Service based comparison of group cognitive behavior therapy to waiting list control for chronic fatigue syndrome with regard to symptom reduction and positive psychological dimensions

Background: Although chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS) sometimes referred to as myalgic encephalomyelitis (ME) is a very challenging condition to treat, there is evidence that individual cognitive behavioral therapy (ICBT) can be effective for treatment and management of its symptoms. Furthermore, group cognitive behavioral therapy (GCBT) is emerging as promising treatment for the condition. The aim of the present study was to explore further the effectiveness of GCBT in a routine clinical setting and to investigate associated positive psychological effects related to GCBT. Methods: In this pragmatic, non-randomized, controlled trial, 28 people acted as their own waiting list control by completing a range of measures 8 weeks prior to taking part in the GCBT. The intervention consisted of 8 consecutive weeks of 2.5-hour sessions. Results: Repeated measures analysis of covariance revealed significant improvements in physical fatigue (F = 28.31, P < .01, effect size d = 0.52), mental fatigue (F = 7.72, P < .01, effect size d = 0.22), and depressive symptoms (Beck depression inventory-fast screen for medical individuals [BDI-FS]: F = 11.43, P < .01, effect size d = 0.30; hospital anxiety and depression scale [HADS-D]: F = 16.72, P < .01, effect size d = 0.38) compared with the waiting list. Improvements in quality of life (F = 7.56, P < .01, effect size d = 0.23), hope (F = 15.15, P < .01, effect size d = 0.36), and optimism (F = 8.17, P < .01, effect size d = 0.23) were also identified, but no change was reported for anxiety levels. Global outcome measures revealed that the majority of the individuals found the treatment beneficial and were satisfied with the results. Conclusion: GCBT is a beneficial and cost-effective treatment that individuals find amenable in routine clinical practice for CFS. Additionally we have described important effects emerged on positive psychological dimensions such as hope and optimism potentially enhancing the overall benefit

National level prescribing of psychotropic medication in primary care during the COVID-19 pandemic in England: potential implications for cardiometabolic health

The COVID-19 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic has had a global impact on healthcare provision. Changes in prescribing of commonly used medications can be used as a marker for diagnoses of new patients as well as measuring service levels for patients in primary care [1]

Reducing fatigue-related symptoms in Long COVID-19: a preliminary report of a lymphatic drainage intervention

Introduction In the early days of the first global wave of the COVID-19 pandemic, the potential for a postviral syndrome to manifest following COVID-19 infection was first recognized. Here, we present an analysis of a case series of the first 20 patients’ data collected in clinical practice to evaluate the potential of a possible alternative treatment for Long COVID. Methods Face-to-face treatment sessions with Perrin techniqueTM practitioners occurred weekly involving effleurage/other manual articulatory techniques. The individuals being treated also undertook daily self-massage along with gentle mobility exercises. Patients recorded symptom severity using the self-report 54-item profile of fatigue-related states (PFRS) before and after treatment. Results The mean age of male patients was 41.8 years (range, 29–53 years), and for female patients, 39.3 years (range, 28–50 years). None of the participants had a prior diagnosis of chronic fatigue syndrome, and all were new attendees to the clinics at the time of initial assessment. The average number of treatment sessions was 9.7 in men and 9.4 in women. The reduction in PFRS scores was 41.8% in men and 60.5% in women. The highest subscale scores on average were for fatigue, with the lowest for somatic symptoms. All subscale scores showed, on average, a similar reduction of approximately 50% postintervention, with the reduction in score relating to a decrease in the severity of symptoms. Conclusion Our findings suggest that a specific manual lymphatic drainage intervention may help to reduce fatigue symptoms related to Long COVID, perhaps preventing acute symptoms through early intervention

Monitoring drug interventions in people with bipolar disorder

'Editorial Material

Natural desiccated thyroid for the treatment of hypothyroidism?

Primary hypothyroidism affects about 3% of the general population in Europe. Early treatments in the late 19th Century involved subcutaneous as well as oral administration of thyroid extract. Until the early 1970s, the majority of people across the world with hypothyroidism were treated with natural desiccated thyroid (NDT) (derived from pig thyroid glands) in various formulations, with the majority of people since then being treated with levothyroxine (L-thyroxine). There is emerging evidence that may account for the efficacy of liothyronine (NDT contains a mixture of levothyroxine and liothyronine) in people who are symptomatically unresponsive to levothyroxine. While this is a highly selected group of people, the severity and chronicity of their symptoms and the fact that many patients have found their symptoms to be alleviated, can be viewed as valid evidence for the potential benefit of NDT when given after careful consideration of other differential diagnoses and other treatment options

Liothyronine and levothyroxine prescribing in England: A comprehensive survey and evaluation

