Evaluating the Impact of Using a Wound-Specific Oral Nutritional Supplement to Support Wound Healing in a Rehabilitation Setting

Chronic wounds adversely affect patient quality of life, increase the risk of mortality, and impose high costs on healthcare systems. Since protein-energy malnutrition or specific nutrient deficiencies can delay wound healing, nutritionally focused care is a key strategy to help prevent or treat the occurrence of non-healing wounds. The objective of our study of inpatients in a rehabilitation hospital was to quantify the effect of daily wound-specific oral nutritional supplementation (WS-ONS) on healing chronic wounds. Using electronic medical records, we conducted a retrospective analysis of patients with chronic wounds. We identified records for (a) a treatment group who received standard wound care + usual hospital diet + daily WS-ONS for ≥14 days, and (b) a control group who received standard wound care + a usual hospital diet. We collected data for demographics, nutritional status, and wound-relevant health characteristics. We examined weekly measurements of wound number and sizes (surface area for superficial wounds or volume for non-superficial wounds). There were 341 patients identified, 114 with 322 wounds in the treatment group and 227 patients with 420 wounds in the control group. We found that rehabilitation inpatients who were given nutritional support had larger wounds and lower functional independence on admission. At discharge, wound area reduction (percent) was nearly two-fold better in patients who were given daily WS-ONS + usual hospital diet compared to those who consumed usual diet only (61.1% vs 34.5%). Overall, weekly wound improvement (lowered wound area or wound volume) was more likely in the WS-ONS group than in the Control group, particularly from the start of care to week 2. Inpatients with largest wounds and lowest functional independence on admission were most likely to be given WS-ONS, an indication that caregivers recognised the need for supplementation. Week-to-week improvement in wound size was more likely in patients who received WS-ONS than in those who did not. Specifically, wound areas and wound volumes were significantly lower at discharge among patients who were given specialised nutritional support. More research in this field is needed to improve care and reduce healthcare costs

External Validation of a Model Determining Risk of Neoplastic Progression of Barrett\u27s Esophagus in a Cohort of Us Veterans

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Risk of esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) in those with Barrett\u27s esophagus (BE) is 11-fold greater than the general population. It remains unclear which BE patients are at highest risk of progression to EAC. We aimed to validate a predictive model risk-stratifying BE patients. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study at the Houston Veteran Affairs Medical Center of consecutive patients with a new diagnosis of BE from November 1990 to January 2019. Study follow-up was through February 2020. Patients were excluded if they had no follow-up EGD with esophageal biopsy sampling after the initial BE-diagnosing EGD or evidence of high-grade dysplasia (HGD) or EAC on initial EGD. We performed an external validation study of a risk model containing sex, smoking, BE length, and low-grade dysplasia (LGD) status and assessed discriminatory ability using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC). RESULTS: Among 608 BE patients, 24 progressed to HGD/EAC. The points-based model discriminated well with an AUROC of .72 (95% confidence interval [CI], .63-.82). When categorized into low-, intermediate-, and high-risk groups according to published cutoffs, the AUROC was poor at .57. Restructured into low-risk versus high-risk groups, the AUROC was .72 (95% CI, .64-.80). Excluding baseline LGD did not reduce discriminatory ability (AUROC, .73; 95% CI, .64-.82). CONCLUSIONS: This external validation provides further evidence that the model including sex, LGD status, smoking status, and BE length may help to risk stratify BE patients. A simplified version excluding LGD status and/or reducing the number of risk groups has increased utility in clinical practice without loss of discriminatory ability

Baseline Characteristics of Sars-Cov-2 Vaccine Non-Responders in a Large Population-Based Sample

INTRODUCTION: Studies indicate that individuals with chronic conditions and specific baseline characteristics may not mount a robust humoral antibody response to SARS-CoV-2 vaccines. In this paper, we used data from the Texas Coronavirus Antibody REsponse Survey (Texas CARES), a longitudinal state-wide seroprevalence program that has enrolled more than 90,000 participants, to evaluate the role of chronic diseases as the potential risk factors of non-response to SARS-CoV-2 vaccines in a large epidemiologic cohort. METHODS: A participant needed to complete an online survey and a blood draw to test for SARS-CoV-2 circulating plasma antibodies at four-time points spaced at least three months apart. Chronic disease predictors of vaccine non-response are evaluated using logistic regression with non-response as the outcome and each chronic disease + age as the predictors. RESULTS: As of April 24, 2023, 18,240 participants met the inclusion criteria; 0.58% (N = 105) of these are non-responders. Adjusting for age, our results show that participants with self-reported immunocompromised status, kidney disease, cancer, and other non-specified comorbidity were 15.43, 5.11, 2.59, and 3.13 times more likely to fail to mount a complete response to a vaccine, respectively. Furthermore, having two or more chronic diseases doubled the prevalence of non-response. CONCLUSION: Consistent with smaller targeted studies, a large epidemiologic cohort bears the same conclusion and demonstrates immunocompromised, cancer, kidney disease, and the number of diseases are associated with vaccine non-response. This study suggests that those individuals, with chronic diseases with the potential to affect their immune system response, may need increased doses or repeated doses of COVID-19 vaccines to develop a protective antibody level

Antibody Duration after infection From Sars-Cov-2 in the Texas Coronavirus antibody Response Survey

Understanding the duration of antibodies to the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) virus that causes COVID-19 is important to controlling the current pandemic. Participants from the Texas Coronavirus Antibody Response Survey (Texas CARES) with at least 1 nucleocapsid protein antibody test were selected for a longitudinal analysis of antibody duration. A linear mixed model was fit to data from participants (n = 4553) with 1 to 3 antibody tests over 11 months (1 October 2020 to 16 September 2021), and models fit showed that expected antibody response after COVID-19 infection robustly increases for 100 days postinfection, and predicts individuals may remain antibody positive from natural infection beyond 500 days depending on age, body mass index, smoking or vaping use, and disease severity (hospitalized or not; symptomatic or not)