The relationship of primary health care use with persistence of insomnia: a prospective cohort study

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Prevalence of insomnia symptoms in the general population is high. Insomnia is linked with high health care use and within primary care there are a number of treatment options available. The objective of this study was to determine the association of persistence and remission of insomnia with primary health care using a longitudinal study.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>A postal survey of registered adult (over 18 years) populations of five UK general practices, repeated after 1 year, linked to primary care records. Baseline survey responders were assessed for persistence of insomnia symptoms at 12 months. The association of primary care consultation or prescription for any mood disorder (defined as anxiety, depression, stress, neurosis, or insomnia) in the 12 months between baseline and follow-up surveys with persistence of insomnia was determined.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>474 participants reporting insomnia symptoms at baseline were followed up at 12 months. 131(28%) consulted for mood problem(s) or received a relevant prescription. Of these 100 (76%) still had insomnia symptoms at one year, compared with 227 (66%) of those with no contact with primary care for this condition (OR 1.37; 95% CI 0.83, 2.27). Prescription of hypnotics showed some evidence of association with persistence of insomnia at follow-up (OR 3.18; 95% CI 0.93, 10.92).</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Insomniacs continue to have problems regardless of whether or not they have consulted their primary care clinician or received a prescription for medication over the year. Hypnotics may be associated with persistence of insomnia. Further research is needed to determine more effective methods of identifying and managing insomnia in primary care. There may however be a group who have unmet need such as depression who would benefit from seeking primary health care.</p

Cyanobacterial lipopolysaccharides and human health – a review

Cyanobacterial lipopolysaccharide/s (LPS) are frequently cited in the cyanobacteria literature as toxins responsible for a variety of heath effects in humans, from skin rashes to gastrointestinal, respiratory and allergic reactions. The attribution of toxic properties to cyanobacterial LPS dates from the 1970s, when it was thought that lipid A, the toxic moiety of LPS, was structurally and functionally conserved across all Gram-negative bacteria. However, more recent research has shown that this is not the case, and lipid A structures are now known to be very different, expressing properties ranging from LPS agonists, through weak endotoxicity to LPS antagonists. Although cyanobacterial LPS is widely cited as a putative toxin, most of the small number of formal research reports describe cyanobacterial LPS as weakly toxic compared to LPS from the Enterobacteriaceae. We systematically reviewed the literature on cyanobacterial LPS, and also examined the much lager body of literature relating to heterotrophic bacterial LPS and the atypical lipid A structures of some photosynthetic bacteria. While the literature on the biological activity of heterotrophic bacterial LPS is overwhelmingly large and therefore difficult to review for the purposes of exclusion, we were unable to find a convincing body of evidence to suggest that heterotrophic bacterial LPS, in the absence of other virulence factors, is responsible for acute gastrointestinal, dermatological or allergic reactions via natural exposure routes in humans. There is a danger that initial speculation about cyanobacterial LPS may evolve into orthodoxy without basis in research findings. No cyanobacterial lipid A structures have been described and published to date, so a recommendation is made that cyanobacteriologists should not continue to attribute such a diverse range of clinical symptoms to cyanobacterial LPS without research confirmation