-
1.
Effectiveness of Mindfulness Meditation vs Headache Education for Adults With Migraine: A Randomized Clinical Trial.
Wells, RE, O'Connell, N, Pierce, CR, Estave, P, Penzien, DB, Loder, E, Zeidan, F, Houle, TT
JAMA internal medicine. 2021;181(3):317-328
-
-
-
Free full text
-
Plain language summary
Mindfulness-based stress reduction (MBSR), a standardized mind-body treatment that teaches momentary awareness with decreased sensory percept judgment, is associated with improvements in many chronic pain conditions. Mindfulness may be particularly helpful for migraine, as it diminishes affective responses to stress, the most common migraine trigger. This study is a double-blinded, randomized clinical trial of MBSR vs headache education for adults with migraine. The study enrolled 96 participants out of which 89 participants attended at least 1 class and completed at least 1 headache log (MBSR, 45; headache education, 44) across 7 cohorts. Participants were randomly assigned to one of the two arms. Results indicate that participants in both groups demonstrated a reduction of migraine days per month from baseline at 12 weeks. Furthermore, both groups sustained reductions in frequency of migraine and headache without group differences. Compared with headache education, MBSR participants had improvements in headache-related disability, quality of life, depression scores, self-efficacy, pain catastrophizing, and decreased experimentally induced pain intensity and unpleasantness out to 36 weeks. Authors conclude that mindfulness may help treat the total burden of migraine. However, a larger, more definitive study is needed to understand the impact of mindfulness on migraine.
Abstract
Importance: Migraine is the second leading cause of disability worldwide. Most patients with migraine discontinue medications due to inefficacy or adverse effects. Mindfulness-based stress reduction (MBSR) may provide benefit. Objective: To determine if MBSR improves migraine outcomes and affective/cognitive processes compared with headache education. Design, Setting, and Participants: This randomized clinical trial of MBSR vs headache education included 89 adults who experienced between 4 and 20 migraine days per month. There was blinding of participants (to active vs comparator group assignments) and principal investigators/data analysts (to group assignment). Interventions: Participants underwent MBSR (standardized training in mindfulness/yoga) or headache education (migraine information) delivered in groups that met for 2 hours each week for 8 weeks. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was change in migraine day frequency (baseline to 12 weeks). Secondary outcomes were changes in disability, quality of life, self-efficacy, pain catastrophizing, depression scores, and experimentally induced pain intensity and unpleasantness (baseline to 12, 24, and 36 weeks). Results: Most participants were female (n = 82, 92%), with a mean (SD) age of 43.9 (13.0) years, and had a mean (SD) of 7.3 (2.7) migraine days per month and high disability (Headache Impact Test-6: 63.5 [5.7]), attended class (median attendance, 7 of 8 classes), and followed up through 36 weeks (33 of 45 [73%] of the MBSR group and 32 of 44 [73%] of the headache education group). Participants in both groups had fewer migraine days at 12 weeks (MBSR: -1.6 migraine days per month; 95% CI, -0.7 to -2.5; headache education: -2.0 migraine days per month; 95% CI, -1.1 to -2.9), without group differences (P = .50). Compared with those who participated in headache education, those who participated in MBSR had improvements from baseline at all follow-up time points (reported in terms of point estimates of effect differences between groups) on measures of disability (5.92; 95% CI, 2.8-9.0; P < .001), quality of life (5.1; 95% CI, 1.2-8.9; P = .01), self-efficacy (8.2; 95% CI, 0.3-16.1; P = .04), pain catastrophizing (5.8; 95% CI, 2.9-8.8; P < .001), depression scores (1.6; 95% CI, 0.4-2.7; P = .008), and decreased experimentally induced pain intensity and unpleasantness (MBSR group: 36.3% [95% CI, 12.3% to 60.3%] decrease in intensity and 30.4% [95% CI, 9.9% to 49.4%] decrease in unpleasantness; headache education group: 13.5% [95% CI, -9.9% to 36.8%] increase in intensity and an 11.2% [95% CI, -8.9% to 31.2%] increase in unpleasantness; P = .004 for intensity and .005 for unpleasantness, at 36 weeks). One reported adverse event was deemed unrelated to study protocol. Conclusions and Relevance: Mindfulness-based stress reduction did not improve migraine frequency more than headache education, as both groups had similar decreases; however, MBSR improved disability, quality of life, self-efficacy, pain catastrophizing, and depression out to 36 weeks, with decreased experimentally induced pain suggesting a potential shift in pain appraisal. In conclusion, MBSR may help treat total migraine burden, but a larger, more definitive study is needed to further investigate these results. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02695498.
