Screening for hazardous alcohol use in the Emergency Department:Comparison of phosphatidylethanol with the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test and the Timeline Follow-back

Background: Up to 15% of all visits to the Emergency Department (ED) are alcohol related. Identification of problematic alcohol use is important in this setting because it allows for intervention and prevention efforts. This study investigated the correlation between the objective phosphatidylethanol (PEth) marker and the subjective Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT) and Timeline Followback Questionnaire (TLFB) as screening methods for hazardous alcohol use in the general ED population. Methods: This prospective cohort study included 301 ED patients (57% male) who were seen in the ED and required to give a blood sample. The correlation between the values of PEth (PEth 16:0/18:1 and PEth 16:0/18:2) and the scores on the AUDIT and TLFB were analyzed using Spearman's rank correlation coefficient. Differences between risk categories of PEth and AUDIT were also examined. Results: The Spearman correlation coefficients between PEth 16:0/18:1|PEth 16:0/18:2 values and the AUDIT scores were moderate (PEth 16:0/18:1: 0.67, p < 0.001; PEth 16:0/18:2: 0.67, p < 0.001). Of the patients who scored ‘low risk drinking/abstinence’ according to the AUDIT questionnaire, respectively 1% and 4% had PEth 16:0/18:1|PEth 16:0/18:2 values indicating excessive alcohol use, and another 10% and 12% had PEth 16:0/18:1|PEth 16:0/18:2 values indicating moderate alcohol consumption. Of the 12 (PEth 16:0/18:1) and 25 (PEth 16:0/18:2) patients with high-risk values, respectively 25% and 40% scored in the lowest risk category on the AUDIT questionnaire. Spearman correlation coefficients between PEth 16:0/18:1|PEth 16:0/18:2 values and TLFB two-week scores were high (PEth 16:0/18:1: 0.74, p < 0.001; PEth 16:0/18:2: 0.82, p < 0.001). Conclusions: AUDIT scores were moderately correlated with PEth values in the general ED population. In almost all cases where there was not a good correlation, patients had high PEth values with low AUDIT scores. We conclude that PEth identifies patients with problematic alcohol use who are missed by the AUDIT questionnaire and therefore PEth could be used as an additional screening method for hazardous alcohol use in this population

Axial slicing versus bivalving in the pathological examination of pancreatoduodenectomy specimens (APOLLO): a multicentre randomized controlled trial

Background: In pancreatoduodenectomy specimens, dissection method may affect the assessment of primary tumour origin (i.e. pancreatic, distal bile duct or ampullary adenocarcinoma), which is primarily determined macroscopically. This is the first study to prospectively compare the two commonly used techniques, i.e. axial slicing and bivalving. Methods: In four centres, a randomized controlled trial was performed in specimens of patients with a suspected (pre)malignant tumour in the pancreatic head. Primary outcome measure was the level of certainty (scale 0–100) regarding tumour origin by four independent gastrointestinal pathologists based on macroscopic assessment. Secondary outcomes were inter-observer agreement and R1 rate. Results: In total, 128 pancreatoduodenectomy specimens were randomized. The level of certainty in determining the primary tumour origin did not differ between axial slicing and bivalving (mean score 72 [sd 13] vs. 68 [sd 16], p = 0.21), nor did inter-observer agreement, both being moderate (kappa 0.45 vs. 0.47). In pancreatic cancer specimens, R1 rate (60% vs. 55%, p = 0.71) and the number of harvested lymph nodes (median 16 vs. 17, p = 0.58) were similar. Conclusion: This study demonstrated no differences in determining the tumour origin between axial slicing and bivalving. Both techniques performed similarly regarding inter-observer agreement, R1 rate, and lymph node harvest

The Stability of Comorbid Psychiatric Disorders: A 7 Year Follow Up of Children with Pervasive Developmental Disorder-Not Otherwise Specified

