Archive for January, 2010

OMNI Postings of 1/31/10

Two citizens from the UP in Michigan brought home a puzzle one day, and sat down to solve it. A week later, they finished the puzzle.

“Well, that didn’t take so durn long,” said one of them.

“Naw, it didn’t. ‘Specially considering it says 3-5 years on the box.”

 

But I digress…….

 

 

This is a NYT article on the beauties of medical simulation training.  Anesthesia residents at Stanford, for example, must go through an extensive simulated situation in which the “patient,” a specialized mannequin, develops a severe, unexpected allergic reaction and then dies. During this training, the residents must provide and coordinate medical care with other members of the team and then conduct the difficult conversation with the patient’s “wife,” a live actor who has been trained to play the role of a shocked and then grieving widow.

 ”I’m sorry, you’re husband died on the table.  But I heard he was a real stiff anyway!”

http://omniphysicians.com/2010/01/29/medical-simulation-training/

 

 

They’re implicating wooden toilet seats because of a rash of contact dermatitis.  Seems like itching athletes are becoming the butt of a lot of rude jokes.  Most cases are fairly benign and easy to treat with topical steroids, according to the researchers, but because many pediatricians do not suspect the cause and do not treat it properly, the inflammation can persist and spread further, causing painful and itchy skin eruptions. One patient’s dermatitis reportedly became infected with methicillin-resistant Staphyloccocus aureus. Missed and delayed diagnoses were a hallmark of every case described in the review.

http://omniphysicians.com/2010/01/28/from-toilet-seats/

 

 

A $3.5 million research project will study the long-term benefits and risks of implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs) in patients at risk of death from ventricular fibrillation.  The study will follow 3,500 patients with ICDs from the Cardiovascular Research Network to determine how often the devices deliver shocks, whether the shocks are appropriate, and to identify those patients who are most likely to require ICD shocks.    I’m sure the results will be electrifying!

http://omniphysicians.com/2010/01/28/study-of-implantable-cardioverter-defibrillators/

 

 

 

Paul R

OMNI Postings of 1/30/10

Q: What has 132 legs and 8 teeth?

A: The front row of a Rascal Flatts concert!

 

But I digress………

 

Did you know that spices in foods may be irradiated? 

Spices have been irradiated for safety in the United States for years, but the process has largely been invisible. That’s because it has been limited to spices used as ingredients in other foods—mostly ready-to-eat foods, according to food industry officials. Under Food and Drug Administration (FDA) rules, such foods don’t have to be labeled as containing irradiated ingredients.

http://omniphysicians.com/2010/01/29/irradiating-spices/

 

 

This is the story about the British doc who screwed around with research to prove that vaccines cause autism. 

The General Medical Council, which will now decide whether to revoke Wakefield’s medical license, highlighted several areas where the doc who happens to be working in this country, acted against the interest of the children involved in his 1998 study. It criticized Wakefield for carrying out invasive tests, such as colonoscopies and spinal taps, without due regard for how the children involved might be affected. It also cited his method of gathering blood samples — he paid children at his son’s birthday party $8 to give blood — and said that Wakefield displayed a “callous disregard for the distress and pain the children might suffer.”  The panel also criticized Wakefield for failing to disclose that, while carrying out the research, he was being paid by lawyers acting for parents who believed their children had been harmed by the MMR shot.

http://omniphysicians.com/2010/01/29/unethical-behavior/

 

 

This is the FDA notice that approves the use of Zyprexa on adolescent depressed kids.  However, its use in this population may cause weight gain and hyperlipedemia.  So, at least they’ll be smiling when they get their MI at 19.

http://omniphysicians.com/2010/01/30/zyprexa-approved-for-adolescents/

 

 

 

2010 Edit this entry.

 

1

 

Paul R

Zyprexa approved for adolescents

Zyprexa (olanzapine): Use in Adolescents

http://www.fda.gov/Safety/MedWatch/SafetyInformation/SafetyAlertsforHumanMedicalProducts/ucm198402.htm

Audience: Neuropsychiatric healthcare professionals

[Posted 01/29/2010] Lilly and FDA notified healthcare professionals of changes to the Prescribing Information for Zyprexa related to its indication for use in adolescents (ages 13-17) for treatment of schizophrenia and bipolar I disorder [manic or mixed episodes]. The revised labeling states that:

Section 1, Indications and Usage: When deciding among the alternative treatments available for adolescents, clinicians should consider the increased potential (in adolescents as compared with adults) for weight gain and hyperlipidemia. Clinicians should consider the potential long-term risks when prescribing to adolescents, and in many cases this may lead them to consider prescribing other drugs first in adolescents.

Section 17.14, Need for comprehensive Treatment Program in Pediatric Patients: Zyprexa is indicated as an integral part of a total treatment program for pediatric patients with schizophrenia and bipolar disorder that may include other measures (psychological, educational, social) for patients with the disorder. Effectiveness and safety of ZYPREXA have not been established in pediatric patients less than 13 years of age.

OMNI Postings 1/29/10

What do West Virginians call a pretty woman?
A tourist.

