#harvardmed

Dr. Dryden-Peterson SCOTT DRYDEN-PETERSON, MD Assistant Professor, Medicine, Harvard Medical School Research Affiliate, Immunology and Infectious Diseases Harvard T.H. Chan School Of Public Health Associate Physician, Medicine, Infectious Diseases Brigham And Women's Hospital Research Associate, Botswana Harvard AIDS Institute MedicalResearch.com:  What is the background for this study?  Response: The combination of the antiviral medicine nirmatrelvir and ritonavir (Paxlovid) which boosts antiviral levels was found to reduce the need for hospitalization by nearly 90% among unvaccinated people. Whether nirmatrelvir plus ritonavir can also help vaccinated people was uncertain. MedicalResearch.com:  What are the main findings? Response: When comparing similar patients with early COVID-19 we found that those receiving nirmatrelvir plus ritonavir were approximately 45% less likely to be hospitalized than those that received no treatment. This protection was observed among all groups of patients, including vaccinated and boosted patients. The overall rate of hospitalization was relatively low among vaccinated patients but it was even lower among those that received nirmatrelvir plus ritonavir. MedicalResearch.com: What should readers take away from your report? Response: Early treatment with nirmatrelvir plus ritonavir can make COVID-19 safer for both vaccinated and unvaccinated patients at elevated risk.   MedicalResearch.com: What recommendations do you have for future research as a result of this work? Response: We found substantial disparity in prescribing of nirmatrelvir plus ritonavir. Further work needed to ensure access to lower-income patients and Black or Hispanic/Latinx patients to this treatment.  No conflicts of interest Citation: Nirmatrelvir plus ritonavir for early COVID-19 and hospitalization in a large US health system Scott Dryden-Peterson, Andy Kim, Arthur Y. Kim, Ellen C. Caniglia, Inga Lennes, Rajesh Patel, Lindsay Gainer, Lisa Dutton, Elizabeth Donahue, Rajesh T. Gandhi, Lindsey R. Baden, Ann E. Woolley medRxiv 2022.06.14.22276393; doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2022.06.14.22276393 The information on MedicalResearch.com is provided for educational purposes only, and is in no way intended to diagnose, cure, or treat any medical or other condition. Always seek the advice of your physician or other qualified health and ask your doctor any questions you may have regarding a medical condition. Some links may be sponsored and no links are warranted or endorsed by MedicalResearch.com or its parent company, Eminent Domains Inc. In addition to all other limitations and disclaimers in this agreement, service provider and its third party providers disclaim any liability or loss in connection with the content provided on this website.   Read the full article

Last week, students in the Harvard Medical School and Harvard School of Dental Medicine Class of 2025 sported their white coats for the first time, officially starting the journey to become physicians and dentists. Congrats everyone!⠀ Follow @joseifworldblog.page for more stories🔥⚡ ⠀ #HarvardMed #Harvard #WhiteCoat #HarvardMed25#joseifworldblog #lindas #reelsinstagram #reactions #university #universe #worldwide #archive #silence #everest #explore #exploremore #instagram #joseifworld #sisterhood #brotherhood #BLM #washingtonpost #nepal #unitedstates #naijanews #nbcnews #instablog9ja #chanel https://www.instagram.com/p/CSbdsBOpnZh/?utm_medium=tumblr

Last week, students in the Harvard Medical School and Harvard School of Dental Medicine Class of 2025 sported their white coats for the first time, officially starting the journey to become physicians and dentists. Congrats everyone!⠀ ⠀ #HarvardMed #Harvard #WhiteCoat #HarvardMed25 https://www.instagram.com/p/CSbcZQagiPN/?utm_medium=tumblr

