Categories
Guest Articles

Mental health in the medical profession: Support for students

Dr Stuart Dorney

Much has been reported about the prevalence of mental health concerns amongst medical students and doctors, both internationally and in Australia.

In 2013, beyondblue released the results from its national survey of Australian medical students and doctors. Among the survey’s key objectives was to better understand the issues associated with the mental health of Australian medical students and doctors, and to increase awareness of these issues across the profession and the wider community. [1]

The survey included questions about general mental health status, substance use, suicidal ideation and self-harm, workplace and life stressors, levels of burnout, impact of mental health symptoms, treatment and coping strategies employed to address mental health symptoms, barriers to seeking treatment and support, and attitudes regarding doctors with mental health conditions. The survey was completed by 1,811 (27%) of the 6,658 students and 12,252 (28.5%) of 42,942 doctors sampled. [2] Most of the students who participated were aged 22-25 years old (45.1%), female (62.6%), non-Indigenous (98.8%), located in a metropolitan region (66.5%), and worked part-time on average 12 hours per week (50%). [2] The responses from the survey were compared with the responses from the National Survey of Mental Health and Wellbeing, conducted by the Australian Bureau of Statistics in 1997. [2]

Dr Greg Kesby

beyondblue found that very high levels of psychological distress was three times higher in medical students than in the general population (9.2% and 3.1% respectively), and two times higher than levels reported by interns (9.2% and 4.4% respectively). [2] Students also reported higher rates of burnout and emotional exhaustion, with the highest rates being reported by females. [2]

When it came to perceptions about mental health within the medical profession, a high proportion of respondents held the view that doctors who had a mental health issue were stigmatised as a consequence, a finding particularly prevalent amongst those respondents who had been diagnosed with a mental illness themselves. Students with a current mental health diagnosis, compared with those not currently diagnosed, were more likely to report they felt doctors with a history of mental illness were less competent (52.4% and 38.2% respectively). Furthermore, 42% of students with a current mental health diagnosis felt that doctors tended to advise colleagues not to divulge their history of depression or anxiety disorders, compared to 22.6% of students who were not currently diagnosed with depression or anxiety. [2] This finding is particularly disturbing and probably explains the considerable reluctance of some medical students and members of the medical profession to seek independent help for mental health issues, and instead pursue a pathway of self-diagnosis and self-treatment with its associated risks. Too often we see students and medical practitioners only first presenting for appropriate independent care when they are acutely unwell or in crisis. This is unnecessary and needs to change.

The Medical Council of New South Wales has published a guideline for self-treatment and treating family members, which encourages all medical practitioners (and students) to have their own, independent general practitioner and advises practitioners against self-diagnosis or initiating treatment for themselves or their family members. [3] The Medical Board of Australia’s Good medical practice: a code of conduct for doctors in Australia also advises medical practitioners who know or suspect they have a health condition or impairment that could adversely affect their judgement, performance, or patients’ health not to rely on their own assessment of the risk they pose to patients and to instead consult their doctor about whether, and in what ways, they may need to modify their practice. [4]

Just as we would recommend to patients, it is important for medical students and doctors to adopt a healthy lifestyle through a balanced diet and regular exercise. It is also vital to ensure that immunisations are kept up to date, alcohol is consumed within the National Health and Medical Research Council guidelines, and that illicit drug use and prescription drug misuse is avoided. It is also helpful to have a strong personal support network and develop interests outside of medicine.

Key to addressing health issues, including mental illness, is early intervention. Medical students should feel comfortable and be encouraged to seek independent, objective advice from a general practitioner as early as possible when mental health issues arise, and in providing care medical practitioners must endeavour to provide a non-judgemental and supportive environment that good medical practice dictates for all patients. In addition to seeking advice and treatment from a general practitioner, psychologist, or psychiatrist, there are a range of early intervention services and supports available to promote optimal care, including the various university health services, university medical facilities, beyondblue, Headspace, Lifeline, and the Doctor’s Health Advisory Service, available in each state and territory.

Under the Health Practitioner Regulation National Law (NSW) (the National Law), impairment is one of the grounds under which a complaint or notification can be made about a student or practitioner. This often generates fear amongst students as to whether their mental health issues will exclude them from graduating and practising as a medical practitioner. However, it needs to be appreciated that the term “impairment” has a specific meaning under the National Law. It refers to a physical or mental impairment, disability, condition, or disorder (including substance abuse or dependence) that is linked to a student’s capacity to undertake clinical training, or a doctor’s capacity to practise medicine. [5] In some instances notification is mandatory.

While recent media reports and editorial columns have suggested that mandatory reporting laws in all states and territories excluding Western Australia may be a barrier to medical students and doctors accessing support and treatment for mental health problems, there is no reliable evidence to support such claims and no reason that this should be the case. The purpose of mandatory reporting is to act as a safeguard when medical students and doctors are unwilling or unable to seek help and manage any risk to public safety by compelling practitioners to raise serious concerns with the regulatory authorities. The threshold for making a mandatory notification about an impaired colleague is high. A practitioner treating a medical student or doctor is not automatically required to make a mandatory notification simply because they have a mental health issue. The National Law states it is only when a practitioner has formed a reasonable belief that a fellow practitioner has placed the public at risk of substantial harm in the practice of the profession because of their impairment that they are required to make a mandatory notification. [6]

Education providers also have an obligation to make a mandatory notification if they have formed a reasonable belief that a student undertaking clinical training has a health issue that may place the public at substantial risk of harm. The formation of a reasonable belief may well be influenced by factors such as whether the medical student is receiving appropriate treatment and advice or has made a voluntary notification. [6]

Medical students and doctors who believe they may have an impairment are encouraged to make a voluntary notification to the Australian Health Practitioner Regulation Agency (AHPRA). [6] For individuals with mental health issues who self-notify or who are the subject of a notification to AHPRA, there are remedial, non-disciplinary programs, which differ from state to state, that are designed to support students to remain in study and doctors to remain in practice whilst receiving appropriate treatment, provided it is safe for them to do so.

In NSW, the Medical Council’s Health Program aims to protect the public while at the same time supporting medical students and doctors affected by health issues, including mental illness. Not everyone with a mental health issue who self-notifies or is the subject of a notification to AHPRA enters into the Health Program. Many are assessed as having a psychiatric illness that is under appropriate management, with the student/doctor having appropriate insight and support networks, and are therefore not considered to place the public at a significant risk of harm. That is, they are not considered “impaired” as defined in the National Law. Most of those who do enter the Health Program remain in practice or study, subject to conditions on their registration tailored to address their particular circumstances and designed to ensure public safety while they undertake treatment and rehabilitation. Participants remain under the care of their own treating practitioners, but also undergo independent reassessment by Council-nominated practitioners from time to time. Participants in the Health Program meet with Council delegates, usually at six to 12 monthly intervals, and as they progress in their rehabilitation and recovery, the conditions on their registration are gradually eased, until the Medical Council considers that they no longer require being under the Council’s surveillance and consequently exit the Health Program. Whilst return to unconditional practice is a goal of the Program, some participants, for example those with a recurring psychiatric illness, may remain on the Program indefinitely, albeit with low level conditions and occasional review by the Council.

Many participants have had great success on the Health Program and have found the experience of significant benefit. For example, one participant, who had suffered from depression since his teenage years, found the Program’s impact on his work and personal life to be “only positive”. He said the Program encouraged him to set realistic work schedules, engage in activities outside the workplace, develop insight into the demands that he had previously placed on himself, and establish strong networks of support, both personally and professionally. Upon exiting, he said the Program had assisted him to successfully return to practice and engage in a “full and meaningful life”. Another, who had been self-prescribing and suffering from depression, and by his own assessment entered the Health Program “at a time when I was out of control and rapidly heading towards disaster”, found the Program forced him to confront his problems, encouraged him to maintain engagement with a treating psychiatrist, and enabled him to stop his prescription drug misuse and eventually return to full time work. He attributes his professional survival to his involvement in the Health Program and, at the time of exiting the Program, was receiving consistent feedback that he was excelling in his practice of medicine.

We are a caring profession, and we need to care for ourselves as well as each other. The Medical Council and other regulatory authorities encourage everyone with mental health issues, including medical students and doctors, to seek appropriate care – and seek it early. We recognise that some will be reluctant or unable to do so – through fear, or a lack of insight, or simply due to the lack of energy and initiative that may accompany their illness. You are therefore all encouraged to reach out to your colleagues if you suspect they may be suffering in silence. Offer those who appear to be troubled with life assistance in accessing appropriate support. Help them frame their thinking around whether they should self-notify to AHPRA. You can start by simply asking “Are you okay?”

References

[1] beyondblue. Doctors’ mental health program. https://www.beyondblue.org.au/about-us/programs/workplace-and-workforce-program/programs-resources-and-tools/doctors-mental-health-program (accessed Nov 2015).

[2] beyondblue. National mental health survey of doctors and medical students. 2013. http://www.beyondblue.org.au/docs/default-source/default-document-library/bl1148-report—nmhdmss-exec-summary_web (accessed Nov 2015).

[3] Medical Council of NSW. Guideline for self-treatment and treating family members. 2014. http://www.mcnsw.org.au/resources/1460/Guideline%20for%20self-treatment%20and%20treating%20family%20members%20PDF.pdf (accessed Nov 2015).

[4] Medical Board of Australia. Good medical practice: a code of conduct for doctors in Australia. http://www.medicalboard.gov.au/Codes-Guidelines-Policies/Code-of-conduct.aspx (accessed Nov 2015).

[5] Medical Board of Australia, Information on the management of impaired practitioners and students. 2012. http://www.medicalboard.gov.au/documents/default.aspx?record=WD12%2F7049&dbid=AP&chksum=Pzr054PF7tcB6ZQnesHKvA%3D%3D (accessed Nov 2015).

[6] Medical Board of Australia, Guidelines for mandatory notifications, http://www.medicalboard.gov.au/Codes-Guidelines-Policies/Guidelines-for-mandatory-notifications.aspx (accessed Nov 2015).

Categories
Review Articles

Is switching anticoagulant brands safe – Coumadin and Marevan?

Aim: Warfarin is the most frequently prescribed antithrombotic agent, available in Australia as brands Coumadin and Marevan. Although both are manufactured by Aspen Pharmaceuticals, there are differences in formulation. The product information states they cannot be used interchangeably. Two incident reports of warfarin brand interchange in our hospital prompted a literature review. We aimed to review published evidence on the pharmacokinetics and bioequivalence of different warfarin brands and make brand switching recommendations. Methods: Systematic review of the literature on warfarin bioequivalence and incidents reported by the Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA).  Results and discussion: Fifteen studies explored different warfarin formulations. No significant differences were found in efficacy with brand switching in eight studies analysing participants who were healthy, had atrial fibrillation (AF), or a mechanical heart valve. Prospective observational studies demonstrated no significant difference in the International Normalised Ratio (INR) or adverse events, however, a retrospective observational study demonstrated an increase in complications. Of the four population studies, only one demonstrated elevated rates of haemorrhage or thrombosis. No studies directly compared Coumadin and Marevan. Three TGA case reports describe adverse events from brand switching. Conclusion: Studies of different warfarin formulations demonstrate bioequivalence in population studies, but with marked inter-individual variation, hence the recommendation is to continue the same brand of warfarin where possible. However, brand switching is preferable to withholding a dose of warfarin for inpatients, in the absence of the patient’s usual brand.  If substituting or brand switching, close monitoring with frequent INR testing is suggested.

Introduction

Warfarin is the most frequently prescribed antithrombotic agent in Australia. Indications include both prevention and treatment of thrombosis, prevention of strokes associated with atrial fibrillation (AF) as well as clotting on mechanical heart valves. [1]  Warfarin is also effective in the treatment of deep venous thrombosis and pulmonary embolism.  The benefits of warfarin need to be weighed against the risk of haemorrhage, a common complication seen in patients prescribed these anticoagulants. Every year 1.2 to 8.1% of patients on long-term warfarin therapy experience a major bleeding complication, attributable to its narrow therapeutic index, as well as susceptibility to other medications interfering with warfarin’s absorption, metabolism, and clearance. [2,3]

In Australia, there are two brands of warfarin: Coumadin and Marevan. Both brands are now manufactured by the same company, Aspen Pharmacare Australia Pty Ltd, and previously by Boots Healthcare Australia Pty Ltd. [1] Brands differ in tablet colour, markings and excipients, and were marketed before bioavailability testing was required. Prescribing bodies within Australia, including the Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA) and the National Prescribing Service do not recommend interchanging warfarin brands, Coumadin and Marevan, due to the lack of information on bioequivalence. [1,4] It has been recommended that patients remain on the same brand of warfarin if possible, with more frequent International Normalised Ratio (INR) testing if switching brands. [5] The practice within hospitals in Victoria has been to prescribe Coumadin preferentially, with Marevan prescribed only if the patient has been previously stabilised on this brand. [6]

Two locally reported incidents involving brand switching led to a review of the literature to inform practice. One of the incidents involved a 52-year-old male patient who mistakenly received Coumadin, when Marevan was his usual brand. The nurse administering the nocte medications quickly discovered this incident. The patient’s INR was measured to be sub-therapeutic. The second patient was an 88-year-old female admitted to hospital after a fall and did not receive her regular prescribed Marevan dose, as staff were unable to source that brand after-hours. This patient had an elevated INR prior to the incident and warfarin was subsequently ceased. The two local incidents did not result in change of therapy or result in harm.

We aimed to review published evidence on the pharmacokinetics and bioequivalence of different warfarin brands and make brand switching recommendations.

Methods

Search strategy

A systematic review of the medical literature was performed by FC using PubMed (1996-Jan 2015). Author IW performed a cross-referencing search of Embase (1974-Jan 2015) to ensure the completeness of the literature review. The search terms included warfarin, bioequivalence, Coumadin, and Marevan. Additionally, the search included unpublished reports from the TGA Database of Adverse Events Notification (DAEN), which was searched by author LG for reports of unexpected therapeutic response from substitution of either Marevan or Coumadin. Search parameters on the DAEN: Date Range: 01/01/1971 to 21/05/2014 ‘Therapeutic response unexpected with drug substitution’; Medicine Names: Marevan, Coumadin, Warfarin Sodium. [7] Further unpublished information was included from the Danish Health and Medicines Authority (DHMA).

Eligibility Criteria for Studies

Studies that were considered for inclusion included randomised controlled trials (RCTs), crossover trials, retrospective studies, and case reports, published in English and on human participants, with any follow-up time. Systematic reviews and meta-analyses were analysed but not included. The bibliographies of all retrieved articles were manually checked.

