Media coverage on coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has been extensive, yet large gaps remain in our understanding of the role of social media platforms during worldwide health crisis. The purpose of this study was to assess the most viewed YouTube videos on COVID-19 for medical content. We coded video characteristics, source, and medical content of the 113 most-widely viewed videos about COVID-19. Seventynine (69.9%) videos were classified as useful, and 10 (8.8%) videos were classified as misleading. Independent users were more likely to post misleading videos than useful videos (60.0% vs 21.5%, P = 0.009). News agencies were more likely to post useful videos than misleading videos (72.2% vs 40.0%, P = 0.039). Useful videos were more likely to present any information on prevalence or incidence (79.7% vs 20.0%, P < 0.001), as well as information on outcomes or prognosis (84.8% vs 30.0%, P < 0.001) compared to misleading videos. The World Health Organization contributed one useful video (1.3%), while no videos from the Center for Disease Control were included. Although YouTube generally is a useful source of medical information on the COVID-19 pandemic, increased efforts to disseminate accurate information from reputable sources is desired to help mitigate disease spread and decrease unnecessary panic in the general population. ARTICLE HISTORY
Light chain (AL) amyloidosis is characterized by the misfolding of immunoglobulin light chains, accumulating as amyloid fibrils in vital organs. Multiple reports have indicated that amyloidogenic light chains internalize into a variety of cell types, but these studies used urine-derived proteins without indicating any protein sequence information. As a result, the role of somatic mutations in amyloidogenic protein internalization has not been yet studied. We characterized the internalization of AL-09, an AL amyloidosis protein into mouse cardiomyocytes. We also characterized the internalization of the germline protein κI O18/O8, devoid of somatic mutations, and three AL-09 restorative mutations (I34N, Q42K, and H87Y) previously characterized for their role in protein structure, stability, and amyloid formation kinetics. All proteins shared a common internalization pathway into lysosomal compartments. The proteins caused different degrees of lysosomal expansion. Oregon green (OG) labeled AL-09 showed the most rapid internalization, while OG-Q42K presented the slowest rate of internalization.
Objectives: The purpose of this single center, prospective randomized controlled trial was to compare clinical outcomes between an ultrasound-guided greater occipital nerve block (GONB) at the C2 vertebral level versus landmark-based GONB at the superior nuchal line.Methods: Patients with occipital neuralgia or cervicogenic headache were randomized to receive either a landmark-based GONB with sham ultrasound at the superior nuchal line or ultrasound-guided GONB at the C2 vertebral level with blinding of patients and data analysis investigators. Clinical outcomes were assessed at 30 minutes, 2 weeks, and 4 weeks postinjection.Results: Thirty-two patients were recruited with 16 participants in each group. Despite randomization, the ultrasound-guided GONB group reported higher numeric rating scale (NRS) scores at baseline. Those in the ultrasound-guided GONB group had a significant decrease in NRS from baseline compared with the landmark-based GONB group at 30 minutes (change of NRS of 4.0 vs. 2.0) and 4-week time points (change of NRS of 2.5 vs. −0.5). Both groups were found to have significant decreases in Headache Impact Test-6. The ultrasound-guided GONB had significant improvements in NRS, severe headache days, and analgesic use at 4 weeks when compared with baseline. No serious adverse events occurred in either group.Conclusions: Ultrasound-guided GONBs may provide superior pain reduction at 4 weeks when compared with landmark-based GONBs for patients with occipital neuralgia or cervicogenic headache.
BACKGROUND: Intrathecal drug delivery systems (IDDS) have been utilized for over 3 decades for management of chronic pain and spasticity. Patients with IDDS may present for surgical procedures unrelated to the IDDS device, although data are limited regarding perioperative outcomes. METHODS: This is a historical matched cohort study conducted between January 1, 2007 and December 31, 2016 of patients with an opioid-based IDDS versus matched control patients undergoing surgery excluding interventional pain procedures. Patients in the IDDS group were matched with up to 2 patients without an IDDS. Multivariable regression analyses were utilized to assess differences in the primary outcome of cumulative perioperative opioid consumption (ie, intraoperative and postanesthesia care unit [PACU] opioid consumption), and opioid consumption during the first 24 and 72 postoperative hours. Postoperative clinical outcomes were also assessed including escalating oxygen requirements, naloxone administration, painsedation mismatch, and perioperative pain service consultation. RESULTS: A total of 321 surgeries were included, 112 with IDDS and 209 controls, with median (interquartile range [IQR]) age of 57 (49-64) years. Compared to matched controls, patients with an IDDS had greater perioperative opioid consumption (median [IQR] oral morphine milligram equivalents [OME] of 110 vs 93 [IQR,; adjusted multiplicative increase 1.28 [95% confidence interval {CI}, 1.03-1.59]; P = .026). IDDS patients also had greater opioid consumption in the first 24 and 72 postoperative hours (multiplicative increases of 2.23 [95% CI, 1.36-3.63], P = .001, and 2.46 [95% CI, 1.41-4.32], P = .002, respectively). There were no significant differences in postoperative oxygen requirements, naloxone administration, or pain-sedation mismatch. Inpatient pain medicine consultation was more frequent in IDDS patients compared to controls (51.8% vs 6.2%; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with opioid-based IDDS received more perioperative opioids and were more likely to receive postoperative pain service consultation compared to matched controls. There were no significant differences in clinical safety outcomes, suggesting tolerance for higher opioid doses. Further research is warranted to optimize perioperative outcomes in those with IDDS. (Anesth Analg 2022;134:35-43) KEY POINTS• Question: How do perioperative outcomes of opioid consumption and postoperative respiratory complications compare between patients with an opioid-based intrathecal drug delivery system (IDDS) versus control patients without an IDDS? • Findings: Patients with an opioid-based IDDS consumed more perioperative opioids, yet experienced similar adverse events (ie, escalation in postoperative oxygen requirements, postoperative naloxone administration, and pain-sedation mismatch) compared to matched control patients. • Meaning: Patients with an opioid-based IDDS have greater perioperative opioid needs with no differences in safety outcomes, suggesting tolerance for higher opioid doses.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.