postoperative pain: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. JAnesthesiology. 2011;115(3):575–588. doi:10.1097/ALN.0b013e31822a24c2

    14. Cepeda MS, Africano JM, Polo R, et al. What decline in pain intensity is meaningful to patients with acute pain? Pain. 2003;105(1–2):151–157. doi:10.1016/s0304-3959(03)00176-3

    15. KubulusC M, Wagenpfeil G, Wagenpfeil G, et al. Chronic pain patients and time to sustained acceptable pain scores after major surgery – A retrospective registry analysis. J Clin Anesth. 2023;89(10):111152. doi:10.1016/j.jclinane.2023.111152

    16. Zhang XG, Xi WB, Tu WF, et al. Expert consensus for comprehensive goal-directed perioperative analgesia management in China (2021). Chin J Painol. 2021;17(2):119–125. doi:10.3760/cma.j.cn101658-20201016-00005

    17. OshimaY MY, Taniguchi Y, Taniguchi Y, et al. Mental state can influence the degree of postoperative axial neck pain following cervical laminoplasty. Global Spine J. 2019;9(3):292–297. doi:10.1177/2192568218793861

    18. Wang M, Xiong HP, Sheng K, et al. Perioperative administration of pregabalin and esketamine to prevent chronic pain after breast cancer surgery: a randomized controlled trial. Drug Des Devel Ther. 2023;7(6):1699–1706. doi:10.2147/DDDT.S413273

    19. Han YQ, Li PL, Miao MR, et al. S-ketamine as an adjuvant in patient-controlled intravenous analgesia for preventing postpartum depression: a randomized controlled trial. BMC Anesthesiol. 2022;22(1):49. doi:10.1186/s12871-022-01588-7

    20. Zhang AY, Zhou YX, Zheng X, et al. Effects of S-ketamine added to patient-controlled analgesia on early postoperative pain and recovery in patients undergoing thoracoscopic lung surgery: a randomized double-blinded controlled trial. JClin Anesth. 2024;92(2):111299. doi:10.1016/j.jclinane.2023.111299

    21. Wang XM, Lin C, Lan LF, et al. Perioperative intravenous S-ketamine for acute postoperative pain in adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis(1):s. JClin Anesth. 2021;68(1):110071. doi:10.1016/j.jclinane.2020.110071

    22. Jouguelet-lacoste J, Colla LL, Schilling D, et al. The use of intravenous infusion or single dose of low-dose ketamine for postoperative analgesia: a review of the current literature. JPain Med. 2015;16(2):383–403. doi:10.1111/pme.12619

    23. Adegbola A, Gritsenko K, Medrano EM. Perioperative Use of Ketamine. Curr Pain Headache Rep. 2023;27(9):445–448. doi:10.1007/s11916-023-01128-z

    24. Borggreve AS, Kingma BF, Domrachev SA, et al. Surgical treatment of esophageal cancer in the era of multimodality management. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2018:1434192–1434209. doi:10.1111/nyas.13677.

    25. Brinck ECV, Tiippana E, Heesen M, et al. Perioperative intravenous ketamine for acute postoperative pain in adults. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018;12(12):CD012033. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD012033.pub4

    26. Dale O, Somogyi AA, Li YB, et al. Does intraoperative ketamine attenuate inflammatory reactivity following surgery? A systematic review and meta-analysis. Anesth Analg. 2012;115(4):934–943. doi:10.1213/ANE.0b013e3182662e30

    27. Zhang JX, MaQ LIW, Li W, et al. S-Ketamine attenuates inflammatory effect and modulates the immune response in patients undergoing modified radical mastectomy: a prospective randomized controlled trial. Front Pharmacol. 2023;14(2):1128924. doi:10.3389/fphar.2023.1128924

    28. Welters ID, Feurer MK, Preiss V, et al. Continuous S-(+)-ketamine administration during elective coronary artery bypass graft surgery attenuates pro-inflammatory cytokine response during and after cardiopulmonary bypass. Br J Anaesth. 2011;106(2):172–179. doi:10.1093/bja/aeq341

    29. Persson J. Wherefore ketamine? Curr Opin Anaesthesiol. 2010;23(4):455–460. doi:10.1097/ACO.0b013e32833b49b3

    Continue Reading

  • “At home, I never felt included, I always felt on the outside”: Deaf peoples’ perspectives on how inadequate access to childhood communication influences mental health outcomes | BMC Public Health

    “At home, I never felt included, I always felt on the outside”: Deaf peoples’ perspectives on how inadequate access to childhood communication influences mental health outcomes | BMC Public Health

  • Kusters A, Meulder MD, O’Brien D. Innovations in deaf studies : The role of deaf scholars. Oxford University Press; 2017. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/316878714_Innovations_in_Deaf_Studies_The_Role_of_Deaf_Scholars.

  • World Federation of The Deaf. Our Work 2016 [cited 2024 February]. Available from: https://wfdeaf.org/our-work/.

  • Department of Health and Aged Care. About ear health 2021 [cited 2024 June]. Available from: https://www.health.gov.au/topics/ear-health/about.

  • Australian Bureau of Statistics. Language used at home (LANP) Census of population and housing 2021 [cited 2024 February]. Available from: https://www.abs.gov.au/census/guide-census-data/census-dictionary/2021/variables-topic/cultural-diversity/language-used-home-lanp.

  • Wroblewska-Seniuk KE, Dabrowski P, Szyfter W, Mazela J. Universal newborn hearing screening: methods and results, obstacles, and benefits. Pediatr Res. 2017;81(3):415–22.

    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 

  • Baker-Shenk CL, Padden C. American sign language: A look at its history, structure, and community. TJ Pub Incorporated. 1979. https://www.amazon.com/American-Language-History-Structure-Community/dp/0932666019.

  • Higgins M, Lieberman AM. Deaf students as a linguistic and cultural minority: shifting perspectives and implications for teaching and learning. PubMed Central. 2016;196(1):9–18.

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Donnell MB, Falk EB, Lieberman MD. Social in, social out: How the brain responds to social language with more social language. Commun Monogr. 2015;82(1):31–63.

    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 

  • Humphries T, Mathur G, Napoli DJ, Padden C, Rathmann C. Deaf children need rich language input from the start: Support in advising parents. Children. 2022;9(11):1609.

    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 

  • Hall ML, Hall WC, Caselli NK. Deaf children need language, not (just) speech. First Lang. 2019;39(4):367–95.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chomsky N. Knowledge of language: Its nature, origin, and use. New York; 1986. https://www.amazon.com/Knowledge-Language-Nature-Origin-Convergence/dp/0030055520.

  • Willems RM, Varley R. Neural insights into the relation between language and communication. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience. 2010;4(203).

  • Mayberry RI, Lock E. Age constraints on first versus second language acquisition: Evidence for linguistic plasticity and epigenesis. Brain Lang. 2003;87(3):369–84.

    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 

  • Humphries T, Kushalnagar P, Mathur G, Napoli DJ, Padden C, Rathmann C, et al. Language choices for deaf infants: Advice for parents regarding sign languages. Clin Pediatr. 2016;55(6):513–7.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen NJ. The impact of language development on the psychosocial and emotional development of young children. In: Tremblay RE, Boivin M, Peters RD, editors. Encyclopedia on Early Childhood Development [Internet]. Montreal, Quebec: CEECD / SKC-ECD; 2010.

  • Glickman N, Crump C, Hamerdinger S. Language deprivation is a game changer for the clinical specialty of deaf mental health. JADARA. 2020;54(1):54.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hall WC. What you don’t know can hurt you: The risk of language deprivation by impairing sign language development in deaf children. Matern Child Health. 2017;21:961–5.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hall WC, Levin LL, Anderson ML. Language deprivation syndrome: A possible neurodevelopmental disorder with sociocultural origins. Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol. 2017;52(6):761–76.

    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 

  • Gulati S. Language deprivation syndrome. In: Glickman NS, Hall WC, editors. Language Deprivation and Deaf Mental Health. New York and London: Routledge Tayor & Francis Group; 2019. p. 24–46.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnston T, Schembri A. Australian sign language (Auslan): An introduction to sign language linguistics. Cambridge University Press; 2007. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/32893365_Australian_Sign_Language_Auslan_An_Introduction_to_Sign_Language_Linguistics.

  • Murray J, Hall WC, Snoddon K. The importance of signed languages for deaf children and their families. The Hearing Journal. 2020;73(3):30–2.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haualand H, Allen C. Deaf people and human rights. World Federation of the Deaf and Swedish National Association of the Deaf; 2009. https://inee.org/resources/deaf-people-and-human-rights.

  • Howell T, Sung V, Smith L, Dettman S. Australian families of deaf and hard of hearing children: Are they using sign?. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol. 2024;179. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38579404/.

  • Mitchell RE, Karchmer MA. Chasing the mythical ten percent: Parental hearing status of deaf and hard of hearing students in the United States. Sign Language Studies. 2004;4(2):138–63.

    Google Scholar 

  • Humphries T, Kushalnagar P, Mathur G, Napoli DJ, Rathmann C, Smith S. Support for parents of deaf children: Common questions and informed, evidence-based answers. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol. 2019;118:134–42.