Risk of bias

Risk of bias was assessed in each individual study (Table 1).

Summary measures

Summary measures used include confidence intervals, p-values, and area under the curve (AUC).

Results

v7i1p3f1

Figure 1: Study flow diagram. 

The initial search identified 216 records. After duplicates were removed, 148 records were then screened for eligibility, resulting in 125 articles being excluded after review of the titles. A total of seven full-text papers were excluded for reasons stated in Figure 1.

Fifteen studies were included in the analysis, all published between 1971 and 2011. There were three studies in healthy subjects. There were twelve studies of outpatients taking warfarin, including five RCTs, two prospective observational studies, four retrospective studies and one ecological study. The literature search did not identify any studies in which Coumadin and Marevan (Boots or Aspen) were directly compared.

Pharmacokinetic studies in healthy subjects

Three studies in healthy patients demonstrated no difference in average peak plasma concentrations or AUC, but individual patient variability existed.  Müller et al. compared the bioavailability of four warfarin tablet formulations. [8] All products were administered as a single 10 mg oral dose to twelve healthy males, and no significant difference was found in the mean average peak plasma concentrations and AUC (for the plasma concentration time curve). Warfarin bioavailability in the four brands differed by less than 20% when compared to the reference product, Marevan, suggesting that all four types of warfarin could be safely interchanged, without any significant bleeding risk. [8] McGilveray et al. assessed the bioavailability of four warfarin products in eight healthy males. Of these, two sodium warfarin products gave AUC ratios of 97.3% and 100.5% and potassium warfarin of 86.6% relative to the reference products. Significant differences were noted in the time to reach peak concentration, as well as concentration at one hour with one of the products reaching its maximum concentration before this first measurement. [9] Wagner et al. found no significant difference in peak plasma concentration or average plasma concentrations measured at 4, 8, 12, 24, 48, 72, and 96 hours in three different brands of warfarin amongst a group of twelve healthy study subjects. However, there was a statistically significant difference in plasma concentration measured at one hour and in peak plasma concentration time, though it was minimal (p<0.005 and p<0.05 respectively). The three different brands had occurrences of peak plasma concentration at 2.3 hours, 3.6 hours, and 4.1 hours. [10] These studies demonstrate that in healthy males, when brand substitution of warfarin occurred, there was no significant difference in the overall peak concentration of plasma warfarin levels or AUC.

Crossover RCTs

Five RCTs with a crossover design measured the INR of patients with a history of AF or mechanical heart valves who were taking either a branded or generic version of warfarin, having achieved stable anticoagulation with long-term therapy prior to the study. After changing brand, all studies found no statistically significant difference in the average INR of both groups after at least nine weeks of follow-up.

Three studies, Neutel et al., [11] Handler et al., [12] and Weibert et al. [13] examined patients with AF. Neutal et al. demonstrated the bioequivalence of warfarin made by Dupont and Barr Laboratories in a randomised, blinded, crossover study, and showed that the average INR values differed by less than 2% in 55 patients with AF. [11] Handler et al. conducted a study with the objective of substituting warfarin (Dupont) and warfarin (Barr Laboratories) of the same dose and determining its safety and efficacy to confirm bioequivalence results found in other studies. Participants received either warfarin made by Dupont or Barr Laboratories for a period of 28 days and then switched over to the alternate drug for a further two 28-day periods. The mean change in INR measured after every 28 days was -0.17 in patients who began with warfarin (Dupont). After switching, the mean changes were -0.02 and -0.16 respectively. For those starting on warfarin (Barr Laboratories), the mean change from baseline in INR was +0.01, after switching it was -0.16 and -0.18. These differences were not statistically significant, and with the number of dose changes (0.70 ± 0.6 mg for brand A, 0.63 ± 0.9 mg for brand B, and 0.72 ± 0.8 mg for brand C, p=0.89) and mean dose for a stable INR (4.6 ± 2.2 mg, 5.3 ± 2.2 mg, and 5.3 ± 2.4 mg), warfarin (Dupont) was determined to be equivalent to warfarin (Barr Laboratories) in safety and efficacy. Eleven participants were excluded from the study due to dosage adjustments throughout the period, however, an intention-to-treat analysis showed the results fell within the Federal Drug Agency (FDA)’s INR variability values. Handler et al. therefore suggested that additional tests and surveillance are not needed when switching generic with branded warfarin. Weibert et al. performed an RCT crossover comparison of Coumadin and Apothecon warfarin in 19 patients with chronic and paroxysmal AF. [13] Participants already on anticoagulation therapy were randomly assigned to take either Coumadin or Apothecon warfarin for four weeks and then crossed over to receive the alternate for another four weeks.  Although seven participants in each group required dosage changes and experienced INR changes outside the desired range, there was no significant change in INR or dosage alteration in either group overall. Therefore, for chronic and paroxysmal AF patients, these brands were considered to be equivalent in anticoagulation action.

Lee et al. studied 35 patients with mechanical valves. [14] This study found no difference in pooled mean INR between Coumadin (Dupont) and warfarin (Lennon) (INR 2.28 and 2.27, respectively) and was within the range for bioequivalence (90% CI for the difference: 96.4 – 104.9). There were also no differences in the adverse event profiles of the two formulations. In a double-blinded crossover RCT, Pereira et al. also suggested that generic and branded warfarin may be used interchangeably. They studied seven patients, and switched them four times between generic Apo-warfarin and to Coumadin over 30 weeks. This study found no significant difference in mean INR results or number of dosage adjustments between patients who switched between the brands and a control group who stayed on Coumadin (p>0.69). They also found no patient and warfarin interaction (p>0.81). [15]

Observational studies

Observational studies were performed by Swenson et al., Milligan et al., and Richton-Hewett et al., observing patient groups switching from brand-name to generic warfarin. Swenson et al. prospectively studied 210 patients, with 105 controls remaining on Coumadin for the study period and 105 patients switching brands. The mean INR difference between the two groups before and after enrolment was not clinically significant (p=0.15). The number of dosage changes required was similar in both groups, with no thromboembolic or haemorrhagic adverse events or any emergency presentations associated with coagulation problems in either group. [16] Milligan et al. prospectively observed 182 participants switching from Coumadin to generic warfarin and demonstrated no significant variation in the parameters studied, including INR (p=0.3), adverse events, and frequency of INR monitoring. [17] One small retrospective study demonstrated an increase in complications with brand switching. Richton-Hewett et al. in 1980 assessed the effect of interchanging brand-name and generic warfarin with a retrospective chart review of 55 patients. [18] The 15 patients who switched to generic warfarin were significantly (p<0.001) more likely to have a prothrombin time (PT) outside of the therapeutic range and were also more likely to require a dosage change. Notably, one patient required a six-day hospital admission with epistaxis and an elevated PT.

Cohort studies

Regional changes in warfarin formulation afforded the opportunity to examine population-based changes in response to brand switching in three cohort studies and one ecological study. These studies demonstrated safety overall, but with some limitations. Halkin et al. observed 975 participants after a nationwide generic switch of warfarin formulations in Israel. [19] They found that INR values were lower and warfarin doses higher (p<0.01), consistent with decreased apparent warfarin sensitivity with the generic brand. Witt et al. found similar results in the United States in a retrospective cohort study of 2299 participants. Calculated INR values were similar, with the average INR decreasing by 0.13 after the switch and no significant differences found in outcomes of hospitalisation, Emergency Department (ED) visits, or bleeding and thromboembolism. However 39% of patients experienced a worsening in therapeutic INR control of more than 10%, whilst 33% experienced INR control that improved by greater than 10%. Witt et al. suggest that receiving long-term anticoagulation therapy with brand-name warfarin can be successfully switched to a generic warfarin, with overall INR levels similar or lower than before such a switch. [20]

A further population-based study was performed by Ghate et al. of 37,756 patients with AF and at least three warfarin prescriptions during the twelve-month follow-up period. The study population was identified via a database of patients receiving commercial health insurance benefits. [19] The patients stayed on Coumadin, generic warfarin, or switched their formulation. An increased risk of thrombotic events was observed in those who switched from Coumadin to generic warfarin compared to those who stayed on Coumadin (hazard ratio (HR)=1.81; 95% CI 1.42 to 2.31, p<0.001). Similarly, increased risk of thrombosis was seen in patients changing from generic warfarin to Coumadin (HR=1.76; 95% CI 1.35 to 2.30, p<0.001) and generic warfarin to another generic type (HR=1.89; 95% CI 1.57 to 2.29, p<0.001). In addition to this, all groups who switched were observed to have an increased risk of haemorrhage. In comparison to the group who remained on Coumadin, switching to the generic formulation was associated with a significantly higher risk of haemorrhagic events (HR=1.51; 95% CI 1.17 to 1.93, p=0.001). [21]

Paterson et al. conducted a population-based, cross-sectional, time series analysis of outpatients aged 66 or older in Ontario, Canada following the province’s switch to one of two generic warfarin formulations (Apo-warfarin and Taro-warfarin) from Coumadin. [22] Trends in warfarin prescribing, INR testing, and hospitalisations for major haemorrhage and stroke were analysed 40 months before, during the one month of, and the nine months after the mandated switch. No significant differences in the rate of INR testing was found (p=0.93), nor hospitalisation for haemorrhage (p=0.97), or cerebral thromboembolism (p=0.89). [22]

Case reports

Exploration of the TGA DAEN for unpublished Australian case reports revealed two adverse drug reactions involving change of warfarin brand, both of which occurred in 2007. They involved an increased INR when the patient changed from Marevan to Coumadin. One of these reports was complicated with a possible drug interaction with concomitant flucloxacillin. The severities of these two reports were not defined. A third report described a patient who experienced an INR decrease when changed from Coumadin to Marevan.

Other case reports have documented adverse events after switching to generic warfarin. The DHMA has made a precautionary decision to cease switching Marevan to generic warfarin Orion after similar adverse drug reaction reports of elevated INR levels. It is important to note that they have not observed any problems with the generic brand and have not ruled out alternate reasons for the changes in INR. [23] In Oklahoma City, two cases saw subtherapeutic INR levels after a switch from Coumadin to generic warfarin despite the Food and Drug Administration asserting bioequivalence. Both reports conclude that INR levels should be closely monitored if switching is unavoidable. [24]

Discussion

This systematic review of the literature identified a number of studies exploring different warfarin brands, using different methodologies and with a variety of measures of bioequivalence in both healthy subjects and patients. However, the brands raising concern in our hospital, Coumadin and Marevan, have not been directly compared. This review demonstrates that there are conflicting findings in individual versus population studies. Overall, there were no significant differences in plasma drug levels or in efficacy as measured by INR with brand switching on an individual patient level. However, population studies demonstrated an increased risk of thrombosis and haemorrhage with brand switching.

Given the widespread use of warfarin, there are a very low number of reports of issues after brand switching both locally and in the published literature. This may be due to under-recognition and under-reporting of adverse reactions. [7] It may also be that brand switching of warfarin rarely occurs and, if it is occurring, then it may be happening without significant adverse events. In Australia, it is recommended that switching warfarin brands should be avoided. Differences in the excipients between the different brands theoretically may affect bioavailability, however, no comparative trials of the Aspen brands have been published. Another important issue in switching brands is the potential for confusion in patients due to different strengths and colours of the medications, potentially resulting in incorrect dosage.

This review demonstrates that when brand switching does occur in a supervised manner, such as that of a clinical trial, the risks are minimal. For hospital inpatients, we would therefore suggest that giving the alternate brand of warfarin is preferable to withholding a dose. Either a return to the patient’s usual brand or a permanent switch to the preferred brand could then be considered. Increased vigilance in following up the INR would be mandatory, due to both the change in formulation and the fact that hospital inpatients are unwell, and that in itself can affect the INR.

The majority of warfarin use, however, is in the community rather than in hospitals. Switching a patient’s warfarin brand should be considered on a case-by-case basis. There should be a compelling reason for brand switching, and the patient’s ability to comprehend the different dosing between brands should be considered. Most importantly, there should be capacity, both by the patient and the pathology provider, to increase monitoring of INR until clinical stability is established on the new brand.

The strengths of this review are that a variety of methods have been used to address the question of safety of switching warfarin brands, which improves the quality of the evidence. With recent updated information available, paired with case examples, it allows a comprehensive expansion on previous reviews exploring similar topics. However, there are several important limitations. The RCTs reviewed all had small sample sizes, with the largest having only 113 participants. [13] This limits the generalisability of these results. Additionally, RCTs may overstate the safety of brand switching due to selection bias, for example,  (1) patients on anticoagulation who agree to enter a trial may manage their anticoagulation better than the general population, (2) well-controlled patients are more likely to participate in a trial, or (3) compliance with medication and dietary restrictions increases during the period of the trial. Studies focusing on pharmacokinetics and bioequivalence may not be adequate to assess clinical outcomes. There are also biases in population studies. For example, factors such as changes to the environment affecting the whole region and contributing to the outcome may not be recognised. Ecological studies cannot be used to prove or explore associations between determinants of disease. There are limitations in the use of a retrospective dataset, such as health insurance claims, in which it cannot be confirmed whether individuals actually took the warfarin dispensed by the pharmacy. Additionally, if the dataset was created for an alternate purpose, such as discharge coding to determine reimbursement, inconsistent definitions, or coding practices may mean the data is of too poor quality to use in a study. There may also be inadequate information about the confounders and data quality. Differential loss to follow-up can introduce bias in retrospective and prospective cohort studies. Across all studies, publication bias and selective reporting within the studies may influence the cumulative evidence.

Conclusion

Studies of different brands of warfarin demonstrate that brand switching is generally safe, although some population studies have demonstrated that INR control may worsen for a period, and that risk of both thrombosis and haemorrhage may increase. Based on the studies reviewed, we support the recommendation to continue with the same brand of warfarin, if possible. However, in the inpatient hospital setting, brand switching is preferable to withholding a dose of warfarin in the absence of the preferred brand, with appropriate INR testing afterwards. We therefore recommend that in an in-patient situation, substitution with an alternate brand of warfarin should occur if one brand is unavailable and INR is monitored daily until stability is assured. In the community, brand switching should be considered on a case-by-case basis with increased INR monitoring until clinical stability is reached. Phasing out formulations of warfarin so only one brand is available, with support from the local regulatory drug agency, including advisory information and support for patients and clinicians, would resolve the confusion.

Conflicts of Interest

None declared.

References

[1] Product Information: Marevan, Coumadin. Aspen Pharmacare Australia Pty Ltd. eMIMS (accessed 5/7/2015).

