Archive for the ‘Public Health’ category

Nurse-Based Care Comparable to Physician-Based Care in HIV Treatment

June 18th, 2010

Source: http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/723712?sssdmh=dm1.622418&src=nldne&uac=148789HX

by Emma Hitt, PhD

Nurse-managed care of patients receiving antiretroviral therapy (ART) for HIV may result in comparable outcomes to physician-managed care and enable expanded access to care in resource-poor settings.

Ian Sanne, MD, from the University of the Witwatersrand, in Johannesburg, South Africa, and colleagues with the Comprehensive International Program for Research in AIDS in South Africa conducted a randomized noninferiority trial at 2 South African primary-care clinics. They published their findings online June 16 in The Lancet.

According to Dr. Sanne and colleagues, a shortage of 4.3 million health workers (ie, physicians, midwives, nurses, and support workers) exists worldwide, and only 17.4 medical practitioners, most located in urban areas, are available to treat 100,000 people in South Africa.

To compare outcomes of nurse vs physician management of physician-initiated ART care for HIV-infected patients, researchers randomly assigned HIV-positive individuals with a CD4 cell count of fewer than 350 cells per microliter or World Health Organization (WHO) stage 3 or 4 disease to ART care monitored by either nurses (n = 404) or physicians (n = 408).

Treatment failure was defined as a composite of the following endpoints: traditional virological failure, occurrence of dose-limiting toxic effects, death, and all clinic losses that translated to failure of the treatment strategy to maintain patients on ART.

Of the patients, 46% demonstrated treatment failure — 48% in the nurse group and 44% in the physician group (hazard ratio, 1.09; 95% confidence interval, 0.89 – 1.33), which was within the limits for noninferiority.

Other outcomes at a median follow-up of 120 weeks were also comparable between the nurse- and physician-monitored patients, including deaths (10 vs 11), virological failures (44 vs 39), toxicity failures (68 vs 66), and program losses (70 vs 63).

According to the researchers, approximately 16% to 17% of patients were considered treatment failures because of the dose-limiting toxic effects of stavudine, which included a high frequency of lipomorphological changes and lactate increases.

“WHO and South African guidelines have moved away from reliance on stavudine; however, this drug remains widely used in resource-poor HIV therapy programmes,” they write. “The dose reduction of stavudine to 30 mg after the first year of the study, which was in line with WHO recommendations, might have reduced drug-limiting toxic effects,” they add.

“The results of this study lend support to the expanded access to treatment with use of models of task shifting in primary health care,” the authors conclude.

Independent commentators Mark Boyd, MD, from National Centre in HIV Epidemiology and Clinical Research and St Vincent’s Hospital, , Sydney, Australia, and Chidi Nwizu, MBBS, from the University of Maryland School of Medicine, in Baltimore, point out that “it is marvellous to see the results of a practical and innovative study which helps propel the field forward and improves our collective confidence that despite all the obstacles we can succeed.”

However, they add that many HIV-infected patients reside and access care in rural areas. “The study sites in [the Comprehensive International Program for Research in AIDS in South Africa] were not rural and had reasonable access to laboratories and ancillary services,” they write. “These are potential challenges in decentralisation models that include task-shifting.”

The study was supported by the National Institutes of Health, the US Agency for International Development, and the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases. The authors and Dr. Nwizu have disclosed no relevant financial relationships. Dr. Boyd serves on an HIV advisory board for MSD Australia and for Bristol-Myers Squibb Australia; has received funding and/or has partnered with Merck, Abbott, and the American Foundation for AIDS Research; and has spoken at events for Abbott and Merck, received honoraria from MSD Australia and Janssen-Cilaq Australia, and serves as vice president of the Australasian Society for HIV Medicine.

Open letter to Lamberto Andreotti, Chief Executive Officer, Bristol-Myers Squibb

June 11th, 2010

Sources: The Lancet

We, the UNITAID board members representing non-governmental organisations (NGOs) and communities affected by HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis, and malaria, are writing to you to express our deep concern that Bristol-Myers Squibb (BMS) is to close a factory in France that manufactures a second-line antiretroviral medicine for children with HIV/AIDS who weigh less than 10 kg: buffered didanosine in the 25 mg formulation.
Closing this factory means that 4000—7000 babies currently enrolled in treatment plans in developing countries through UNITAID could be left without the medicines they need. Didanosine is the last therapeutic option for these babies and without it they could die. We understand that closure of the plant will take place in June of this year, with no plans for resumption of production before April, 2011, at the earliest, when a new plant is due to open. Therefore there is likely to be a shortage of about 15 000 packs of didanosine 25 mg across all UNITAID beneficiary countries between now and when production is expected to resume in April, 2011.
Currently, there is no alternative generic product that has been assessed by WHO and prequalified for use by UN agencies. We urge you, as the Chief Executive Officer of BMS, a company that prides itself on its high standards of corporate responsibility, to respond urgently to our concerns, outlining the steps you will take to avoid any treatment interruption. We would also like your confirmation that a BMS plant will resume production of this vital medicine in 2011.

Blood Donation Ban For MSM

June 9th, 2010

oh..
End of last month, scientists from Canada said it is time to change the policy that bans blood donations in Canada from all men who have sex with men. (Canadian Medical Association Journal).

Many developed countries – including the UK – have a lifetime ban on blood donations from men who have ever had sex with other men, even if the encounter took place many years earlier.

The policy was introduced in the early 1980s as the threat of HIV/Aids emerged.

But writing in the Canadian Medical Association Journal, Mark Wainberg and Norbert Gilmore note that the highly sensitive procedures now routinely used for testing mean it would be very hard for infected blood to slip through.

It was time, they said, to consider scrapping the old policy of “indefinite deferral” and look at asking men to wait between one and five years after having sex with another man before giving blood.

“The current policy is counterproductive in terms of loss of donors, loss of good will, student protests, donor boycotts, among other negative effects,” they write.

“We believe that any potentially negative consequences of a change in deferral would be offset by the benefits.”

Transmission time

Opponents of the lifetime ban point to new testing techniques which are able to detect the HIV virus in the blood after as little as 12 days – down from three to six months previously.

Thus a “window” where infected blood might unknowingly enter the supply system remains, but it is a very short one. And opponents of the lifetime ban also point to the moral issue of double standards.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/10163222.stm

Interestingly a paper from BMJ (http://www.bmj.com/cgi/content/full/338/feb26_1/b318) holds a very different opinion.

BMJ is on twitter

May 21st, 2010

Emmm, interesting, British Medical Journal now has all their journals on Twitter.

It’s quite a prompt way to share front-line informaiton or so. I like the idea but haven’t found their daily updates are really useful yet.