 

But I digress……

 

Do you wear a mask when you do an LP?  Maybe you should…..

http://omniphysicians.com/2010/01/28/bacterial-meningitis-after-intrapartum-spinal-anesthesia/

 

 

This report serves to remind us that cases of malaria are not limited to tropical climes and third world nations.  This report centers on cases in Houston.  The authors studied reviews from patients at four tertiary pediatric-care hospitals in Houston to study the epidemiology of malaria cases in the surrounding area from 1994 to 2007. The researchers examined the medical records of 104 children aged 19 days to 17.4 years who had discharge diagnoses of malaria as well as positive malaria smears.

Among the reviewed cases, 43 children were immigrants and 61 had recently traveled outside the United States. Ninety percent of these children had traveled to West Africa, 5% to Central America and 5% to Asia — all of which are malaria-endemic regions.

http://omniphysicians.com/2010/01/28/houston-area-malaria-cases/

 

 

This is a report from AMA with regard to Barack’s State of the Union.  Liability reform is still an afterthought.

http://omniphysicians.com/2010/01/29/still-kissing-up-to-obama/

 

1

 

Paul R

Unethical behavior

Link:  http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1957656,00.html

Friday, Jan. 29, 2010

Doctor in MMR-Autism Scare Ruled

Unethical

By Eben Harrell / London

In 1998, Andrew Wakefield, a gastroenterologist at London’s Royal Free Hospital, published a study in the prestigious medical journal Lancet that linked the triple Measles, Mumps and Rubella (MMR) vaccine with autism and bowel disorders in children. The study — and Wakefield’s subsequent public statements that parents should refuse the vaccines — sparked a public health panic that led vaccination rates in Britain to plunge.

Wakefield’s study has since been discredited, and the MMR vaccine deemed to be safe. But now medical authorities in the U.K. have also ruled that the manner in which Wakefield carried out his research was unethical. In a ruling on Jan. 28, The General Medical Council, which registers and regulates doctors in the U.K., ruled that Wakefield acted “dishonestly and irresponsibly” during his research and with “callous disregard” for the children involved in his study. (See the year in health 2009.)

After the finding, Wakefield, who now heads an autism research center in Austin, Texas, described the decision as “unfounded and unjust.” He added that he had “no regrets” over his work.

The General Medical Council, which will now decide whether to revoke Wakefield’s medical license, highlighted several areas where Wakefield acted against the interest of the children involved in the 1998 study. It criticized Wakefield for carrying out invasive tests, such as colonoscopies and spinal taps, without due regard for how the children involved might be affected. It also cited Wakefield’s method of gathering blood samples — he paid children at his son’s birthday party $8 to give blood — and said that Wakefield displayed a “callous disregard for the distress and pain the children might suffer.”

The panel also criticized Wakefield for failing to disclose that, while carrying out the research, he was being paid by lawyers acting for parents who believed their children had been harmed by the MMR jab.

The panel’s ruling follows a refutation of Wakefield’s research from the scientific community. Ten of 13 authors in the Lancet study have since renounced the study’s conclusions. The Lancet has said it should not have published the study in the first place, and various other studies have failed to corroborate Wakefield’s hypothesis. (Watch a video on the story of an uninsured woman.)

Despite this, the effects of the media frenzy surrounding Wakefield’s research — a study found that MMR was the most written about science topic in the U.K. in 2002 — continue to be felt in Britain. Vaccination rates among toddlers plummeted from over 90% in the mid-1990s to below 70% in some places by 2003. Following this drop, Britain saw an increase in measles cases at a time when the disease had been all but eradicated in many developed countries. In 1998, there were just 56 cases of the disease in England and Wales; by 2008 there were 1,370.

Despite assurances from various health bodies that Wakefield’s study was seriously flawed, he still has a dedicated following among parents concerned about a rise in autism rates in the U.K. and U.S. — the cause of which has so far baffled health experts. Wakefield is now the Executive Director of the Thoughtful House autism center in Texas, which the Times of London recently claimed receives millions of dollars in donations each year. At the ruling in London, Wakefield was flanked by a small group of supporters, some of whom shouted in protest as the ruling was read out. Speaking after the hearing, Wakefield remained unbowed, and addressed his supporters directly: “It remains finally for me to thank parents whose loyalty has been extraordinary, and I want to reassure them that the science will continue in earnest.”

Irradiating spices

Link:  http://www.cidrap.umn.edu/cidrap/content/fs/food-disease/news/jan2910spices-jw.html

Jan 29, 2010 (CIDRAP News) – When people think of food irradiation, they probably think about irradiation of ground beef to kill E coli. So when a company whose pepper-coated salami has been linked to a 40-state Salmonella outbreak pledged this week to use irradiated pepper from now on, it may have raised some eyebrows and sparked new interest.

Daniele Inc., a Rhode Island firm, reported this week that it found Salmonella in black pepper it uses to coat some of its salami products. Yesterday Rhode Island’s health department said it found the outbreak strain in an open container of pepper from Daniele. The department was still awaiting results of tests on unopened containers.

Spices have been irradiated for safety in the United States for years, but the process has largely been invisible. That’s because it has been limited to spices used as ingredients in other foods—mostly ready-to-eat foods, according to food industry officials. Under Food and Drug Administration (FDA) rules, such foods don’t have to be labeled as containing irradiated ingredients.

Grocery shoppers won’t find any irradiated packaged spices on store shelves, because those products have to be labeled as irradiated, and food companies fear that will scare consumers away, industry sources say.