-
2.
6-month neurological and psychiatric outcomes in 236 379 survivors of COVID-19: a retrospective cohort study using electronic health records.
Taquet, M, Geddes, JR, Husain, M, Luciano, S, Harrison, PJ
The lancet. Psychiatry. 2021;8(5):416-427
-
-
-
Free full text
Plain language summary
Recent literature shows that COVID-19 survivors might be at an increased risk of neurological and psychiatric disorders. The aim of this study was to investigate the incidence of neurological and psychiatric diagnoses in survivors in the 6 months after documented clinical COVID-19 infection. This study is a retrospective cohort study with the primary cohort comprised of 236,379 patients diagnosed with COVID-19 and two propensity-score-matched control cohorts. The primary cohort was divided into one of the four subgroups. Results indicate that the severity of COVID-19 had a clear effect on subsequent neurological diagnoses. In fact, COVID-19 was associated with an increased risk of neurological and psychiatric outcomes. However, the incidences and hazard ratio of these were greater in patients who had required hospitalisation, and particularly those who required ITU admission or developed encephalopathy, even after extensive propensity score matching for other factors. Authors conclude that COVID-19 is followed by significant rates of neurological and psychiatric diagnoses over the subsequent 6 months.
Abstract
BACKGROUND Neurological and psychiatric sequelae of COVID-19 have been reported, but more data are needed to adequately assess the effects of COVID-19 on brain health. We aimed to provide robust estimates of incidence rates and relative risks of neurological and psychiatric diagnoses in patients in the 6 months following a COVID-19 diagnosis. METHODS For this retrospective cohort study and time-to-event analysis, we used data obtained from the TriNetX electronic health records network (with over 81 million patients). Our primary cohort comprised patients who had a COVID-19 diagnosis; one matched control cohort included patients diagnosed with influenza, and the other matched control cohort included patients diagnosed with any respiratory tract infection including influenza in the same period. Patients with a diagnosis of COVID-19 or a positive test for SARS-CoV-2 were excluded from the control cohorts. All cohorts included patients older than 10 years who had an index event on or after Jan 20, 2020, and who were still alive on Dec 13, 2020. We estimated the incidence of 14 neurological and psychiatric outcomes in the 6 months after a confirmed diagnosis of COVID-19: intracranial haemorrhage; ischaemic stroke; parkinsonism; Guillain-Barré syndrome; nerve, nerve root, and plexus disorders; myoneural junction and muscle disease; encephalitis; dementia; psychotic, mood, and anxiety disorders (grouped and separately); substance use disorder; and insomnia. Using a Cox model, we compared incidences with those in propensity score-matched cohorts of patients with influenza or other respiratory tract infections. We investigated how these estimates were affected by COVID-19 severity, as proxied by hospitalisation, intensive therapy unit (ITU) admission, and encephalopathy (delirium and related disorders). We assessed the robustness of the differences in outcomes between cohorts by repeating the analysis in different scenarios. To provide benchmarking for the incidence and risk of neurological and psychiatric sequelae, we compared our primary cohort with four cohorts of patients diagnosed in the same period with additional index events: skin infection, urolithiasis, fracture of a large bone, and pulmonary embolism. FINDINGS Among 236 379 patients diagnosed with COVID-19, the estimated incidence of a neurological or psychiatric diagnosis in the following 6 months was 33·62% (95% CI 33·17-34·07), with 12·84% (12·36-13·33) receiving their first such diagnosis. For patients who had been admitted to an ITU, the estimated incidence of a diagnosis was 46·42% (44·78-48·09) and for a first diagnosis was 25·79% (23·50-28·25). Regarding individual diagnoses of the study outcomes, the whole COVID-19 cohort had estimated incidences of 0·56% (0·50-0·63) for intracranial haemorrhage, 2·10% (1·97-2·23) for ischaemic stroke, 0·11% (0·08-0·14) for parkinsonism, 0·67% (0·59-0·75) for dementia, 17·39% (17·04-17·74) for anxiety disorder, and 1·40% (1·30-1·51) for psychotic disorder, among others. In the group with ITU admission, estimated incidences were 2·66% (2·24-3·16) for intracranial haemorrhage, 6·92% (6·17-7·76) for ischaemic stroke, 0·26% (0·15-0·45) for parkinsonism, 