From Wiley via Jisc Publications RouterHistory: received 2021-01-06, rev-recd 2021-03-28, accepted 2021-04-12, pub-electronic 2021-07-06Article version: VoRPublication status: PublishedAbstract: Introduction: The approach to thyroid hormone replacement varies across centres, but the extent and determinants of variation is unclear. We evaluated geographical variation in levothyroxine (LT4) and liothyronine (LT3) prescribing across General Practices in England and analysed the relationship of prescribing patterns to clinical and socioeconomic factors. Methods: Data was downloaded from the NHS monthly General Practice Prescribing Data in England for the period 2011‐2020. Results: The study covered a population of 19.4 million women over 30 years of age, attending 6,660 GP practices and being provided with 33.7 million prescriptions of LT4 and LT3 at a total cost of £90million/year. Overall, 0.5% of levothyroxine treated patients continue to receive liothyronine. All Clinical Commission Groups (CCGs) in England continue to have at least one liothyronine prescribing practice and 48.5% of English general practices prescribed liothyronine in 2019‐2020. Factors strongly influencing more levothyroxine prescribing (model accounted for 62% of variance) were the CCG to which the practice belonged and the proportion of people with diabetes registered on the practice list plus antidepressant prescribing, with socioeconomic disadvantage associated with less levothyroxine prescribing. Whereas factors that were associated with increased levels of liothyronine prescribing (model accounted for 17% of variance), were antidepressant prescribing and % of type 2 diabetes mellitus individuals achieving HbA1c control of 58 mmol/mol or less. Factors that were associated with reduced levels of liothyronine prescribing included smoking and higher obesity rates. Conclusion: In spite of strenuous attempts to limit prescribing of liothyronine in general practice a significant number of patients continue to receive this therapy, although there is significant geographical variation in the prescribing of this as for levothyroxine, with specific general practice and CCG‐related factors influencing prescribing of both levothyroxine and liothyronine across England

Liothyronine and levothyroxine prescribing in England: A comprehensive survey and evaluation

Introduction The approach to thyroid hormone replacement varies across centres, but the extent and determinants of variation is unclear. We evaluated geographical variation in levothyroxine (LT4) and liothyronine (LT3) prescribing across General Practices in England and analysed the relationship of prescribing patterns to clinical and socioeconomic factors. Methods Data was downloaded from the NHS monthly General Practice Prescribing Data in England for the period 2011-2020. Results The study covered a population of 19.4 million women over 30 years of age, attending 6,660 GP practices and being provided with 33.7 million prescriptions of LT4 and LT3 at a total cost of £90million/year. Overall, 0.5% of levothyroxine treated patients continue to receive liothyronine. All Clinical Commission Groups (CCGs) in England continue to have at least one liothyronine prescribing practice and 48.5% of English general practices prescribed liothyronine in 2019-2020. Factors strongly influencing more levothyroxine prescribing (model accounted for 62% of variance) were the CCG to which the practice belonged and the proportion of people with diabetes registered on the practice list plus antidepressant prescribing, with socioeconomic disadvantage associated with less levothyroxine prescribing. Whereas factors that were associated with increased levels of liothyronine prescribing (model accounted for 17% of variance), were antidepressant prescribing and % of type 2 diabetes mellitus individuals achieving HbA1c control of 58 mmol/mol or less. Factors that were associated with reduced levels of liothyronine prescribing included smoking and higher obesity rates. Conclusion In spite of strenuous attempts to limit prescribing of liothyronine in general practice a significant number of patients continue to receive this therapy, although there is significant geographical variation in the prescribing of this as for levothyroxine, with specific general practice and CCG-related factors influencing prescribing of both levothyroxine and liothyronine across England

Trends in costs and prescribing for liothyronine and levothyroxine in England and wales 2011–2020

From Wiley via Jisc Publications RouterHistory: received 2020-11-08, rev-recd 2020-12-14, accepted 2020-12-21, pub-electronic 2021-03-21, pub-print 2021-06Article version: VoRPublication status: PublishedAbstract: Introduction: Recent prescribing policies in England and Wales have imposed significant restrictions on liothyronine prescribing in general practice driven by the prohibitive costs and uncertain benefits of liothyronine in the management of hypothyroidism. However, the impact of these policies on liothyronine usage and costs is still unclear. Methods: Data were downloaded from the NHS monthly General Practice Prescribing Data in England and from the Comparative Analysis System for Prescribing Audit (CASPA) in Wales for 2011–2020. Trends over the period in amount and costs of levothyroxine and liothyronine prescribing were analysed. Results: The total medication costs per year for England Wales for hypothyroidism rose from £60.8 million to £129.8 million in 2015–16 and have since reduced to £88.4 million. Levothyroxine prescriptions have been growing above the population growth rate at 0.7%/annum in England and 1.1% in Wales. The costs/patient/year for liothyronine rose from £550 to £3000 in 2015–16 and has since fallen to £2500. Use of liothyronine as a percentage of levothyroxine started to fall in 2015–16 at 7%/annum in England and 3% in Wales. Nevertheless, 0.5% of levothyroxine‐treated patients continue to receive liothyronine. All Clinical Commission Groups (CCGs) in England continue to have at least one liothyronine prescribing practice and 48.5% of English general practices prescribed liothyronine in 2019–20. Conclusion: In spite of strenuous attempts to limit prescribing of liothyronine in general practice, a significant number of patients continue to receive this therapy. The price differential of liothyronine vs levothyroxine should be examined again in light of the continuing use of liothyronine

