Search Results for ""
- ACP Online (7611)
- Annals of Internal Medicine (6848)
- IM Matters (3144)
- ACP Hospitalist (2393)
- Annals of Internal Medicine: Clinical Cases (500)
- ACP Store (226)
Displaying 581 - 590 of 7611 in ACP Online
Diagnostic Reasoning
A collection of educational materials in the Online Learning Center.
Diabetes
A collection of educational materials in the Online Learning Center.
Dermatology
A collection of activities in the Online Learning Center.
Depression
A collection of educational materials in the Online Learning Center.
Cultural Competency
A collection of educational materials in the Online Learning Center.
Crystal Arthropathies
A collection of educational materials in the Online Learning Center.
Critical Care
A collection of critical care activities in the Online Learning Center.
Coronavirus
A collection of activities in the Online Learning Center.
Coronary Artery Disease
A collection of educational materials in the Online Learning Center.
Community-Acquired Pneumonia
A collection of educational materials in the Online Learning Center.
Displaying 581 - 590 of 6848 in Annals of Internal Medicine
These Annals of Internal Medicine results only contain recent articles.
- Visit annals.org to search all content back to 1927.
- View Annals of Internal Medicine CME by topic here.
Effectiveness of Existing Insomnia Therapies for Patients Undergoing Hemodialysis: A Randomized Clinical Trial: Annals of Internal Medicine: Vol 177, No 2
Background: Chronic insomnia is common in patients undergoing in-center hemodialysis, yet there is limited evidence on effective treatments for this population. Objective: To compare the effectiveness of cognitive behavioral therapy for insomnia (CBT-I), trazodone, and placebo for insomnia in patients undergoing long-term hemodialysis. Design: Randomized, multicenter, double-blinded, placebo-controlled trial. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03534284) Setting: 26 dialysis units in Albuquerque, New Mexico, and Seattle, Washington. Participants: Patients with Insomnia Severity Index (ISI) score of 10 or greater, with sleep disturbances on 3 or more nights per week for 3 or more months. Intervention: Participants were randomly assigned to 6 weeks of CBT-I, trazodone, or placebo. Measurements: The primary outcome was the ISI score at 7 and 25 weeks from randomization. Results: A total of 923 patients were prescreened, and of the 411 patients with chronic insomnia, 126 were randomly assigned to CBT-I (n = 43), trazodone (n = 42), or placebo (n = 41). The change in ISI scores from baseline to 7 weeks with CBT-I or trazodone was no different from placebo: CBT-I, −3.7 (95% CI, −5.5 to −1.9); trazodone, −4.2 (CI, −5.9 to −2.4); and placebo, −3.1 (CI, −4.9 to −1.3). There was no meaningful change in ISI scores from baseline to 25 weeks: CBT-I, −4.8 (CI, −7.0 to −2.7); trazodone, −4.0 (CI, −6.0 to −1.9); and placebo, −4.3 (CI, −6.4 to −2.2). Serious adverse events (SAEs), particularly serious cardiovascular events, were more frequent with trazodone (annualized cardiovascular SAE incidence rates: CBT-I, 0.05 [CI, 0.00 to 0.29]; trazodone, 0.64 [CI, 0.34 to 1.10]; and placebo, 0.21 [CI, 0.06 to 0.53]). Limitation: Modest sample size and most participants had mild or moderate insomnia. Conclusion: In patients undergoing hemodialysis with mild or moderate chronic insomnia, there was no difference in the effectiveness of 6 weeks of CBT-I or trazodone compared with placebo. The incidence of SAEs was higher with trazodone. Primary Funding Source: National Institutes of Health/National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases.