1·74% (1·31-2·30) for dementia, 19·15% (17·90-20·48) for anxiety disorder, and 2·77% (2·31-3·33) for psychotic disorder. Most diagnostic categories were more common in patients who had COVID-19 than in those who had influenza (hazard ratio [HR] 1·44, 95% CI 1·40-1·47, for any diagnosis; 1·78, 1·68-1·89, for any first diagnosis) and those who had other respiratory tract infections (1·16, 1·14-1·17, for any diagnosis; 1·32, 1·27-1·36, for any first diagnosis). As with incidences, HRs were higher in patients who had more severe COVID-19 (eg, those admitted to ITU compared with those who were not: 1·58, 1·50-1·67, for any diagnosis; 2·87, 2·45-3·35, for any first diagnosis). Results were robust to various sensitivity analyses and benchmarking against the four additional index health events. INTERPRETATION Our study provides evidence for substantial neurological and psychiatric morbidity in the 6 months after COVID-19 infection. Risks were greatest in, but not limited to, patients who had severe COVID-19. This information could help in service planning and identification of research priorities. Complementary study designs, including prospective cohorts, are needed to corroborate and explain these findings. FUNDING National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Oxford Health Biomedical Research Centre.
-
3.
Acute responses of hepatic fat content to consuming fat, glucose and fructose alone and in combination in non-obese non-diabetic individuals with non-alcoholic fatty liver disease.
Kovar, J, Dusilova, T, Sedivy, P, Bruha, R, Gottfriedova, H, Pavlikova, P, Pitha, J, Smid, V, Drobny, M, Dezortova, M, et al
Journal of physiology and pharmacology : an official journal of the Polish Physiological Society. 2021;72(1)
-
-
-
Free full text
Plain language summary
Non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) is often associated with obesity or conditions related to obesity, such as type 2 diabetes. Steatosis is one of the four stages of NAFLD, where there is a small layer of fat build-up on the liver. Currently, one in three people in the UK has simple fatty liver or steatosis. A fascinating aspect of this study is exploring the long-term cumulative effects of daily fat intake when consumed with glucose or fructose and in the pathogenesis of steatosis. In this randomised controlled study, the researchers examined the immediate impact of high-fat loads on hepatic fat content (HFC) when administered with glucose or fructose in eight healthy overweight males with NFALD. The experiments lasted only eight hours. HFC was only transiently elevated by co-administration of glucose and high-fat loading. However, fructose co-administration with multiple high-fat loads promoted HFC. Small sample size and short duration are the limitations of this study. Long-term robust studies are needed to confirm the findings. Yet, healthcare professionals can use this study to distinguish between the immediate effects of fructose or glucose when combined with multiple doses of high fat on HFC in healthy and NAFLD subjects.
Abstract
We have recently demonstrated that a high-fat load can induce immediate increase in hepatic fat content (HFC) and that such an effect can be modified differently by co-administration of fructose or glucose in healthy subjects. Therefore, we addressed the question how consumption of these nutrients affects changes in HFC in subjects with non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD). Eight male non-obese non-diabetic patients with NAFLD underwent 6 experiments each lasting 8 hours: 1. fasting, 2. high-fat load (150 g of fat (dairy cream) at time 0), 3. glucose (three doses of 50 g at 0, 2, and 4 hours), 4. high-fat load with three doses of 50 g of glucose, 5. fructose (three doses of 50 g at 0, 2, and 4 hours), 6. high-fat load with three doses of 50 g of fructose. HFC was measured using magnetic resonance spectroscopy prior to meal administration and 3 and 6 hours later. Plasma triglycerides, non-esterified fatty acids, glucose and insulin were monitored throughout each experiment. HFC increased by 10.4 ± 6.9% six hours after a high-fat load and by 15.2 ± 12.5% after high-fat load with fructose. When co-administering glucose with fat, HFC rose only transiently to return to baseline at 6 hours. Importantly, NAFLD subjects accumulated almost five times more fat in their livers than healthy subjects with normal HFC. Consumption of a high-fat load results in fat accumulation in the liver of NAFLD patients. Fat accumulation after a fat load is diminished by glucose but not fructose co-administration.