[2] Levine MN, Raskob G, Landefeld S, Kearon C. Hemorrhagic complications of anticoagulant therapy. Chest. 1998;114:511S-523S.

[3] Guyatt GH, Akl EA, Crowther M, Gutterman DD, Schuünemann HJ,  Antithrombotic Therapy and Prevention of Thrombosis, 9th ed: American College of Chest Physicians Evidence-Based Clinical Practice Guidelines, Chest. 2012;141:1412S3.

[4] Adverse Drug Reactions Advisory Committee, Coumadin and Marevan are not interchangeable, Australian Adverse Drug Reactions Bulletin, June 1999;18:2.

[5] Fry FK, PBAC, Boots. Warfarin tablets, Aust Prescr 1997;20:33.

[6] Dooley M. Recommendations for warfarin in Victorian public hospitals [letter]. Aust Prescr 2003;26:27-9.

[7] Adverse Drug Reaction Reports. Received via personal communication with the Therapeutic Goods Administration. 4th April 2014.

[8] Müller FO, Steyn JM, Hundt HK, Luus HG (1988 Dec 3) Warfarin bio-availability. A comparison of 4 products. S Afr Med J, 74, pp. 1.

[9] McGilveray IJ, Midha KK, Cooper JK: Bioavailability of Canadian tablet formulations of Warfarin Sodium and Potassium. Can J Pharm Sci. 1978;13:9-11.

[10] Wagner JG, Welling PG, Lee KP and Walker JE: In vivo and in vitro availability of commercial Warfarin tablets. J Pharm Sci. 1971;60:666-677.

[11] Neutel JM, Smith DHG. A randomized crossover study to compare the efficacy and tolerability of Barr warfarin sodium to the currently available Coumadin. Cardiovasc Rev Rep. 1998;19:49–59.

[12] Handler J, Nguyen TT, Rush S, Pham NT. A blinded, randomized, crossover study comparing the efficacy and safety of generic warfarin sodium to Coumadin. Prev Cardiol. 1998;4;13–20.

[13] Weibert RT, Yeager BF, Wittkowsky AK, Bussey HI, Wilson DB, Godwin JE et al. A randomized, crossover comparison of warfarin products in the treatment of atrial fibrillation. Ann Pharmacother. 2000;34:981–8.

[14] Lee HL, Kan CD, Yang YJ. Efficacy and tolerability of the switch from a branded to a generic warfarin sodium product: an observer-blinded, randomized, crossover study. Clin Ther. 2005;27:309–19.

[15] Pereira JA, Holbrook AM, Dolovich L, Goldsmith C, Thabane L, Douketic JD et al. Are brand-name and generic warfarin interchangeable? Multiple n-of-1 randomized, crossover trials. Ann Pharmacother. 2005 Jul-Aug; 39:1188-93.

[16] Swenson CN, Fundak G. Observational cohort study of switching warfarin sodium products in a managed care organization. Am J Health Syst Pharm. 2000;57:452-455.

[17] Milligan PE, Banet GA, Waterman AD, Gatchel SK, Gage BF. Substitution of Generic Warfarin for Coumadin in an HMO Setting. Ann Pharmacother. 2002;36: 764-768.

[18] Richton-Hewett S, Foster E, Apstein CS: Medical and economic consequences of a blinded oral anticoagulant brand change at a municipal hospital. Arch Intern Med. 1998;148:806-808.

[19] Ghate SR, Biskupiak JE, Ye X, Hagan M, Kwong WJ, Fox ES, et al. Hemorrhagic and thrombotic events associated with generic substitution of warfarin in patients with atrial fibrillation: a retrospective analysis. Ann Pharmacother. 2011;45: 701-12.

[20] Halkin H, Shapiro J, Kurnik D, Loebstein R, Shalev V, Kokia E. Increased warfarin doses and decreased international normalized ratio response after nationwide generic switching. Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2003;74:215-221.

[21] Witt DM, Tillman DJ, Evans CM, Plotkin TV, Sadler MA. Evaluation of the clinical and economic impact of a brand name-to-generic warfarin sodium conversion program. Pharmacotherapy. 2003;23:360-368.

[22] Paterson JM, Naglie G, Laupacis A, Stukel T. Clinical consequences of generic warfarin substitution. JAMA. 2006;296:1969-1972.

[23] Danish Health and Medicines Authority. Warfarin Orion must not replace Marevan and Waran. Danish Pharmacovigilance. 2015[cited 2015 July 4]. Available from: https://sundhedsstyrelsen.dk/en/news/2015/danish-pharmacovigilance-update,-april-2015.

[24] Hope KA1, Havrda DE. Subtherapeutic INR values associated with a switch to generic warfarin. Ann Pharmacother. 2001 Feb;35:183-7.

Table 1: Summary of studies

Reference

Year

Country Trial design* Participants Number of subjects Follow up (weeks) Mean age (years) Males (%) Brands Outcomes Limitations and bias
Müller8 1988 South Africa RCT Healthy males 12 1.14 (8 days) 22 100 Warfarin (Petersen), Warfarin (Lennon), Coumadin (Boots),

Marevan (Allen & Hanburys)

Test products differed less than 20% from Marevan Single blind – experimenter’s bias

Small study size

Only male participants

McGilveray9 1978 Canada Crossover trial Healthy males 8 None   25-42

(range)

100 Sodium warfarin

Potassium warfarin (Manufacturers not stated)

No difference in average peak plasma concentrations. Significant difference in the time required to reach peak concentrations. Two sodium warfarin products gave AUCs of 97.3% and 100.5%. The potassium warfarin gave a lower value of 86.6% relative to the reference products No mention of blinding – performance bias

No mention of randomisation – selection bias

Small study size

Only male participants

Wagner10 1971 US Crossover trial Healthy subjects 12 1 25 83 Warfarin (3 different manufacturers not identified) No overall significant difference in average peak plasma concentrations or average time taken to reach peak plasma concentration. A small statistically significant difference in plasma concentration measured at 1 hour and in peak plasma concentration time (p<0.005 and p<0.05 respectively) No mention of blinding – performance bias

No mention of randomisation – selection bias

Small study size

Study performed more than 44 years ago

Neutel 11

1998

SB crossover RCT Outpatients Atrial Fibrillation 39 9 70 100 Coumadin (Dupont) Warfarin (Barr Laboratories) Changes in INR after switching were not significant (p>0.05); no differences in adverse effect profiles AF participants – detection bias

Only male participants

Small study size

Handler 12

1998

US DB crossover RCT Outpatients Atrial Fibrillation 57 12 69 65 Coumadin (Dupont) Warfarin (Barr Laboratories) No significant differences in INR (p=0.40), dose adjustments, adverse events AF participants – detection bias

Small study size

Funded by generic manufacturer

Weibert13

2000

US DB crossover RCT Outpatients Atrial fibrillation 113 14 70 75 Coumadin (DuPont) Warfarin (Apothecon) No significant differences in daily dose (0.5 mg/d), average INR difference (< 0.08), adverse events AF participants – detection bias

Small study size

Single blind of investigators not patients – performance bias

Increased regularity of INR monitoring, which may have detected more variability than normal

Funded by generic manufacturer

Lee14

2005

Taiwan SB crossover RCT Mechanical heart valves 35 12 52 71 Coumadin (Dupont) Warfarin (Lennon) Dose changes were rare; no significant differences in pooled INRs between Coumadin (Dupont) and warfarin (Lennon) (INR 2.28 and 2.27, respectively). The 90% CI for the difference was 96.4 – 104.9 HV participants – detection bias

Observer blinded

Small study size

Pereira15

2005

US DB crossover RCT Outpatients Various indications 7 30 63 43 Coumadin (Bristol-Myers Squibb) Warfarin (Apotex) No significant differences in mean INR measurements or variation (p>0.69). No patient and warfarin interaction found (p>0.81) Small study size

Patients underwent dosage adjustments if INR was out of target range

Swenson16

2000

US Prospective observational cohort study Outpatients Various indications 210 20 78 50 Coumadin (Dupont) Warfarin (Barr Laboratories) No significant differences in INR between groups (p=0.15); no adverse effects or events Non-randomised assignment – selection bias

Confounding

Milligan17

2002

US Prospective observational study Outpatients Various indications 182 78 75 57 Coumadin (Bristol-Myers Squibb) Warfarin (Barr Laboratories) No significant differences in INR (p=0.3), dose adjustments, adverse events Funded by an insurance company

Non-randomised assignment – selection bias

Confounding

Richton-Hewett18

1998

US Retrospective cohort study Outpatients Various indications 55 30 56 47 Coumadin (Du Pont) Panwarfarin (Abbott Laboratories) Higher rate of INR out of range (p<0.001), dose changes (p<0.05), clinic utilisation (p<0.03) with generic group; no significant differences in morbidity/mortality Non-randomised assignment – selection bias

Non-blinded staff – experimenter’s bias

Confounding

Small study size

Halkin19

2003

Israel Retrospective observational study Outpatients Various indications 975 52 70 47 Coumadin Sodium (Taro Pharmaceutical Industries)

Coumadin Sodium clathrate (Taro, new formulation)

After the switch, INR values were lower and warfarin doses prescribed were higher (p<0.01) Non-randomised assignment – selection bias

Confounding

Data from administrative database

Witt20

2003

US Retrospective cohort study Outpatients Various indications 2299 26 69 54 Coumadin

Warfarin (Barr Laboratories)

INR values below therapeutic range with generic (p<0.0001); overall average INR decreased by 0.13 after switch; no significant differences in hospitalisations, ED use, outcomes (bleeding or thromboembolism) Non-randomised assignment – selection bias

Confounding

Fatal adverse effects not included in study as post-conversion questionnaire required

Ghate21

2011

US Historical cohort analysis Atrial fibrillation 37 756 52 71 58 Generic warfarin Coumadin (DuPont/Bristol-Myers Squibb) Increase in thrombotic events in those groups who had switched

Coumadin to generic warfarin (HR=1.81; 95% CI 1.42 to 2.31, p<0.001)

Generic warfarin to Coumadin (HR=1.76; 95% CI 1.35 to 2.30, p<0.001)

Generic warfarin to another generic (HR=1.89; 95% CI 1.57 to 2.29, p<0.001)

Increase in haemorrhagic events in those groups who had switched to generic (HR=1.51; 95% CI 1.17 to 1.93, p=0.001)

Non-randomised assignment – selection bias

Information from insurance claims database with no available information about INR monitoring, adherence to therapy and missed follow-up appointments

Confounding

Paterson23

2006

Canada Ecological study Outpatients Various indications 36 724 200 >65 years old Not specified Coumadin (Bristol-Myers Squibb) Warfarin (Apo-warfarin and Taro-warfarin) No significant differences in INR testing (p=0.93) or hospitalisation for haemorrhage (p=0.97) or thromboembolism (p=0.89) Funded by the government

Focussed on major clinical events needing hospitalisation but excluded other outcomes with less reliable code, for example, DVT

Cross-sectional – cannot determine causation

Administrative health data used

 

Categories
Feature Articles

Primary prevention of dengue: A comparison between the problems and prospects of the most promising vector control and vaccination approaches.

Dengue fever has the highest and fastest-rising morbidity and mortality of any vector-borne viral disease. The growing global impact of dengue is a public health challenge with an economic burden that is currently unmet by licensed vaccines or vector control strategies. Therefore, effective, efficient, safe, and sustainable interventions are a public health priority. However, interventions also must be applicable to tropical and less developed regions where dengue is prevalent. Vector control, the principal method for dengue prevention, is not sustainable because current methodology is expensive and of limited effectiveness. Innovative candidate vaccines, including live-chimeric, live-attenuated, inactivated, subunit, and DNA vaccines, and vector control approaches, such as the release of mosquitoes carrying the dominant-lethal allele or Wolbachia, are in trials.  The most advanced and promising new dengue control measures are the Sanofi Pasteur live-attenuated ChimeriVax vaccine (CYD-TDV) and infection of the Aedes mosquito vector with the endosymbiotic Wolbachia bacteria. While vaccination shows slightly more promise than vector control, in terms of effectiveness and sustainability, integration of both interventions may be more effective than either approach alone.

Relevance to medical students

The rapid pace of development of vaccines for dengue fever will rapidly reduce the over-100-million dengue fever cases and their associated morbidity and mortality within the next few years. A candidate vaccine against dengue viruses called, CYD-TDV, could reach registration and review by the World Health Organization in 2016. If countries do license CYD-TDV, future doctors will need to understand the costs and benefits of vaccination, particularly any undesirable outcomes after vaccination, and whether alternatives exist.

Introduction

There are more than 100 million dengue cases annually and the financial cost of this disease has been estimated to be more than $2 billion in the Americas and $1 billion in South-East Asia each year. [1] The 30-fold increase in the incidence of dengue in the last 50 years has highlighted the failure of existing vector control strategies and the need for new vaccine or vector control approaches. [1] The most advanced of these are the mosquito-infecting bacteria Wolbachia, and Sanofi Pasteur’s chimeric tetravalent dengue vaccine (CYD-TDV). A comparison of their problems and prospects based on effectiveness, efficiency, safety, sustainability, economy, and universality may guide their adoption. While these approaches have been developed in isolation, their combination may help achieve the World Health Organization (WHO) goals of reducing dengue mortality by 50% and morbidity by 25% by 2020. [2]

Vaccinations

Prospects

The ideal dengue fever vaccine would induce a neutralising and balanced response for all four dengue serotypes, provide long-lasting or life-long protection, be safe and stable, balance reactogenicity and immunogenicity, and be cost-effective and context-appropriate.  A more universal vaccine would confer “herd immunity” to the general population by reducing the reservoir of infected individuals and infection transmission. Vaccine candidates should be evaluated in trials spanning different populations and patterns of dengue transmission. [2] Several vaccine types are under development, including live-attenuated, live-chimeric, inactivated, subunit, and DNA vaccines (Table 1). [3] Inactivated and subunit vaccines are safer, in principle, due to a lower risk of reversion to virulence and are under evaluation in pre-clinical or early clinical trials. [4] Several more cost-effective and immunogenic live viral vaccines are under evaluation in late-stage clinical trials. [17]

Table 1: Candidate vaccine approaches.