“There are no retail spices that are irradiated, primarily due to the fact that they have to be labeled,” said Steve Markus, director of food safety and commercial products for Sterigenics, a company based in Oak Brook, Ill., that sterilizes food and medical supplies with irradiation and other methods.

McCormick & Co., a major marketer of retail spices, does not use irradiation on any of its consumer products, relying instead on steam sterilization and other methods, said company spokeswoman Laurie Harrsen.

“While irradiation of food products is both effective and lawful, our McCormick US Consumer Products Division does not irradiate any of its consumer products at present (and has no plans to do so in the future) as we believe there is insufficient consumer acceptance of irradiation to date,” Harrsen told CIDRAP News by e-mail.

Spices that McCormick produces for industrial food customers are also treated by steam sterilization and other processes, she said, adding, “We will only send product out for irradiation if specifically directed to do so by that industrial food customer (it is not a common request).”

However, irradiation of spices is far from rare, according to other industry sources. Estimates vary but suggest that up to a third of the overall volume of spices marketed in the United States is irradiated.

On the basis of numbers from four providers of irradiation services, Ronald Eustice, executive director of the Minnesota Beef Commission in Minneapolis, estimated that about 175 million pounds of spices are irradiated annually, or about a third of commercial production. Eustice is a proponent of food irradiation, especially for meat.

Markus, of Sterigenics, said the FDA has estimated the amount of irradiated spices at about 190 million pounds annually. (The FDA was asked for an estimate but did not provide one in time for this article.)

Jim Prevor, an expert on the perishable-food industry, the editor of two food industry magazines, and writer of the “Perishable Pundit” blog, estimates that the share of commercial spices undergoing irradiation is probably only about 15%.

“The real number we don’t have a specific handle on,” Prevor said. “For spices used in ready-to-eat foods I’d say the number is slightly higher. My guess would be 25%.”

“The significant thing is really not the total percent, it’s the percentage of spices used in ready-to-eat foods, and there’s even less information on that than on the total amount,” he said.

Irradiation is often used with spices that are added to ready-to-eat foods after they have been cooked, since those foods are not cooked at home.

“The spices that are being treated [with irradiation] are those that don’t go on to applications where it’s further processed,” said Markus. “The bacteria is killed at that point.”

Prevor speculated that the salami-related Salmonella outbreak may spur greater interest in irradiation of spices. “I think this is sort of a wake-up call for the industry,” he said.

But given the limited irradiation capacity in the United States and the large share of it that is dedicated to sterilizing medical equipment, Prevor expressed doubt about the ability to quickly expand irradiation of spices.

Other than irradiation, methods that are commonly used to kill microbes in spices—nearly all of which are imported from tropical countries—include steam sterilization and fumigation with gases such as ethylene oxide and propylene oxide, according to industry sources.

Food irradiation for safety involves exposing the target food to ionizing radiation, which can come in the form of an electron beam, gamma rays from a radioactive substance such as cobalt-60, or x-rays. The process kills microbes by disrupting their DNA. It does not make foods radioactive.

Food irradiation for safety is permitted in more than 40 countries and has long been endorsed by major medical and health organizations, including the World Health Organization. The FDA says it has evaluated irradiation safety for more than 40 years and found it safe and effective for many foods. When performed properly on suitable products, irradiation does not impair nutritional quality or change the taste or texture of food, according to the agency.

Markus said Sterigenics, which he described as the leading US irradiation provider for spices, uses cobalt-60 to treat spices, because it is more effective than the other irradiation technologies. Gamma rays penetrate food much better than the other forms of irradiation, he said.

He also said irradiation works much better than a fumigant like ethylene oxide on items like spices. “The effectiveness of ethylene oxide is not nearly as good as irradiation,” he said. “It may provide a 1- to 2-log reduction [in microbial load], whereas with irradiation you can create near-sterility.”

See also:

FDA overview of food irradiation
http://www.fda.gov/Food/FoodIngredientsPackaging/IrradiatedFoodPackaging/ucm081050.htm

 

Medical simulation training

Link:   http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/29/health/28chen.html?ref=health

NYT

January 29, 2010
Doctor and Patient

Practicing on Patients, Real and Otherwise

By PAULINE W. CHEN, M.D.

Near the end of my surgical training, I spent three months as chief resident of a hospital trauma team. Two other doctors-in-training and I formed the first-line emergency room response, assessing and resuscitating patients who had been mangled, burned or otherwise injured. It was my first experience as a leader, but each of us was already fairly proficient and we all got along. I was confident that we would work well together.

I was wrong.

During our first week, one of the senior trauma surgeons played a video of one of our resuscitations, and I was reminded not of some slick made-for-television emergency room scene, but of the Three Stooges. In white coats.

One resident stood at the patient’s side, holding a rubber tube in one hand and a syringe in the other, unsure of which to use first. The other resident kept bumping into the nurses and the respiratory therapist as he paced alongside the patient. I watched myself standing at the head of the bed mumbling orders that no one could hear. The patient had sustained only minor injuries and ultimately survived; but his outcome had little to do with our team. Other than the one experienced nurse in the room and the senior surgeon who showed up 10 minutes into the resuscitation, no one seemed to know what to do or how to coordinate their actions with everyone else’s.