-
4.
Effect of High-Intensity Interval Training, Moderate Continuous Training, or Guideline-Based Physical Activity Advice on Peak Oxygen Consumption in Patients With Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction: A Randomized Clinical Trial.
Mueller, S, Winzer, EB, Duvinage, A, Gevaert, AB, Edelmann, F, Haller, B, Pieske-Kraigher, E, Beckers, P, Bobenko, A, Hommel, J, et al
JAMA. 2021;325(6):542-551
-
-
-
Free full text
-
Plain language summary
Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) is a condition in which the heart's lower left chamber is less able to pump blood due to stiffness. The prevalence of HFpEF is high among the elderly. Endurance exercise is known to increase peak oxygen consumption (Vo2). This prospective, randomised, controlled, three-armed, multi-centre trial aimed to understand the effects of endurance training in older people with HFpEF at 3 and 12 months. In this study, 180 sedentary patients with HFpEF were randomly assigned to high-intensity interval training, moderate continuous training, or control of home-based tele-guideline physical activity advice. The study found no statistically significant difference in changes in V̇o2 between high-intensity interval and moderate continuous training, and neither group met the clinically significant difference of 2.5 mL/kg/min compared with the guideline control. Diastolic function or natriuretic peptides did not change significantly in any group. Adherence level was lower among elderly patients, and there were serious adverse effects in patients with HFpEE. Healthcare professionals can use the findings of this study to understand the impact and adverse effects of endurance training at different intensities in patients with HFpEE.
Abstract
Importance: Endurance exercise is effective in improving peak oxygen consumption (peak V̇o2) in patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). However, it remains unknown whether differing modes of exercise have different effects. Objective: To determine whether high-intensity interval training, moderate continuous training, and guideline-based advice on physical activity have different effects on change in peak V̇o2 in patients with HFpEF. Design, Setting, and Participants: Randomized clinical trial at 5 sites (Berlin, Leipzig, and Munich, Germany; Antwerp, Belgium; and Trondheim, Norway) from July 2014 to September 2018. From 532 screened patients, 180 sedentary patients with chronic, stable HFpEF were enrolled. Outcomes were analyzed by core laboratories blinded to treatment groups; however, the patients and staff conducting the evaluations were not blinded. Interventions: Patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1; n = 60 per group) to high-intensity interval training (3 × 38 minutes/week), moderate continuous training (5 × 40 minutes/week), or guideline control (1-time advice on physical activity according to guidelines) for 12 months (3 months in clinic followed by 9 months telemedically supervised home-based exercise). Main Outcomes and Measures: Primary end point was change in peak V̇o2 after 3 months, with the minimal clinically important difference set at 2.5 mL/kg/min. Secondary end points included changes in metrics of cardiorespiratory fitness, diastolic function, and natriuretic peptides after 3 and 12 months. Results: Among 180 patients who were randomized (mean age, 70 years; 120 women [67%]), 166 (92%) and 154 (86%) completed evaluation at 3 and 12 months, respectively. Change in peak V̇o2 over 3 months for high-intensity interval training vs guideline control was 1.1 vs -0.6 mL/kg/min (difference, 1.5 [95% CI, 0.4 to 2.7]); for moderate continuous training vs guideline control, 1.6 vs -0.6 mL/kg/min (difference, 2.0 [95% CI, 0.9 to 3.1]); and for high-intensity interval training vs moderate continuous training, 1.1 vs 1.6 mL/kg/min (difference, -0.4 [95% CI, -1.4 to 0.6]). No comparisons were statistically significant after 12 months. There were no significant changes in diastolic function or natriuretic peptides. Acute coronary syndrome was recorded in 4 high-intensity interval training patients (7%), 3 moderate continuous training patients (5%), and 5 guideline control patients (8%). Conclusions and Relevance: Among patients with HFpEF, there was no statistically significant difference in change in peak V̇o2 at 3 months between those assigned to high-intensity interval vs moderate continuous training, and neither group met the prespecified minimal clinically important difference compared with the guideline control. These findings do not support either high-intensity interval training or moderate continuous training compared with guideline-based physical activity for patients with HFpEF. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02078947.
