Out of the Chrysalis of Silence, Into a World of Possibilities: Family Experiences of Having a Child Who Uses a Speech Generating Device

Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis (IUPUI)There are children in this world who are silenced by disability. The struggles of these children as they attempt to find a voice are difficult and often considered insurmountable. With advances in computer technology, devices are available to assist the child to have a voice. This voice is not found easily or acquired without difficulty. Even after finding and acquiring the necessary device, the child requires education and support to learn to use the device effectively. Challenges may be specific to the child’s disability, the support systems involved with the child, or even the technology itself. It is the adults in the child’s life, and the child’s family in particular, who provide needed support and assistance in helping him/her find an effective way of expressing his/her ideas. Families are an essential component in assisting their children to learn to use the device. My pilot study examined parents’ likes and dislikes of their child’s communication device. The preliminary data from that study illuminated several factors that increased the struggles of these children and their families as they work together to learn the device. These factors include financial, emotional, and developmental costs; as well as the lack of appropriately trained professionals; and excessive time lapses from evaluation to receipt of the device. The purpose of this study was to give a voice to the experiences of families around a child’s use of one type of augmentative and alternative (AAC), a speech generating device (SGD), by analyzing family’s experiences of the child’s use of a SGD as seen through the lens of the child’s primary caregiver. Interpretive phenomenologic methods for data collection and interpretation were used to elucidate the experience of families who have a child who is currently using or who has previously used a SGD as a method of communication. One cannot learn about the lived experience of the family without first listening to their story and allowing the family to share how their child’s use of a SGD affected the life of their family

IUPUC Faculty Mentoring Program

Short talk presentation slide

Diversifying for Sustainability: Repurposing a Targeted Pilot Faculty Mentoring Program

For most junior faculty at Indiana University – Purdue University Columbus, dissatisfaction with traditional mentoring, that is, pairing with a senior departmental colleague for open-ended mentoring, was a fact of faculty life. In 2015-16, the authors addressed this ineffective reality by implementing a grant funded pilot program to provide targeted mentoring on career self-efficacy for under-represented, pre-promotion faculty. Mentors received training and were matched with mentees. Assessment demonstrated program effectiveness. Participants made measurable gains in general self-efficacy; increasing their self-confidence, establishing more robust social supports, and learning new strategies for career success. Upon program completion, we sought a sustainable modification of the program to more broadly serve all faculty. Feedback from focus groups led us to diversify the program by creating a “mentor bureau” and conducting mentee-only peer mentoring sessions. The bureau helps mentees form a local mentoring network or “map” (Rockquemore, 2013). We asked mentors to identify areas of expertise and mentees to choose from among these topics. In 2016-17, the mentoring bureau enlisted 15 mentors who mentored 11 mentees. Including program leaders, 44% (27 of 62) of full-time faculty participated in the bureau. Peer-mentoring was conducted through informal discussions at monthly mentee-only lunches. Feedback indicates satisfaction with both program components. Mentees reported that they gained expertise through the mentoring bureau and built relationships in the peer mentoring meetings. We are pleased to have the opportunity to share our sustainable and diverse mentoring model that successfully complements traditional mentoring

Career Self-Efficacy Mentoring for Pre-Promotion Underrepresented Faculty

posterThis poster describes the progress and lessons learned as a result of newly implemented Faculty Mentoring Program at Indiana University – Purdue University Columbus