Vaccine type Developer Process Progress
Live, attenuated chimeric (recombinant) Acambis / Sanofi Pasteur Insertion of genes coding for DENV structural proteins into a yellow fever virus (17D) backbone. [5] Phase III tetravalent – leading candidate [4]
Centre for Disease Control (CDC) / Inviragen Insertion of serotype genes into serotype II (DENV2-PDK53) DNA backbone. [6] Phase II monovalent [7]
National Institutes of Health (NIH) / University of Maryland Insertion of serotype II and III genes into safer, more immunogenic serotype I and IV DNA backbone. Live attenuated DENV Delta-30 mutation. [8] Phase I tetravalent
Live, traditionally attenuated Walter-Reed Army Institute of Research (WRAIR) / GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) Attenuation achieved by growing the virus in cultured cells and selecting strains Phase II tetravalent; technical issues [6]
Mahidol Institute / Sanofi Pasteur Phase II tetravalent
Inactivated GSK Viruses cultured and killed [9] Phase I tetravalent
Subunit Hawaii Biotech Viral immunogenic envelope is combined with viral non-structural protein antigens to produce recombinant 80% E subunit vaccine [10] Phase I tetravalent [11]
DNA WRAIR Dengue prM-E DNA vaccine incorporating membrane and envelope genes into a plasmid vector [12] Phase I monovalent

 

The leading vaccine candidate is the tetravalent Sanofi CYD-TDV that recently completed phase III clinical trials. [4] Phase I and II trials have established the vaccine is safe and immunogenic, inducing neutralising antibody responses in 77–100% of recipients receiving three doses of the vaccine. [13] A neutralising immune response is achieved through inserting dengue structural protein genes for the four serotypes onto a yellow fever virus backbone. [14] The multi-centre Phase III efficacy studies have further supported this effectiveness and safety. [17] The vaccine reduces dengue fever incidence by 56% and dengue haemorrhagic fever by 88%. [15] More than 28,000 subjects have been immunised with this vaccine. [16,17] CYD-TDV is based on the safe and effective YF-17D vaccine. [18] Pre-clinical and phase I studies have suggested that the incorporation of four dengue serotypes into the YF-17D RNA backbone has not come at the cost of the vaccine’s stability. [19] The reactogenicity profile is similar to the YF-17D control. [20] A more robust immune response, with no adverse reactions, has been observed post-injection in flavivirus-vaccinated individuals. No cases of dengue-like disease that could arise from reversion of live vaccine strains to virulence were observed in studies on younger subjects. [21] There was a low vaccine viraemia and similar rates of adverse events compared to the YF-17D control. The vaccine’s commercial prospects are still uncertain, but it has a low production cost. [22] Over 20 clinical trials and 20,000 subjects have therefore found the Sanofi vaccine safe and immunogenic. [16]

Problems

The major challenge with the Sanofi Pasteur vaccine has been to induce a balanced immune response against all four dengue virus serotypes (DENV 1-4). The vaccine has needed to elicit protective responses against all four serotypes and not produce sub-neutralising levels of antibody that might enhance subsequent DENV infections. ChimeriVax proved notably inefficient in protecting against DENV-2. [23] The efficacy of ChimeriVax was found to be 61%, 82%, and 90% against DENV-1, DENV-3, and DENV-4, respectively, and only 3.5% against DENV-2 after a single dose and 9.2% against DENV-2 after three doses. [24] Other challenges are the three six-monthly doses of vaccine, which could reduce patient compliance and reduce its utility as a traveller’s vaccine.

Vector control

Prospects

Vector control methods, which seek to eliminate the hosts of disease-transmitting pathogens, need to reduce dengue incidence in an efficient and economical manner without burdening local health infrastructure. While transient control has value in dengue prevention, ideal methods should be sustainable, require minimal reapplication of insecticide, and account for external factors, such as climate change. [15] Safety is paramount and the effects of preventive interventions on health and ecology should be monitored or the strategy may be limited in its use, for example, in the case of the carcinogenic, toxic, and polluting, but highly efficient insecticide, dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane (DDT). [25] Ultimately, the proposed intervention will need to be based on scientific evidence as well as public and government support. Current chemical, environmental, biological, and genetic vector control methods are not successfully mitigating dengue’s increasing prevalence, geographical distribution, and severity (Table 2). [26] Whether inserting the endosymbiotic Wolbachia bacteria into A. aegypti mosquitoes will be effective in controlling dengue remains to be seen.

Table 2: Candidate vector control approaches

Vector control type Process Progress       
Chemical [27] Insecticides, larvicides, pest control Popular and evidence-based
Concerns about significant financial and logistical costs, contamination and toxicity and insecticide resistance
Environmental [28] Eliminating mosquito breeding grounds, screens, water and waste management Appropriate strategies have the potential to reduce vector transmission and benefit overall health of people and the environment
Significant infrastructure needed
Biological [29] Natural predators and pathogens, (for example, Wolbachia) Successful in local elimination of mosquitoes
Significant infrastructure needed
Genetic Release of insects carrying dominant-lethal allele (RIDL), Sterile insect technique (SIT), HE gene, RNAi Limited field trials and mixed data on effects in reducing target populations in field trials. Large release numbers required

 

Wolbachia promises to be the equivalent of a human “vaccine” for dengue vectors, by inducing a natural biologic resistance to dengue infection in dengue-carrying A. aegypti mosquito populations. Wolbachia occurs naturally in approximately 40% of arthropods and reduces A. aegypti’s ability to respond to viruses, life-span, and reproduction. [30, 31] All three forms of Wolbachia (wAlbB, wMelPop, and wMel), inhibit DENV replication and dissemination within the host mosquito and may block viral transmission. [32, 33] Wolbachia strains can dramatically reduce the lifespan of the female A. aegypti mosquito so that virus transmission may not occur before the insect dies. [34, 35] However, some Wolbachia strains are transmitted from mother to offspring in A. aegypti populations resulting in rapid spread throughout a population. [35] Risk assessments failed to identify significant risks associated with releasing Wolbachia-infected A. aegypti. [36] Safety concerns relate to the possible transfer of Wolbachia to humans by mosquito bites, and to non-target species and mosquito predators. [37] Wolbachia infection rates remain at 100% one year after Wolbachia wMel release in Cairns. [38] This intervention has now received regulatory approval. The success of field trials such as this would allow this innovation to move to countries where dengue is endemic.

Problems

The challenge now remains to make Wolbachia-based vector control strategies more universally applicable and sustainable. Some effects of specific Wolbachia strains on DENV transmission may be inappropriate for certain contexts. For example, wMelPop has a more significant impact on DENV transmission in dengue-endemic settings than wMel due to a stronger DENV transmission-blocking effect. [39] However, the wMelPop strain reduces the fitness of A. aegypti more than wMel, so would require additional Wolbachia mosquito deployment to maintain sufficient levels of Wolbachia-infected vectors to prevent dengue transmission. The sustainability of Wolbachia-based strategies is challenged by the significant financial and operational costs for rearing, releasing and re-establishing Wolbachia-infected mosquito populations. [40] As with insecticides, the evolution of resistance poses a risk. [41] A. aegypti could evolve resistance against particular strains of Wolbachia, similar to the resistance of Drosophila simulans after transinfection with Wolbachia wMelPop. [42] Furthermore, dengue virus strains could develop a means of evading Wolbachia-based transmission blocking. Longer-term, larger-scale trials are needed to assess how Wolbachia can reduce the burden of dengue in a sustainable manner.

Comparisons

Table 3. Overview of promising vaccine and vector control approaches.

Vaccination – Sanofi Pasteur Vector control – Wolbachia
Mechanism 1.      Vaccine contains strains against the four dengue virus serotypes

2.      Dendritic cells carry strains to lymph nodes to activate B cell proliferation and antibody production

3.      When bitten by infected mosquitos, antibodies neutralise the virus

1.      Natural arthropod Wolbachia bacteria injected into A. Aegypti eggs

2.      Reduce mosquito reproduction, lifespan and pathogen replication

3.      Wolbachia passed between generations

Efficacy/efficiency Neutralising and immunogenic; reduces dengue fever by 56% and dengue hemorrhagic fever by 88%; inefficient in tackling DENV-2 in trials Inhibits DENV replication and dissemination and reduces vector lifespan and reproduction; predicted to reduce transmission by 60–100%
Safety YF-17D is a safe, stable vaccine backbone; low viraemia, reactogenicity, and adverse events Minimal safety concerns, such as Wolbachia transfer to humans, non-target species, and mosquito predators
Sustainability Long-term waning of vaccine-elicited immunity may require boosters Stable in short-term, but potential for Wolbachia resistance in the long-term
Economy Low production cost Large operational and re-establishment costs
Universality Most useful in tropical regions, rather than as a traveller’s vaccine Mainly effective in urban centers and tropical regions

 

Vaccination and vector control have the potential to be effective, safe, and sustainable, despite their failure to control dengue to date (Table 3). Two large-scale phase III trials in the Americas and Asia involving 40,000 participants have demonstrated an efficacy of 60.8% for CYD-TDV. [16] However, Wolbachia-based vector control is still at the small-scale trial stage in Australia in order to refine methods with further large-scale trials in Indonesia, Vietnam, and Brazil. Small scale trials have been completed in Vietnam. Licensing of the Sanofi Pasteur vaccine is expected with Australian Pesticides and Veterinary Medicines Authority (AVPMA) approval already achieved in Australia. [4] Licensing of Wolbachia will require further field trials, risk assessment, and time. Both vaccination and Wolbachia involve fixed, front-loaded establishment costs that are significantly lower than traditional vector control methods. The risk of adverse events is increased with the Sanofi Pasteur CYD-TDV vaccine that had an efficacy ranging from 56 to 100% against DENV-1, DENV-3 and DENV-4, but not against DENV-2. It may be that incomplete protection can be achieved through combining vaccine and vector control approaches to reduce DENV-2 transmission.

Combinations

Modelling shows that combining vector control with vaccination could increase intervention effectiveness by reducing vector density and therefore infections. One compartmental model found that an imperfect vaccine could reduce dengue incidence by 57%, ten years post-vaccination, but when combined with other strategies, there was a greater reduction in incidence with a rate of 81%, ten years post-vaccination. [43] Another model demonstrated that less efficacious vaccines should not be applied without concurrently applying vector control approaches. [44] Computer simulations suggest that in areas of high mosquito density, vector control followed by vaccination programs could reduce potential surges in dengue virulence. [45] Vector control and vaccination approaches therefore need context-sensitive and coordinated integration. Applied together, vector control and vaccination interventions could reduce DENV transmission significantly and prove to be cost effective. [46] Vaccines for other diseases have previously been paired with vector control methods with few safety issues, better protection against disease risk, and extended efficacy. [47]

Conclusion

The development of safe, effective, and affordable dengue vaccines and new vector control methods promise to rapidly reduce dengue incidence and therefore morbidity and mortality. The most advanced vaccine candidate has proven safe and protective against three of the four dengue virus serotypes. Of the emerging genetic, biological, and environmental vector control methods, the closest to clinical application is the release of mosquitoes infected with specific strains of Wolbachia that can reduce dengue virus replication, reproduction, and life span. The vaccine shows slightly more promise than the Wolbachia vector control method. History has shown that no single approach is able to control dengue and the future of dengue fever prevention may be integrated immunisation, vector control, and social mobilisation.

Conflict of Interest

None declared.

References

[1] Bhatt S, Gething P, Brady O, Messina J, Farlow A, Moyes C. The global distribution and burden of dengue. Nature. 2013;496(7446):504-507.

[2] Guzman M, Halstead S, Artsob H, Buchy P, Farrar J, Gubler D. Dengue: a continuing global threat. Nat Rev Micro. 2010;8(12):S7-S16.

[3] Hombach J, Jane Cardosa M, Sabchareon A, Vaughn D, Barrett A. Scientific consultation on immunological correlates of protection induced by dengue vaccines. Vaccine. 2007;25(21):4130-4139.

[4] Guy B, Barrere B, Malinowski C, Saville M, Teyssou R, Lang J. From research to phase III: Preclinical, industrial and clinical development of the Sanofi Pasteur tetravalent dengue vaccine. Vaccine. 2011;29(42):7229-7241.

[5] Durbin A, Whitehead S. Next-Generation Dengue Vaccines: Novel Strategies Currently Under Development. Viruses. 2011;3(12):1800-1814.

[6] Sun W, Cunningham D, Wasserman S, Perry J, Putnak J, Eckels K. Phase 2 clinical trial of three formulations of tetravalent live-attenuated dengue vaccine in flavivirus-naive adults. Hum Vaccin. 2009;5(1):33-40.

[7] Huang C, Butrapet S, Pierro D, Chang G, Hunt A, Bhamarapravati N. Chimeric Dengue Type 2 (Vaccine Strain PDK-53)/Dengue Type 1 Virus as a Potential Candidate Dengue Type 1 Virus Vaccine. J Virol. 2000;74(7):3020-3028.

[8] Osorio J, Huang C, Kinney R, Stinchcomb D. Development of DENVax: A chimeric dengue-2 PDK-53-based tetravalent vaccine for protection against dengue fever. Vaccine. 2011;29(42):7251-7260.

[9] Halstead S, Deen J. The future of dengue vaccines. Lancet. 2002;360(9341):1243-1245.

[10] Putnak R, Coller B, Voss G, Vaughn D, Clements D, Peters I. An evaluation of dengue type-2 inactivated, recombinant subunit, and live-attenuated vaccine candidates in the rhesus macaque model. Vaccine. 2005;23(35):4442-4452.

[11] Lazo L, Izquierdo A, Suzarte E, Gil L, Valds I, Marcos E. Evaluation in mice of the immunogenicity and protective efficacy of a tetravalent subunit vaccine candidate against dengue virus. Microbiol Immunol. 2014;58(4):219-226.

[12] Clements D, Coller B, Lieberman M, Ogata S, Wang G, Harada K. Development of a recombinant tetravalent dengue virus vaccine: Immunogenicity and efficacy studies in mice and monkeys. Vaccine. 2010;28(15):2705-2715.

[13] Putri D, Sudiro T, Yunita R, Jaya U, Dewi B, Sjatha F. Immunogenicity of a candidate DNA vaccine based on the prM/E genes of a dengue type 2 virus Cosmopolitan genotype. Jpn J Infect Dis. 2015.

[14] White L, Sariol C, Mattocks M, Wahala M. P. B. W, Yingsiwaphat V, Collier M. An Alphavirus Vector-Based Tetravalent Dengue Vaccine Induces a Rapid and Protective Immune Response in Macaques That Differs Qualitatively from Immunity Induced by Live Virus Infection. J Virol. 2013;87(6):3409-3424.

[15] Guy B, Saville M, Lang J. Development of sanofi pasteur tetravalent dengue vaccine. Hum Vaccin. 2010;6(9):696-705.