-
5.
Referral to Slimming World in UK Stop Smoking Services (SWISSS) versus stop smoking support alone on body weight in quitters: results of a randomised controlled trial.
Lycett, D, Aveyard, P, Farmer, A, Lewis, A, Munafò, M
BMJ open. 2020;10(1):e032271
-
-
-
Free full text
Plain language summary
Weight gain is a well-known consequence of smoking cessation. The aim of this study was to compare standard stop smoking behavioural support with an intervention that, in addition to providing standard stop smoking support, included personalised weight management support, provided by Slimming World. This study is a parallel group, individually randomised controlled trial. Participants were randomised (1:1) to usual care or Slimming World with usual care. Stop smoking advisors were unaware of the randomisation sequence. Results showed that referral to the Slimming World programme plus usual stop smoking support achieved significantly less weight gain than usual stop smoking support alone. Furthermore, percentage quit was no worse in the treatment than the control group. Authors conclude that referral to a behavioural weight loss programme may be a pragmatic option within stop smoking clinics.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Most people who stop smoking gain weight. Dietary modification may seem an obvious solution, but food restriction may increase cigarette craving and smoking relapse. TRIAL DESIGN An unblinded parallel randomised controlled trial. METHODS Participants were adult smokers with a body mass index greater or equal to 23 kg/m2. Setting was National Health Service commissioned Stop Smoking Services, interventions were referral to a commercial weight management programme, plus stop smoking support (treatment group), compared with stop smoking support alone (control group). Objective was to compare weight change between interventions in smoking abstainers and not abstinent rates in all. Primary outcome was change in weight (kg) at 12 weeks. Randomisation sequence was computer generated and concealed until allocation. RESULTS Seventy-six participants were recruited, 37 were randomised to the treatment group and 39 to the control group. Change in weight was analysed in long-term abstainers (13 treatment, 14 control) only because the aim was to prevent weight gain associated with smoking cessation. Abstinence was analysed on an intention-to-treat basis (37 treatment, 39 control). At 12 weeks weight gain was less in the treatment than the control group with an adjusted mean difference of -2.3 kg 95% CI (-4.4 to -0.1). Craving scores were lower (Mood and Physical Symptoms Scale craving domain -1.6 (-2.7 to -0.5)) and quit rates were higher in the treatment than the control group (32% vs 21%), although the trial was not powered to superiority in cravings and quit rates. No adverse events or side effects were reported. CONCLUSION In people who are obese and want to quit smoking, these data provide modest encouragement that providing weight management at the time of quitting may be helpful. Those who are not obese, but who are informed about potential weight gain during their quit attempt, were uninterested in a weight management programme. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER ISRCTN65705512.
-
6.
Bariatric and metabolic surgery during and after the COVID-19 pandemic: DSS recommendations for management of surgical candidates and postoperative patients and prioritisation of access to surgery.
Rubino, F, Cohen, RV, Mingrone, G, le Roux, CW, Mechanick, JI, Arterburn, DE, Vidal, J, Alberti, G, Amiel, SA, Batterham, RL, et al
The lancet. Diabetes & endocrinology. 2020;8(7):640-648
-
-
-
Free full text
-
Plain language summary
Bariatric surgery has been proven for weight loss in people with severe obesity. However, during the covid-19 pandemic, surgery has been postponed for many individuals. Under normal conditions, patients who are awaiting bariatric surgery are prioritised based on weight, however this does not necessarily reflect severity of their condition. This review paper aimed to develop new criteria in order to help prioritise individuals who are awaiting bariatric surgery. The authors began by reviewing the reasons for delaying bariatric surgery and the need for beds, the risks of covid-19 transmission during the procedure and the severe covid-19 complications that individuals with obesity can experience were discussed. A recommendation was made that all patients having bariatric surgery be tested for Covid-19. Solutions were proposed for those awaiting surgery such as diets, exercise, optimal blood sugar control and the potential use of weight loss medications. Prioritisation of surgery should focus on clinical need; it should be accessible and minimise harm from delays. Individuals with obesity and type 2 diabetes should be prioritised based on those who have an increased risk of death, determined by whether the individual; has poor blood sugar control despite maximal use of medications to control it, uses insulin, has previous heart disease, has liver disease or if they have other risk factors. It was concluded that weight alone is inadequate to prioritise candidates for bariatric surgery. Disease severity should be at the centre of decisions, especially when access to surgery is reduced, as is during the Covid -19 pandemic. This paper could be used by healthcare professionals to understand how to prioritise their obese and type 2 diabetic patients who are awaiting bariatric surgery.
