Value of Community Partnership for Understanding Stress and Coping in Rural Yup’ik Communities: The CANHR Study

Stress and trauma can compromise physical and mental health. Rural Alaska Native communities have voiced concern about stressful and traumatic events and their effects on health. The goal of the Yup’ik Experiences of Stress and Coping Project is to develop an in-depth understanding of experiences of stress and ways of coping in Yup’ik communities. The long-range goal is to use project findings to develop and implement a community-informed and culturally grounded intervention to reduce stress and promote physical and mental health in rural Alaska Native communities. This paper introduces a long-standing partnership between the Yukon-Kuskokwim Regional Health Corporation, rural communities it serves, and the Center for Alaska Native Health Research at the University of Alaska Fairbanks. Within the context of the Stress and Coping project, we then discuss the value and challenges of taking a CBPR approach to advance science and address a priority community concern, and share strategies to respond to challenges. Focus groups were conducted to culturally adapt an existing structured interview and daily diary protocol to better fit Yup’ik ways of knowing. As modified, these interviews increased understanding of stress and coping particular to two Yup’ik communities. Challenges included the geographical nature of Yup’ik communities, communication barriers, competing priorities, and confidentiality issues. Community participation was central in the development of the study protocol, helped ensure that the research was culturally appropriate and relevant to the community, and facilitated access to participant knowledge and rich data to inform intervention development

Disseminating Research in Rural Yup’ik Communities: Challenges and Ethical Considerations in Moving from Discovery to Intervention Development in the Translational Pathway

The native people of Alaska have experienced historical trauma and on-going rapid, often externally imposed changes in culture and lifestyle patterns. As a consequence, these populations shoulder a disproportionately high burden of psychological stress. Yup\u27ik communities in the Yukon Kuskokwim Delta region in Southwest Alaska have experienced epidemics and forced acculturation, contributing to behavioural health issues, including substance abuse and suicide. Cultural loss in Yup\u27ik communities has resulted in generational gaps that disrupt the transmission of cultural traditions and values important for well-being. Despite these intrusions, Yup\u27ik communities have retained cultural traditions which act as protective factors against the development of physical and psychological illness. These cultural protective factors can be harnessed to collaboratively develop culturally grounded interventions that reduce stress and build connections across generations, helping communities move towards wellness on their own terms

Effect of Hydrocortisone on Mortality and Organ Support in Patients With Severe COVID-19: The REMAP-CAP COVID-19 Corticosteroid Domain Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Evidence regarding corticosteroid use for severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is limited. Objective: To determine whether hydrocortisone improves outcome for patients with severe COVID-19. Design, Setting, and Participants: An ongoing adaptive platform trial testing multiple interventions within multiple therapeutic domains, for example, antiviral agents, corticosteroids, or immunoglobulin. Between March 9 and June 17, 2020, 614 adult patients with suspected or confirmed COVID-19 were enrolled and randomized within at least 1 domain following admission to an intensive care unit (ICU) for respiratory or cardiovascular organ support at 121 sites in 8 countries. Of these, 403 were randomized to open-label interventions within the corticosteroid domain. The domain was halted after results from another trial were released. Follow-up ended August 12, 2020. Interventions: The corticosteroid domain randomized participants to a fixed 7-day course of intravenous hydrocortisone (50 mg or 100 mg every 6 hours) (n = 143), a shock-dependent course (50 mg every 6 hours when shock was clinically evident) (n = 152), or no hydrocortisone (n = 108). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was organ support-free days (days alive and free of ICU-based respiratory or cardiovascular support) within 21 days, where patients who died were assigned -1 day. The primary analysis was a bayesian cumulative logistic model that included all patients enrolled with severe COVID-19, adjusting for age, sex, site, region, time, assignment to interventions within other domains, and domain and intervention eligibility. Superiority was defined as the posterior probability of an odds ratio greater than 1 (threshold for trial conclusion of superiority >99%). Results: After excluding 19 participants who withdrew consent, there were 384 patients (mean age, 60 years; 29% female) randomized to the fixed-dose (n = 137), shock-dependent (n = 146), and no (n = 101) hydrocortisone groups; 379 (99%) completed the study and were included in the analysis. The mean age for the 3 groups ranged between 59.5 and 60.4 years; most patients were male (range, 70.6%-71.5%); mean body mass index ranged between 29.7 and 30.9; and patients receiving mechanical ventilation ranged between 50.0% and 63.5%. For the fixed-dose, shock-dependent, and no hydrocortisone groups, respectively, the median organ support-free days were 0 (IQR, -1 to 15), 0 (IQR, -1 to 13), and 0 (-1 to 11) days (composed of 30%, 26%, and 33% mortality rates and 11.5, 9.5, and 6 median organ support-free days among survivors). The median adjusted odds ratio and bayesian probability of superiority were 1.43 (95% credible interval, 0.91-2.27) and 93% for fixed-dose hydrocortisone, respectively, and were 1.22 (95% credible interval, 0.76-1.94) and 80% for shock-dependent hydrocortisone compared with no hydrocortisone. Serious adverse events were reported in 4 (3%), 5 (3%), and 1 (1%) patients in the fixed-dose, shock-dependent, and no hydrocortisone groups, respectively. Conclusions and Relevance: Among patients with severe COVID-19, treatment with a 7-day fixed-dose course of hydrocortisone or shock-dependent dosing of hydrocortisone, compared with no hydrocortisone, resulted in 93% and 80% probabilities of superiority with regard to the odds of improvement in organ support-free days within 21 days. However, the trial was stopped early and no treatment strategy met prespecified criteria for statistical superiority, precluding definitive conclusions. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02735707