The current study was a 7-year follow-up of 74 6-12 year old children with Pervasive Developmental Disorder-Not Otherwise Specified. We examined the rates and 7 year stability of comorbid psychiatric diagnoses as ascertained with the Diagnostic Interview Schedule for Children: Parent version at ages 6-12 and again at ages 12-20. Also, we examined childhood factors that predicted the stability of comorbid psychiatric disorders. The rate of comorbid psychiatric disorders dropped significantly from childhood (81 %) to adolescence (61 %). Higher levels of parent reported stereotyped behaviors and reduced social interest in childhood significantly predicted the stability of psychiatric comorbidity. Re-evaluation of psychiatric comorbidity should be considered in clinical practice, since several individuals shifted in comorbid diagnoses

Screening for hazardous alcohol use in the Emergency Department: Comparison of phosphatidylethanol with the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test and the Timeline Follow-back

Background: Up to 15% of all visits to the Emergency Department (ED) are alcohol related. Identification of problematic alcohol use is important in this setting because it allows for intervention and prevention efforts. This study investigated the correlation between the objective phosphatidylethanol (PEth) marker and the subjective Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT) and Timeline Followback Questionnaire (TLFB) as screening methods for hazardous alcohol use in the general ED population. Methods: This prospective cohort study included 301 ED patients (57% male) who were seen in the ED and required to give a blood sample. The correlation between the values of PEth (PEth 16:0/18:1 and PEth 16:0/18:2) and the scores on the AUDIT and TLFB were analyzed using Spearman's rank correlation coefficient. Differences between risk categories of PEth and AUDIT were also examined. Results: The Spearman correlation coefficients between PEth 16:0/18:1|PEth 16:0/18:2 values and the AUDIT scores were moderate (PEth 16:0/18:1: 0.67, p < 0.001; PEth 16:0/18:2: 0.67, p < 0.001). Of the patients who scored ‘low risk drinking/abstinence’ according to the AUDIT questionnaire, respectively 1% and 4% had PEth 16:0/18:1|PEth 16:0/18:2 values indicating excessive alcohol use, and another 10% and 12% had PEth 16:0/18:1|PEth 16:0/18:2 values indicating moderate alcohol consumption. Of the 12 (PEth 16:0/18:1) and 25 (PEth 16:0/18:2) patients with high-risk values, respectively 25% and 40% scored in the lowest risk category on the AUDIT questionnaire. Spearman correlation coefficients between PEth 16:0/18:1|PEth 16:0/18:2 values and TLFB two-week scores were high (PEth 16:0/18:1: 0.74, p < 0.001; PEth 16:0/18:2: 0.82, p < 0.001). Conclusions: AUDIT scores were moderately correlated with PEth values in the general ED population. In almost all cases where there was not a good correlation, patients had high PEth values with low AUDIT scores. We conclude that PEth identifies patients with problematic alcohol use who are missed by the AUDIT questionnaire and therefore PEth could be used as an additional screening method for hazardous alcohol use in this population

Axial slicing versus bivalving in the pathological examination of pancreatoduodenectomy specimens (APOLLO): a multicentre randomized controlled trial

Background: In pancreatoduodenectomy specimens, dissection method may affect the assessment of primary tumour origin (i.e. pancreatic, distal bile duct or ampullary adenocarcinoma), which is primarily determined macroscopically. This is the first study to prospectively compare the two commonly used techniques, i.e. axial slicing and bivalving. Methods: In four centres, a randomized controlled trial was performed in specimens of patients with a suspected (pre)malignant tumour in the pancreatic head. Primary outcome measure was the level of certainty (scale 0–100) regarding tumour origin by four independent gastrointestinal pathologists based on macroscopic assessment. Secondary outcomes were inter-observer agreement and R1 rate. Results: In total, 128 pancreatoduodenectomy specimens were randomized. The level of certainty in determining the primary tumour origin did not differ between axial slicing and bivalving (mean score 72 [sd 13] vs. 68 [sd 16], p = 0.21), nor did inter-observer agreement, both being moderate (kappa 0.45 vs. 0.47). In pancreatic cancer specimens, R1 rate (60% vs. 55%, p = 0.71) and the number of harvested lymph nodes (median 16 vs. 17, p = 0.58) were similar. Conclusion: This study demonstrated no differences in determining the tumour origin between axial slicing and bivalving. Both techniques performed similarly regarding inter-observer agreement, R1 rate, and lymph node harvest