    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 

  • Dougherty E. Studying Language Acquisition in Deaf Children: The Brink; 2019 [updated March 6, 2017; cited 2024 February]. Available from: https://www.bu.edu/articles/2017/asl-language-acquisition/.

  • Dall M, Fellinger J, Holzinger D. The link between social communication and mental health from childhood to young adulthood: A systematic review. Front Psych. 2022;13:1–18.

    Google Scholar 

  • Parke EM, Becker ML, Graves SJ, Baily AR, Paul MG, Freeman AJ, et al. Social cognition in children with ADHD. J Atten Disord. 2021;25(4):519–29.

    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 

  • James TG, McKee MM, Sullivan MK, Ashton G, Hardy SJ, Santiago Y, et al. Community-engaged needs assessment of deaf American sign language users in Florida, 2018. Public Health Rep. 2022;137(4):730–8.

    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 

  • Gilmour J, Hill B, Place M, Skuse DH. Social communication deficits in conduct disorder: a clinical and community survey. J Child Psychol Psychiatry. 2004;45(5):967–78.

    CAS 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 

  • The diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders. DSM–5. 5th, editor: American Psychiatric Association; 2013. https://www.psychiatry.org/psychiatrists/practice/dsm.

  • Guthrie S, Leslie P. “We didn’t realise how much we needed you”. Speech and language therapy provision in adult mental health settings. Advances in Mental Health. 2023;22(2):212–28.

  • Zangrilli A, Conneely M, McCabe R, Catalfio F, Priebe S. Categorizing what patients with psychosis say in clinical interactions: The development of a framework informed by theory of mind, metacognition and cognitive behavioral theory. J Ment Health. 2022;31(5):673–82.

    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 

  • Walsh I, Regan J, Sowman R, Parsons B, McKay P. A needs analysis for the provision of a speech and language therapy service to adults with mental health disorders. Irish Journal of Psychological Medicine. 2007;24(3):89–93.

    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 

  • World Health Organization. Mental Health [Internet]: World Health Organization; 2024 [cited 2024 June]. Available from: https://www.who.int/health-topics/mental-health#tab=tab_1.

  • Fellinger J, Holzinger D, Pollard R. Mental health of deaf people. The Lancet. 2012;379(9820):1037–44.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moore MS, Levitan L. For hearing people only: 4th edition. Deaf Life Press; 2016. https://www.amazon.com/Hearing-People-Only-4th/dp/B07433KLTK.

  • Australian Bureau of Statistics. National Health Survey: first results, Australia 2017–18 [Canberra, A.C.T.]: Australian Bureau of Statistics; 2018 [cited 2024 February]. Available from: https://research.ebsco.com/linkprocessor/plink?id=6b04c912-58b3-356a-a321-b5f0e623e466.

  • Australian Bureau of Statistics. Disability, ageing and carers, Australia: summary of findings, 2018 Canberra, ACT: Australian Bureau of Statistics; 2019 [cited 2024 February]. Available from: https://research.ebsco.com/linkprocessor/plink?id=591e5870-55a8-3a6b-a4b6-192800f78d4a.

  • Conama JB. Situating the socio-economic position of Irish deaf community in the equality framework. Equality, Diversity and Inclusion. 2013;32(2):173–94.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kushalnagar P, Bruce S, Sutton T, Leigh IW. Retrospective basic parent-child communication difficulties and risk of depression in deaf adults. J Dev Phys Disabil. 2017;29:25–34.

    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 

  • Anderson ML, Craig KSW, Hall WC, Ziedonis DM. A pilot study of deaf trauma survivors’ experiences: Early traumas unique to being deaf in a hearing world. J Child Adolesc Trauma. 2016;9(4):353–8.

    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 

  • Marschark M, Knoors H. Educating deaf children: Language, cognition, and learning. Deaf Educ Int. 2012;14(3):136–60.

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Connell N. “Opportunity Blocked”: Deaf people, employment and the sociology of audism. Humanit Soc. 2022;46(2):336–58.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lott VG, Easterbrooks SR, Heller KW, O’Rourke CM. Work attitudes of students who are deaf and their potential employers. JADARA. 2019;34(2):31–55.

    Google Scholar 

  • Punch R. Employment and adults who are deaf or hard of hearing. Am Ann Deaf. 2016;161(3):384–97.

    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 

  • Napier J, Kidd MR. English literacy as a barrier to health care information for deaf people who use Auslan. Aust Fam Physician. 2013;42(12):896–9.

    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 

  • Barnett SL, Matthews KA, Sutter EJ, DeWindt LA, Pransky JA, O’Hearn AM, et al. Collaboration with deaf communities to conduct accessible health surveillance. Am J Prev Med. 2017;52(3):250–4.

    Google Scholar 

  • Liamputtong P. Handbook of research methods in health social sciences. Singapore: Springer; 2019.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ferndale D, Watson B, Munro L. Creating deaf-friendly spaces for research: Innovating online qualitative enquiries. Qual Res Psychol. 2015;12(3):246–57.

    Google Scholar 

  • Uwe F. Triangulation in data collection. Sage Publications; 2018. 527–44 p. https://chooser.crossref.org/?doi=10.4135%2F9781526416070.n34.

  • Liamputtong P. Researching the vulnerable : A guide to sensitive research methods: Sage Publication; 2007. https://methods.sagepub.com/book/mono/researching-the-vulnerable/toc.

  • Manohar N, MacMillan F, Steiner GZ, Arora A. Recruitment of research participants. In: Liamputtong P, editor. Handbook of research methods in health social sciences. 2018. p. 71–98. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/323554760_Recruitment_of_Research_Participants.

  • Kushalnagar RS, Vogler C. Teleconference accessibility and guidelines for deaf and hard of hearing users. In: Machinery AfC, editor. Proceedings of the 22nd International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility; Virtual Event, Greece2020. p. 1–6. https://par.nsf.gov/servlets/purl/10209492.

  • Jacobson D, Mustafa N. Social identity map: A reflexivity tool for practicing explicit positionality in critical qualitative research. Int J Qual Methods. 2019;18. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/1609406919870075.

  • Manohar N, Liamputtong P, Bhole S, Arora A. Researcher positionality in cross-cultural and sensitive research. In: Liamputtong P, editor. Handbook of Research Methods in Health Social Sciences. Singapore: Springer; 2017. p. 1601–16.

    Google Scholar 

  • Temple B. Qualitative research and translation dilemmas. Qual Res. 2004;4(2):161–78. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/249731128_Qualitative_Research_and_Translation_Dilemmas.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anderson ML, Riker T, Gagne K, Hakulin S, Higgins T, Meehan J, et al. Deaf qualitative health research: Leveraging technology to conduct linguistically and sociopolitically appropriate methods of inquiry. Qualitative health research. 2018;28(11). https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29890891/.

  • Cawthon SW, Garberoglio CL. Evidence-based practices in deaf education: A call to center research and evaluation on the experiences of deaf people. Rev Res Educ. 2021;45(1):346–71.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harris R, Holmes HM, Mertens DM. Research ethics in sign language communities. Sign Language Studies. 2009;9(2):104–31.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rowlands J. Interviewee transcript review as a tool to improve data quality and participant confidence in sensitive research. International Journal of Qualitative Methods. 2021;20.

  • Braun V, Clarke V. Toward good practice in thematic analysis: Avoiding common problems and be(com)ing a knowing researcher. International Journal of Transgender Health. 2022;24(1):1–6.

    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 

  • Allsop DB, Chelladurai JM, Kimball ER, Marks LD, Hendricks JJ. Qualitative methods with Nvivo software: A practical guide for analyzing qualitative data. Psych. 2022;4(2):142–59.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meyer IH. Prejudice, social stress, and mental health in lesbian, gay, and bisexual populations: Conceptual issues and research evidence. Psychol Bull. 2003;129(5):674–97.

    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 

  • Lund EM. Examining the potential applicability of the minority stress model for explaining suicidality in individuals with disabilities. Rehabil Psychol. 2021;66(2):183–91.

    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 

  • Botha M, Frost DM. Extending the minority stress model to understand mental health problems experienced by the autistic population. Society and Mental Health. 2018;10(1):20–34.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berry JW. Stress perspectives on acculturation. In: Sam DL, Berry JW, editors. The Cambridge handbook of acculturation psychology. 12006. p. 43–56.

  • Braun V, Clarke V. A critical review of the reporting of reflexive thematic analysis in Health Promotion International. Health Promotion International. 2024;39(3). https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38805676/.

  • Mortelmans D. Doing qualitative data analysis with NVivo: Springer Nature; 2025.

  • Bauman H-DL. Audism: Exploring the metaphysics of oppression. Journal of deaf studies and deaf education. 2004;9(2):239–46.

  • Wilson JAB, Atcherson SR. Audism and its implications for audiology. Perspectives of the ASHA Special Interest Groups. 2017;2:18–28.

    Google Scholar 

  • Aparicio M, Peigneux P, Charlier B, Balériaux D, Kavec M, Leybaert J. The neural basis of speech perception through lipreading and manual cues: Evidence from deaf native users of cued speech. Front Psychol. 2017;8(426):1–23.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dirth TP, Adamsb GA. Decolonial theory and disability studies: On the modernity/coloniality of ability. J Soc Polit Psychol. 2019;7(1):260–89.

