Attitudinal and Demographic Predictors of Measles-Mumps-Rubella Vaccine (MMR) Uptake during the UK Catch-Up Campaign 2008–09: Cross-Sectional Survey

Background and Objective Continued suboptimal measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) vaccine uptake has re-established measles epidemic risk, prompting a UK catch-up campaign in 2008–09 for children who missed MMR doses at scheduled age. Predictors of vaccine uptake during catch-ups are poorly understood, however evidence from routine schedule uptake suggests demographics and attitudes may be central. This work explored this hypothesis using a robust evidence-based measure. Design Cross-sectional self-administered questionnaire with objective behavioural outcome. Setting and Participants 365 UK parents, whose children were aged 5–18 years and had received <2 MMR doses before the 2008–09 UK catch-up started. Main Outcome Measures Parents' attitudes and demographics, parent-reported receipt of invitation to receive catch-up MMR dose(s), and catch-up MMR uptake according to child's medical record (receipt of MMR doses during year 1 of the catch-up). Results Perceived social desirability/benefit of MMR uptake (OR = 1.76, 95% CI = 1.09–2.87) and younger child age (OR = 0.78, 95% CI = 0.68–0.89) were the only independent predictors of catch-up MMR uptake in the sample overall. Uptake predictors differed by whether the child had received 0 MMR doses or 1 MMR dose before the catch-up. Receipt of catch-up invitation predicted uptake only in the 0 dose group (OR = 3.45, 95% CI = 1.18–10.05), whilst perceived social desirability/benefit of MMR uptake predicted uptake only in the 1 dose group (OR = 9.61, 95% CI = 2.57–35.97). Attitudes and demographics explained only 28% of MMR uptake in the 0 dose group compared with 61% in the 1 dose group. Conclusions Catch-up MMR invitations may effectively move children from 0 to 1 MMR doses (unimmunised to partially immunised), whilst attitudinal interventions highlighting social benefits of MMR may effectively move children from 1 to 2 MMR doses (partially to fully immunised). Older children may be best targeted through school-based programmes. A formal evaluation element should be incorporated into future catch-up campaigns to inform their continuing improvement

Diabetic cardiomyopathy

Diabetic cardiomyopathy is a distinct primary disease process, independent of coronary artery disease, which leads to heart failure in diabetic patients. Epidemiological and clinical trial data have confirmed the greater incidence and prevalence of heart failure in diabetes. Novel echocardiographic and MR (magnetic resonance) techniques have enabled a more accurate means of phenotyping diabetic cardiomyopathy. Experimental models of diabetes have provided a range of novel molecular targets for this condition, but none have been substantiated in humans. Similarly, although ultrastructural pathology of the microvessels and cardiomyocytes is well described in animal models, studies in humans are small and limited to light microscopy. With regard to treatment, recent data with thiazoledinediones has generated much controversy in terms of the cardiac safety of both these and other drugs currently in use and under development. Clinical trials are urgently required to establish the efficacy of currently available agents for heart failure, as well as novel therapies in patients specifically with diabetic cardiomyopathy

2012 ACCF/AHA/ACP/AATS/PCNA/SCAI/STS guideline for the diagnosis and management of patients with stable ischemic heart disease

The recommendations listed in this document are, whenever possible, evidence based. An extensive evidence review was conducted as the document was compiled through December 2008. Repeated literature searches were performed by the guideline development staff and writing committee members as new issues were considered. New clinical trials published in peer-reviewed journals and articles through December 2011 were also reviewed and incorporated when relevant. Furthermore, because of the extended development time period for this guideline, peer review comments indicated that the sections focused on imaging technologies required additional updating, which occurred during 2011. Therefore, the evidence review for the imaging sections includes published literature through December 2011