[16] Capeding M, Tran N, Hadinegoro S, Ismail H, Chotpitayasunondh T, Chua M. Clinical efficacy and safety of a novel tetravalent dengue vaccine in healthy children in Asia: a phase 3, randomised, observer-masked, placebo-controlled trial. Lancet. 2014;384(9951):1358-1365.

[17] Lang J. Recent progress on sanofi pasteur’s dengue vaccine candidate. J Clin Virol. 2009;46:S20-S24.

[18] Kanesa-thasan N, Sun W, Kim-Ahn G, Van Albert S, Putnak J, King A. Safety and immunogenicity of attenuated dengue virus vaccines (Aventis Pasteur) in human volunteers. Vaccine. 2001;19(23-24):3179-3188.

[19] Bonaldo M, Caufour P, Freire M, Galler R. The yellow fever 17D vaccine virus as a vector for the expression of foreign proteins: development of new live flavivirus vaccines. Instituto Oswaldo Cruz. 2000;95:215-223.

[20] Guirakhoo F, Pugachev K, Zhang Z, Myers G, Levenbook I, Draper K. Safety and Efficacy of Chimeric Yellow Fever-Dengue Virus Tetravalent Vaccine Formulations in Nonhuman Primates. J Virol. 2004;78(9):4761-4775.

[21] Guirakhoo F, Kitchener S, Morrison D, Forrat R, McCarthy K, Nichols R. Live Attenuated Chimeric Yellow Fever Dengue Type 2 (ChimeriVax-DEN2) Vaccine: Phase I Clinical Trial for Safety and Immunogenicity: Effect of Yellow Fever Pre-immunity in Induction of Cross Neutralizing Antibody Responses to All. Hum Vaccin.  2006;2(2):60-67.

[22] Guy B, Guirakhoo F, Barban V, Higgs S, Monath T, Lang J. Preclinical and clinical development of YFV 17D-based chimeric vaccines against dengue, West Nile and Japanese encephalitis viruses. Vaccine. 2010;28(3):632-649.

[23] Dayan G, Garbes P, Noriega F, Izoton de Sadovsky A, Rodrigues P, Giuberti C et al. Immunogenicity and Safety of a Recombinant Tetravalent Dengue Vaccine in Children and Adolescents Ages 9-16 Years in Brazil. Am J Trop Med Hyg. 2013;89(6):1058-1065.

[24] Mahoney R, Francis D, Frazatti-Gallina N, Precioso A, Raw I, Watler P. Cost of production of live attenuated dengue vaccines: A case study of the Instituto Butantan, Sao Paulo, Brazil. Vaccine. 2012;30(32):4892-4896.

[25] Halstead S. Dengue vaccine development: a 75% solution? Lancet. 2012;380(9853):1535-1536.

[26] Sabchareon A, Wallace D, Sirivichayakul C, Limkittikul K, Chanthavanich P, Suvannadabba S. Protective efficacy of the recombinant, live-attenuated, CYD tetravalent dengue vaccine in Thai schoolchildren: a randomised, controlled phase 2b trial. Lancet. 2012;380(9853):1559-1567.

[27] Amarasinghe A, Mahoney R. Estimating potential demand and supply of dengue vaccine in Brazil. Hum Vaccin. 2011;7(7):776-780.

[28] Maguire S, Hardy C. Discourse and Deinstitutionalization: the Decline of DDT. Academy of Management Journal. 2009;52(1):148-178.

[29] Gubler D. Epidemic dengue/dengue hemorrhagic fever as a public health, social and economic problem in the 21st century. Trends in Microbiology. 2002;10(2):100-103.

[30] Maciel-de-Freitas R, Aguiar R, Bruno R, Guimares M, Loureno-de-Oliveira R, Sorgine M. Why do we need alternative tools to control mosquito-borne diseases in Latin America? Instituto Oswaldo Cruz. 2012;107(6):828-829.

[31] Thammapalo S, Meksawi S, Chongsuvivatwong V. Effectiveness of Space Spraying on the Transmission of Dengue/Dengue Hemorrhagic Fever (DF/DHF) in an Urban Area of Southern Thailand. J Trop Med. 2012;2012:1-7.

[32] Nam V, Yen N, Duc H, Tu T, Thang V, Le N. Community-Based Control of Aedes aegypti By Using Mesocyclops in Southern Vietnam. Am J Trop Med Hyg. 2012;86(5):850-859.

[33] Mousson L, Zouache K, Arias-Goeta C, Raquin V, Mavingui P, Failloux A. The Native Wolbachia Symbionts Limit Transmission of Dengue Virus in Aedes albopictus. PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2012;6(12):e1989.

[34] Moreira L, Saig E, Turley A, Ribeiro J, O’Neill S, McGraw E. Human Probing Behavior of Aedes aegypti when Infected with a Life-Shortening Strain of Wolbachia. PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2009;3(12):e568.

[35] Yeap H, Mee P, Walker T, Weeks A, O’Neill S, Johnson P. Dynamics of the “Popcorn” Wolbachia Infection in Outbred Aedes aegypti Informs Prospects for Mosquito Vector Control. Genetics. 2010;187(2):583-595.

[36] Moreira L, Iturbe-Ormaetxe I, Jeffery J, Lu G, Pyke A, Hedges L. A Wolbachia Symbiont in Aedes aegypti Limits Infection with Dengue, Chikungunya, and Plasmodium. Cell. 2009;139(7):1268-1278.

[37] Lu P, Bian G, Pan X, Xi Z. Wolbachia Induces Density-Dependent Inhibition to Dengue Virus in Mosquito Cells. PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2012;6(7):e1754.

[38] Min K, Benzer S. Wolbachia, normally a symbiont of Drosophila, can be virulent, causing degeneration and early death. National Academies Press. 1997;94(20):10792-10796.

[39] McMeniman C, Lane R, Cass B, Fong A, Sidhu M, Wang Y. Stable Introduction of a Life-Shortening Wolbachia Infection into the Mosquito Aedes aegypti. Science. 2009;323(5910):141-144.

[40] De Barro P, Murphy B, Jansen C, Murray J. The proposed release of the yellow fever mosquito, Aedes aegypti containing a naturally occurring strain of Wolbachia pipientis, a question of regulatory responsibility. J Verbr Lebensm. 2011;6(S1):33-40.

[41] Popovici J, Moreira L, Poinsignon A, Iturbe-Ormaetxe I, McNaughton D, O’Neill S. Assessing key safety concerns of a Wolbachia-based strategy to control dengue transmission by Aedes mosquitoes. Instituto Oswaldo Cruz. 2010;105(8):957-964.

[42] Hoffmann A, Iturbe-Ormaetxe I, Callahan A, Phillips B, Billington K, Axford J. Stability of the wMel Wolbachia Infection following Invasion into Aedes aegypti Populations. PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2014;8(9):e3115.

[43] Ferguson N, Hue Kien D, Clapham H, Aguas R, Trung V, Bich Chau T. Modeling the impact on virus transmission of Wolbachia-mediated blocking of dengue virus infection of Aedes aegypti. Sci Trans Med. 2015;7(279):279ra37-279ra37.

[44] Hoffmann A, Montgomery B, Popovici J, Iturbe-Ormaetxe I, Johnson P, Muzzi F. Successful establishment of Wolbachia in Aedes populations to suppress dengue transmission. Nature. 2011;476(7361):454-457.

[45] McMeniman C, Lane A, Fong A, Voronin D, Iturbe-Ormaetxe I, Yamada R. Host Adaptation of a Wolbachia Strain after Long-Term Serial Passage in Mosquito Cell Lines. J Appl Environ Microbiol. 2008;74(22):6963-6969.

[46] McGraw E, Merritt D, Droller J, O’Neill S. Wolbachia density and virulence attenuation after transfer into a novel host. National Academies Press. 2002;99(5):2918-2923.

[47] Knerer G, Currie C, Brailsford S. Impact of combined vector-control and vaccination strategies on transmission dynamics of dengue fever: a model-based analysis. Health Care Manag Sci. 2013;.

[48] Boccia T, Burattini M, Coutinho F, Massad E. Will people change their vector-control practices in the presence of an imperfect dengue vaccine? Epidemiol Infect. 2013;142(03):625-633.

[49] Thavara U, Tawatsin A, nagao Y. Simulations to compare efficacies of tetravalent dengue vaccines and mosquito vector control. Epidemiol Infect. 2013;142(06):1245-1258.

[50] Knerer G, Currie C, Brailsford S. The Cost-Effectiveness of Combined Vector-Control and Vaccination Strategies on Prevention of Dengue Fever: A Dynamic Model-Based Analysis. Value in Health. 2014;17(7):A806.

[51] Lipsitch M, O’Neill K, Cordy D, Bugalter B, Trzcinski K, Thompson C. Strain Characteristics of Streptococcus pneumon Vaccine. J. Infect Dis. 2007;196(8):1221-1227.

Categories
Feature Articles

Smoke on the Water: A Student Based Guide to Electronic Cigarettes

Diseases attributed to tobacco smoking are some of the most prevalent and preventable in the world. Therefore, smoking cessation programs and interventions are crucial components of population health strategies. Currently used interventions and medications have proved effective in aiding patient abstinence from tobacco, yet they are often met with low patient uptake, satisfaction, and compliance. Electronic cigarettes pose a new challenge for clinicians as minimal evidence exists on their safety, health impact and effectiveness as smoking cessation tools.

The evidence to date on electronic cigarettes was reviewed and this guide was developed to assist medical students in providing information and advice to patients about electronic cigarettes. The guide includes information on types of electronic cigarettes, how they work, their health effects, their use in smoking cessation and, current regulation in Australia. The article also includes patient-centred frequently asked questions, with evidence-based answers.

v7i1p10f1

Figure 1: Aerosol from an e-cigarette

Behind the smoke screen

What are e-cigarettes?

Electronic cigarettes, also known as e-cigarettes, e-cigs, personal vaporisers or electronic nicotine delivery systems (ENDS), are battery-operated devices used to simulate the experience of smoking by delivering flavoured nicotine, in the form of an aerosol (Figure 1). Despite the original design dating back to 1963, [1] it was only in 2003 that the Chinese inventor and pharmacist, Hon Lik, was able to  develop the first commercially viable modern e-cigarette. [2]

People use e-cigarettes for many reasons, including: To make it easier to reduce the number of cigarettes you smoke (79.0%), they may be less hazardous to your health (77.2%), they are cheaper than regular cigarettes (61.3%), they are a quitting aid (57.8%), so you can smoke in places where smoking regular cigarettes is banned (57.4%), as an alternative to quitting (48.2%), e-cigarettes taste better than regular cigarettes (18.2%). [3]

What makes up an e-cigarette?

There are various classes of e-cigarette, but all follow a simple design. A lithium ion battery is attached to a heating element known as an “atomiser” which vaporises the e-liquid. The e-liquid, sometimes called “juice”, is traditionally held in a cartridge (the mouth piece) and usually consists of a combination of propylene glycol and glycerine (termed humectants) to produce aerosols that simulate conventional cigarette smoke. [4] Liquid nicotine, water, and/or flavourings are commonly included in e-liquids as well. Some devices have a button designed to activate the atomiser; however, more recent designs work via a pressure sensor that detects airflow when the user sucks on the device. This pressure sensor design emits aerosolised vapour, which the user inhales. This practice is known as ‘vaping’.

What types of e-cigarettes exist?

Currently, three classes of e-cigarettes exist on the market [5]:

v7i1p10f2

Figure 2: A cigalike.

“e-Go’s” comprise the second class. These are larger than cigalikes and have removable tanks that can be refilled with e-liquid (Figure 3).

v7i1p10f3

Figure 3: An e-Go.

Finally, there are modular e-cigarettes (or ‘mods’), which are usually larger than e-Go’s. They have a removable tank and can be customised to the user’s preferences (Figure 4).

v7i1p10f4

Figure 4: A modular e-cigarette, or “mod”.

Why is this important?

E-cigarette devices vary vastly between developers. [6] Users are able to modify their e-cigarette atomisers, circuitry, and battery power to alter vapour production. [7-9] By 2014, there were an estimated 466 brands of e-cigarette with 7764 flavours. [10] Users are also able to select their own e-juice, with 97-99% of users choosing e-liquid containing nicotine. [6, 11] Despite devices on the market delivering less nicotine than conventional combustible cigarettes, [12] many health professionals are concerned about the short and long-term health effects of e-cigarettes. [13]

Demystifying the situation

How safe are e-cigarettes?

Given that e-cigarettes have been available for just under a decade, no long-term studies into their health effects currently exist. However, several short-term studies have been conducted on the health implications of e-liquids, e-cigarette devices, and vapour.