    Google Scholar 

  • Engberg-Pedersen E. Space in Danish sign language: The semantics and morphosyntax of the use of space in a visual language: Signum Press; 1993. https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/nordic-journal-of-linguistics/article/abs/elisabeth-engbergpedersen-space-in-danish-sign-language-the-semantics-and-morphosyntax-of-the-use-of-space-in-a-visual-language-international-studies-on-sign-language-research-and-communication-of-the-deaf-vol-19-hamburg-signum-verlag-1993-406-pp/773C6C3D6DFA88C2C3F4CCAD85AECF9D.

  • Kusters A, Green M, Moriarty E, Snoddon K. Sign language ideologies: Practices and politics. Sign language ideologies in practice. 2020:3–22. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/344263685_Sign_language_ideologies_Practices_and_politics.

  • Meek DR. Dinner table syndrome: A phenomenological study of deaf individuals’ experiences with inaccessible communication. Qualitative Report. 2020;25(6):1676–94.

    Google Scholar 

  • Listman JD, Kurz KB. Lived experience: Deaf professionals’ stories of resilience and risks. The Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education. 2020;25(2):239–49.

    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 

  • Glickman N. Do you hear voices? Problems in assessment of mental status in deaf persons with severe language deprivation. The Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education. 2007;12(2):127–47.

    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 

  • Solomon A. Far from the tree: Parents, children, and the search for identity. Am J Med Genet A. 2014;164A(9):2412–3.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berry M. Being deaf in mainstream education in the United Kingdom: Some implications for their health. Universal Journal of Psychology. 2017;5(3):129–39.

    Google Scholar 

  • Herbert M, Pires A. Bilingualism and code-blending among deaf ASL-English bilinguals. In: Guijarro-Fuentes P, Suárez-Gómez C, editors. New Trends in Language Acquisition Within the Generative Perspective Studies in Theoretical Psycholinguistics. 49. Dordrecht: Springer; 2020. p. 99–139.

  • Mauldin L, Fannon T. They told me my name: Developing a deaf identity. Symb Interact. 2021;44(2):339–66.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zeshan U, Panda S. Two languages at hand: Code-switching in bilingual deaf signers. In: Zeshan U, Webster J, editors. Sign Multilingualism. Berlin: Boston: De Gruyter Mouton; 2020. p. 81–126.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marschark M, Hauser PC. How deaf children learn: What parents and teachers need to know. USA: Oxford University Press; 2012.

    Google Scholar 

  • Holcomb TK, Smith DH. Deaf eyes on interpreting: Gallaudet University Press; 2018. https://gupress.gallaudet.edu/Books/D/Deaf-Eyes-on-Interpreting.

  • Jemina N, Skinner R, Young A, Oram R. Mediating identities: Sign language interpreter perceptions on trust and representation. Journal of Applied Linguistics and Professional Practice. 2017;14(1):75–95.

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Brien D, Hodge G, Gulamani S, Rowley K, Adam R, Emery S, et al. Deaf academics’ perceptions of “trust” in relationships with signed language interpreters. Translation & Interpreting: The International Journal of Translation and Interpreting Research. 2023;15(2):25–42.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sheppard K, Badger T. The lived experience of depression among culturally Deaf adults. J Psychiatr Ment Health Nurs. 2010;17(9):783–9.

    CAS 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 

  • Pinquart M, Pfeiffer JP. Bullying in students with and without hearing loss. Deaf Educ Int. 2015;17(2):101–10.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weiner MT, Day SJ, Galvan D. Deaf and hard of hearing students’ perspectives on bullying and school climate. Am Ann Deaf. 2013;158(3):334–43.

    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 

  • Fellinger J, Holzinger D, Sattel H, Laucht M, Goldberg D. Correlates of mental health disorders among children with hearing impairments. Dev Med Child Neurol. 2009;51(8):635–41.

    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 

  • Bouldin E, Patel SR, Tey CS, White M, Alfonso KP, Govil N. Bullying and children who are deaf or hard-of-hearing: A Scoping review. The Laryngoscope. United States: Wiley-Blackwell; 2021. p. 1884–92.

  • Jalkhi AG, Rowley J. ‘There is no barrier when it comes to your deafness’: participatory research exploring the views of deaf and hard-of-hearing students being educated in a resource provision. Eur J Spec Needs Educ. 2024:1–17. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/381950138_’There_is_no_barrier_when_it_comes_to_your_deafness’_participatory_research_exploring_the_views_of_deaf_and_hard-of-hearing_students_being_educated_in_a_resource_provision.

  • Edmondson S, Howe J. Exploring the social inclusion of deaf young people in mainstream schools, using their lived experience. Educ Psychol Pract. 2019;35(2):216–28.

    Google Scholar 

  • Olsson S, Dag M, Kullberg C. Deaf and hard-of-hearing adolescents’ experiences of inclusion and exclusion in mainstream and special schools in Sweden. Eur J Spec Needs Educ. 2018;33(4):495–509.

    Google Scholar 

  • Power D, Hyde M. The characteristics and extent of participation of deaf and hard-of-hearing students in regular classes in Australian schools. J Deaf Stud Deaf Educ. 2002;7(4):302–11.

    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 

  • Humphries T, Kushalnagar P, Mathur G, Napoli DJ, Padden C, Rathmann C, et al. Language acquisition for deaf children: Reducing the harms of zero tolerance to the use of alternative approaches. Harm Reduct J. 2012;9(16). https://harmreductionjournal.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1477-7517-9-16.

  • Caselli N, Pyers J, Lieberman AM. Deaf children of hearing parents have age-level vocabulary growth when exposed to American sign language by 6 months of age. J Pediatr. 2021;232:229–36.

    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 

  • Nordhagen GG. Ål folk college brings together deaf people from all corners of the world [Internet] Norway: FriFagbevegelse; 2022 [cited 2024 March]. Available from: https://frifagbevegelse.no/ntlmagasinet/al-folkehogskole-samler-dove-fra-alle-verdenshjorner-6.469.921918.1ec744a630?fbclid=IwY2xjawE6fsNleHRuA2FlbQIxMAABHZIZzT2UQUX3xSZD_q0spfV6vNMtsU5J-DI0F5ckax8PEybLxIctLjXvaw_aem_eJ0G9guUFTVM61r0QNnU4w.

  • Szarkowski A, Moeller MP, Gale E, Smith T, Birdsey BC, Moodie STF, et al. Family-centered early intervention deaf/hard of hearing (FCEI-DHH): Cultural & global implications. The Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education. 2024;29(1):127–39.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoskin J, Herman R, Woll B. Deaf language specialists: Delivering language therapy in signed languages. The Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education. 2023;28(1):40–52.

    Google Scholar 

  • The Hands and Voices Off to a Great Start. The Hands & Voices Family Support Activities Guide [Internet]: Hands and Voices; 2024 [cited 2024 March]. Available from: https://handsandvoices.org/great-start/fam-support-guide/index.html.

  • Hauser PC, O’Hearn A, McKee M, Steider A, Thew D. Deaf epistemology: Deafhood and deafness. Am Ann Deaf. 2010;154(5):486–92.

    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnston T. W(h)ither the deaf community? Population, genetics, and the future of Australian sign language. Sign Language Studies. 2006;6(2):137–73.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zamborlin C. Going beyond pragmatic failures: Dissonance in intercultural communication. Intercult Pragmat. 2007;4(1):21–50.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schwartz S, Zamboanga B, Wang W, Olthuis J. Measuring identity from an Eriksonian perspective: Two sides of the same coin? J Pers Assess. 2009;91(2):143–54.

    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 

  • Molinsky A. Cross-cultural code-switching: The psychological challenges of adapting behavior in foreign cultural interactions. Acad Manag Rev. 2007;32(2):622–40.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gardner-Chloros P. Contact and code-switching. In: Hickey R, editor. The Handbook of Language Contact. John Wiley & Sons Ltd; 2020. p. 181-99. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/9781119485094.ch9.

  • Hauser PC. An analysis of codeswitching. In: Metzger M, editor. Bilingualism and Identity in Deaf Communities. Washington, DC: Gallaudet University Press; 2000. p. 43–78.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hall MA, Dugan E, Zheng B, Mishra AK. Trust in physicians and medical institutions: what is it, can it be measured, and does it matter? Milbank Q. 2001;79(4):613–39.

    CAS 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 

  • Jaiswal J, Halkitis PN. Towards a more inclusive and dynamic understanding of medical mistrust informed by science. Behav Med. 2019;45(2):79–85.

    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaplunov E. Mistrust between deaf patients and hearing staff in healthcare settings. Empedocles: European Journal for the Philosophy of Communication. 2023;14(1):21–42.

  • Hellström L, Thornberg R, Espelage DL. Definitions of bullying. In: Smith PK, Norman JOH, editors. The Wiley Blackwell handbook of bullying: A comprehensive and international review of research and intervention. 1: John Wiley & Sons Ltd; 2021. p. 2–21. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/351365405_Definitions_of_bullying.

  • Gaynor C, Watson S. Evaluating DFID’s policy on tackling social exclusion: Baseline, framework and indicators. 2007. https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5a751239ed915d5c544654fc/wp22-social-exclusion.pdf.