Mutability and mutational spectrum of chromosome transmission fidelity genes

It has been more than two decades since the original chromosome transmission fidelity (Ctf) screen of Saccharomyces cerevisiae was published. Since that time the spectrum of mutations known to cause Ctf and, more generally, chromosome instability (CIN) has expanded dramatically as a result of systematic screens across yeast mutant arrays. Here we describe a comprehensive summary of the original Ctf genetic screen and the cloning of the remaining complementation groups as efforts to expand our knowledge of the CIN gene repertoire and its mutability in a model eukaryote. At the time of the original screen, it was impossible to predict either the genes and processes that would be overrepresented in a pool of random mutants displaying a Ctf phenotype or what the entire set of genes potentially mutable to Ctf would be. We show that in a collection of 136 randomly selected Ctf mutants, >65% of mutants map to 13 genes, 12 of which are involved in sister chromatid cohesion and/or kinetochore function. Extensive screening of systematic mutant collections has shown that ~350 genes with functions as diverse as RNA processing and proteasomal activity mutate to cause a Ctf phenotype and at least 692 genes are required for faithful chromosome segregation. The enrichment of random Ctf alleles in only 13 of ~350 possible Ctf genes suggests that these genes are more easily mutable to cause genome instability than the others. These observations inform our understanding of recurring CIN mutations in human cancers where presumably random mutations are responsible for initiating the frequently observed CIN phenotype of tumors

Effect of Hydrocortisone on Mortality and Organ Support in Patients With Severe COVID-19: The REMAP-CAP COVID-19 Corticosteroid Domain Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Evidence regarding corticosteroid use for severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is limited. Objective: To determine whether hydrocortisone improves outcome for patients with severe COVID-19. Design, Setting, and Participants: An ongoing adaptive platform trial testing multiple interventions within multiple therapeutic domains, for example, antiviral agents, corticosteroids, or immunoglobulin. Between March 9 and June 17, 2020, 614 adult patients with suspected or confirmed COVID-19 were enrolled and randomized within at least 1 domain following admission to an intensive care unit (ICU) for respiratory or cardiovascular organ support at 121 sites in 8 countries. Of these, 403 were randomized to open-label interventions within the corticosteroid domain. The domain was halted after results from another trial were released. Follow-up ended August 12, 2020. Interventions: The corticosteroid domain randomized participants to a fixed 7-day course of intravenous hydrocortisone (50 mg or 100 mg every 6 hours) (n = 143), a shock-dependent course (50 mg every 6 hours when shock was clinically evident) (n = 152), or no hydrocortisone (n = 108). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was organ support-free days (days alive and free of ICU-based respiratory or cardiovascular support) within 21 days, where patients who died were assigned -1 day. The primary analysis was a bayesian cumulative logistic model that included all patients enrolled with severe COVID-19, adjusting for age, sex, site, region, time, assignment to interventions within other domains, and domain and intervention eligibility. Superiority was defined as the posterior probability of an odds ratio greater than 1 (threshold for trial conclusion of superiority >99%). Results: After excluding 19 participants who withdrew consent, there were 384 patients (mean age, 60 years; 29% female) randomized to the fixed-dose (n = 137), shock-dependent (n = 146), and no (n = 101) hydrocortisone groups; 379 (99%) completed the study and were included in the analysis. The mean age for the 3 groups ranged between 59.5 and 60.4 years; most patients were male (range, 70.6%-71.5%); mean body mass index ranged between 29.7 and 30.9; and patients receiving mechanical ventilation ranged between 50.0% and 63.5%. For the fixed-dose, shock-dependent, and no hydrocortisone groups, respectively, the median organ support-free days were 0 (IQR, -1 to 15), 0 (IQR, -1 to 13), and 0 (-1 to 11) days (composed of 30%, 26%, and 33% mortality rates and 11.5, 9.5, and 6 median organ support-free days among survivors). The median adjusted odds ratio and bayesian probability of superiority were 1.43 (95% credible interval, 0.91-2.27) and 93% for fixed-dose hydrocortisone, respectively, and were 1.22 (95% credible interval, 0.76-1.94) and 80% for shock-dependent hydrocortisone compared with no hydrocortisone. Serious adverse events were reported in 4 (3%), 5 (3%), and 1 (1%) patients in the fixed-dose, shock-dependent, and no hydrocortisone groups, respectively. Conclusions and Relevance: Among patients with severe COVID-19, treatment with a 7-day fixed-dose course of hydrocortisone or shock-dependent dosing of hydrocortisone, compared with no hydrocortisone, resulted in 93% and 80% probabilities of superiority with regard to the odds of improvement in organ support-free days within 21 days. However, the trial was stopped early and no treatment strategy met prespecified criteria for statistical superiority, precluding definitive conclusions. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02735707