SARS-CoV-2 Virologic Rebound With Nirmatrelvir–Ritonavir Therapy: An Observational Study: Annals of Internal Medicine: Vol 176, No 12
Background: Data are conflicting regarding an association between treatment of acute COVID-19 with nirmatrelvir−ritonavir (N-R) and virologic rebound (VR). Objective: To compare the frequency of VR in patients with and without N-R treatment for acute COVID-19. Design: Observational cohort study. Setting: Multicenter health care system in Boston, Massachusetts. Participants: Ambulatory adults with acute COVID-19 with and without use of N-R. Intervention: Receipt of 5 days of N-R treatment versus no COVID-19 therapy. Measurements: The primary outcome was VR, defined as either a positive SARS-CoV-2 viral culture result after a prior negative result or 2 consecutive viral loads above 4.0 log10 copies/mL that were also at least 1.0 log10 copies/mL higher than a prior viral load below 4.0 log10 copies/mL. Results: Compared with untreated persons (n = 55), those taking N-R (n = 72) were older, received more COVID-19 vaccinations, and more commonly had immunosuppression. Fifteen participants (20.8%) taking N-R had VR versus 1 (1.8%) who was untreated (absolute difference, 19.0 percentage points [95% CI, 9.0 to 29.0 percentage points]; P = 0.001). All persons with VR had a positive viral culture result after a prior negative result. In multivariable models, only N-R use was associated with VR (adjusted odds ratio, 10.02 [CI, 1.13 to 88.74]; P = 0.038). Virologic rebound was more common among those who started therapy within 2 days of symptom onset (26.3%) than among those who started 2 or more days after symptom onset (0%) (P = 0.030). Among participants receiving N-R, those who had VR had prolonged shedding of replication-competent virus compared with those who did not have VR (median, 14 vs. 3 days). Eight of 16 participants (50% [CI, 25% to 75%]) with VR also reported symptom rebound; 2 were completely asymptomatic. No post-VR resistance mutations were detected. Limitations: Observational study design with differences between the treated and untreated groups; positive viral culture result was used as a surrogate marker for risk for ongoing viral transmission. Conclusion: Virologic rebound occurred in approximately 1 in 5 people taking N-R, often without symptom rebound, and was associated with shedding of replication-competent virus. Primary Funding Source: National Institutes of Health.
Real-World Effectiveness of BNT162b2 Against Infection and Severe Diseases in Children and Adolescents
Background: The efficacy of the BNT162b2 vaccine in pediatrics was assessed by randomized trials before the Omicron variant’s emergence. The long-term durability of vaccine protection in this population during the Omicron period remains limited. Objective: To assess the effectiveness of BNT162b2 in preventing infection and severe diseases with various strains of the SARS-CoV-2 virus in previously uninfected children and adolescents. Design: Comparative effectiveness research accounting for underreported vaccination in 3 study cohorts: adolescents (12 to 20 years) during the Delta phase and children (5 to 11 years) and adolescents (12 to 20 years) during the Omicron phase. Setting: A national collaboration of pediatric health systems (PEDSnet). Participants: 77 392 adolescents (45 007 vaccinated) during the Delta phase and 111 539 children (50 398 vaccinated) and 56 080 adolescents (21 180 vaccinated) during the Omicron phase. Intervention: First dose of the BNT162b2 vaccine versus no receipt of COVID-19 vaccine. Measurements: Outcomes of interest include documented infection, COVID-19 illness severity, admission to an intensive care unit (ICU), and cardiac complications. The effectiveness was reported as (1-relative risk)*100, with confounders balanced via propensity score stratification. Results: During the Delta period, the estimated effectiveness of the BNT162b2 vaccine was 98.4% (95% CI, 98.1% to 98.7%) against documented infection among adolescents, with no statistically significant waning after receipt of the first dose. An analysis of cardiac complications did not suggest a statistically significant difference between vaccinated and unvaccinated groups. During the Omicron period, the effectiveness against documented infection among children was estimated to be 74.3% (CI, 72.2% to 76.2%). Higher levels of effectiveness were seen against moderate or severe COVID-19 (75.5% [CI, 69.0% to 81.0%]) and ICU admission with COVID-19 (84.9% [CI, 64.8% to 93.5%]). Among adolescents, the effectiveness against documented Omicron infection was 85.5% (CI, 83.8% to 87.1%), with 84.8% (CI, 77.3% to 89.9%) against moderate or severe COVID-19, and 91.5% (CI, 69.5% to 97.6%) against ICU admission with COVID-19. The effectiveness of the BNT162b2 vaccine against the Omicron variant declined 4 months after the first dose and then stabilized. The analysis showed a lower risk for cardiac complications in the vaccinated group during the Omicron variant period. Limitation: Observational study design and potentially undocumented infection. Conclusion: This study suggests that BNT162b2 was effective for various COVID-19–related outcomes in children and adolescents during the Delta and Omicron periods, and there is some evidence of waning effectiveness over time. Primary Funding Source: National Institutes of Health.