  • Williams KD, Carter-Sowell AR. Margalization through social ostracism: Effects of being ignored and excluded. In: Butera F, Levine JM, editors. Coping with Minority Status: Responses to Exclusion and Inclusion: Cambridge University Press; 2008. p. 104–21. https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/abs/coping-with-minority-status/marginalization-through-social-ostracism-effects-of-being-ignored-and-excluded/F7EE772BE45E332DE501BE528B8E748F.

  • Continue Reading

  • Investigation of appropriate mortality due to clinically diagnosed Alz

    Investigation of appropriate mortality due to clinically diagnosed Alz

    Introduction

    The prevalence of dementia is increasing worldwide, with projections estimating that the number of individuals affected will reach 150 million by 2050.1,2 Alzheimer’s disease (AD) and other major forms of dementia are progressive neurodegenerative disorders that affect the entire body, ultimately leading to death from complications and associated conditions.3,4 Patients with Vascular dementia (VD) often succumb to cerebrovascular disease or myocardial infarction; however, VD itself can result in pathologies such as aspiration pneumonia, which can also be fatal.5

    As awareness grows regarding dementia as a terminal condition, it has become a focus of palliative care in many countries.6,7 Consequently, AD and other dementias rank among the leading causes of death in European countries and the United States (US). Notably, AD is the most common form of dementia, accounting for approximately 60% of all cases, with a reported death rate of 13% in France, 12% in the United Kingdom, and 7% in the US.8

    Although the prevalence of dementia increases with age, Japan, despite having one of the longest life expectancies globally, reports a lower ranking of dementia as a cause of death compared to that in other countries. The reported mortality rate for AD and other dementias in Japan is 1.6% for both, significantly lower than rates observed in Western countries.9 Conversely, “senility” ranked as the third leading cause of death in Japan’s 2018 mortality statistics, accounting for 8% of deaths. This discrepancy has sparked debate over whether deaths caused by dementia are being inaccurately documented as senility on death certificates.10,11

    The idea that dementia should be recognized as a cause of death was proposed by Molsa et al5 in 1986 and is now well established in many countries. However, even in the US, where dementia ranks higher as a cause of death than in Japan, the underreporting of dementia-related mortality remains a contentious issue.12 Research has estimated that the actual death rate due to dementia in the US is approximately 14%, whereas only approximately 5% is officially recorded.13 Japanese death statistics are compiled based on death certificates issued by physicians. The first author, a psychiatrist with extensive experience in internal medicine, observed that in psychiatric hospitals, where many patients with dementia are admitted, the cause of death listed on death certificates was often recorded as another condition, even when the patient had died of dementia. Although the proportion of deaths occurring in hospitals in Japan has been gradually decreasing, it still accounts for nearly 70% of all deaths. According to a 2020 survey by the Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare (MHLW), a total of 75,900 individuals with dementia were hospitalized in Japan, including 50,600 with AD and 25,300 with other dementias. Of these, 39,200 patients with AD and 18,800 with other dementias were admitted to psychiatric hospitals, resulting in a total of 58,000 patients with dementia hospitalized in such facilities.14 According to statistics from the MHLW, 76% (58,000) of all hospitalized Japanese patients with dementia are admitted to psychiatric hospitals. Japan has approximately 1.58 million hospital beds, of which approximately 20%, or 323,000 beds, are designated for psychiatric care. Of these, 244,000 beds are in psychiatric hospitals, and 79,000 are in general hospitals.15 The majority of inpatient psychiatric care is provided in psychiatric hospitals. In recent years, there has been an increasing trend of patients with dementia being admitted to psychiatric hospitals and remaining there until death.16,17

    We hypothesized that the low proportion of deaths attributed to dementia in Japanese mortality statistics may be due to the omission of AD and other dementias in the direct cause of death section on death certificates. To explore this, we aimed to investigate whether dementia was accurately recorded as the main diagnosis or direct cause of death on death certificates, focusing on psychiatric hospitals with a high number of inpatients with dementia. This analysis utilized both death certificates and medical records.

    Methods

    Participants

    We examined the death certificates of patients who died in 11 psychiatric hospitals in the northern Kanto region of Japan between fiscal years (FY) 2010 and 2020. During this period, 942 deaths were recorded, with death certificates available for all cases and medical records accessible for 653 cases. Therefore, the 653 cases with both death certificates and medical records were selected for the present study (Figure 1).

    Figure 1 Consort flow diagram of study patients.

    All data used in this study were anonymized during the collection process to ensure individuals’ confidentiality and informed consent was obtained from participants in the form of opt-out on the website. The study was approved by the Ethical Review Committee of Jichi Medical University (approval number: 23–139). The study protocol adhered to the Declaration of Helsinki guidelines.

    Survey Items

    The investigation of death certificates and medical records was conducted by Sato, a Board Certified Member of the Japanese Society of Internal Medicine. In cases where uncertainties arose during the review of medical records, particularly in determining the direct cause of death, the final determination was made in consultation with Shioda, who had worked as a general physician for many years.

    From the total of 653 death certificates (male: 393; female: 260), we extracted the following information: age at death, sex, column I of the death certificate (Disease or condition directly leading to death), and column II of the death certificate (Other significant conditions contributing to death but not related to the disease or condition causing it). The direct cause of death was defined as the disease listed at the bottom of column I, in accordance with the methods prescribed by the World Health Organization (WHO) and the MHLW for identifying causes of death. The names of the direct causes of death were classified using the 10th revision of the International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems (ICD-10), which is the standard classification system used in official death statistics in Japan.

    We analyzed 653 medical records (male: 393; female: 260) of patients for whom records were available, focusing on the disease that led to admission, the presence of AD as a comorbidity, and the categorization of dementia as a cause of hospital admission (AD or other dementias). Additionally, we examined whether dementia was accurately documented in column I of the death certificate when AD or any other dementia was identified as the cause of death. The medical records were further reviewed to determine whether dementia had progressed to become a direct cause of death. In this study, death due to dementia was defined using two criteria:1 the patient’s condition prior to death met the National Hospice and Palliative Care Organization (NHPCO) definition of hospice care induction criteria (Table 1); and2 the patient died from a condition attributable to dementia, such as pneumonia, asphyxia resulting from impaired swallowing, urinary tract infections and kidney failure due to dysuria, or infections related to pressure ulcers and other recurring conditions. Cases in which patients with dementia died from apparent malignant diseases, heart diseases, or cerebrovascular diseases were excluded.

    Table 1 Hospice Criteria for Dementia

    Analysis

    We categorized the mental disorders causing hospitalization into the following groups: AD (F00), other dementias (F0 excluding F00), mood disorder spectrum (F3), schizophrenia disorder spectrum (F4), and other mental disorders. The age at death was compared across these categories.

    Based on the death certificates, we classified the direct causes of death for the 653 cases using the ICD-10 codes. The number of deaths for men, women, and the overall death rates were identified by ICD codes.

    The medical records of 148 patients hospitalized for AD were reviewed to determine the appropriate direct cause of death. For each ICD code, we calculated the difference between the number of deaths recorded on the death certificate and the number of deaths corrected based on the medical record review.

    The medical records of 124 patients hospitalized for other dementias were reviewed to determine the appropriate direct cause of death. For each ICD code, the difference between the number of deaths recorded on the death certificate and the number of deaths corrected through medical record review was calculated.

    The medical records of 13 patients with comorbid AD who were admitted for other mental disorders were reviewed to determine the appropriate direct cause of death and the mental disorder leading to hospitalization. Discrepancies between the number of deaths recorded on death certificates and the corrected number of deaths based on medical record investigations were identified.

    We examined whether there were differences in the number of deaths attributed to AD between death certificates and the corrected number of deaths. The proportions of AD deaths, as recorded on death certificates and as determined by medical record review, were compared overall and by sex. Ratios were analyzed using the chi-squared (χ2) test. Additionally, the χ2 test was used to determine whether there were significant differences in AD mortality by sex.

    We investigated whether there were differences in the number of deaths attributed to all dementias between death certificates and the corrected number of deaths. The proportion of dementia-related deaths, as recorded on death certificates and as determined by medical record review, were compared overall and by sex. Ratios were analyzed using the χ2 test. Additionally, the χ2 test was used to assess whether there were significant differences in dementia-related mortality by sex.

    A P-value of <0.05 was considered statistically significant. All statistical analyses were conducted using IBM SPSS statistics for Windows, version 26.

    Results

    A total of 942 death certificates were identified for patients who died between FY 2010 and FY 2020 in 11 psychiatric hospitals. Of these, 393 were male, and 260 were female, resulting in a total of 653 patients for which both death certificates and medical records were verified (Figure 1).

    Mental Disorders Causing Hospitalization and Associated Age of Death

    We categorized mental disorders causing hospitalization into AD (F00), other dementias (F0 excluding F00), mood disorder spectrum (F3), schizophrenia disorder spectrum (F4), and other psychiatric disorders. The age at death was analyzed for each disorder.

    The most common mental disorder was schizophrenia (293 cases), followed by AD (148 cases) and other dementias (124 cases) (Table 2). The average age at death for patients with AD and other dementias was over 80 years. In contrast, the average age at death for patients with other conditions was approximately 70 years (Table 2).