Effect of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor and angiotensin receptor blocker initiation on organ support-free days in patients hospitalized with COVID-19

IMPORTANCE Overactivation of the renin-angiotensin system (RAS) may contribute to poor clinical outcomes in patients with COVID-19. Objective To determine whether angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitor or angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) initiation improves outcomes in patients hospitalized for COVID-19. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS In an ongoing, adaptive platform randomized clinical trial, 721 critically ill and 58 non–critically ill hospitalized adults were randomized to receive an RAS inhibitor or control between March 16, 2021, and February 25, 2022, at 69 sites in 7 countries (final follow-up on June 1, 2022). INTERVENTIONS Patients were randomized to receive open-label initiation of an ACE inhibitor (n = 257), ARB (n = 248), ARB in combination with DMX-200 (a chemokine receptor-2 inhibitor; n = 10), or no RAS inhibitor (control; n = 264) for up to 10 days. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The primary outcome was organ support–free days, a composite of hospital survival and days alive without cardiovascular or respiratory organ support through 21 days. The primary analysis was a bayesian cumulative logistic model. Odds ratios (ORs) greater than 1 represent improved outcomes. RESULTS On February 25, 2022, enrollment was discontinued due to safety concerns. Among 679 critically ill patients with available primary outcome data, the median age was 56 years and 239 participants (35.2%) were women. Median (IQR) organ support–free days among critically ill patients was 10 (–1 to 16) in the ACE inhibitor group (n = 231), 8 (–1 to 17) in the ARB group (n = 217), and 12 (0 to 17) in the control group (n = 231) (median adjusted odds ratios of 0.77 [95% bayesian credible interval, 0.58-1.06] for improvement for ACE inhibitor and 0.76 [95% credible interval, 0.56-1.05] for ARB compared with control). The posterior probabilities that ACE inhibitors and ARBs worsened organ support–free days compared with control were 94.9% and 95.4%, respectively. Hospital survival occurred in 166 of 231 critically ill participants (71.9%) in the ACE inhibitor group, 152 of 217 (70.0%) in the ARB group, and 182 of 231 (78.8%) in the control group (posterior probabilities that ACE inhibitor and ARB worsened hospital survival compared with control were 95.3% and 98.1%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE In this trial, among critically ill adults with COVID-19, initiation of an ACE inhibitor or ARB did not improve, and likely worsened, clinical outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT0273570

American Indian and Alaska Native Mental Health Research

Community collaboration improves the quality of research and makes it more relevant to the community. However, past research eff orts with Native people have rarely been collaborative in terms of design, conduct, and interpretation The Rationale and Aim of the Paper There are two limitations about collaboration and dissemination. First, in spite of the importance of collaboration among researchers, communities, and community-based organizations, few have detailed the process of developing and maintaining these collaborative relationship

Culturally adapting an evidence-based intervention to promote a healthy diet and lifestyle for Yup’ik Alaska native communities

ABSTRACTUnderserved populations are at increased risk for obesity and related cardiovascular disease, type 2 diabetes, and other chronic diseases. Lack of access to healthy foods, sedentary behaviour, and other social environmental factors contribute to disease risk. Yup’ik Alaska Native communities are experiencing lifestyle changes that are likely to affect their cardiometabolic risks. Barrera & Castro’s Cultural Adaptation Framework was used to adapt an evidence-based intervention (EBI) originally designed for Latino communities for use in Yup’ik communities. Focus groups and key informant interviews were held in two Yup’ik communities. Major themes included causes of obesity, barriers and facilitators to healthy foods and physical activity, and intervention ideas. The adaptation process was guided by a Community Planning Group of Yup’ik women and included information gathering, preliminary adaptation design, preliminary adaptation tests, and adaptation refinement. Two of the adapted educational modules were pilot tested. Involving community members as co-researchers in cultural adaptation is vital for an EBI to be effective in another population. Small group gatherings led by local lay health workers are culturally appropriate and may be an effective health promotion model in Yup’ik communities. Social environmental factors affecting healthy food availability and physical activity need further exploration

Disseminating research in rural Yup’ik communities: challenges and ethical considerations in moving from discovery to intervention development

Background. The native people of Alaska have experienced historical trauma and rapid changes in culture and lifestyle patterns. As a consequence, these populations shoulder a disproportionately high burden of psychological stress. The Yup’ik Experiences of Stress and Coping project originated from rural Yup’ik communities’ concerns about stress and its effects on health. It aimed to understand the stressful experiences that affect Yup’ik communities, to identify coping strategies used to deal with these stressors and to inform culturally responsive interventions. Objectives. Here, we examine the process of moving from research (gaining understanding) to disseminating project findings to translation into intervention priorities. We highlight the importance of community participation and discuss challenges encountered, strategies to address these challenges and ethical considerations for responsible intervention research with indigenous communities that reflect their unique historical and current socio-cultural realities. Design. Community-wide presentations and discussions of research findings on stress and coping were followed by smaller Community Planning Group meetings. During these meetings, community members contextualized project findings and discussed implications for interventions. This process placed priority on community expertise in interpreting findings and translating results and community priorities into grant applications focused on intervention development and evaluation. Results. Challenges included translation between English and Yup’ik, funding limitations and uncertainties, and the long timelines involved in moving from formative research to intervention in the face of urgent and evolving community needs. The lack of congruence between institutional and community worldviews in the intervention research enterprise highlights the need for “principled cultural sensitivity”. Conclusions. Cultural sensitivity requires sharing results that have practical value, communicating openly, planning for sustainability and incorporating indigenous knowledge and expertise through a community-guided process. Our research findings will inform continued work within our partnership as we co-develop culturally based strategies for multilevel community interventions to address stress