Multiorgan MRI findings after hospitalisation with COVID-19 in the UK (C-MORE): a prospective, multicentre, observational cohort study

Introduction: The multiorgan impact of moderate to severe coronavirus infections in the post-acute phase is still poorly understood. We aimed to evaluate the excess burden of multiorgan abnormalities after hospitalisation with COVID-19, evaluate their determinants, and explore associations with patient-related outcome measures. Methods: In a prospective, UK-wide, multicentre MRI follow-up study (C-MORE), adults (aged ≥18 years) discharged from hospital following COVID-19 who were included in Tier 2 of the Post-hospitalisation COVID-19 study (PHOSP-COVID) and contemporary controls with no evidence of previous COVID-19 (SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid antibody negative) underwent multiorgan MRI (lungs, heart, brain, liver, and kidneys) with quantitative and qualitative assessment of images and clinical adjudication when relevant. Individuals with end-stage renal failure or contraindications to MRI were excluded. Participants also underwent detailed recording of symptoms, and physiological and biochemical tests. The primary outcome was the excess burden of multiorgan abnormalities (two or more organs) relative to controls, with further adjustments for potential confounders. The C-MORE study is ongoing and is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04510025. Findings: Of 2710 participants in Tier 2 of PHOSP-COVID, 531 were recruited across 13 UK-wide C-MORE sites. After exclusions, 259 C-MORE patients (mean age 57 years [SD 12]; 158 [61%] male and 101 [39%] female) who were discharged from hospital with PCR-confirmed or clinically diagnosed COVID-19 between March 1, 2020, and Nov 1, 2021, and 52 non-COVID-19 controls from the community (mean age 49 years [SD 14]; 30 [58%] male and 22 [42%] female) were included in the analysis. Patients were assessed at a median of 5·0 months (IQR 4·2–6·3) after hospital discharge. Compared with non-COVID-19 controls, patients were older, living with more obesity, and had more comorbidities. Multiorgan abnormalities on MRI were more frequent in patients than in controls (157 [61%] of 259 vs 14 [27%] of 52; p<0·0001) and independently associated with COVID-19 status (odds ratio [OR] 2·9 [95% CI 1·5–5·8]; padjusted=0·0023) after adjusting for relevant confounders. Compared with controls, patients were more likely to have MRI evidence of lung abnormalities (p=0·0001; parenchymal abnormalities), brain abnormalities (p<0·0001; more white matter hyperintensities and regional brain volume reduction), and kidney abnormalities (p=0·014; lower medullary T1 and loss of corticomedullary differentiation), whereas cardiac and liver MRI abnormalities were similar between patients and controls. Patients with multiorgan abnormalities were older (difference in mean age 7 years [95% CI 4–10]; mean age of 59·8 years [SD 11·7] with multiorgan abnormalities vs mean age of 52·8 years [11·9] without multiorgan abnormalities; p<0·0001), more likely to have three or more comorbidities (OR 2·47 [1·32–4·82]; padjusted=0·0059), and more likely to have a more severe acute infection (acute CRP >5mg/L, OR 3·55 [1·23–11·88]; padjusted=0·025) than those without multiorgan abnormalities. Presence of lung MRI abnormalities was associated with a two-fold higher risk of chest tightness, and multiorgan MRI abnormalities were associated with severe and very severe persistent physical and mental health impairment (PHOSP-COVID symptom clusters) after hospitalisation. Interpretation: After hospitalisation for COVID-19, people are at risk of multiorgan abnormalities in the medium term. Our findings emphasise the need for proactive multidisciplinary care pathways, with the potential for imaging to guide surveillance frequency and therapeutic stratification