    Table 2 Mental Disorders Causing Hospitalization and Associated Age of Death

    Causes of Death Based on Death Certificates (by ICD Code)

    The results derived from death certificates showed that the leading cause of death was classified under ICD-10 code J, with pneumonia and aspiration pneumonia accounting for 40.3% (263 cases) of all deaths. The second most common cause was ICD-10 code I, representing heart failure and other diseases of the circulatory system, which accounted for 17.6% (115 cases) of deaths. Neoplasms, categorized under ICD-10 code C, were the third most common cause, comprising 12.6% (82 cases) of total deaths. AD accounted for 5.2% (34 cases) of total deaths, while other dementias combined accounted for 6.9% (45 cases).

    Furthermore, 6.6% (43 cases) were classified as others (code R), including 5.4% (35 cases) attributed to senility (Table 3).

    Table 3 Causes of Death Based on Death Certificates (by ICD Code)

    Changes in Direct Cause of Death Before and After Medical Record Confirmation for Patients Admitted with AD

    We examined whether patients admitted with AD were accurately reported as having died from AD. Among 148 cases of patients hospitalized with AD, only 34 death certificates listed AD as the direct cause of death. However, after reviewing the medical records and identifying cases that met the definition of death due to dementia, it was determined that AD should have been listed as the direct cause of death in 116 of the 148 cases.

    A review of medical records where AD was already listed as the direct cause of death on the death certificate confirmed that all these cases met the criteria for dementia-related death, supporting the accuracy of AD as the direct cause of death. For other cases, the direct cause of death was revised as follows: in 43 out of 47 cases of pneumonia and all nine cases of aspiration pneumonia, the direct cause of death was corrected to AD; all 11 cases classified as senility were corrected to AD; 6 out of 9 cases of heart failure were corrected to AD; all 3 cases of renal failure and 3 of urinary tract infections were corrected to AD; one case of infectious and parasitic diseases and one case of diseases of the skin and subcutaneous tissue were corrected to AD; 2 cases classified under external causes of morbidity and mortality were corrected to AD; one case initially labeled as dementia was corrected to AD, as the diagnosis in the medical record specified AD (Table 4).

    Table 4 Changes in Direct Cause of Death Before and After Medical Record Confirmation for Patients Admitted with AD

    Changes in Cause of Death Before and After Medical Record Confirmation for Patients Admitted with Dementias Other Than AD

    The study included 124 patients admitted with dementias other than AD (other dementias). Among these, the primary cause of death listed on the death certificate was dementia in only 10 cases, accounting for less than one-tenth of the total. After reviewing the medical records and identifying cases that met the definition of death due to dementia, it was determined that dementia should have been listed as the direct cause of death in an additional 64 of the 124 cases.

    A review of medical records where dementia was already listed as the direct cause of death on the death certificate confirmed that all these cases met the criteria for dementia-related death, supporting the accuracy of dementia as the direct cause of death. For other cases, the direct cause of death was revised as follows: in 31 out of 46 cases of pneumonia and all 11 cases of aspiration pneumonia, the direct cause of death was corrected to dementia; all 9 cases initially classified as senility were corrected to dementia; 8 of 15 cases of heart failure were corrected to dementia; one case categorized under ICD-10 code R (multi-organ failure) was corrected to dementia; a case of urinary tract infections was corrected to dementia; 2 cases of infectious and parasitic diseases were corrected to dementia; one case classified under external causes of morbidity and mortality was corrected to dementia; 5 cases diagnosed with other dementias at the time of admission were reclassified as AD, and their cause of death was corrected to AD (Table 5).

    Table 5 Changes in Cause of Death Before and After Medical Record Confirmation for Patients Admitted with Dementias Other Than AD

    Causes of Death in Cases of Comorbid AD and Hospitalization for Other Mental Disorders

    The same investigations were conducted for cases where the primary reason for hospitalization was a mental disorder other than AD or other dementias but where AD was present as a complication. Among these, 11 patients were admitted with schizophrenia and 2 with bipolar disorder, both complicated by AD. For the 11 patients with schizophrenia, the direct causes of death listed on death certificates were as follows: pneumonia (five cases), aspiration pneumonia (two cases), senility (two cases), and heart failure (two cases). After a medical record review, all 11 cases were corrected to AD as the direct cause of death. For the two patients with bipolar disorder, the direct causes of death listed on death certificates were pneumonia and aspiration pneumonia. Both cases were also corrected to AD as the direct cause of death.

    Appropriate AD Death Rate in Psychiatric Hospital Inpatients

    The results showed that AD was the direct cause of death in 116 patients hospitalized with AD, 5 patients hospitalized with other dementias, and 13 patients hospitalized with other mental disorders. The proportion of AD-related deaths reported on death certificates and the corrected number of AD-related deaths after medical record confirmation were compared overall and by sex. In total, 134 of the 653 cases (20.5%) were determined to have AD as the direct cause of death, a significant increase from the 34 cases initially identified from death certificates alone (P<0.01). Similarly, by sex: among male patients, 20 of 393 cases (5.1%) were recorded as AD-related deaths before medical record confirmation, while 78 cases (19.8%) were identified after confirmation (P<0.01). Among female patients, 14 of 260 cases (5.4%) were recorded as AD-related deaths before medical record confirmation, while 56 cases (21.5%) were identified after confirmation, also showing a significant difference (P<0.01). The mortality rate due to AD after medical record review was significantly higher in men than in women (P=0.035) (Table 6).

    Table 6 Difference in the Number of Patients Considered to Have AD as the Cause of Death

    Appropriate Dementia-Related Death Rates in Psychiatric Hospital Inpatients

    After reviewing the medical records of 653 patients, 203 (134 with AD and 69 with other dementias) were identified as having dementia as the direct cause of death, representing 31.1% of all deaths. This rate was significantly higher than the rate identified before the medical record review (P<0.01).

    When examining dementia-related deaths by sex: among males, 122 out of 393 patients (31%) were determined to have dementia as the direct cause of death, a significant increase compared to the rate before the medical record review (P<0.01). Among females, 81 out of 260 (31.1%) patients were determined to have dementia as the direct cause of death, also showing a significant increase (P<0.01) (Table 7). The mortality rate due to all dementias after the medical record review showed no significant difference between males and females (P=0.975).

    Table 7 Difference in the Number of Patients Considered to Have Dementia (Including AD) as the Cause of Death

    Discussion

    A survey of the causes of death based on death certificates, categorized by ICD code, revealed that respiratory diseases accounted for approximately 40% of all deaths, followed by cardiovascular diseases at 17.6%, with half of these cases listed as heart failure.

    The underlying cause of death, which forms the foundation for mortality statistics, is determined according to WHO guidelines. Under these guidelines, the illness or injury listed at the bottom of column I on the death certificate is considered the direct cause of death. However, the WHO specifies that terminal conditions, such as heart failure or respiratory failure, are not appropriate as direct causes of death.8

    Additionally, 6.6% of deaths were categorized under the ICD-10 R code, which were found to be inappropriate as direct causes of death, with senility alone accounting for 5.4% of these cases. This indicates that inappropriate causes, such as heart failure and senility, were frequently listed as the direct cause of death. These findings highlight that death certificates in Japanese psychiatric hospitals are often not completed in accordance with proper standards.

    Patients admitted with AD or other dementias accounted for 42% of the total, but only approximately 7% of the total deaths. Among patients admitted with AD, only 25% had AD listed as the cause of death on their death certificate. Respiratory diseases were the most common cause of death, accounting for approximately 40%, with most cases involving pneumonia, including aspiration pneumonia. This finding aligns with those of previous studies.18–21 However, in 91% of the cases where pneumonia and aspiration pneumonia were listed as the cause of death, it was believed that the progression of AD led to impaired swallowing and other functional declines, ultimately resulting in pneumonia.

    Clinically, determining whether complications or the underlying disease is the true cause of death is often challenging. This determination also depends on the country’s rules for selecting the underlying cause of death. For example, in Canada and the United Kingdom22,23 the rule is that if a patient with dementia dies of aspiration pneumonia, dementia is considered the cause of death. While similar rules have been adopted in Japan, they are not widely recognized in clinical practice.

    This discrepancy is also evident in the US, where dementia is reported on death certificates for only a quarter of dementia-related deaths despite being a leading cause of death. A US cohort study reported a significant increase in mortality associated with the incidence and progression of AD, suggesting that AD contributes to more deaths than are officially recorded.24,25

    In contrast, countries such as France and Italy report higher rates of dementia as the underlying cause of death. In Italy, dementia is listed in approximately 12–19% of cases, while in France, it is listed in approximately 26–33% of cases. These differences highlight how the tendency to underreport dementia as a cause of death may vary by country.26

    In this study, approximately 7% of patients hospitalized for AD had “senility” listed as the cause of death. Unlike in other countries, senility is a leading cause of death as per Japan’s mortality statistics. Originally, senility was defined as “symptoms, signs, and abnormal clinical or detection findings that are not classified elsewhere”, making it a condition with an unclear diagnosis. In Japan, it is generally considered acceptable to record “senility” as the cause of death on death certificates, particularly in settings such as nursing homes and home-based palliative care.27

    In contrast, in Europe and the United States, listing only terms such as “senility” or “natural causes” is typically regarded as insufficient for determining the underlying cause of death. This practice may also complicate postmortem investigations or insurance procedures; hence, physicians are strongly encouraged to specify a definitive medical diagnosis.28

    In Japan, the rate of deaths attributed to senility has quadrupled, rising from 2.6% in 2000 to 10.3% in 2020. In contrast, the rate is only 0.8% in France and 0.2% in the US, highlighting a significant international discrepancy.29 In many cases, listing senility as the primary cause of death is inappropriate, particularly when dementia is the underlying condition that leads to a gradual decline and eventual death. Nevertheless, in this study, there were cases where only senility was recorded as the primary cause of death.