Although my team quickly gained the experience that would truly help us save patients, our growing competence came because we were submerging ourselves in trauma resuscitations day after day and night after night. We were learning as generations of doctors before us had — under the supervision of more experienced doctors, through trial and error, and on real patients.

Now it appears that this old paradigm of sinking or swimming with real patients is beginning to change, thanks to a growing field in medical education.

Medical simulation training, which is similar to that used in aviation and in the military, uses mannequins, computers, virtual reality or actors posing as patients to teach doctors, nurses and other clinicians. While simulation training has been used in medicine for nearly 40 years, it has until recently been limited primarily to teaching standard techniques like chest compressions in cardiopulmonary resuscitation or pelvic exams.

But over the last few years, as the technology and training techniques have advanced, experts in the field have begun to broaden the scope of training. No longer confined to isolated procedures, simulation can now recreate entire clinical situations, giving clinicians the opportunity to develop skills in what is often identified as one of the major causes of errors and quality issues in health care: poor teamwork and communication.

“Even if we are good individually, we are not always good at working collectively as a team,” said Dr. David M. Gaba, one of the earliest proponents of simulation in medical training and now associate dean for immersive and simulation-based learning at Stanford University School of Medicine. “Simulation can help develop decision-making, teamwork and team management skills.”

Anesthesia residents at Stanford, for example, must go through an extensive simulated situation in which the “patient,” a specialized mannequin, develops a severe, unexpected allergic reaction and then dies. During this training, the residents must provide and coordinate medical care with other members of the team and then conduct the difficult conversation with the patient’s “wife,” a live actor who has been trained to play the role of a shocked and then grieving widow.

“One of the beauties of simulation is you can let people practice those skills necessary in real-life medicine,” Dr. Gaba said. “You have to be able to handle more than just the cognitive or procedural skills; you have to be able to execute all those things while talking to the patient or the patient’s family.”

Not all doctors, however, are eager to train in a simulated environment, since even the most sophisticated simulations require suspending belief. The “patient” with low oxygen levels does not have bluish lips but a little blue light shining in her mouth. The grieving “spouse” is a well-versed but hired actor. And the dying trauma “victim” appears as flushed — and rubbery — as he was on arrival.

“It’s not the real thing, and doctors are often hesitant at first,” said Dr. Mark Smith, senior director of simulation and innovation at Banner Health, a nonprofit system that just opened a 55,000-square-foot simulation training center in Arizona, the largest of its kind in the United States. “But pretty quickly, doctors realize how nice it is to practice in an environment without consequences.”

The training can be quite challenging, too. Some of the simulated situations at the Banner Simulation Medical Center require as long as four hours to complete and take place in one of the center’s operating rooms, intensive care units or emergency department.

While research has shown that simulation training in specific procedures like the placement of catheters into a central vein can significantly decrease errors, it has been difficult to design and conduct studies that assess the effects of improved teamwork. Nonetheless, medical simulation experts believe that such training can only help clinicians.

“In sports, we would never have all the team members practice alone and then go off to perform,” said Dr. Haru Okuda, executive director of the New York City Health and Hospitals Corporation Institute of Medical Simulation and Advanced Learning. “It doesn’t make sense to have clinicians training alone either.”

The company will be opening a 10,000-square-foot training facility this fall at the Jacobi Medical Center in the Bronx, and Dr. Okuda plans to instruct some 14,000 clinicians over the next three years. “In the simulation world, you can practice to mastery,” he said. “In this way we can standardize the quality of care across our hospitals so that if, for example, a patient went to one hospital to deliver a baby, she would get the same level of care available at any other hospital in our system.”

The cost of these innovative training centers is high. The Banner Simulation Center cost $12 million to build, and the New York City Health and Hospitals Corporation Institute will require $10 million to complete. And unlike other investments, medical simulation training centers rarely generate revenue.

“Some people might ask, ‘Where’s my return on investment?’ ” Dr. Smith said. “But it’s really all about cost savings and patient care. We take such better care of our patients when we’ve got these skills. It’s no longer acceptable to learn on patients. It’s just not right.”

Which is true, though with one important caveat.

“Simulation allows you to do a lot of things safely and in a controlled fashion,” Dr. Gaba said. “But simulation will never completely replace practicing the craft of medicine under more experienced hands. People aren’t airplanes or machines. People are human beings, and we don’t come with instruction manuals.”

Or, as a friend who flies for a major international carrier told me recently: “You can get everything in a simulation except for the feeling, the real feeling, of the last 200 feet of landing.”