Effect of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor and angiotensin receptor blocker initiation on organ support-free days in patients hospitalized with COVID-19

IMPORTANCE Overactivation of the renin-angiotensin system (RAS) may contribute to poor clinical outcomes in patients with COVID-19. Objective To determine whether angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitor or angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) initiation improves outcomes in patients hospitalized for COVID-19. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS In an ongoing, adaptive platform randomized clinical trial, 721 critically ill and 58 non–critically ill hospitalized adults were randomized to receive an RAS inhibitor or control between March 16, 2021, and February 25, 2022, at 69 sites in 7 countries (final follow-up on June 1, 2022). INTERVENTIONS Patients were randomized to receive open-label initiation of an ACE inhibitor (n = 257), ARB (n = 248), ARB in combination with DMX-200 (a chemokine receptor-2 inhibitor; n = 10), or no RAS inhibitor (control; n = 264) for up to 10 days. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The primary outcome was organ support–free days, a composite of hospital survival and days alive without cardiovascular or respiratory organ support through 21 days. The primary analysis was a bayesian cumulative logistic model. Odds ratios (ORs) greater than 1 represent improved outcomes. RESULTS On February 25, 2022, enrollment was discontinued due to safety concerns. Among 679 critically ill patients with available primary outcome data, the median age was 56 years and 239 participants (35.2%) were women. Median (IQR) organ support–free days among critically ill patients was 10 (–1 to 16) in the ACE inhibitor group (n = 231), 8 (–1 to 17) in the ARB group (n = 217), and 12 (0 to 17) in the control group (n = 231) (median adjusted odds ratios of 0.77 [95% bayesian credible interval, 0.58-1.06] for improvement for ACE inhibitor and 0.76 [95% credible interval, 0.56-1.05] for ARB compared with control). The posterior probabilities that ACE inhibitors and ARBs worsened organ support–free days compared with control were 94.9% and 95.4%, respectively. Hospital survival occurred in 166 of 231 critically ill participants (71.9%) in the ACE inhibitor group, 152 of 217 (70.0%) in the ARB group, and 182 of 231 (78.8%) in the control group (posterior probabilities that ACE inhibitor and ARB worsened hospital survival compared with control were 95.3% and 98.1%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE In this trial, among critically ill adults with COVID-19, initiation of an ACE inhibitor or ARB did not improve, and likely worsened, clinical outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT0273570

A Guide for Urogynecologic Patient Care Utilizing Telemedicine During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Review of Existing Evidence

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: The COVID-19 pandemic and the desire to flatten the curve of transmission have significantly affected the way providers care for patients. Female Pelvic Medicine and Reconstructive Surgeons (FPMRS) must provide high quality of care through remote access such as telemedicine. No clear guidelines exist on the use of telemedicine in FPMRS. Using expedited literature review methodology, we provide guidance regarding management of common outpatient urogynecology scenarios during the pandemic. METHODS: We grouped FPMRS conditions into those in which virtual management differs from direct in-person visits and conditions in which treatment would emphasize behavioral and conservative counseling but not deviate from current management paradigms. We conducted expedited literature review on four topics (telemedicine in FPMRS, pessary management, urinary tract infections, urinary retention) and addressed four other topics (urinary incontinence, prolapse, fecal incontinence, defecatory dysfunction) based on existing systematic reviews and guidelines. We further compiled expert consensus regarding management of FPMRS patients in the virtual setting, scenarios when in-person visits are necessary, symptoms that should alert providers, and specific considerations for FPMRS patients with suspected or confirmed COVID-19. RESULTS: Behavioral, medical, and conservative management will be valuable as first-line virtual treatments. Certain situations will require different treatments in the virtual setting while others will require an in-person visit despite the risks of COVID-19 transmission. CONCLUSIONS: We have presented guidance for treating FPMRS conditions via telemedicine based on rapid literature review and expert consensus and presented it in a format that can be actively referenced