MedicalResearch.com Interview with: Hooman Azad First author and a 3rd year medical student Feinberg School of Medicine Northwestern University Eric Fleegler, MD MPH FAAP Senior author and Pediatric Emergency Physician Boston Children’s Hospital Assistant Professor of Pediatrics and Emergency Medicine Harvard Medical School MedicalResearch.com: What is the background for this study? Response: Pediatric firearm violence is a public health crisis. The firearm fatality rate has increased by >50% over the past 10 years. Over our 26-year study period (1991-2016), 13,697 children under the age of 15 died at the hands of a firearm. Laws have been employed to try to reduce these deaths, and Child Access Prevention (CAP) laws, which aim to hold parents liable for the safe storage of their firearms, were passed in 25 states between 1989-2000. No new state passed a CAP laws after the year 2000. Child Access Prevention laws come in two flavors – recklessness laws that hold firearm owners liable for directly providing firearms to a minor, and negligence laws that hold the firearm owner liable for the unsafe storage of firearms with variability in how storage is defined and what penalties are imposed. MedicalResearch.com: What are the main findings? Response: We found significant reductions of firearm violence in states with negligence- Child Access Prevention laws, with overall 13% fewer firearm fatalities, and between 12-15% fewer firearm homicides, firearm suicides, and unintentional firearm deaths. These results control for other firearm laws, firearm ownership rates, and other factors associated with firearm fatality rates. Recklessness CAP laws were not associated with lower fatalities rates. When looking at stronger forms of negligence laws, the reduction in firearm fatalities was even larger, with a >50% reduction in unintentional firearm fatalities in states with the strongest CAP laws.  MedicalResearch.com: What should readers take away from your report? Response: It is critical that research inform policy, and we aimed to determine what the impact of child-specific firearm laws might be. Our findings show that, in states with these laws, there is a significant reduction in pediatric  firearm deaths. Five hundred children die each year from firearm violence, and these deaths happen in much higher rates in certain states. Still, only 25 states have any form of CAP law, and only 16 states have CAP laws that our study found to be effective. MedicalResearch.com: What recommendations do you have for future research as a result of this work?  Response: It is not well-understood where firearms are located and who owns the firearms that are used in pediatric firearm deaths. Understanding the situations surrounding pediatric firearm homicides is especially critical, as prior research has focused mostly on firearm suicides and unintentional firearm deaths. Finally, smart technologies that allow weapons use only by the individual who owns the firearm are exciting future avenues, but no firearm with such technology has ever been sold commercially in the United States.  Citation: Azad HA, Monuteaux MC, Rees CA, et al. Child Access Prevention Firearm Laws and Firearm Fatalities Among Children Aged 0 to 14 Years, 1991-2016. JAMA Pediatr. Published online March 02, 2020. doi:10.1001/jamapediatrics.2019.6227 The information on MedicalResearch.com is provided for educational purposes only, and is in no way intended to diagnose, cure, or treat any medical or other condition. Always seek the advice of your physician or other qualified health and ask your doctor any questions you may have regarding a medical condition. In addition to all other limitations and disclaimers in this agreement, service provider and its third party providers disclaim any liability or loss in connection with the content provided on this website.   Read the full article

#Repost @harvardmed with @make_repost ・・・ This image from the Gu Lab at Harvard Medical School shows arteries in a mouse brain. In a new study, the research reveals how the brain and its arteries communicate to regulate neurovascular coupling, a process that supplies blood to areas of heighted neural activity to ensure healthy brain function. #HarvardMed #neuroscience https://www.instagram.com/p/B89bazypOVU/?igshid=1v11vchbo19eh