Flu Map: 1/23/10

 

1

ILI Visits

 

1

H1N1 Hospitalizations & Deaths

 

1

Old swine flu vaccines & H1N1

Link:  http://www.plospathogens.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.ppat.1000745

Protection of Mice against Lethal Challenge

with 2009 H1N1 Influenza A Virus by 1918-

Like and Classical Swine H1N1 Based

Vaccines

Citation: Manicassamy B, Medina RA, Hai R, Tsibane T, Stertz S, et al. (2010) Protection of Mice against Lethal Challenge with 2009 H1N1 Influenza A Virus by 1918-Like and Classical Swine H1N1 Based Vaccines. PLoS Pathog 6(1): e1000745. doi:10.1371/journal.ppat.1000745

The recent 2009 pandemic H1N1 virus infection in humans has resulted in nearly 5,000 deaths worldwide. Early epidemiological findings indicated a low level of infection in the older population (>65 years) with the pandemic virus, and a greater susceptibility in people younger than 35 years of age, a phenomenon correlated with the presence of cross-reactive immunity in the older population. It is unclear what virus(es) might be responsible for this apparent cross-protection against the 2009 pandemic H1N1 virus. We describe a mouse lethal challenge model for the 2009 pandemic H1N1 strain, used together with a panel of inactivated H1N1 virus vaccines and hemagglutinin (HA) monoclonal antibodies to dissect the possible humoral antigenic determinants of pre-existing immunity against this virus in the human population. By hemagglutinination inhibition (HI) assays and vaccination/challenge studies, we demonstrate that the 2009 pandemic H1N1 virus is antigenically similar to human H1N1 viruses that circulated from 1918–1943 and to classical swine H1N1 viruses. Antibodies elicited against 1918-like or classical swine H1N1 vaccines completely protect C57B/6 mice from lethal challenge with the influenza A/Netherlands/602/2009 virus isolate. In contrast, contemporary H1N1 vaccines afforded only partial protection. Passive immunization with cross-reactive monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) raised against either 1918 or A/California/04/2009 HA proteins offered full protection from death. Analysis of mAb antibody escape mutants, generated by selection of 2009 H1N1 virus with these mAbs, indicate that antigenic site Sa is one of the conserved cross-protective epitopes. Our findings in mice agree with serological data showing high prevalence of 2009 H1N1 cross-reactive antibodies only in the older population, indicating that prior infection with 1918-like viruses or vaccination against the 1976 swine H1N1 virus in the USA are likely to provide protection against the 2009 pandemic H1N1 virus. This data provides a mechanistic basis for the protection seen in the older population, and emphasizes a rationale for including vaccination of the younger, naïve population. Our results also support the notion that pigs can act as an animal reservoir where influenza virus HAs become antigenically frozen for long periods of time, facilitating the generation of human pandemic viruses.

Still kissing up to Obama

Link:  http://www.ama-assn.org/ama/pub/health-system-reform/news/january-2010/obama-state-of-union.shtml

AMA Responds to President Obama’s State of

the Union

AMA Renews Call for Health System Reform, Permanent Medicare Physician Payment Reform

For immediate release:
Jan. 27, 2010

Statement Attributable to:
J. James Rohack, MD
President, American Medical Association

“Tonight, President Obama reminded our nation what’s at stake for our country if Congress does not help Americans have health care security and stability.  Dedicated physicians are the backbone of our health care system, and we need to strengthen what works and fix what’s broken to help them continue to provide high-quality care to patients

“The AMA applauds President Obama for his ongoing commitment to health system reform and we second his call to ‘Let us find a way to come together and finish the job for the American people.’  Every American will benefit from health insurance market reforms that eliminate unfair business practices like denials for pre-existing medical conditions.  It is a tragedy that millions of Americans live sicker and die younger solely because they lack health coverage – every American should have affordable, high-quality health coverage. The pressures on our health care system have not abated; people are losing their health coverage along with their jobs and the rising cost of premiums is putting pressure on employers and families.

“This week, the AMA sent a letter to President Obama and members of Congress to encourage them to continue efforts to enact meaningful health reform this year. The letter outlined eight critical elements of health reform, based on long-standing AMA policy, that include: providing health coverage to all Americans; enacting market reforms that eliminate denials for pre-existing conditions; assuring that health care decisions are made by patients and their physicians and allow them to privately contract without penalty.  In addition, the AMA supports initiatives that: provide for quality improvement, prevention, and wellness; implement medical liability reforms to reduce the cost of defensive medicine; streamline and standardize insurance claims to eliminate unnecessary costs and administrative burdens and modify antitrust enforcement policies to empower physicians to improve quality and integration.

“As we work on health reform, Congress faces a March 1 deadline to permanently repeal the broken Medicare physician payment formula that puts access to care and choice of physician at risk for seniors, military families and baby boomers.  On March 1, physicians caring for seniors and military families face a 21 percent cut because of the flawed payment formula, which will force them to make tough decisions. The U.S. Senate must once and for all fix the broken formula to preserve the physician foundation of Medicare for current and future seniors who rely on the program.

“We are pleased that Mrs. Obama will shine a spotlight on the problem of childhood obesity, and we look forward to working with the White House on this important public health issue for America’s families.”

Media contact:
Katherine Hatwell
American Medical Association
202-789-7419
katherine.hatwell@ama-assn.org

From toilet seats?

Link:  http://www.pediatricsupersite.com/view.aspx?rid=60385

Posted on the Pediatric SuperSite on January 26, 2010

Toilet seats implicated in recent cases of contact dermatitis

Contact dermatitis cases caused by toilet seats appear to be making a comeback in pediatricians’ offices, according to researchers from Johns Hopkins Children’s Center in Baltimore.

Analyzing two cases from the United States and three from India in the February issue of Pediatrics, the researchers said the culprits responsible for the reemergence of the condition are harsh cleaning chemicals and exotic wooden toilet seats, which are making a comeback as bathroom décor, especially seats covered with varnishes and paints.

