Cerebrospinal fluid levels of neopterin are elevated in delirium after hip fracture

Background The inflammatory cell product neopterin is elevated in serum before and during delirium. This suggests a role for disordered cell-mediated immunity or oxidative stress. Cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) neopterin levels reflect brain neopterin levels more closely than serum levels. Here we hypothesized that CSF neopterin levels would be higher in delirium. Methods In this prospective cohort study, 139 elderly patients with acute hip fracture were recruited in Oslo and Edinburgh. Delirium was diagnosed with the confusion assessment method performed daily pre-operatively and on the first 5 days post-operatively. Paired CSF and blood samples were collected at the onset of spinal anaesthesia. Neopterin levels were measured using high-performance liquid chromatography. Results Sixty-four (46 %) of 139 hip fracture patients developed delirium perioperatively. CSF neopterin levels were higher in delirium compared to controls (median 29.6 vs 24.7 nmol/mL, p = 0.003), with highest levels in patients who developed delirium post-operatively. Serum neopterin levels were also higher in delirium (median 37.0 vs 27.1 nmol/mL, p = 0.003). CSF neopterin remained significantly associated with delirium after controlling for relevant risk factors. Higher neopterin levels were associated with poorer outcomes (death or new institutionalization) 1 year after surgery (p = 0.02 for CSF and p = 0.03 for serum). Conclusions This study is the first to examine neopterin in CSF from patients with delirium. Our findings suggest potential roles for activation of cell-mediated immune responses or oxidative stress in the delirium process. High levels of serum or CSF neopterin in hip fracture patients may also be useful in predicting poor outcomes

Contrasting academic and lay press print coverage of the 2013-2016 Ebola Virus Disease outbreak

<div><p>Under a traditional paradigm, only those with the expected background knowledge consume academic literature. The lay press, as well as government and non-government agencies, play a complementary role of extracting findings of high interest or importance and translating them for general viewing. The need for accurate reporting and public advising is paramount when attempting to tackle epidemic outbreaks through behavior change. Yet, public trust in media outlets is at a historic low. The Crisis and Emergency Risk Communication (CERC) model for media reporting on public health emergencies was established in 2005 and has subsequently been used to analyze media reporting on outbreaks of influenza and measles as well as smoking habits and medication compliance. However, no media analysis had yet been performed on the 2013–2016 Ebola Virus Disease (EVD) outbreak. This study compared the EVD information relayed by lay press sources with general review articles in the academic literature through a mixed-methods analysis. These findings suggest that comprehensive review articles could not serve as a source to clarify and contextualize the uncertainties around the EVD outbreak, perhaps due to adherence to technical accuracy at the expense of clarity within the context of outbreak conditions. This finding does not imply inferiority of the academic literature, nor does it draw direct causation between confusion in review articles and public misunderstanding. Given the erosion of the barriers siloing academia, combined with the demands of today’s fast-paced media environment, contemporary researchers should realize that no study is outside the public forum and to therefore consider shifting the paradigm to take personal responsibility in the process of accurately translating their scientific words into public policy actions to best serve as a source of clarity.</p></div