Dr. Danziger John Danziger, MD Harvard Medical Faculty Physicians, Nephrology Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center MedicalResearch.com: What is the background for this study? Response: Racial health disparities have long been described, extending even into the highest levels of medical care, namely the Intensive Care Unit (ICU). Accordingly, we wanted to know whether improvements in ICU care seen over the last decade are equally observed in minority and non-minority serving hospitals. MedicalResearch.com: What are the main findings? Response: We found significant differences in ICU outcomes over the last decade amongst patients in minority serving hospitals compared to non-minority hospitals. MedicalResearch.com: What should readers take away from your report? Nearly a third of critically ill African American and half of critically ill Hispanic patients were treated at only 14 of more than 200 surveyed hospitals. A steady decline (about 2 percent) each year in ICU deaths at non-minority hospitals, but no decline after the first few years at minority hospitals. Longer lengths of ICU and hospital stay and critical illness hospitalizations at minority hospitals than non-minority hospitals. African Americans treated at non-minority hospitals experienced a 3 percent decline in mortality each year, compared to no decline in mortality when treated at minority hospitals. MedicalResearch.com: What recommendations do you have for future research as a result of this work? Response: Our analysis can not resolve whether the worse outcomes are due to differences in hospital practices or differences in patient populations.  Either way however, as resource allocation is further stretched by the burgeoning costs of medical care, focusing on areas of greatest need is critical.  Our study identifies minority serving hospitals as an area of great need. These hospitals, and the patients they serve, require more support to mitigate the disadvantages facing African Americans.  This might include resources to better identify and treat those disease that preferentially affect African Americans, such as heart failure and kidney disease, as well as interventions to improve primary care access and health literacy in African American serving areas. As a  nephrologist, I am particularly interested in the effect of racial disparities on kidney disease.  While African Americans have the highest rates of kidney failure amongst ethnic groupings, they tend to receive lower quality dialysis care.  Whether differences in access to the full range of dialysis and dialysis related therapies contribute to this disparity needs to be addressed. I have no conflicts of interests or disclosures to make. Citation: American Thoracic Society's American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine January 2020 Temporal trends in critical care outcomes in United States minority serving hospitals   Last Modified:   The information on MedicalResearch.com is provided for educational purposes only, and is in no way intended to diagnose, cure, or treat any medical or other condition. Always seek the advice of your physician or other qualified health and ask your doctor any questions you may have regarding a medical condition. In addition to all other limitations and disclaimers in this agreement, service provider and its third party providers disclaim any liability or loss in connection with the content provided on this website.   Read the full article

MedicalResearch.com Interview with: Dr. Madras Bertha K. Madras PhD Director, Laboratory of Addiction Neurobiology Psychobiologist, Substance Use Disorders Division, Basic Neuroscience Division Professor of Psychobiology, Department of Psychiatry Harvard Medical School MedicalResearch.com: What is the background for this study? Parent use of marijuana is rising, and I wondered whether this could be associated with offspring use of specific substances and across several substances Several fathers have confided in me that they used marijuana to bond with their sons. They became horrified after witnessing their sons progress to using other drugs, especially heroin. In general, living with a parent using substances or having substance use disorders is an explicit risk for use of substances among young offspring. Yet, few studies have directly examined whether parental marijuana use elevates the risk for opioid misuse among adolescent and young adults living with parents.  Most importantly and to the best of our knowledge, none of the existing research  simultaneously explored frequency of  parental marijuana use and whether it related to adolescent and young adult offspring’s marijuana, tobacco, alcohol use, and opioid misuse. MedicalResearch.com: What are the main findings? We found substantial marijuana use among US parents living with offspring aged 12-30 years. Past year marijuana  use  among mothers (7.6%) or fathers (9.6%) was high, as was at least approximately weekly use (3.5% among mothers and 5.4% of fathers). Although parental marijuana use is reportedly lower than in non-parenting populations, this protective factor may be reduced with increasing marijuana use among parents. Parental past-year marijuana use was consistently associated with a generalized risk of past-year marijuana, tobacco, and alcohol use and opioid misuse among both adolescent and young adult offspring living in the same household. Even if a parent reported lifetime marijuana use but not in the past year, substance use among offspring was generally higher than among children whose parents had never used marijuana. Parental marijuana use was a specific risk factor for marijuana and tobacco use by both adolescent and  young adult offspring and for alcohol use by adolescent offspring, after adjusting for a number of  factors. Adolescent offspring’s substance use appeared to be particularly associated with whether a mother used  marijuana in the past or continues to use, and suggests apivotal influence of mothers’ marijuana consumption in substance use by her children. (delete “compared with a father” because NSDUH never samples both mother and father and offspring). MedicalResearch.com: What should readers take away from your report? Response: More parents with children (ages 12-30) living at home use marijuana. Children are much higher at risk of using  marijuana if parents use. They are at higher risk of using other drugs as well. Drug use at home is a risk for children MedicalResearch.com: What recommendations do you have for future research as a result of this work? Our findings should be incorporated into a general prevention campaign, educating parents on their potential and pivotal role in transmitting the risk for generalized substance use in their offspring. Clinicians should use this information to discuss parental substance use in the home and its potential role in fostering transgenerational substance use. As marijuana use among youth confers a high risk of other substance use, including opioids, it is important for parents to become aware that use of any one substance by offspring can be associated with use of other substances. We do not know whether parents used in front of their chilodren, whetehr they give marijuna to their children or many personal variables . No financial interest. A listed speaker for "Speakers for Change" Citation:   Associations of Parental Marijuana Use With Offspring Marijuana, Tobacco, and Alcohol Use and Opioid Misuse Bertha K. Madras PhD, Beth Han MD, PhD, MPH, Wilson M. Compton MD, MPE, Christopher M. Jones PharmD, DrPH, MPH, Elizabeth I. Lopez PhD, Elinore F. McCance-Katz MD, PhD JAMA Network Open. 2019;2(11):e1916015. doi:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2019.16015  Last Modified: The information on MedicalResearch.com is provided for educational purposes only, and is in no way intended to diagnose, cure, or treat any medical or other condition. Always seek the advice of your physician or other qualified health and ask your doctor any questions you may have regarding a medical condition. In addition to all other limitations and disclaimers in this agreement, service provider and its third party providers disclaim any liability or loss in connection with the content provided on this website.   Read the full article