Pediatricians should inquire about toilet seats and cleaners used both at home and at school any time they see a toddler or a young child with skin irritation around the buttocks or upper thighs.

Most cases are fairly benign and easy to treat with topical steroids, according to the researchers, but because many pediatricians do not suspect the cause and do not treat it properly, the inflammation can persist and spread further, causing painful and itchy skin eruptions. One patient’s dermatitis reportedly became infected with methicillin-resistant Staphyloccocus aureus. Missed and delayed diagnoses were a hallmark of every case described in the review, study researcher Bernard A. Cohen, MD, of the division of pediatric dermatology at Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, said in a press release.

To prevent toilet-seat dermatitis, Cohen and colleagues recommend:

  • Using paper toilet seat covers in public restrooms, including hospital and school restrooms;
  • Replacing wooden toilet seats with plastic ones;
  • Cleaning toilet seats and bowls daily;
  • Avoiding harsh store-brand cleaners, which often contain skin irritants like phenol or formaldehyde.

Equally effective and gentler substitutes such as rubbing alcohol and hydrogen peroxide could be used instead.

Litvinov I. Pediatrics. 2010;doi:10.1542/peds.2009-2430

Houston-area malaria cases

Posted on the Pediatric SuperSite on January 27, 2010

Houston-area malaria cases linked to immigration, travel

Link:  http://www.pediatricsupersite.com/view.aspx?rid=60407

All patients included in a recent study involving 21 children with severe malaria and 83 children with uncomplicated malaria, were either recent immigrants or had traveled outside of the United States prior to presenting with symptoms.

“A multifaceted approach will be necessary to prevent imported malaria,” the researchers wrote.

They performed retrospective chart reviews from patients at four tertiary pediatric-care hospitals in Houston to study the epidemiology of malaria cases in the surrounding area from 1994 to 2007. The researchers examined the medical records of 104 children aged 19 days to 17.4 years who had discharge diagnoses of malaria as well as positive malaria smears.

Among the reviewed cases, 43 children were immigrants and 61 had recently traveled outside the United States. Ninety percent of these children had traveled to West Africa, 5% to Central America and 5% to Asia — all of which are malaria-endemic regions. For 42 children, travel was vacation-related with the intent to visit the family’s country of origin.

Results also revealed that the following factors were more often associated with severe as opposed to uncomplicated malaria:

  • Vacation-related travel (67% vs. 27%).
  • Female sex (67% vs. 39%).
  • Birth in the United States (64% vs. 35%).
  • Shorter travel duration (median, 23.5 days vs. 35 days).
  • Shorter duration between return from travel and appearance of symptoms (median, 13 days vs. 25 days).
  • History of vomiting (81% vs. 57%).
  • Higher peak parasitemia (median, 11.2% vs. 1.5%).
  • Hepatomegaly (71% vs. 39%) and heart murmur (67% vs. 42%) accompanying symptoms.

The researchers identified 47 children with documentation of malaria prophylaxis and 17 who had pretravel visits with medical providers. Five of nine children visiting relatives and friends engaged in pretravel consultations. However, only eight of 47 had documentation of prophylaxis appropriate for the region to which they were traveling.

Stricter adherence to prophylaxis recommendations might have prevented more U.S.–born children from contracting the disease abroad, the researchers noted. However, prophylaxis did not play a role in the severity of disease in children with malaria.

“For children leaving the United States to visit malaria-endemic regions, efforts must raise awareness of the risk of contracting malaria and of the need for appropriate prophylaxis, particularly for travelers to West Africa,” the researchers wrote. They encourage maintaining a “high index of suspicion” for malaria in any febrile child who has returned to the United States from this region, particularly during the summer months and winter holiday season. – by Melissa Foster

Oramasionwu GE. Pediatr Infect Dis J. 2010;29:28-32.

Bacterial Meningitis After Intrapartum Spinal Anesthesia

Link:  http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm5903a1.htm?s_cid=mm5903a1_e

Bacterial Meningitis After Intrapartum Spinal Anesthesia — New York and Ohio, 2008–2009

MMWR   January 29, 2010 / 59(03);65-69

In June 2007, the Healthcare Infection Control Practices Advisory Committee (HICPAC) recommended for the first time that surgical masks be worn by spinal procedure operators to prevent infections associated with these procedures (1). HICPAC made the recommendation in response to several reports of meningitis following myelography procedures. In September 2008, three bacterial meningitis cases in postpartum women were reported to the New York State Department of Health (NYSDOH); in May 2009, two similar cases were reported to the Ohio Department of Health. All five women had received intrapartum spinal anesthesia. Four were confirmed to have Streptococcus salivarius meningitis, and one woman subsequently died. This report summarizes the investigations of these five cases, which determined that the New York cases were associated with one anesthesiologist and the Ohio cases were associated with a second anesthesiologist. In Ohio, the anesthesiologist did not wear a mask; wearing a mask might have prevented the infections. The findings underscore the need to follow established infection-control recommendations during spinal procedures, including the use of a mask and adherence to aseptic technique.

Case Reports

New York. In September 2008, a healthy woman aged 24 years (patient A) was admitted in active labor to a New York City hospital. She received combined spinal-epidural anesthesia from anesthesiologist A, and delivered a healthy baby. Approximately 22 hours after receiving anesthesia, patient A experienced headache, back pain, rigors, nausea, vomiting, and disorientation.

