Bmc Med
-
Gold mines represent a potential hotspot for Mycobacterium tuberculosis (Mtb) transmission and may be exacerbating the tuberculosis (TB) epidemic in South Africa. However, the presence of multiple factors complicates estimation of the mining contribution to the TB burden in South Africa. ⋯ Gold mine workers are estimated to contribute a disproportionately large number of Mtb infections in South Africa on a per-capita basis. However, mine workers contribute only a small fraction of overall Mtb infections in South Africa. Our results suggest that curtailing transmission in mines may have limited impact at the country level, despite potentially significant impact at the mining level.
-
Despite the gender parity existing in medical schools for over three decades, women remain underrepresented in academic medical centers, particularly in senior ranks and in leadership roles. This has consequences for patient care, education, research, and workplace culture within healthcare organizations. This study was undertaken to explore the perspectives of faculty members at a single department of medicine on the impact of the existing gender gap on organizational effectiveness and workplace culture, and to identify systems-based strategies to mitigate the gap. ⋯ The existing gender gap in academic medicine may have negative consequences for organizational effectiveness and workplace culture but many systems-based strategies to mitigate the gap exist. Although these solutions warrant rigorous evaluation, they are feasible to institute within most healthcare organizations immediately.
-
Pragmatic randomized controlled trials (RCTs) mimic usual clinical practice and they are critical to inform decision-making by patients, clinicians and policy-makers in real-world settings. Pragmatic RCTs assess effectiveness of available medicines, while explanatory RCTs assess efficacy of investigational medicines. Explanatory and pragmatic are the extremes of a continuum. This debate article seeks to evaluate and provide recommendation on how to characterize pragmatic RCTs in light of the current landscape of RCTs. It is supported by findings from a PubMed search conducted in August 2017, which retrieved 615 RCTs self-labeled in their titles as "pragmatic" or "naturalistic". We focused on 89 of these trials that assessed medicines (drugs or biologics). ⋯ To allow for a more appropriate characterization of the degree of pragmatism in clinical research, submissions of RCTs to funders, research ethics committees and to peer-reviewed journals should include a PRECIS-2 tool assessment done by the trial investigators. Clarity and accuracy on the extent to which a RCT is pragmatic will help understand how much it is relevant to real-world practice.
-
Drug-induced liver injury (DILI) is a common complication of tuberculosis treatment. We utilised data from the REMoxTB clinical trial to describe the incidence of predisposing factors and the natural history in patients with liver enzyme levels elevated in response to tuberculosis treatment. ⋯ Our results provide evidence of the risk of DILI in tuberculosis patients on standard treatment. Older patients on standard therapy, HIV-positive patients, Asian patients and those receiving isoniazid were at higher risk of elevated enzyme levels. Monitoring hepatic enzymes during the first 2 months of standard therapy detected approximately 75% of patients with a peak enzyme elevation ≥3 × ULN, suggesting this should be a standard of care. These results provide evidence for the potential of moxifloxacin in hepatic sparing.
-
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) often approves new drugs based on trials that use surrogate markers for endpoints, which involve certain trade-offs and may risk making erroneous inferences about the medical product's actual clinical effect. This study aims to compare the treatment effects among pivotal trials supporting FDA approval of novel therapeutics based on surrogate markers of disease with those observed among postapproval trials for the same indication. ⋯ Many postapproval drug trials are not directly comparable to previously published pivotal trials, particularly with respect to endpoint selection. Although treatment effects from pivotal trials supporting FDA approval of novel therapeutics based on non-continuous surrogate markers of disease are often larger than those observed among postapproval trials using surrogate markers as trial endpoints, there is no evidence of difference between pivotal and postapproval trials using continuous surrogate markers.