MedicalResearch.com Interview with: Dr. McCormick Natalie McCormick, Ph.D. Post-Doctoral Research Fellow Clinical Epidemiology Program Division of Rheumatology, Allergy, and Immunology, Massachusetts General Hospital Department of Medicine, Harvard Medical School Arthritis Research Canada  MedicalResearch.com: What is the background for this study? Response: Biologic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) have improved the health and productivity of many people living with moderate-to-severe inflammatory rheumatic diseases. They are also among the highest-spend drugs in the USA, with substantial out-of-pocket costs that pose barriers to treatment initiation and adherence. To understand the drivers of ongoing bDMARD spending growth, and effective ways of containing costs, we analysed drug spending data for all bDMARD claims in Medicare Part D, Part B fee-for-service, and Medicaid over 2012 to 2016, isolating the impact of changes in drug prices from changes in utilisation.  MedicalResearch.com: What are the main findings? Response: Spending on Medicare and Medicaid claims for bDMARDs nearly doubled from $5.3 billion in 2012 to $10.3 billion in 2016. Majority of this five-year, $5.0 billion spending increase was from post-market drug price increases alone, rather than changes in treatment uptake or duration which could have added clinical value. Surprisingly, it was the earliest-approved drugs that had the biggest price increases. Time-varying manufacturers’ rebates had little impact on these findings. MedicalResearch.com: What should readers take away from your report? Response: Price hikes can impose considerable financial and disease burdens on bDMARD recipients, as these drugs are placed in specialty tiers where patients pay a percentage of the pre-rebate (list) price. Thus, even if rebates increase alongside list prices, patients do not benefit directly. While proposals to remove rebates or pass them along to consumers may help some beneficiaries, more changes are needed to control public spending and patients’ out-of-pocket costs for these potent treatments. For example, eliminating specialty tiers altogether or allowing Medicare to negotiate with manufacturers directly. MedicalResearch.com: What recommendations do you have for future research as a result of this work? Response: We did not have access to individual-level data but would like to investigate how these price increases may impact patients’ out-of-pocket costs and adherence to therapy over the long term. With recipient numbers also driving spending growth, we’d like to see which diagnoses had the biggest increases in bDMARD uptake. Moving forward, it will also be important to assess the impact of lower-priced DMARD biosimilars on public spending, though only two biosimilars are being marketed in the USA at this time.  MedicalResearch.com: Is there anything else you would like to add? Response: This research is being presented in a Plenary session at the 2019 American College of Rheumatology annual meeting. The accompanying manuscript is published in Arthritis & Rheumatology: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/art.41138. The authors are supported by training and salary awards from the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (NM), National Institutes of Health (ZSW, JH), Rheumatology Research Foundation (ZSW), and Caney Family Foundation (CAS). We no actual or potential conflicts of interest to disclose. Last Modified: The information on MedicalResearch.com is provided for educational purposes only, and is in no way intended to diagnose, cure, or treat any medical or other condition. Always seek the advice of your physician or other qualified health and ask your doctor any questions you may have regarding a medical condition. In addition to all other limitations and disclaimers in this agreement, service provider and its third party providers disclaim any liability or loss in connection with the content provided on this website.   Read the full article