Nicotine

The e-cigarette market is largely unregulated. One study found nicotine amounts in e-liquids varied greatly, with concentrations ranging from 0-34 mg/mL. [14] Of additional concern, further studies found significant discrepancies between ‘label concentration’ of nicotine and ‘actual concentration’, [15] with one reporting that ‘nicotine free’ e-liquids actually contained nicotine. [16] This is of ethical concern given that nicotine is a highly addictive drug [17] likely to influence usage patterns and dependence behaviours. There is a need to assess nicotine dependence in e-cigarette users. [18] One study looked at pharmacokinetic absorption of nicotine by comparing nicotine delivery via e-cigarettes, combustion cigarettes, and nicotine inhalers. It found that e-cigarette absorption rates lay between those of combustion cigarettes and nicotine inhalers, implying that nicotine is absorbed though both buccal (slow, nicotine inhaler) and pulmonary (fast, combustion cigarette) routes. As nicotine dependence is related to absorption rate and exposure, this suggests e-cigarettes users are at risk of dependence. This claim was verified by other studies, which conclusively demonstrated e-cigarette users can achieve nicotine exposure similar to that of combustion cigarette smokers. [19,20]

Propylene glycol and glycerine (humectants)

Propylene glycol and glycerine have not been deemed safe for inhalation [21] because little is known about their long-term impacts on health when inhaled. [22] By-products of heating both propylene glycol (propylene oxide) and glycerine (acrolein) have been found to be potentially carcinogenic and irritating to the respiratory tract. [23] A systematic review of contaminants in e-cigarettes concluded that humectants warrant further investigation given the precautionary nature of threshold limit values (TLVs) for exposures to hydrocarbons with no established toxicity (The TLV of a substance being the level to which it is believed a worker can be exposed, day after day, for a working lifetime without adverse health effects). [24]

Flavours

There are over 7000 flavours of e-liquid as of January 2014. Despite nearly all of these flavourings having been approved for human oral consumption, their safety when heated and inhaled remains questionable. [25] In fact, many flavourings have been shown to be cytotoxic when heated and others resemble known carcinogens. [26] One study found heating cinnamon flavoured e-liquid produced cinnamaldehyde, a highly cytotoxic substance, [27] while another study found balsamic flavour e-cigarettes triggered pro-inflammatory cytokine release in lung epithelium. [28] Furthermore, a recent study looking at 30 e-fluids found that the majority of flavours consisted of aldehydes which are known ‘primary irritants’ of the respiratory mucosa. [29] Manufacturers do not always disclose the exact ingredients in their e-liquids and many compounds are potentially cytotoxic, pro-inflammatory and/or carcinogenic. Thus, the safety of e-liquids cannot be assured. [25,30]

Toxins

In the US, the Food and Drug Administration analysed the vapour of 18 cartridges from two leading e-cigarette manufacturers and confirmed the presence of known and potentially carcinogenic or mutagenic substances. These included diethylene glycol (DEG, an ingredient used in antifreeze that is toxic to humans), tobacco-specific nitrosamines (TSNAs, human carcinogens) and tobacco-specific impurities suspected of being harmful to humans (anabasine, myosmine, and β-nicotyrine). [31] To put these findings into context, the concentration of toxins in e-cigarettes ranged between 9 and 450 times less than those in conventional cigarettes. [19] Secondly, they were found to be at acceptable involuntary work place exposure levels. [24] Furthermore, levels of TSNAs were comparable in toxicity to those of nicotine inhalers or patches, [32] two forms of nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) commonly used in Australia. [33] Lastly, e-cigarettes contain only 0.07-0.2% of the TSNAs present in conventional cigarettes. [34] Of note, in 15 subsequent studies that looked at DEG in e-cigarettes, none was found. [34] 

E-cigarette device

Many chemicals used in e-liquids are considered safe for oral ingestion, yet their health effects when inhaled as vapour remain uncertain. This applies not only to e-liquids but also the e-cigarette device itself. Many e-cigarette devices are highly customisable, with users able to increase voltages, producing greater toxin levels. One study identified arsenic, lead, chromium, cadmium and nickel in trace amounts not harmful to humans, while another found these elements at levels higher than in combustion cigarettes. [36,37] Lerner et al. looked at reactive oxygen species (ROS) generated in e-cigarette vapour and found them similar to those in conventional smoke. They also found metals present at levels six times greater than in conventional cigarette smoke. [38] A recent review noted that small amounts of metals from the devices in the vapour are not likely to pose a serious health risk to users, [24] while other studies found metal levels in e-cigarette vapour to be up to ten times less than those in some inhaled medicines. [39] Given that metals found in e-cigarette vapour are likely a contaminant of the device [6, 40], variability in the e-cigarette manufacturing process and materials requires stricter regulation to prevent harm to consumers.

Effects on health

E-cigarettes appear to be safer than combustion cigarettes, [15] but they should not be considered harm free. [41] A 2014 Cochrane review found no ‘serious’ adverse effects from e-cigarette trials to date, [42] yet another review which included 28 publications found hazards related to e-cigarettes (Table 1). [43].

Table 1. Frequently reported hazards of electronic cigarette smoking [43]

Respiratory system Upper respiratory tract irritation, dry cough, dryness of the mucus membrane, nose bleeding, release of cytokines and pro-inflammatory mediators, allergic airway inflammation, decreased exhaled nitric oxide (FeNO) synthesis
Nervous system Headache, dizziness, nervousness, insomnia, sleeplessness
GIT Nausea, vomiting, dry mouth, mouth or tongue sores/inflammation, black tongue, gum bleeding, gingivitis, gastric burning, constipation
CVS Palpitation, chest pain
Eye Irritation, redness and dryness of the eyes, can cause eye damage
Choking hazards Accidental exposure to high concentrations of e-liquids can cause choking hazards
Malignancy Change in bronchial gene expression and risk of lung cancer
Miscellaneous Shortness of breath, shivering etc

Other large studies supported this information. [23,44-46] Research on short-term changes to cardiorespiratory physiology following e-cigarette use included increased airway resistance [25] and slightly elevated blood pressure and heart rate. [47] As the short- and long-term consequences of e-cigarette use are currently unclear, [47] a conservative stance would be to assume vaping as harmful until more evidence becomes available.

Where there’s smoke, there’s fire

 Australian law and e-cigarettes

In Australia there is currently no federal law that specifically addresses the regulation of electronic cigarettes; rather, laws that relate to poisons, tobacco, and therapeutic goods have been applied to e-cigarettes in ways that effectively ban the sale of those containing nicotine. In all Australian states and territories, legislation relating to nicotine falls under the Commonwealth Poisons Standard. [49,50] In all states and territories, the manufacture, sale, personal possession, or use of electronic cigarettes that contain nicotine is unlawful, unless specifically approved, authorised or licenced. [49,50]

Under the Commonwealth Poisons Standard nicotine is considered a Schedule 7 – Dangerous Poison. E-cigarettes containing nicotine could be removed from this category in the future should any device become registered by the Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA), thus allowing it to be sold lawfully.

There are currently no TGA registered nicotine containing electronic cigarettes [51] and importation, exportation, manufacture and supply is a criminal offence under the Therapeutic Goods Act 1989. [52] It is, however, possible to lawfully import electronic cigarettes containing nicotine from overseas for personal therapeutic use (e.g. as a quitting aid) if one has a medical prescription as this is exempt from TGA registration requirements outlined in the personal importation scheme under the Therapeutic Goods Regulations 1990.

Therefore, it is up to the discretion of the medical practitioner if they provide a prescription for a product not yet approved by the TGA. Given that legislation currently exists to permit medical practitioners to assist individuals in obtaining e-cigarettes, it is imperative we understand both the legal environment at the time and the health consequences.

Stick that in your e-cig and vape it!

E-cigarettes as smoking cessation aids

v7i1p10f5

Figure 5: Quitting tobacco cigarettes through vaping (Image courtesy vaping360.com)

A debate continues as to whether e-cigarettes – with or without nicotine – are able to play a role in smoking cessation (Figure 5). In the absence of large scale clinical trials it is impossible to answer this question definitively. What is clear from smoking statistics worldwide is that more needs to be done regarding smoking cessation. E-cigarettes may be another tool to help achieve a tobacco free future. Thus far, conventional NRT has been rated by most smokers attempting to quit as unappealing [53] despite evidence that NRT increases quit rates by 50-70% compared to placebo. [54] Few trials have been conducted to investigate whether e-cigarettes are effective tools for smoking cessation, but one recent systematic review and meta-analysis found that nicotine containing e-cigarettes were associated with both a significant reduction in the number of combustion cigarettes smoked as well as complete smoking tobacco abstinence. [53] This suggests that e-cigarettes have potential as cessation aids and tobacco harm reduction devices.

E-cigarettes containing nicotine were more successful in helping patients reduce or quit smoking than those without nicotine according to a recent Cochrane review, [42] a finding in-line with conventional NRT vs. placebo studies. The review was unable to compare e-cigarette trials to conventional NRT trials given differences in study designs but commented that on average quit rates using conventional NRT at 12 months were 10%, while e-cigarette use corresponded with quit rates of 20%.

E-cigarettes, unlike conventional NRT products, are not only able to provide smokers with nicotine to satisfy their pharmacological addiction, but by design simulate many of the behaviours that have been psychologically ingrained through long-term smoking. E-cigarettes allow users to inhale and exhale a smoke-like substance. They can handle a device of similar shape to satisfy the oral fixation. Psychological triggers from ‘smoker-friendly venues’ can be relieved by using e-cigarettes, and flavourings can be customised to tobacco or menthol. These factors may prove e-cigarettes a valuable ally in the fight on tobacco. However, there is concern among some health practitioners that e-cigarettes may be a gateway to use of combusted tobacco. [55] If a patient is seeking advice about quitting, it is important to provide them with well tested NRT and medications. These include nicotine delivery preparations for oromucosal (nicotine gum and spray) and transdermal (nicotine patches) routes as well as other drugs including bupropion, varenicline and cytisine medications, [56] with varenicline being the most effective in improving likelihood of quitting. [53]

Questions you may be asked by patients

My partner and I are looking to start a family soon. Is it safe to use electronic cigarettes during pregnancy?

As e-cigarettes lack many of the harmful carcinogens found in regular tobacco cigarettes, consumers might be misled into believing these products are safe. This is of great concern to traditionally high-risk groups, such as pregnant women. In a 2015 review, the author concluded that, based on current evidence, no amount of nicotine is known to be safe during pregnancy. [40] To date, there is no evidence looking specifically at e-cigarette use in pregnant women, however much is known about nicotine exposure in pregnancy. Nicotine is metabolised faster in pregnant women [57] and easily crosses the placental barrier to enter fetal circulation, [40,58] and nicotinic receptors implicated in brain development [59,60] are present in the fetal brain from the first trimester of pregnancy. Many women may seek to use e-cigarettes since conventional NRT in pregnant women has been highly unsuccessful for smoking cessation. [61] Nicotine is considered a Category D drug under Australian pregnancy guidelines (formerly ADEC) and exposure during pregnancy has been found to cause significant health consequences in the fetus and neonate. [62] It is important to inform patients that current evidence suggests nicotine, at any concentration, during pregnancy is not considered safe and all efforts should be made to ensure a nicotine-free pregnancy with effective strategies implemented prior to conception.

My housemates are always using e-cigarettes near me. Can I get sick if I am around them when they use one?

Evidence, especially long-term data, is lacking on the effects of e-cigarettes on bystanders. [13] What is known is e-cigarette vapour contains nicotine and particles that may be inhaled by persons in the vicinity of e-cigarette users. [28] One study found low levels of formaldehyde and nicotine among several other chemicals emitted into the air. It was subsequently concluded that toxins in e-cigarette aerosols were emitted at much lower levels compared with conventional cigarette emissions. [63] A 2014 systematic review [24] compared TLVs to the “worst case” assumptions about both chemical content of aerosols and liquids as well as behaviour of e-cigarette users and concluded “there is no evidence that vaping produces inhalable exposures to contaminants of the aerosol that would warrant health concerns by the standards that are used to ensure safety of workplaces”. Any effect on bystanders from e-cigarette vapour is likely to be much less than combustion cigarettes, a similar conclusion reached by other studies. [39,64] However, some studies have shown serum cotinine levels (the primary metabolite of nicotine) to be increased in non-smokers exposed to e-cigarette vapour, [65,66] though only to levels ten percent of that of second-hand smoke from conventional cigarettes. Even if toxins in vapour are likely to pose little harm to bystanders, the very presence of toxins and nicotine in vapour is inconsistent with the claim most e-cigarette companies make of vapour being ‘just harmless water vapour’.

So I’ve heard e-cigarettes may be unhealthy, but are they dangerous?

There are potential dangers surrounding e-cigarettes arising from their design and engineering. The United States Fire Administration recently compiled a report of over 25 fires or explosions from e-cigarettes, either while being used or charged, many of which resulted in serious burns to individuals and damage to property. [67]

Nicotine in the e-liquid refill packs is considered a potentially lethal poison. [11] If ingested or in direct contact with skin it poses a potential serious health risk, [68] including the potential for overdose in children. [69] There has been at least one known fatality in a toddler from accidental ingestion and overdose of liquid nicotine intended for e-cigarette use. There have been over 3500 liquid nicotine exposure related incidents recorded by the American Association of Poison Control Centres since November 2014. [70]

What are tobacco companies doing about e-cigarettes?

It is worth noting that many tobacco companies have opted to include e-cigarettes in their product portfolio. [6] Thus ethically speaking, it is vital for doctors to understand that by recommending e-cigarettes they may indirectly be supporting the tobacco industry.

Conclusion

E-cigarettes are a growing market and present a novel challenge to clinicians and medical students. Traditional approaches of obtaining pack-year histories or relying on tell-tale signs of smoking such as tar stained fingers or smoke odour will not work for e-cigarette users. We must ask specifically about use of e-cigarettes when taking a smoking history, use terms like ‘vaping’, ask whether the e-juice contains nicotine and if they have customised their devices. We must not become complacent simply because e-cigarettes are currently viewed as the lesser of two evils with regards to impact on health. As medical students, deciding whether or not to endorse e-cigarettes as smoking cessation aids is a complex issue given that proven, safe, and effective treatments currently exist, and those should be used as primary cessation aids. If a patient has used these primary aids and failed to quit, it is worthwhile considering e-cigarettes as an avenue for achieving tobacco abstinence. It is unlikely that the clinicians we encounter in our studies will have a detailed understanding on e-cigarettes and vaping practises; it is therefore up to us to keep abreast of such knowledge to provide patients with quality information and care.

Acknowledgments

The author would like to thank Kelly Mirowska-Allen, a third-year medical student at the University of Melbourne, for assistance in proofreading this article and providing support and advice.

Conflict of interest

None declared.

References

[1] A GH. Smokeless non-tobacco cigarette. Google Patents; 1965.

[2] Hancock T. Chinese e-cigarette inventor fights for royalties. The Japan Times [Internet]. 2013 Oct 4 [cited 2015 27th July]. Available from: http://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2013/10/04/business/chinese-e-cigarette-inventor-fights-for-royalties/#.VbXikPmqqkq.

[3] Hummel K, Hoving C, Nagelhout GE, de Vries H, van den Putte B, Candel MJ, et al. Prevalence and reasons for use of electronic cigarettes among smokers: Findings from the International Tobacco Control (ITC) Netherlands Survey. Int J Drug Policy. 2015;26(6):601-8.

[4] Cheng T. Chemical evaluation of electronic cigarettes. Tob Control. 2014;23 Suppl 2:ii11-7.

[5] Farsalinos KE, Romagna G, Tsiapras D, Kyrzopoulos S, Voudris V. Characteristics, perceived side effects and benefits of electronic cigarette use: a worldwide survey of more than 19,000 consumers. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2014;11(4):4356-73.

[6] Born H, Persky M, Kraus DH, Peng R, Amin MR, Branski RC. Electronic Cigarettes: A Primer for Clinicians. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2015;153(1):5-14.

[7] Cooper S. What you need to know about vaporizers: Engadget [Internet]. 2014 May 23 [cited 2015 28 July]. Available from: http://www.engadget.com/2014/05/23/vaporizers-explainer/.

[8] Larson E. Pimp My Vape: The rise of e-cigarette hackers. Mashable Australia [Internet]. 2014 Jan 25 [cited 2015 28 July]. Available from: http://mashable.com/2014/01/25/vaping-subculture/.