    Hayashi et al reported that 90% of death certificates listing senility as the cause of death did not mention any other causes, and this percentage has been increasing over time.29 This raises an important question: was senility truly the sole cause of death, or were there underlying diseases that went unlisted? Based on our investigation, it is likely the latter, indicating a need for a better understanding of dementia, clearer definitions of senility, and greater public awareness about the proper completion of death certificates.

    Additionally, the results of the medical record survey revealed six cases where heart failure was described as a terminal condition without detailed examination. The underlying cause of death, which serves as the basis for mortality statistics, is determined by the guidelines set by the WHO. According to these rules, if the condition listed in the bottom line of column I is likely to have caused all the other conditions listed above, it is considered the underlying cause of death. However, if an inappropriate condition is listed in column II as the cause of death, it may be inaccurately classified as such. Furthermore, the WHO guidelines advise against listing terminal conditions, such as cardiac failure or respiratory failure, as the cause of death.

    In this study, 124 patients with non-AD dementia were found to have psychiatric disorders that led to their hospitalization. Among the patients whose death certificates listed pneumonia and aspiration pneumonia as the cause of death, 74% may have developed pneumonia and aspiration pneumonia due to the deterioration of swallowing and other functions caused by the progression of dementia. Additionally, as seen in AD cases, there were nine instances where only senility was listed as the cause of death on the death certificate. Many cases also featured a diagnosis of dementia without further classification. In such instances, AD was often considered the underlying cause of death. These findings suggest that a significant number of cases may have had AD as the actual cause of death.

    The results of the medical record survey indicated that in cases where AD was diagnosed alongside other psychiatric disorders, the cause of death was frequently misattributed, with some instances where it should have been recognized as resulting from AD. Notably, a significant number of patients with schizophrenia were identified with complications related to AD.

    The risk of developing dementia among patients with ataxia is reported to be approximately twice as high as that in the general population.30 Specifically, it is hypothesized that patients with schizophrenia who develop AD may experience heightened susceptibility to schizophrenia-like symptoms due to the progressive decline in cognitive function.31

    In diagnosing dementia, cognitive dysfunction observed in patients with schizophrenia during the early stages of their illness can complicate the timely diagnosis of dementia. This delay can hinder accurate estimation of the co-occurrence rates of schizophrenia and AD.32 Comprehensive patient interviews and detailed examination findings are essential for differentiating schizophrenia from dementia. However, distinguishing schizophrenia from dementia based solely on clinical symptoms remains challenging.33,34 This diagnostic difficulty may lead to underdiagnosis or misdiagnosis of both conditions, as the perceived benefit of differentiating between them might be minimal.

    There was a significant increase in deaths attributed to AD across both sexes before and after the medical record survey. This rise can largely be attributed to complications of AD, such as pneumonia, being documented as the immediate cause of death, while AD, as the underlying condition, was often omitted from the records.

    Overall, in this study, the appropriate cause of death was identified by analyzing the diseases and medical conditions listed in patients’ medical records and comparing them to the information documented on death certificates. This analysis revealed a significant increase in the reported mortality rate of AD and overall dementia. The findings suggest that while physicians often diagnose AD and dementia, there is insufficient recognition of dementia as a direct cause of death, leading to incomplete or inaccurate death certificates. Given that Japan’s death statistics are based on these certificates, the actual number of dementia-related deaths in Japan is likely substantially higher than that officially reported.

    Prior to the survey, 34 out of 653 deaths (5.2%) were attributed to AD, whereas post-survey, this number increased to 134 out of 653 (20.5%), representing nearly a fourfold rise. These findings imply that while the official number of deaths due to AD in Japan is approximately 25,000, the actual figure could be closer to 100,000. Similarly, deaths attributed to total dementia increased from 45 out of 653 (6.9%) before the survey to 203 out of 653 (31.1%) after the survey, approximately 4.5 times higher. These results suggest that the actual number of dementia-related deaths in Japan might be approximately 220,000, surpassing the approximately 190,000 deaths reported due to senility and potentially making dementia the third leading cause of death in the country.

    These findings indicate that the number of deaths due to dementia, including AD, is significantly underreported on death certificates. As approximately 30% of the deaths in psychiatric hospitals analyzed in this study were attributed to dementia, it is imperative for medical personnel involved in psychiatric care to be well-informed about dementia, including AD. Furthermore, death certificates serve as foundational data for death statistics and are critical for national healthcare administration and policy decision-making. Therefore, even psychiatrists must possess adequate knowledge on how to accurately complete death certificates.

    Additionally, in this study, heart failure was often not diagnosed following a thorough examination immediately prior to death, and some death certificates listed heart failure as a terminal condition for convenience. Villar et al reported that 56.8% of death certificates listed respiratory or cardiac arrest as the direct cause of death prior to educational interventions, whereas none listed these causes following such education.35 This emphasizes the importance of proper training on accurate death certificate entries in Japan.

    This study has some limitations. The result lacks broader applicability. It was conducted exclusively in the northern Kanto region of Japan, which may limit the applicability of its findings to other regions, as the practices for completing death certificates could vary geographically. Additionally, the study focused exclusively on psychiatric diseases, without including a death certificate survey in general hospitals or home care settings. Therefore, generalizing these findings to estimate the national mortality rate of dementia, including AD, across Japan may not be appropriate. Furthermore, It has been suggested that individuals with mental disorders receive less frequent medical evaluations.36 Since the patients in this study were also hospitalized in psychiatric facilities, it is possible that serious conditions such as cancer and myocardial infarction were insufficiently investigated. Consequently, the potential for an elevated mortality rate for dementia, including Alzheimer’s disease, in the medical record survey cannot be ruled out.

    Although not relevant to the present study, we found that patients hospitalized with schizophrenia spectrum disorders, mood disorder spectrum disorders, and other mental disorders had shorter life expectancies than did those with AD or other dementias. Patients with schizophrenia have reduced life expectancies. Kiviniemi et al reported that patients with schizophrenia have a 4.45-fold higher risk of death than that in the general population,37 and Owens et al noted that these patients have a life expectancy approximately 20% shorter than that of the general population.38 In the present study, the age at death for patients with schizophrenia was approximately 10 years younger than for those with dementia.

    In recent years, individuals with various mental disorders reportedly have significantly shorter life expectancies than do those without mental illness. Patients with organic mental illnesses, including dementia, experience reduced life expectancy, but the extent of reduction is reported to be smaller than that for other psychiatric disorders. Consequently, the age at death for patients with AD and other dementias is higher than for those with other psychiatric disorders.39 The results of our study align with these previous findings.

    Conclusion

    We investigated whether dementia was accurately recorded as the main diagnosis or direct cause of death on death certificates, focusing on psychiatric hospitals with a high number of inpatients with dementia. Dementia including AD was not accurately recorded on death certificates and the actual mortality rate for dementia including AD was estimated to be higher than currently reported. These findings underscore the critical need to increase awareness about dementia as a cause of death and to educate the public and healthcare professionals on accurately documenting it on death certificates.To further validate the findings of this study, it is necessary to expand the scope of the research to include general hospitals and nursing care facilities in future investigations and to examine the actual conditions more comprehensively.

    Acknowledgments

    This work was supported by Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology Japan Society for the Promotion of Science Grant Number JP20K23203. We would like to thank Editage for English language editing and all the participants for their cooperation.

    Author Contributions

    All authors made a significant contribution to the work reported, whether that is in the conception, study design, execution, acquisition of data, analysis and interpretation, or in all these areas; took part in drafting, revising or critically reviewing the article; gave final approval of the version to be published; have agreed on the journal to which the article has been submitted; and agree to be accountable for all aspects of the work.

    Disclosure

    The authors declare no conflicts of interest in this work.

    References

    1. Nichols E, Steinmetz JD, Vollset SE. GBD. 2019 dementia forecasting collaborators. estimation of the global prevalence of dementia in 2019 and forecasted prevalence in 2050: an analysis for the global burden of disease study 2019. Lancet Public Health. 2022;7(2):e105–e125. doi:10.1016/S2468-2667(21)00249-8

    2. Prince M, Wimo A, Guerchet M, et al. World Alzheimer Report 2015: The Global Impact of Dementia. London, UK: Alzheimer’s Disease International; 2015.

