Impact of organized violence on illness experience of Turkish/Kurdish and Bosnian migrant patients in primary care

Background: Migration, particularly when associated with exposure to organized violence, can seriously affect mental and physical health in ways that are not obvious. This study considers the clinical impact of organized violence on emotional and somatic problems encountered in the course of primary health care. Methods: Migrant patients from Bosnia (n=36) and Turkey (n=62) in primary care were recruited into the study and divided into two groups: male and female migrants of both countries who reported experience of organized violence and those who did not. Symptom profiles and patterns of distress were compared between those with and without experience of organized violence. Results: Somatic and emotional problems, such as diffuse pain, numbness in arms and legs, stress, flashbacks, disturbed sleep and nightmares were reported significantly more often by violence survivors than by the control group. Also associated with experience of organized violence were higher frequencies of reported emotional problems, such as feeling out of balance in the previous months, extreme sadness and difficulties settling in Switzerland. Among the men, more than 62% of the violence survivors reported thoughts of self-harm compared with 11% of the control group whereas thoughts of self-harm among the women were more associated with the uncertain legal status in Switzerland than with violence experience. Conclusion: Exposure to organized violence contributed to increased health problems of these migrant patients who were presenting in primary care. A useful feature of this research should also be incorporated into clinical practice. Consideration of relevant aspects of patients' social experience, including victimization by violence, requires attention not only to spontaneous accounts in the course of history taking but also focused queries to clarify such questions

Polyparasite Helminth infections and their association to anaemia and undernutrition in Northern Rwanda

Abstract Background Intestinal schistosomiasis and soil-transmitted helminth (STH) infections constitute major public health problems in many parts of sub-Saharan Africa. In this study we examined the functional significance of such polyparasite infections in anemia and undernutrition in Rwandan individuals. Methods Three polyparasite infection profiles were defined, in addition to a reference profile that consisted of either no infections or low-intensity infection with only one of the focal parasite species. Logistic regression models were applied to data of 1,605 individuals from 6 schools in 2 districts of the Northern Province before chemotherapeutic treatment in order to correctly identify individuals who were at higher odds of being anaemic and/or undernourished. Findings Stunted relative to nonstunted, and males compared to females, were found to be at higher odds of being anaemic independently of polyparasite infection profile. The odds of being wasted were 2-fold greater for children with concurrent infection of at least 2 parasites at M+ intensity compared to those children with the reference profile. Males compared to females and anaemic compared to nonanaemic children were significantly more likely to be stunted. None of the three polyparasite infection profiles were found to have significant effects on stunting. Conclusion The present data suggest that the levels of polyparasitism, and infection intensities in the Rwandan individuals examined here may be lower as compared to other recent similar epidemiological studies in different regions across sub-Saharan Africa. Neither the odds of anaemia nor the odds of stunting were found to be significantly different in the three-polyparasite infection profiles. However, the odds of wasting were higher in those children with at least two parasites at M+ intensity compared to those children with the reference profile. Nevertheless, despite the low morbidity levels indicated in the population under study here, we recommend sustainable efforts for the deworming of affected populations to be continued in order to support the economic development of the country

The Role of Centralized Reading of Endoscopy in a Randomized Controlled Trial of Mesalamine for Ulcerative Colitis

Interobserver differences in endoscopic assessments contribute to variations in rates of response to placebo in ulcerative colitis (UC) trials. We investigated whether centralized review of images could reduce these variations. We performed a 10-week, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study of 281 patients with mildly to moderately active UC, defined by an Ulcerative Colitis Disease Activity Index (UCDAI) sigmoidoscopy score ≥2, that evaluated the efficacy of delayed-release mesalamine (Asacol 800-mg tablet) 4.8 g/day. Endoscopic images were reviewed by a single expert central reader. The primary outcome was clinical remission (UCDAI, stool frequency and bleeding scores of 0, and no fecal urgency) at week 6. The primary outcome was achieved by 30.0% of patients treated with mesalamine and 20.6% of those given placebo, a difference of 9.4% (95% confidence interval [CI], -0.7% to 19.4%; P = .069). Significant differences in results from secondary analyses indicated the efficacy of mesalamine. Thirty-one percent of participants, all of whom had a UCDAI sigmoidoscopy score ≥2 as read by the site investigator, were considered ineligible by the central reader. After exclusion of these patients, the remission rates were 29.0% and 13.8% in the mesalamine and placebo groups, respectively (difference of 15%; 95% CI, 3.5%-26.0%; P = .011). Although mesalamine 4.8 g/day was not statistically different from placebo for induction of remission in patients with mildly to moderately active UC, based on an intent-to-treat analysis, the totality of the data supports a benefit of treatment. Central review of endoscopic images is critical to the conduct of induction studies in UC; ClinicalTrials.gov Number, NCT0105934

The role of centralized reading of endoscopy in a randomized controlled trial of mesalamine for ulcerative colitis

Background & Aims: Interobserver differences in endoscopic assessments contribute to variations in rates of response to placebo in ulcerative colitis (UC) trials. We investigated whether centralized review of images could reduce these variations. Methods: We performed a 10-week, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study of 281 patients with mildly to moderately active UC, defined by an Ulcerative Colitis Disease Activity Index (UCDAI) sigmoidoscopy score ≥2, that evaluated the efficacy of delayed-release mesalamine (Asacol 800-mg tablet) 4.8 g/day. Endoscopic images were reviewed by a single expert central reader. The primary outcome was clinical remission (UCDAI, stool frequency and bleeding scores of 0, and no fecal urgency) at week 6. Results: The primary outcome was achieved by 30.0% of patients treated with mesalamine and 20.6% of those given placebo, a difference of 9.4% (95% confidence interval [CI], -0.7% to 19.4%; P =.069). Significant differences in results from secondary analyses indicated the efficacy of mesalamine. Thirty-one percent of participants, all of whom had a UCDAI sigmoidoscopy score ≥2 as read by the site investigator, were considered ineligible by the central reader. After exclusion of these patients, the remission rates were 29.0% and 13.8% in the mesalamine and placebo groups, respectively (difference of 15%; 95% CI, 3.5%-26.0%; P =.011). Conclusions: Although mesalamine 4.8 g/day was not statistically different from placebo for induction of remission in patients with mildly to moderately active UC, based on an intent-to-treat analysis, the totality of the data supports a benefit of treatment. Central review of endoscopic images is critical to the conduct of induction studies in UC; ClinicalTrials.gov Number, NCT01059344. © 2013 by the AGA Institute