[9] Ebbert JO, Agunwamba AA, Rutten LJ. Counseling patients on the use of electronic cigarettes. Mayo Clin. Proc. 2015;90(1):128-34.

[10] Zhu SH, Sun JY, Bonnevie E, Cummins SE, Gamst A, Yin L, et al. Four hundred and sixty brands of e-cigarettes and counting: implications for product regulation. Tob Control. 2014;23 Suppl 3:iii3-9.

[11] Brandon TH, Goniewicz ML, Hanna NH, Hatsukami DK, Herbst RS, Hobin JA, et al. Electronic nicotine delivery systems: a policy statement from the American Association for Cancer Research and the American Society of Clinical Oncology. Clin. Cancer Res. 2015; 21(3):514-25.

[12] Farsalinos KE, Spyrou A, Tsimopoulou K, Stefopoulos C, Romagna G, Voudris V. Nicotine absorption from electronic cigarette use: comparison between first and new-generation devices. Sci Rep. 2014;4:4133.

[13] Callahan-Lyon P. Electronic cigarettes: human health effects. Tob Control. 2014;23 Suppl 2:ii36-40.

[14] Goniewicz ML, Hajek P, McRobbie H. Nicotine content of electronic cigarettes, its release in vapour and its consistency across batches: regulatory implications. Addiction. 2014;109(3):500-7.

[15] Farsalinos KE, Polosa R. Safety evaluation and risk assessment of electronic cigarettes as tobacco cigarette substitutes: a systematic review. Ther Adv Drug Saf. 2014;5(2):67-86.

[16] Goniewicz ML, Knysak J, Gawron M, Kosmider L, Sobczak A, Kurek J, et al. Levels of selected carcinogens and toxicants in vapour from electronic cigarettes. Tob Control. 2014;23(2):133-9.

[17] Nestler EJ. Cellular basis of memory for addiction. Dialogues Clin Neurosci. 2013;15(4):431-43.

[18] Fagerstrom K, Eissenberg T. Dependence on tobacco and nicotine products: a case for product-specific assessment. Nicotine Tob Res. 2012;14(11):1382-90.

[19] Schroeder MJ, Hoffman AC. Electronic cigarettes and nicotine clinical pharmacology. Tob Control. 2014;23 Suppl 2:ii30-5.

[20] Dawkins L, Corcoran O. Acute electronic cigarette use: nicotine delivery and subjective effects in regular users. Psychopharmacology. 2014;231(2):401-7.

[21] Jimenez Ruiz CA, Solano Reina S, de Granda Orive JI, Signes-Costa Minaya J, de Higes Martinez E, Riesco Miranda JA, et al. The electronic cigarette. Official statement of the Spanish Society of Pneumology and Thoracic Surgery (SEPAR) on the efficacy, safety and regulation of electronic cigarettes. Arch Bronconeumol. 2014;50(8):362-7.

[22] Pepper JK, Brewer NT. Electronic nicotine delivery system (electronic cigarette) awareness, use, reactions and beliefs: a systematic review. Tob Control. 2014;23(5):375-84.

[23] Grana R, Benowitz N, Glantz SA. E-cigarettes: a scientific review. Circulation. 2014;129(19):1972-86.

[24] Burstyn I. Peering through the mist: systematic review of what the chemistry of contaminants in electronic cigarettes tells us about health risks. BMC Public Health. 2014;14:18.

[25] Bertholon JF, Becquemin MH, Annesi-Maesano I, Dautzenberg B. Electronic cigarettes: a short review. Respiration. 2013;86(5):433-8.

[26] Bahl V, Lin S, Xu N, Davis B, Wang YH, Talbot P. Comparison of electronic cigarette refill fluid cytotoxicity using embryonic and adult models. Reprod Toxicol. 2012;34(4):529-37.

[27] Behar RZ, Davis B, Wang Y, Bahl V, Lin S, Talbot P. Identification of toxicants in cinnamon-flavored electronic cigarette refill fluids. Toxicol In Vitro. 2014;28(2):198-208.

[28] Rom O, Pecorelli A, Valacchi G, Reznick AZ. Are E-cigarettes a safe and good alternative to cigarette smoking? Ann. N. Y. Acad. Sci. 2015;1340:65-74.

[29] Tierney PA, Karpinski CD, Brown JE, Luo W, Pankow JF. Flavour chemicals in electronic cigarette fluids. Tob Control. 2015.

[30] Schraufnagel DE, Blasi F, Drummond MB, Lam DC, Latif E, Rosen MJ, et al. Electronic cigarettes. A position statement of the forum of international respiratory societies. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2014;190(6):611-8.

[31] FDA. Public Health Focus – Summary of Results: Laboratory Analysis of Electronic Cigarettes Conducted By FDA [WebContent]. 2015 [cited 2015 28 July]. Available from: http://www.fda.gov/NewsEvents/PublicHealthFocus/ucm173146.htm.

[32] Stepanov I, Jensen J, Hatsukami D, Hecht SS. Tobacco-specific nitrosamines in new tobacco products. Nicotine Tob Res. 2006;8(2):309-13.

[33] Quit Victoria. Nicotine replacement products 2015 [cited 2015 28 July]. Available from: http://www.quit.org.au/preparing-to-quit/choosing-best-way-to-quit/nicotine-replacement-products.

[34] Cahn Z, Siegel M. Electronic cigarettes as a harm reduction strategy for tobacco control: a step forward or a repeat of past mistakes? J Public Health Policy. 2011;32(1):16-31.

[35] Chausse P, Naughton G, Dutheil F. Electronic Cigarettes: The Resistance Value of the Heating Filament Could Be the Key to Lung Toxicity. Chest. 2015;148(1):e29-30.

[36] Cobb NK, Abrams DB. E-cigarette or drug-delivery device? Regulating novel nicotine products. N Engl J Med. 2011;365(3):193-5.

[37] Williams M, Villarreal A, Bozhilov K, Lin S, Talbot P. Metal and silicate particles including nanoparticles are present in electronic cigarette cartomizer fluid and aerosol. PloS one. 2013;8(3):e57987.

[38] Lerner CA, Sundar IK, Watson RM, Elder A, Jones R, Done D, et al. Environmental health hazards of e-cigarettes and their components: Oxidants and copper in e-cigarette aerosols. Environ Pollut. 2015;198:100-7.

[39] Hajek P, Etter JF, Benowitz N, Eissenberg T, McRobbie H. Electronic cigarettes: review of use, content, safety, effects on smokers and potential for harm and benefit. Addiction. 2014;109(11):1801-10.

[40] Suter MA, Mastrobattista J, Sachs M, Aagaard K. Is there evidence for potential harm of electronic cigarette use in pregnancy? Birth Defects Res A Clin Mol Teratol. 2015; 103(3):186-95.

[41] Pisinger C, Dossing M. A systematic review of health effects of electronic cigarettes. Prev Med. 2014;69:248-60.

[42] McRobbie H, Bullen C, Hartmann-Boyce J, Hajek P. Electronic cigarettes for smoking cessation and reduction. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2014;12:CD010216.

[43] Meo SA, Al Asiri SA. Effects of electronic cigarette smoking on human health. Eur Rev Med Pharmacol Sci. 2014;18(21):3315-9.

[44] Gualano MR, Passi S, Bert F, La Torre G, Scaioli G, Siliquini R. Electronic cigarettes: assessing the efficacy and the adverse effects through a systematic review of published studies. J Public Health. 2014.

[45] Franck C, Budlovsky T, Windle SB, Filion KB, Eisenberg MJ. Electronic cigarettes in North America: history, use, and implications for smoking cessation. Circulation. 2014;129(19):1945-52.

[46] Hua M, Alfi M, Talbot P. Health-related effects reported by electronic cigarette users in online forums. J Med Internet Res. 2013;15(4):e59.

[47] Orellana-Barrios MA, Payne D, Mulkey Z, Nugent K. Electronic Cigarettes-A Narrative Review for Clinicians. Am J Med. 2015;128(7):674-81.

[48] Chapman S, Byrne F, Carter SM. “Australia is one of the darkest markets in the world”: the global importance of Australian tobacco control. Tob Control. 2003;12 Suppl 3:iii1-3.

[49] Victoria Q. Legal status of electronic cigarettes in Australia. 2015 [cited 2015 26 July]. Available from: http://www.quit.org.au/downloads/resource/policy-advocacy/policy/legal-status-electronic-cigarettes-australia.pdf.

[50] The Poisons Standard (the SUSMP) | Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA). 2015 [cited 2015 26 July]. Available from: https://www.tga.gov.au/publication/poisons-standard-susmp.

[51] TGA. Electronic cigarettes | Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA) 2015 [cited 2015 26 July]. Available from: http://www.tga.gov.au/community-qa/electronic-cigarettes.

[52] Therapeutic Goods Act Section 19B, (1989).

[53] Rahman MA, Hann N, Wilson A, Mnatzaganian G, Worrall-Carter L. E-cigarettes and smoking cessation: evidence from a systematic review and meta-analysis. PloS one. 2015;10(3):e0122544.

[54] Stead LF, Perera R, Bullen C, Mant D, Hartmann-Boyce J, Cahill K, et al. Nicotine replacement therapy for smoking cessation. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2012;11:CD000146.

[55] Klein JD. Electronic Cigarettes Are Another Route to Nicotine Addiction for Youth. JAMA Pediatr. 2015:1-2.

[56] Green G. Nicotine Replacement Therapy for Smoking Cessation. Am Fam Physician. 2015;92(1):Online.

[57] Dempsey D, Jacob P, 3rd, Benowitz NL. Accelerated metabolism of nicotine and cotinine in pregnant smokers. J Pharmacol Exp Ther. 2002;301(2):594-8.

[58] Luck W, Nau H, Hansen R, Steldinger R. Extent of nicotine and cotinine transfer to the human fetus, placenta and amniotic fluid of smoking mothers. Dev Pharmacol Ther. 1985;8(6):384-95.

[59] Hellstrom-Lindahl E, Nordberg A. Smoking during pregnancy: a way to transfer the addiction to the next generation? Respiration. 2002;69(4):289-93.

[60] Nasrat HA, Al-Hachim GM, Mahmood FA. Perinatal effects of nicotine. Biol Neonate. 1986;49(1):8-14.

[61] Coleman T, Chamberlain C, Cooper S, Leonardi-Bee J. Efficacy and safety of nicotine replacement therapy for smoking cessation in pregnancy: systematic review and meta-analysis. Addiction. 2011;106(1):52-61.

[62] Bruin JE, Gerstein HC, Holloway AC. Long-term consequences of fetal and neonatal nicotine exposure: a critical review. Toxicol Sci. 2010;116(2):364-74.

[63] Schripp T, Markewitz D, Uhde E, Salthammer T. Does e-cigarette consumption cause passive vaping? Indoor Air. 2013;23(1):25-31.

[64] McAuley TR, Hopke PK, Zhao J, Babaian S. Comparison of the effects of e-cigarette vapor and cigarette smoke on indoor air quality. Inhal Toxicol. 2012;24(12):850-7.

[65] Drummond MB, Upson D. Electronic cigarettes. Potential harms and benefits. Ann Am Thorac Soc. 2014;11(2):236-42.

[66] Czogala J, Goniewicz ML, Fidelus B, Zielinska-Danch W, Travers MJ, Sobczak A. Secondhand exposure to vapors from electronic cigarettes. Nicotine Tob Res. 2014;16(6):655-62.

[67] Administration USF. Electronic Cigarette Fires and Explosions 2014 [cited 2015 30 July]. Available from: https://www.usfa.fema.gov/downloads/pdf/publications/electronic_cigarettes.pdf.

[68] Yang L, Rudy SF, Cheng JM, Durmowicz EL. Electronic cigarettes: incorporating human factors engineering into risk assessments. Tob Control. 2014;23 Suppl 2:ii47-53.

[69] Bhatnagar A, Whitsel LP, Ribisl KM, Bullen C, Chaloupka F, Piano MR, et al. Electronic cigarettes: a policy statement from the American Heart Association. Circulation. 2014;130(16):1418-36.

[70] Gillian Mohney. First Child’s Death From Liquid Nicotine Reported as ‘Vaping’ Gains Popularity. ABC News [Internet]. 2014 Dec 12 [cited 2015 30 July]. Available from: http://abcnews.go.com/Health/childs-death-liquid-nicotine-reported-vaping-gains-popularity/story?id=27563788.

Categories
Case Reports

Expect the unexpected: A case of malignant hyperthermia in a 14-year-old boy undergoing gastroscopy

Malignant hyperthermia (MH) is a rare pharmacogenetic disorder, in which volatile anaesthetic agents trigger deregulated calcium release causing hypermetabolic crisis in susceptible individuals. MH is an anaesthetic emergency that requires prompt recognition due to the high mortality related to delayed treatment. This report documents an unexpected case of MH during an elective gastroscopy at the Royal Children’s Hospital in a 14 year old boy who had previously undergone uneventful general anaesthesia. The patient developed early signs suggestive of MH after exposure to sevoflurane and was treated with dantrolene. He made a full recovery and a later muscle biopsy confirmed MH susceptibility. This case highlights the importance of clinical vigilance for this rare condition, especially in “low risk” patients without any past or family history for MH. This case also illustrates how early recognition of non-specific clinical signs and efficient implementation of a local MH action plan can lead to successful outcomes despite the potential life-threatening nature of an acute MH crisis.

Introduction

Malignant hyperthermia (MH) is a life-threatening anaesthetic emergency most commonly triggered by inhalational anaesthetic agents. The disease was first described in 1962, after ten members in a Melbourne family died after general anaesthesia with ether. [1] It was later found to be an inherited pharmacogenetic disorder where anaesthetic agents cause abnormal calcium release in skeletal muscle leading to a hypermetabolic crisis. MH is a rare disease with an estimated incidence of <0.02%. [2] It may only be encountered once in an anaesthetist’s career, but prompt recognition and treatment may make the difference between life and death for the patient. This case report describes an unexpected occurrence of MH in a low-risk paediatric patient undergoing routine gastroscopy. This case highlights the importance of clinical vigilance and a well-implemented action plan in achieving good clinical outcomes in an acute MH event. The key points in the clinical diagnosis and management of MH as well as the values of genetic testing are discussed.

Case report

A 14 year old boy with a five week history of intermittent epigastric pain associated with food was referred to the Royal Children’s Hospital (RCH) Day Surgery for an elective gastroscopy under general anaesthesia (GA) for investigation of peptic ulcer disease. He had previously undergone wisdom tooth extraction under GA at another Victorian hospital without any adverse reaction to volatile anaesthetics. There was no known family history of unexpected intraoperative deaths. Except for an enlarged body habitus (body weight of 110 kg), his peri-operative assessment was unremarkable, and he was an otherwise healthy boy.