Mortality in 98 type 1 diabetes mellitus and type 2 diabetes mellitus: Foot ulcer location is an independent risk determinant

From Wiley via Jisc Publications RouterHistory: received 2020-10-04, rev-recd 2021-02-18, accepted 2021-03-24, pub-electronic 2021-06-14Article version: VoRPublication status: PublishedAbstract: Introduction: We previously demonstrated in both a longitudinal study and in meta‐analysis (pooled relative‐risk RR, 2.45) that all‐cause mortality is significantly higher in people with diabetes foot ulceration (DFU) than with those without a foot ulcer. In this prospective study, we looked at the factors linked to mortality after presentation to podiatry with DFU. Methods: Ninety‐eight individuals recruited consecutively from the Salford Royal Hospital Multidisciplinary Foot Clinic in Spring 2016 were followed up for up to 48 months. Data concerning health outcomes were extracted from the electronic patient record (EPR). Results: Seventeen people (17) had type 1 diabetes mellitus, and 81 had type 2 diabetes mellitus. Thirty‐one were women. The mean age (range) was 63.6 (28–90) years with maximum diabetes duration 45 years. Mean HbA1c was 72 (95% CI: 67–77) mmol/mol; 97% had neuropathy (International Working Group on the Diabetic Foot (IWGDF) monofilament); 62% had vascular insufficiency (Doppler studies); 69% of ulcers were forefoot, and 23% of ulcers were hind foot in location. Forty of 98 (40%) patients died in follow‐up with 27% of death certificates including sepsis (not foot‐related) and 35% renal failure as cause of death. Multivariate regression analysis indicated a 6.3 (95% CI: 3.9–8.1) fold increased risk of death with hind foot ulcer, independent of age/BMI/gender/HbA1c/eGFR/total cholesterol level. Conclusion: This prospective study has indicated a very high long‐term mortality rate in individuals with DFU, greater for those with a hind foot ulcer and shown a close relation between risk of sepsis/renal failure and DFU mortality, highlighting again the importance of addressing all risk factors as soon as people present with a foot ulcer

A Retrospective Real-World Study of the Effectiveness and Tolerability of Tildrakizumab in UK Adults with Moderate-to-Severe Chronic Plaque Psoriasis

INTRODUCTION: As with most medicines historically, clinicians prescribing tildrakizumab have relied on information derived from registration studies undertaken in a prospective controlled clinical trial setting. More recently, clinicians, policymakers, and commissioners increasingly rely on real-world data to inform both policy and practice. METHODS: A retrospective real-world data study was undertaken at four specialist dermatology departments in the United Kingdom. All adult patients treated with tildrakizumab for moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis were included, with data being collected for 122 patients. RESULTS: Psoriatic patients on tildrakizumab tended to be overweight (median body mass index of 32 (range 19–59) (n = 61); 26/68 (38%)  120 kg). The study population had high levels of comorbidities (83/116, 72%), multiple special sites (39/117, 33%), and histories of biological treatments (81/100, 81%). Most patients (61/80, 76%) initiated on tildrakizumab were switched from another biological treatment. Tildrakizumab was effective, with 91/122 (75%) patients remaining on treatment for the duration of the study—a median of 12 months per patient (range 1–29 months)—and achieving a change in median Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) from 12 to 0.35 and in Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) from 20 to 0. The response rate was 57/66 (86%) when tildrakizumab was used as the first- or second-line biologic compared to 19/31 (61%) when used as the third- to seventh-line. Thirty-three (78.6%) patients over 90 kg of weight received the 200-mg dose of tildrakizumab. All but one (n = 8) patient with body weight over 120 kg maintained response over time. There was one treatment discontinuation; a patient who had a local sensitivity reaction. CONCLUSIONS: In UK clinical practice, tildrakizumab was well tolerated and effective at doses of 100 mg or 200 mg in a range of patient phenotypes