Within 1 hour of patient A’s admission, a second healthy woman aged 31 years (patient B) was admitted to the same hospital in active labor. Patient B also received combined spinal-epidural anesthesia from anesthesiologist A and delivered a healthy baby. Approximately 21 hours after initiation of anesthesia, patient B experienced headache, back and neck pain, and nausea. Cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) and blood cultures collected from both patients before the administration of antibiotics resulted in no growth. S. salivarius was identified in patient A’s CSF by polymerase chain reaction (PCR) with primers used to identify various genera of bacteria by 16S rDNA sequence analysis at the NYSDOH Wadsworth Center (Table). Both women recovered without complications.

To determine whether other cases of health-care–associated bacterial meningitis had occurred, the hospital conducted a 6-month retrospective review among postpartum patients who received combined spinal-epidural anesthesia. A third case was identified in a woman aged 37 years (patient C) who received anesthesia from anesthesiologist A in July 2008. Patient C experienced headache, lethargy, confusion, and a possible seizure approximately 19 hours after initiation of anesthesia. S. salivarius was cultured from her CSF.

Two days after symptom onset for patients A and B, the hospital and NYSDOH conducted an investigation, which included a site visit, active case finding, cultures of two bags of anesthetic medication for epidural infusion prepared using sterile technique under a laminar flow hood by the hospital pharmacy on the same date as the medication administered to patients A and B during their procedures, onsite review of combined spinal-epidural anesthesia procedure protocols, and interviews with the pharmacist and members of the medical staff and labor and delivery nursing staff. Anesthesiologist A reported routine use of masks during spinal anesthesia procedures. A nasopharyngeal swab from anesthesiologist A grew coagulase-negative staphylococci. Samples of the anesthetic medication were negative for bacteria by culture and 16S rDNA sequence analysis. Staff members reported that the presence of unmasked visitors in the room during spinal anesthesia procedures was common. Subsequently, the hospital reinforced policies and procedures to enhance hand hygiene and maintenance of sterile fields, and required the use of masks, gowns, and sterile gloves for staff members performing spinal anesthesia procedures. In addition, the hospital instituted new policies to minimize visitors and require masks for all persons in the room during spinal anesthesia. The hospital also initiated a program to monitor compliance with these policies.

Ohio. In May 2009, a healthy woman aged 26 years (patient D) was admitted to a hospital in active labor. She received spinal anesthesia from anesthesiologist B and delivered a healthy baby. Approximately 15 hours after receiving the spinal injection, patient D experienced fever, nausea, and severe headache; a blood culture and diagnostic lumbar puncture were performed. The patient became lethargic and unresponsive and was airlifted to a tertiary-care hospital approximately 6 hours after symptom onset. She subsequently recovered.

A second healthy woman aged 30 years (patient E) was admitted to the same hospital in active labor 3 hours after patient D. Patient E also received spinal anesthesia from anesthesiologist B and delivered a healthy baby. Approximately 13 hours after receiving the spinal injection, patient E experienced a severe headache, fever, confusion, and lethargy, and later became unresponsive. Blood cultures were drawn. Approximately 6 hours after symptom onset, she was airlifted to the same tertiary-care hospital as patient D; she died 7 hours later. The cause of death was determined by autopsy to be suppurative meningoencephalitis caused by Streptococcus salivarius. CSF was collected on autopsy.

Blood and CSF cultures collected from both patient D and patient E revealed Streptococcus salivarius (Table). Isolates from patients D and E were indistinguishable by pulsed-field gel electrophoresis at CDC’s Streptococcal Laboratory.

On the day after symptom onset in the two Ohio patients, the hospital, the local health department, the Ohio Department of Health, and CDC initiated an investigation. Investigators cultured one opened anesthetic medication vial and three unopened vials, interviewed the hospital infection preventionist and medical director, and reviewed hospital intrapartum spinal anesthesia procedure protocols. Anesthesiologist B was found to be the only health-care provider involved in the spinal procedures for both patients D and E. As a result of initial concern that patients D and E potentially had meningococcal meningitis, anesthesiologist B had been given ciprofloxacin as postexposure prophylaxis approximately 12 hours after the patients’ symptom onset. Cultures performed on swabs subsequently obtained from the oropharynx, buccal mucosa, and tongue of anesthesiologist B resulted in no growth, but S. salivarius was identified using PCR methods. Culture and PCR of the medication vials revealed no evidence of contamination. Interviews with staff members revealed that anesthesiologists at the hospital did not typically wear masks while performing bedside spinal procedures, despite a hospital policy requiring masks. Anesthesiologist B did not wear a mask while administering spinal anesthesia to patients D and E. Subsequently, the hospital reinforced its policy requiring all staff members to use surgical masks when performing spinal anesthesia procedures. 

Editorial Note

This report describes two clusters of meningitis among women who received spinal anesthesia during labor. Four of the cases were confirmed to be infections with S. salivarius, a bacterium that is part of the normal mouth flora. Features common to all five cases included rapid onset (<24 hours) of meningitis after anesthesia in previously healthy women and the association of each cluster with a single anesthesiologist who performed the procedures (anesthesiologist A in the three New York cases and anesthesiologist B in the two Ohio cases). In both clusters, S. salivarius most likely was transmitted directly from the anesthesiologist to the patients, either by droplet transmission directly from the oropharynx or contamination of sterile equipment.