    3. Crowell V, Reyes A, Zhou SQ, et al. Disease severity and mortality in Alzheimer’s disease: an analysis using the U.S. National Alzheimer’s coordinating center uniform data set. BMC Neurol. 2023;23(1):302. doi:10.1186/s12883-023-03353-w

    4. Todd S, Barr S, Passmore AP. Cause of death in Alzheimer’s disease: a cohort study. QJM. 2013;106(8):747–753. doi:10.1093/qjmed/hct103

    5. Mölsä PK, Marttila RJ, Rinne UK. Survival and cause of death in Alzheimer’s disease and multi-infarct dementia. Acta Neurol Scand. 1986;74(2):103–107. doi:10.1111/j.1600-0404.1986.tb04634.x

    6. Parker D, Lewis J, Gourlay K. Palliative care and dementia. Dement Aust. 2017. Available from https://palliativecare.org.au/wp-content/uploads/dlm_uploads/2018/05/Dementia-Aus-Palliative-Care-Discussion-Paper-36pp-R5.pdf. Accessed February 2023.

    7. The National Hospice Organization Standards and Accreditation Committee Medical Guidelines Task Force. Medical guidelines for determining prognosis in selected non-cancer diseases. Hosp J. 1996;11(2):47–63. doi:10.1080/0742-969X.1996.11882820

    8. World Health Organization (WHO). Global health estimates: leading causes of death. Available from: https://www.who.int/data/gho/data/themes/mortality-and-global-health-estimates/ghe-leading-causes-of-death. Accessed December 2023.

    9. Statistics of Japan. Available from: https://www.e-stat.go.jp/en/stat-search/files?page=1&layout=datalist&toukei=00450011&tstat=000001028897&cycle=7&year=20220&month=0&tclass1=000001053058&tclass2=000001053061&tclass3=000001053065. Accessed December, 2023.

    10. Hayashi R, Imanaga T, Marui E, et al. Senility deaths in aged societies: the case of Japan. Glob Health Med. 2024;6(1):40–48. doi:10.35772/ghm.2023.01127

    11. Imanaga T, Toyama T. Survey on the diagnosis of senility as the cause of death in home medical care. Jpn Prim Care Assoc. 2018;41(4):169–175.

    12. Taylor C, Greenlund S, McGuire L, et al. Deaths from Alzheimer’s disease—United States, 1999-2014. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2017;66(20):521–526. doi:10.15585/mmwr.mm6620a1

    13. Stokes AC, Weiss J, Lundberg DJ, et al. Estimates of the association of dementia with US mortality levels using linked survey and mortality records. JAMA Neurol. 2020;77(12):1543–1550. doi:10.1001/jamaneurol.2020.2831

    14. Ministry of health, labour and welfare. Available from: https://www.mhlw.go.jp/toukei/saikin/hw/kanja/20/index.html. Accessed December 2023.

    15. Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare. Handbook of Health and Welfare Statistics 2023. Available from: https://www.mhlw.go.jp/english/database/db-hh/2-2.html. Accessed December, 2023.

    16. Okayama T, Usuda K, Okazaki E, et al. Number of long-term inpatients in Japanese psychiatric care beds: trend analysis from the patient survey and the 630 survey. BMC Psychiatry. 2020;20(1):522. doi:10.1186/s12888-020-02927-z

    17. Toba K. Japan’s new framework on dementia care. Innov Aging. 2021;5(Suppl 1):383. doi:10.1093/geroni/igab046.1487

    18. Brunnstrom HR, Englund EM. Cause of death in patients with dementia disorders. Eur J Neurol. 2009;16(4):488–492. doi:10.1111/j.1468-1331.2008.02503.x

    19. Burns A, Jacoby R, Luthert P, et al. Cause of death in Alzheimer’s disease. Age Ageing. 1990;19(5):341–344. doi:10.1093/ageing/19.5.341

    20. Ives DG, Samuel P, Psaty BM, et al. Agreement between nosologist and cardiovascular health study review of deaths: implications of coding differences. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2009;57(1):133–139. doi:10.1111/j.1532-5415.2008.02056.x

    21. Romero JP, Benito-Leon J, Louis ED, et al. Underreporting of dementia deaths on death certificates: a systematic review of population-based cohort studies. J Alzheimers Dis. 2014;41(1):213–226. doi:10.3233/JAD-132765

    22. UK Government. Guidance for doctors completing medical certificates of cause of death in England and Wales (accessible version). Available from: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/guidance-notes-for-completing-a-medical-certificate-of-cause-of-death/guidance-for-doctors-completing-medical-certificates-of-cause-of-death-in-england-and-wales-accessible-version. Accessed December, 2023.

    23. Statistics Canada. Canadian Vital Statistics Death Database: Data Dictionary and User Guide 2013; 2017.

    24. Ganguli M, Rodriguez EG. Reporting of dementia on death certificates: a community study. J Am Geriatr Soc. 1999;47(7):842–849. doi:10.1111/j.1532-5415.1999.tb03842.x

    25. James BD, Leurgans SE, Hebert LE, et al. Contribution of Alzheimer disease to mortality in the United States. Neurology. 2014;82(12):1045–1050. doi:10.1212/WNL.0000000000000240

    26. Désesquelles A, Demuru E, Salvatore MA, et al. Mortality from Alzheimer’s disease, Parkinson’s disease, and dementias in France and Italy: a comparison using the multiple cause-of-death approach. J Aging Health. 2014;26(2):283–315. doi:10.1177/0898264313514443

    27. Ministry of Health. Labour and welfare. manual to fill in a death certificate: Available from: https://www.mhlw.go.jp/toukei/manual/dl/manual_r03.pdf. Accessed December, 2024.

    28. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Physicians’ handbook on medical certification of death. Available from: https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/misc/hb_cod.pdf. Accessed December, 2024.

    29. Hayashi R, Beppu M, Ishii F, et al. Statistical analysis of senility death in Japan. J Popul Probl. 2023;78(1):1–18.

    30. Lin CE, Chung CH, Chen LF, et al. Increased risk of dementia in patients with schizophrenia: a population-based cohort study in Taiwan. Eur Psychiatry. 2018;53:7–16. doi:10.1016/j.eurpsy.2018.05.005

    31. Harrison PJ. The neuropathology of schizophrenia: a critical review of the data and their interpretation. Brain. 1999;122(4):593–624.

    32. Radhakrishnan R, Butler R, Head L. Dementia in schizophrenia. Adv Psychiatr Treat. 2012;18(2):144–153. doi:10.1192/apt.bp.110.008268

    33. Tsuang MT, Stone WS, Faraone SV. Toward reformulating the diagnosis of schizophrenia. Am J Psychiatry. 2001;158(5):670–676.

    34. McKeith IG, Cummings J. Behavioural changes in dementia with Lewy bodies. Lancet Neurol. 2005;4(1):19–27.

    35. Villar J, Pérez-Méndez L. Evaluating an educational intervention to improve the accuracy of death certification among trainees from various specialties. BMC Health Serv Res. 2007;7(1):183. doi:10.1186/1472-6963-7-183

    36. Goldman ML, Mangurian C, Corbeil T, et al. Medical comorbid diagnoses among adult psychiatric inpatients. Gen Hosp Psychiatry. 2020;66:16–23.

    37. Kiviniemi M, Suvisaari J, Pirkola S, et al. Regional differences in five-year mortality after a first episode of schizophrenia in Finland. Psychiatr Serv. 2010;61(3):272–279. doi:10.1176/ps.2010.61.3.272

    38. Owens DG, Cunningham EC, Johnstone EC. Treatment and management of schizophrenia. In: Gelder M, editor. New Oxford Textbook of Psychiatry. 2nd ed ed. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press; 2012.

    39. Peritogiannis V, Ninou A, Samakouri M. Mortality in schizophrenia-spectrum disorders: recent advances in understanding and management. Healthcare. 2022;10(2366):2366. doi:10.3390/healthcare10122366

    Continue Reading

  • Cambodia confirms 12th H5N1 case—Doctors warn early signs of bird flu you shouldn’t ignore – Healthcare News

    Cambodia confirms 12th H5N1 case—Doctors warn early signs of bird flu you shouldn’t ignore – Healthcare News

    Cambodia has confirmed yet another human case of the H5N1 bird flu virus, this time, in a 5-year-old boy from Kampot province. This marks the 12th reported case in the country this year, according to a translated update posted by the Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy (CIDRAP), University of Minnesota.

    H5N1 bird flu cases have been rising in the US, raising concerns among health experts. The virus can cause serious illness in people. It usually spreads from infected birds or animals, and human-to-human transmission is rare. However, doctors are closely monitoring the situation because the infection can turn severe if not treated early.

    What is H5N1?

    H5N1, commonly known as bird flu, is a type of influenza virus that primarily affects birds but can sometimes jump to humans through direct or indirect contact with infected animals or contaminated environments. The virus has been around for decades, but what makes it dangerous is its high mortality rate in humans.

    Unlike regular flu viruses, which often cause mild to moderate symptoms, H5N1 can trigger severe respiratory illness. According to the World Health Organization (WHO), more than 50 per cent of confirmed human cases of H5N1 have resulted in death.

    What are the early signs of H5N1 infection?