Abstract
The coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic is wreaking havoc on society, especially health-care systems, including disrupting bariatric and metabolic surgery. The current limitations on accessibility to non-urgent care undermine postoperative monitoring of patients who have undergone such operations. Furthermore, like most elective surgery, new bariatric and metabolic procedures are being postponed worldwide during the pandemic. When the outbreak abates, a backlog of people seeking these operations will exist. Hence, surgical candidates face prolonged delays of beneficial treatment. Because of the progressive nature of obesity and diabetes, delaying surgery increases risks for morbidity and mortality, thus requiring strategies to mitigate harm. The risk of harm, however, varies among patients, depending on the type and severity of their comorbidities. A triaging strategy is therefore needed. The traditional weight-centric patient-selection criteria do not favour cases based on actual clinical needs. In this Personal View, experts from the Diabetes Surgery Summit consensus conference series provide guidance for the management of patients while surgery is delayed and for postoperative surveillance. We also offer a strategy to prioritise bariatric and metabolic surgery candidates on the basis of the diseases that are most likely to be ameliorated postoperatively. Although our system will be particularly germane in the immediate future, it also provides a framework for long-term clinically meaningful prioritisation.
-
7.
Effect of Supplemental Parenteral Nutrition Versus Enteral Nutrition Alone on Clinical Outcomes in Critically Ill Adult Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.
Alsharif, DJ, Alsharif, FJ, Aljuraiban, GS, Abulmeaty, MMA
Nutrients. 2020;12(10)
-
-
-
Free full text
Plain language summary
For individuals who are critically ill and cannot eat, the use of a tube through the mouth is the preferred way to ensure nutrition needs are met. However, complications such as diarrhoea and vomiting often means that these individuals still do not achieve optimal nutrition. In these instances, giving individuals nutrients directly into a vein alongside the feeding tube is an option to ensure they do not become nutrient deficient. This is known as a combination of enteral and parenteral nutrition. However, studies on the use of this combination are limited. This systematic review and meta-analysis of 5 studies aimed to determine the effects of a combination of enteral and parenteral feeding on clinical outcomes compared to a feeding tube alone. The results showed that compared to enteral feeding alone the combination decreased infections and intensive care unit (ICU) mortality. There was a very small effect on duration of ventilation and no effects were seen on length of hospital stay nor length of ICU stay. It was concluded that enteral feeding alone is insufficient to meet the nutritional needs of critically ill patients. Supplementing in parenteral nutrition may be of benefit to these individuals and help decrease infections and improve ICU mortality. This study could be used by healthcare professionals to understand that the health of patients who are being fed through a tube may be compromised through malnutrition and that supplemental ways of getting more nutrients into these individuals is of importance.
Abstract
Enteral nutrition (EN) is considered the first feeding route for critically ill patients. However, adverse effects such as gastrointestinal complications limit its optimal provision, leading to inadequate energy and protein intake. We compared the clinical outcomes of supplemental parenteral nutrition added to EN (SPN + EN) and EN alone in critically ill adults. Electronic databases restricted to full-text randomized controlled trials available in the English language and published from January 1990 to January 2019 were searched. The risk of bias was evaluated using the Jadad scale, and the meta-analysis was conducted using the MedCalc software. A total of five studies were eligible for inclusion in the systematic review and meta-analysis. Compared to EN alone, SPN + EN decreased the risk of nosocomial infections (relative risk (RR) = 0.733, p = 0.032) and intensive care unit (ICU) mortality (RR = 0.569, p = 0.030). No significant differences were observed between SPN + EN and EN in the length of hospital stay, hospital mortality, length of ICU stay, and duration of mechanical ventilation. In conclusion, when enteral feeding fails to fulfill the energy requirements in critically ill adult patients, SPN may be beneficial as it helps in decreasing nosocomial infections and ICU mortality, in addition to increasing energy and protein intakes with no negative effects on other clinical outcomes.