In the Ohio cluster, the anesthesiologist did not wear a mask during the procedures, making direct droplet transmission most likely. The two patients were infected with S. salivarius with indistinguishable PFGE patterns. A PFGE pattern could not be determined for the S. salivarius carried by the Ohio anesthesiologist because the bacteria were identified by PCR instead of culture. In the New York cluster, S. salivarius was not isolated from the anesthesiologist, so a comparison could not be made with the bacteria identified from two of the three patients. However, the anesthesiologist was the only common exposure identified in the three cases. The occurrence of meningitis caused by normal mouth flora after spinal injection procedures performed by a common provider suggests a breach in aseptic technique. Retrospective review of the procedures with the anesthesiologist did not reveal obvious breaches in aseptic technique; however, certain breaches (e.g., not wearing a mask properly during the procedure) might be difficult to identify retrospectively.

The intrathecal space is entered during several diagnostic and therapeutic spinal procedures, including lumbar puncture, myelography, and spinal anesthesia, and can occur inadvertently during epidural anesthesia. Cases of meningitis have been reported after all of these procedures, although most published cases have involved spinal anesthesia (2). The actual incidence of meningitis after these procedures is not known. In Sweden, one case of purulent meningitis occurred per 53,000 episodes of spinal anesthesia during 1990–1999 (3). A literature review identified only 179 cases of post spinal procedure meningitis reported worldwide during 1952–2005 (2); in contrast, approximately 300,000 diagnostic lumbar punctures were performed on inpatients in the United States in 2007 alone (4). Post spinal procedure meningitis causes serious infections; in one case series, one third of cases resulted in death (5).

Potential sources of bacterial introduction into the intrathecal space during spinal procedures include intrinsic or extrinsic contamination of needles, syringes, or injected medications; inadequately decontaminated patient skin; inadequately cleaned health-care provider hands; a contaminated sterile field; and droplet transmission from the health-care provider’s upper airway. S. salivarius and other viridans group streptococci, which are normal mouth flora, are the most commonly identified etiologies of meningitis after spinal procedures, accounting for 49% and 60% of cases in two literature reviews (2,6). Droplet transmission of oral flora has been suggested as the most likely route of transmission in reports of clusters associated with a single health-care provider (7,8).

Although occurrence of meningitis after spinal anesthesia is not new, the cases described in this report occurred after the June 2007 release of recommendations for the prevention of such infections (1), in which HICPAC recommended that surgical masks be used by health-care providers who were either placing a catheter or injecting material into the spinal canal or epidural space (1). In 2006, the American Society of Regional Anesthesia and Pain Medicine also had recommended the use of surgical masks during regional anesthesia procedures (9). In addition to the wearing of masks, HICPAC also recommend that providers perform all invasive procedures, such as the ones described in this report, in accordance with safe injection practices. These practices include consistent use of aseptic technique, including using new sterile needles and syringes when accessing multidose vials and using single-dose vials whenever possible.

Health-care providers who perform spinal procedures should be familiar with and follow the recommendations for use of masks, proper aseptic technique, and safe injection practices. Facilities at which these procedures are performed should raise awareness of these recommendations among staff members and assess compliance with the recommendations by performing periodic audits. Local and state health departments are in a position to help health-care facilities identify and investigate cases or clusters of health-care–associated meningitis and ensure adherence to infection-control recommendations.

Acknowledgments

This report is based, in part, on contributions by R Gallo and R Garg, New York State Dept of Health.

References

  1. Siegel J, Rhinehart E, Jackson M, Chiarello L, and the Healthcare Infection Control Practices Advisory Committee. 2007 guideline for isolation precautions: preventing transmission of infectious agents in healthcare settings. Available at http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/dhqp/gl_isolation.html. Accessed January 22, 2010.
  2. Baer E. Post-dural puncture bacterial meningitis. Anesthesiology 2006;105: 381–93.
  3. Moen V, Dahlgren N, Irestedt L. Severe neurological complications after central neuraxial blockades in Sweden 1990–1999. Anesthesiology 2004;101:950–9.
  4. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project (HCUPnet). Available at http://hcupnet.ahrq.gov/hcupnet.jspExternal Web Site Icon. Accessed January 22, 2010.
  5. Pandian JD, Sarada C, Radhakrishnan VV, Kishore A. Iatrogenic meningitis after lumbar puncture-a preventable health hazard. J Hosp Infect 2004;56:119–24.
  6. Yaniv LG, Potasman I. Iatrogenic meningitis: an increasing role for resistant viridans streptococci? Case report and review of the last 20 years. Scand J Infect Dis 2000;32:693–6.
  7. Schneeberger P, Janssen M, Voss A. Alpha-hemolytic streptococci: a major pathogen of iatrogenic meningitis following lumbar puncture. Case reports and a review of the literature. Infection 1996;24:29–33.
  8. Veringa E, Van Belkum A, Schellekens H. Iatrogenic meningitis by Streptococcus salivarius following lumbar puncture. J Hosp Infect 1995;29:316–8.
  9. Hebl J. The importance and implications of aseptic techniques during regional anesthesia. Reg Anesth Pain Med 2006;31:311–23.