    Initial symptoms of H5N1 are similar to those of the common flu, which makes early detection difficult. Look out for:

    • High fever
    • Cough
    • Sore throat
    • Body aches
    • Fatigue

    As the infection progresses, more severe symptoms may appear, such as:

    • Shortness of breath
    • Chest pain
    • Diarrhea
    • Seizures
    • Altered mental status or confusion

    In some cases, H5N1 can rapidly develop into pneumonia, acute respiratory distress, and multi-organ failure, especially if medical care is delayed.

    The H5N1 US outbreak

    In the US, the virus recently made headlines after being detected in dairy cattle. A few human cases have also been confirmed among farm workers who had direct exposure. Fortunately, the symptoms in these cases were mild. Still, experts warn that the virus is mutating and must be closely watched to prevent a larger outbreak.

    After-effects and complications of H5N1

    People who recover from H5N1 may still experience lingering effects, including:

    • Fatigue
    • Lung damage
    • Depression or anxiety
    • Increased vulnerability to other infections

    These after-effects can last for weeks or even months, depending on how severe the illness was.

    When to see a doctor

    If you’ve been in close contact with poultry and start experiencing flu-like symptoms, it’s important to seek medical care immediately. Let your doctor know about your exposure history, as early antiviral treatment can reduce the severity of the illness and lower the risk of complications.

    Continue Reading

  • Prevalence and patterns of multiple long-term conditions among lymphatic filariasis patients in Odisha, India: a community-based cross-sectional study | BMC Public Health

    Prevalence and patterns of multiple long-term conditions among lymphatic filariasis patients in Odisha, India: a community-based cross-sectional study | BMC Public Health

    This is the first study to use a random sample to look into the prevalence of MLTC in patients with lymphatic filariasis. We observed hypertension to be the most common comorbid chronic condition, followed by peptic ulcer disease, visual impairment, arthritis, and diabetes, which is in contrast with the findings of another study conducted among 323 tuberculosis patients in two states of India that reported depression to be the most prevalent condition, followed by diabetes, peptic ulcer disease, and hypertension [29]. Nonetheless, hypertension, diabetes, and peptic ulcer disease had the highest prevalence across both studies that looked at the interface of chronic infectious disease with non-communicable diseases. A probable reason for this could be that patients with lymphatic filariasis share the exposure to the drivers of NCDs in India. Moreover, a few studies also highlight that lymphatic filariasis patients have chronic inflammation due to lymphedema and elephantiasis, which may contribute to the development of cardiometabolic diseases, as proinflammatory immune responses increase the onset of these conditions [30]. Additionally, arthritis attributable to Wuchereria bancrofti has been reported among Indian patients, and its pathogenesis is linked to immune complex deposition or inflammation due to the presence of adult worms in the joint space [31].

    The prevalence of MLTC in our study was greater than that reported in a study conducted in two states of India i.e. Telangana and Odisha, in which the prevalence of multimorbidity among tuberculosis patients was approximately 52% [29]. Additionally, a study conducted among human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) patients reported that the prevalence of multimorbidity was approximately 48% [32]. Nonetheless, the prevalence of MLTC among lymphatic filariasis patients is greater than the global pooled prevalence of multimorbidity, which is approximately 37%, as reported by a recent systematic review based on 126 peer-reviewed studies [33].However, it is worth noting that that the mean age of participants in our study was around 62.1 years which may be one of the reasons for higher prevalence of MLTCs in this study. However, this highlights the need for the assessment of MLTCs among lymphatic filariasis patients to design evidence-based policies in the future to provide continuity of care for these individuals.

    The chances of having MLTC increased with increasing age, which is consistent with the findings of a systematic review that identified older age to be a risk factor for multimorbidity [34], while another systematic review conducted with the aim of identifying risk factors for multimorbidity also showed that increased age was positively associated with multimorbidity [35]. A study conducted in Delhi, India also reported that multimorbidity increased with age, which is in agreement with the findings of our study [36]. This finding highlights two major areas to be focused upon, the first being the demographic shift, which will lead to the addition of an aging population who will require healthcare services. Second, India is attempting to eliminate lymphatic filariasis by 2027 (three years ahead of the global target), which means that further transmission will be interrupted with no new cases [10]. However, patients with existing lymphatic filariasis can survive for many years. Additionally, the burden of MLTC, as indicated by the present study, is high in this group; hence, these individuals will require quality healthcare facilities, thus warranting the strengthening of primary care.

    In our study, males were identified to be at a greater risk of having MLTC than their female counterparts, which is incongruous with the existing MLTC literature in India [21, 22, 36]. All studies to date have reported that females are at greater risk of having MLTC, whereas the present study showed that males are at greater risk of having MLTC, which is a novel finding. A probable reason for this could be the gender roles assigned by society in India and other similar cultures. Despite having lymphatic filariasis, females perform household chores that involve physical activity, whereas males will rest if they are diagnosed with a disease leading to reduced physical activity, increased obesity and other risk factors for developing MLTC.

    We observed that participants with more years of schooling had a greater chance of having MLTC, which is consistent with the findings of a systematic review that also revealed higher education to be directly associated with multimorbidity in Southeast Asia [37]. A probable reason for this could be that with education, people tend to be more health conscious and hence have better chances of being diagnosed and self-reported with chronic conditions. Nonetheless, this finding implies that health literacy should be provided to people with no formal education or fewer years of education.

    We observed that participants who did not work were at a greater risk of having MLTC, which is consistent with the findings of a systematic review that reported that not working or being unemployed increased the risk of having multimorbidity, particularly substance use patterns [38]. Moreover, studies have reported that socioeconomic marginalization increases the risk of multimorbidity, which stands true for patients with lymphatic filariasis, as this disease mostly affects the poorest people of the poor population and often leads to disability, contributing to a loss of livelihood opportunities [20,21,22, 39]. Hence, it is crucial to identify the care-seeking pathways of these patients to make the existing programmes more equitable.

    The most commonly occurring pattern among patients with lymphatic filariasis was hypertension and diabetes, which is congruent with the findings of a systematic review that reported that cardiovascular and metabolic diseases were the most commonly observed multimorbidity patterns in Asia [40]. Our findings also align with the findings of another systematic review showing hypertensive diseases were the most frequent condition in all dyads, followed by gastrointestinal conditions, arthropathies and diabetes mellitus, in India and China [41].

    There was a per unit decrease in self-rated health with an increase in the number of chronic conditions, which is in agreement with the findings of a systematic review that reported a mean decrease of -1.5% to -4.4% (varied depending on the scale used) in health-related quality of life (HRQoL) per added disease [42]. Notably, poor quality of life among our study population was a cumulative effect of MLTC, along with existing disability and functional decline due to chronic lymphatic filariasis, which needs to be addressed.

    Implications for policy and practice

    The findings suggest MLTC to be common among lymphatic filariasis patients, which calls for linking these patients to their nearest Ayushman Arogya Mandir (AAM) or primary healthcare centers formerly known as Health and Wellness Centers for continuity of care. AAMs are established with a vision to strengthen primary care by providing preventive and curative services in the patient’s vicinity with an expanded range of services, especially those curated for chronic conditions. However, lymphatic filariasis is not included in this list despite being prevalent in 339 out of 766 districts across 20 states and Union Territories of India. Hence, the states should be directed to add locally important diseases to the list of AAMs, as health is a state subject in India. This will help in providing quality care to these patients who would eventually help in achieving universal health coverage.

    Individuals with lymphatic filariasis, as seen in our study, mostly belong to deprived strata of society and hence need additional support, which may cause them to incur out-of-pocket expenditures and the risk of impoverishment during treatment. Hence, MLTC among these patients is far more challenging and requires additional efforts to combat. Here, patient-centered holistic care for all ailments at one point/facility is of utmost importance as multiple (self-) referrals to a variety of specialists is not realistic due to disability and low socio-economic status.

    Community health workers (newly recruited cadre of trained nurses) can play a major role in keeping track of these patients by regularly screening for common chronic conditions and managing multiple morbidities through periodical investigations, motivating regular physician visits and helping them in procurement as well as taking their medications. This could be brought under the ambit of the existing Morbidity Management and Disability Prevention (MMDP) component of the Lymphatic Filariasis Elimination Programme by further increasing its scope. Moreover, diabetes (via polyneuropathy) and hypertensive disease (via heart failure ) might aggravate disability of lower extremities in LF patients making effective control of these co-morbidities essential for long term success of LF care.

    Additionally, there is a need for family-based approaches for reducing shared risk factors for MLTCthat may require behavioral change interventions. Future studies should develop interventions to manage MLTC in this population. Addressing disparities in accessing healthcare and improving access to integrated healthcare services at a single platform may help in mitigating the burden of multiple chronic conditions among lymphatic filariasis patients [43].

    Strengths and limitations

    This novel study has a number of strengths, including the use of a random sample, the assessment of common MLTCs, a high response rate, and associations with a number of risk factors, but it was conducted in only one state of India. We used a pre-validated tool to assess MLTC, which was also one of the strengths of this study, but our data were limited by self-reported chronic conditions that may have resulted in recall bias. Nonetheless, we triangulated the self-reported data with those of community healthcare workers. We did not include phenotypic measurements, which was another limitation of the study. Additionally, we could not establish causality, as our study was cross-sectional in nature.

    Continue Reading