-
8.
Comparison of gut microbiota profile in celiac disease, non-celiac gluten sensitivity and irritable bowel syndrome: A systematic review.
Transeth, EL, Dale, HF, Lied, GA
The Turkish journal of gastroenterology : the official journal of Turkish Society of Gastroenterology. 2020;31(11):735-745
-
-
-
Free full text
Plain language summary
Dysbiosis refers to a disturbance in the quantity and composition of the gut microbiota, and this shift in the microbiota profile is associated with a variety of GI disorders including celiac disease (CD), irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) and non-celiac gluten sensitivity (NCGS). There is no current clinical distinction between IBS and NCGS although it is hypothesised the characteristics of gut microbiota of these clinical presentations may overlap. The aim of this review is to analyse the gut microbiota profile in these three diagnoses. Thirteen trials were included in this review and show the bacterial composition of the gut microbiota of patients with CD and IBS shared many similarities when compared to healthy controls, including an overall reduction in microbial abundance. There were fewer similarities between IBS and NCGS, in part due to the lack of existing literature. Based on these findings, the authors suggest the bacterial profiles of patients CD and IBS share certain disease-specific trends. While the current data is limited, the authors hope these suggested trends influence further research to examine the overlap between NCGS and IBS and distinguish differential diagnostic and treatment plans.
Abstract
Gut microbiota is vital for human health. Shifts in the microbial diversity can affect bacterial function, and dysbiosis is associated with a variety of gastrointestinal disorders, including celiac disease (CD) and irritable bowel syndrome (IBS). The distinction between IBS and non-celiac gluten sensitivity (NCGS) is unclear, and it is conceivable that the gut microbiota profile of these patients may overlap. To our knowledge, no existing literature has evaluated the microbial characteristics in CD, IBS, and NCGS. Hence, this systematic review aims to compare the gut microbiota profile in these three diagnoses. A literature search was conducted in PubMed (Medline) until April 2019. Studies investigating bacterial diversity in the gut of patients with CD, IBS, and NCGS were eligible. Inclusion criteria were observational studies and randomized controlled trials reporting bacterial profile at baseline. Ninety-one articles were identified, of which 13 trials were eligible for inclusion. Overall, the bacterial composition of the gut microbiota of patients with CD and those with IBS shared the many similarities. The microbial richness was correspondingly reduced in these patient-groups compared with healthy controls, but this was not reported for NCGS. Our findings suggest that the bacterial profiles of patients with IBS and CD share certain disease-specific trends. Fewer similarities were observed between the bacterial profiles of patients with IBS and NCGS. Notably, the data are limited; thus, no solid conclusions can be made on the basis of these findings alone. The suggested trends can be a valuable basis for further research.
-
9.
Comparing eating behaviours, and symptoms of depression and anxiety between Spain and Greece during the COVID-19 outbreak: Cross-sectional analysis of two different confinement strategies.
Papandreou, C, Arija, V, Aretouli, E, Tsilidis, KK, Bulló, M
European eating disorders review : the journal of the Eating Disorders Association. 2020;28(6):836-846
-
-
-
Free full text
-
Plain language summary
Stress and mental health problems which may be induced by restrictions imposed during the Covid-19 pandemic can lead to unhealthy eating habits. Restrictions have varied amongst countries and this cross-sectional analysis aimed to compare eating behaviours and symptoms of stress experienced by 1841 individuals in countries with differing lockdown measures. The results showed that individuals in the country with higher lockdown measures showed lower restraint in eating, they were more likely to overeat if they saw or smelt food and reported increased anxiety. However, they did not display depression or overeating when experiencing negative feelings. It was concluded that both countries had a high frequency of depression and anxiety. Higher restrictions were associated with greater anxiety, lower restraint and overeating when confronted with food. This paper could be used by healthcare professionals to recognise the need to include dietary advice when dealing with patients who are reporting anxiety during the current Covid-19 pandemic.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE We compared eating behaviours, and depressive and anxiety symptoms in two countries with different confinement strictness strategies and different levels of COVID-19 pandemic. METHOD A web-based cross-sectional survey was administered during and shortly after the COVID-19 related lockdown in Spain and Greece. Multivariable linear regression analyses were performed to identify country differences associated with eating behaviour, and symptoms of depression and anxiety. RESULTS This study included 1,002 responders in Spain and 839 in Greece. The mean ± SD of restraint, emotional and external eating was 2.5 ± 0.79, 2.1 ± 0.81 and 2.6 ± 0.65 in Spain, whereas 2.7 ± 0.85, 2.3 ± 0.99 and 2.9 ± 0.74 in Greece. Spanish participants had lower average scores of restraint and external eating compared to Greek participants (p < .001), but no difference was seen for emotional eating. In Spain, 13.6%, and 12.3% of the survey respondents reported moderate to severe depressive and anxiety symptoms, respectively, whereas in Greece the respective values were 18.8 and 13.2%. After adjusting for several risk factors, a higher prevalence of anxiety symptoms was observed in Spain compared to Greece (p = .001), but no difference was seen for depressive symptoms. CONCLUSIONS This study demonstrated high scores of inappropriate eating behaviours and a high frequency of depressive and anxiety symptoms in two Mediterranean countries during the COVID-19 outbreak. Our findings revealed that compared to Greek participants, Spanish participants, that faced more severe COVID-19 pandemic and stricter lockdown measures, were associated with lower restraint and external eating and increased anxiety symptoms, but not with depressive symptoms or emotional eating.
-
10.
Systematic review and meta-analysis of the associations of vegan and vegetarian diets with inflammatory biomarkers.
Menzel, J, Jabakhanji, A, Biemann, R, Mai, K, Abraham, K, Weikert, C
Scientific reports. 2020;10(1):21736
-
-
-
Free full text
Plain language summary
A growing trend towards vegetarianism and veganism has emerged in the past few years. Evidence has led to the assumption that these diets may protect against chronic disease, and one potential mechanism is through the modulation of inflammatory biomarkers. The aim of this review was to investigate the associations of veganism and vegetarianism with inflammatory markers. From the 21 cross-sectional studies included in this study, both vegan and vegetarian diets were associated with lower levels of CRP compared to omnivores. There was no association with all other inflammatory markers. Based on these findings, the authors conclude there is evidence for both vegan and vegetarian diets reducing CRP, a major marker of low-grade inflammation. More research is needed as most inflammatory markers have only been investigated in single studies thus far.
Abstract
Plant-based diets like vegetarian or vegan diets might influence circulating levels of inflammatory biomarkers, thereby reducing the risk of chronic diseases. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to investigate the associations of veganism and vegetarianism with circulating inflammatory biomarkers in comparison to omnivores. Literature search was conducted in Pubmed and EMBASE until April 2020 and mean differences of biomarkers were assessed for: C-reactive protein (CRP), interleukin-6 (IL-6), interleukin-18 (IL-18), interleukin-1 receptor antagonist (IL-1 RA), tumor necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-ɑ), E-selectin, intercellular adhesion molecule-1 (ICAM-1), monocyte chemoattractant protein-1 (MCP-1), adiponectin, omentin-1 and resistin. Of initially identified 1073 publications, 21 cross-sectional studies met the inclusion criteria and were included in the systematic review and meta-analysis. Vegan diet was associated with lower levels of CRP compared to omnivores [mean difference - 0.54 mg/l, 95%-CI: - 0.79 to - 0.28, p < 0.0001]. This association was less pronounced in vegetarians [mean difference - 0.25 mg/l, 95%-CI: - 0.49 to 0.00, p = 0.05]. In patients with impaired kidney function, the association between vegetarian nutrition and CRP was much stronger with - 3.91 mg/l (95%-CI: - 5.23 to - 2.60; p < 0.0001). No substantial effects were observed for all other inflammatory biomarkers. Despite strong associations between CRP and a vegan or vegetarian diet were seen, further research is needed, as most inflammatory biomarkers were investigated only in single studies so far.