On the day of the gastroscopy, anaesthesia was induced with IV fentanyl (100 μg) and propofol (200 mg). A size 4 laryngeal mask airway (LMA) was inserted and the patient maintained spontaneous ventilation on 2.8% sevoflurane. The first 20 minutes after the induction of anaesthesia were uneventful. However, over the following ten minutes, the patient became increasingly diaphoretic with signs of abdominal distension. His heart rate increased from 80 to 120 bpm, mean arterial blood pressure from 80 to 140 mmHg and end-tidal pCO2 (ETCO2) from 45 to 60 mmHg. Gastroscopy was suspended. The LMA was exchanged for a size 7.5 cuffed endotracheal tube for airway protection. A senior staff anaesthetist was consulted. Although possible diagnoses including pain, light anaesthesia, and obstructed ventilation were considered, there were no obvious painful stimuli or signs of emergence, and the minute ventilation volumes as well as normal chest movement and breath sounds were inconsistent with obstructed ventilation. MH was strongly suspected. An oral temperature probe was inserted and measured a temperature of 40°C, and arterial blood gas (ABG) revealed mixed respiratory and metabolic acidosis (pH 7.02, pCO2 102 mmHg, lactate 8.8 mmol/L, base excess -8 mmol/L). The RCH Malignant Hyperthermia Crisis Plan was activated. The patient was given 250 mg of dantrolene in a large, single IV bolus. Sevoflurane was ceased immediately and he was hyperventilated on 100% oxygen using a Laerdal bag and a separate oxygen source. GA was maintained using a target-controlled infusion of propofol. Cooling was achieved with topical application of ice packs to the neck, axillae and groin. Within ten minutes, the patient’s body temperature returned to 37 °C, heart rate to 80 bpm, ETCO2 to 45 mmHg and his ABG improved dramatically (pH 7.46, pCO2 28 mmHg, lactate 3.7 mmol/L, base excess -3 mmol/L).

He was transferred to the paediatric intensive care unit (PICU) for further management and monitoring. His blood test showed acute hyperkalaemia with an elevated K+ of 7.0 mmol/L but no major elevation in his creatine kinase level. After an overnight stay in PICU, the patient made a full recovery and was discharged from hospital five days later. He subsequently underwent a muscle biopsy, and the caffeine-halothane contracture test confirmed a genetic susceptibility to MH. The patient and his parents were informed of the diagnosis and educated about the condition, with an emphasis on future precautions with undergoing anaesthesia. Genetic counselling was offered to the family.

Discussion

Background

MH is an autosomal-dominant disorder of myocyte hypermetabolism most commonly triggered by volatile anaesthetic agents (e.g. halothane, isoflurane, sevoflurane, desflurane) and in rare cases by the depolarising muscle relaxant suxamethonium. [2] MH is estimated to occur once in every 5,000 to 100,000 cases of anaesthesia [2]. About 20-50% of all MH presentations occur in children, with a male-to-female ratio of 2:1. [3,4] The majority of susceptible individuals carry mutations in calcium channel genes, most commonly in the ryanodine receptor gene RYR1 (70%), and occasionally in the CACNA1S gene (1%) that encodes the α-subunit of the dihydropyridine receptor. [2] Through mechanisms still unknown, an encounter with a triggering anaesthetic agent causes deregulated calcium release from the abnormal channels in skeletal muscle, leading to a hypermetabolic crisis. If left untreated, MH carries a mortality rate of >80%. [5]

Clinical features

Timely recognition of the condition is key to patient survival. As demonstrated in this case, previous uneventful anaesthesia with triggering agents does not rule out MH. Although a detailed anaesthetic history is an important part of peri-operative assessment, 21% of MH patients report previous uneventful anaesthesia and 75% a negative family history. [4] In fact, it has been estimated that on average three anaesthesias are required before an adverse event is triggered in an MH-susceptible patient. [6] The reason for this variability in clinical penetrance is unclear; however, results from animal studies suggest that co-administration with other anaesthetic drugs could influence the onset of MH. [7] Ultimately, the diagnosis of MH falls on the vigilant mind of the anaesthetist. As in this case, the clinical signs are often non-specific (Table 1). Early signs may include increased oxygen consumption (detected by a widened FiO2 and end-tidal O2 gradient), metabolic derangement (hypercapnia, respiratory and metabolic acidosis, diaphoresis, skin mottling), cardiovascular instability (tachycardia, labile blood pressure) and masseter spasm following exposure to succinylcholine. [8]. Masseter spasm has been reported as the earliest sign of acute MH [9] but is present in less than half of paediatric presentations. [10] In children, sinus tachycardia and hypercapnia have been shown as the two most reliable early clinical signs. [10] Fever, hyperkalaemia, and elevated creatine kinase are late signs and their absence does not exclude the diagnosis. [8] The only existing set of diagnostic criteria in the literature was proposed in 1994 by Larach and colleagues [11], which is a clinical grading scale integrating some of the aforementioned early and late signs. However, its diagnostic performance has not been assessed due to the rarity of the condition, and this grading scale is not widely used in Australia. Overall, the anaesthetist needs to apply good clinical judgement and have a strong suspicion for MH if ETCO2 continues to rise despite increased minute ventilation. Other possible differential diagnoses include inadequate anaesthesia or analgesia, insufficient or obstructed ventilation, sepsis, anaphylaxis, endocrine disorders (e.g. thyroid storm, phaeochromocytoma), and neuroleptic malignant syndrome. In this patient, the combination of fever, hypertension, respiratory and metabolic acidosis, lack of exposure to neuroleptic medication, and the time course of clinical deterioration in relation to inhalational anaesthetic exposure made the diagnosis of MH most likely.

Table 1: Clinical features of MH (adapted from Hopkins TM, 2000 [12]).

Clinical Signs Changes in Monitored Variables Change in biochemistry
Early Tachypnoea Increased Fi02 and ETO2 gradient
Rising ETCO2 Increased PaCO2
Increased minute ventilation Decreased pH
Tachycardia Sinus tachycardia
Masseter spasm
Late Diaphoresis Rising core body temperature
Cyanosis Decreased SpO2 Decreased PaO2
Generalised muscle rigidity Elevated creatine kinase
Dark urine
Oliguria
Haemoglobinuria
Deranged UEC
Arrhythmia Widened QRS, VT, VF Hyperkalaemia
Prolonged bleeding Low platelets and fibrinogen
Prolonged prothrombin time
Elevated D-dimers
Death

Management

This case illustrates the value of a well-rehearsed local management protocol in an acute MH event. At RCH, a detailed MH action plan and an emergency MH trolley are readily available in the operating suite. The immediate management includes cessation of the offending anaesthetic agent, termination of surgery, recruitment of additional personnel (especially the most senior anaesthetic staff), and prompt preparation of dantrolene. [13] Dantrolene inhibits calcium release from the sarcoplasmic reticulum by antagonising the ryanodine receptor RYR1, [14] and is the only definitive treatment for MH. Dantrolene is given at 2-3 mg/kg IV every 10-15 minutes until the patient is clinically stable. [15] In this overweight boy, there was the consideration whether to administer the dose according to his true body weight or ideal weight. The MH Association of the United States recommends that dose calculation be based on the patient’s true weight rather than ideal weight, as the major site of action of dantrolene is in the tissue space, and up to 10 mg/kg can be safely administered in boluses. [16] In this case, 250 mg of dantrolene (~2.5 mg/kg at the patient’s true weight) posed a logistical challenge. Dantrolene is manufactured in a powder form and is notoriously slow to dissolve in water. [17] Six nurses had to be recruited to mix 13 ampoules of dantrolene for the patient. Concurrent supportive therapies for MH include hyperventilation with 100% oxygen using a clean source (not the original machine that may retain traces of volatile anaesthetic), maintenance of IV anaesthesia, and in the event of rising core body temperature, employment of cooling methods such as topical application of ice packs to vascular plexuses, cold IV fluids, forced-air cooling blankets, bladder irrigation, and nasal/peritoneal lavage. [15]

Continued monitoring of the patient in an intensive care unit is crucial in the detection and early correction of complications of MH such as hyperkalaemia as seen in this case. Other serious complications include rhabdomyolysis, acidosis, arrhythmias, disseminated intravascular coagulation, and multi-organ failure. [6] Aside from regular observation of the patient’s vital signs and urine output, serial ABGs, FBEs, UECs, coagulation studies, creatine kinase, and ECGs are useful investigations in the ongoing management of MH. Continued monitoring is of particular importance as recrudescence of symptoms has been reported in 14.4% paediatric patients after the initial treatment. [10]

Confirmatory diagnosis

Confirmatory diagnosis of MH susceptibility is made with muscle biopsy that is used for in vitro caffeine-halothane contracture testing (CHCT). Currently, all of the Australian testing centres adopt the protocol recommended by the European Malignant Hyperthermia Group and the test has an estimated sensitivity of 99% and specificity of 94%. [18] In Australia, CHCT is only available to children over 12 years of age, because a relatively large piece of vastus lateralis muscle (0.5 g) is required. The muscle is immersed in a tissue bath with various concentrations of caffeine or halothane, and the test yields a positive, negative or equivocal result for MH susceptibility (Table 2). Although an equivocal CHCT result does not confirm the diagnosis, the patient should be treated clinically as having MH. With advancement in DNA sequencing technologies over the past decade, some American centres now offer genetic testing for families with MH. However, challenges remain in the interpretation of the results. Almost 400 RYR1 mutations have been identified in MH-affected families, but only a few are causal. [19] Additionally, for affected families with normal RYR1 and CACNA1S sequences, DNA testing is of limited value with the causal genes yet to be identified. For the moment, CHCT remains the gold standard of MH testing in Australia.

Table 2. Caffeine-Halothane Contracture Test result for MH susceptibility.

Contraction in caffeine Contraction in halothane
Positive (susceptible) + +
Negative (normal)
Equivocal +
+

Future anaesthetic considerations

It is essential that patients with suspected or confirmed MH avoid any triggering anaesthetic agent in future surgeries, and be anaesthetised with regional anaesthesia or total intravenous anaesthesia assisted by bispectral index monitoring to reduce the risk of intraoperative awareness. Patients should be ventilated on a clean circuit purged of any residual volatile anaesthetic and closely monitored during the procedure. Theatre staff should anticipate acute MH crisis and be ready to act with dantrolene on standby. Where appropriate, sedation and local anaesthesia are also good options for consideration.

Conclusions

Death under general anaesthesia is a medical disaster dreaded by patients and anaesthetists alike. MH is a rare but preventable cause of anaesthetic-related morbidity and mortality, and an acute MH event can be treated with an effective antidote. This case is a reminder that early recognition of MH is often based on pattern recognition of non-specific clinical signs; and excellent clinical outcomes can be achieved when the crisis is acted upon promptly by a trained team. Although a patient who reports a positive MH history invariably puts every anaesthetist on alert, as illustrated in this case report, it is often the “low risk” elective patient who is more likely to develop an acute MH crisis and put the doctor’s clinical skills to the test. For the anaesthetist, continued training on the subject will ensure a low threshold for clinical suspicion when the unexpected case arises. For the hospital, a well-rehearsed local MH action plan is paramount for an efficient response to the emergency to achieve improved patient safety.

Acknowledgements

I would like to thank Dr. Philip Ragg for his advice and discussion of this case report.

Consent

Informed consent was obtained from the patient and his family for publication of this case report.

Conflicts of Interest

None declared.

References

[1] Denborough MA, Forster JF, Lovell RR, Maplestone PA, Villiers JD. Anaesthetic deaths in a family. Brit J Anaesth. 1962 Jun;34:395-6. PubMed PMID: 13885389. Epub 1962/06/01.

[2] Rosenberg H, Sambuughin N, Riazi S, Dirksen R. Malignant Hyperthermia Susceptibility. In: Pagon RA, Adam MP, Ardinger HH, Bird TD, Dolan CR, Fong CT, et al., editors. Gene Reviews. Seattle (WA)1993.

[3] Salazar JH, Yang J, Shen L, Abdullah F, Kim TW. Pediatric malignant hyperthermia: risk factors, morbidity, and mortality identified from the Nationwide Inpatient Sample and Kids’ Inpatient Database. Paediatr anaesth. 2014 Dec;24(12):1212-6. PubMed PMID: 24974921. Epub 2014/07/01.

[4] Strazis KP, Fox AW. Malignant hyperthermia: a review of published cases. Anesth and analg. 1993 Aug;77(2):297-304. PubMed PMID: 8346828. Epub 1993/08/01.

[5] Larach MG, Brandom BW, Allen GC, Gronert GA, Lehman EB. Cardiac arrests and deaths associated with malignant hyperthermia in north america from 1987 to 2006: a report from the north american malignant hyperthermia registry of the malignant hyperthermia association of the United States. Anesthesiology. 2008 Apr;108(4):603-11. PubMed PMID: 18362591. Epub 2008/03/26.

[6] Rosenberg H, Davis M, James D, Pollock N, Stowell K. Malignant hyperthermia. Orphanet j rare dis. 2007;2:21. PubMed PMID: 17456235. Pubmed Central PMCID: 1867813. Epub 2007/04/26.

[7] Gronert GA, Milde JH. Variations in onset of porcine malignant hyperthermia. Anesth and analg. 1981 Jul;60(7):499-503. PubMed PMID: 7195665. Epub 1981/07/01.

[8] Glahn KP, Ellis FR, Halsall PJ, Muller CR, Snoeck MM, Urwyler A, et al. Recognizing and managing a malignant hyperthermia crisis: guidelines from the European Malignant Hyperthermia Group. Brit J anaesth. 2010 Oct;105(4):417-20. PubMed PMID: 20837722. Epub 2010/09/15.

[9] Pollock AN, Langton EE, Couchman K, Stowell KM, Waddington M. Suspected malignant hyperthermia reactions in New Zealand. Anaesth intens care. 2002 Aug;30(4):453-61. PubMed PMID: 12180584. Epub 2002/08/16.

[10] Nelson P, Litman RS. Malignant hyperthermia in children: an analysis of the North American malignant hyperthermia registry. Anesth and analg. 2014 Feb;118(2):369-74. PubMed PMID: 24299931. Epub 2013/12/05.

[11] Larach MG, Localio AR, Allen GC, Denborough MA, Ellis FR, Gronert GA, et al. A clinical grading scale to predict malignant hyperthermia susceptibility. Anesthesiology. 1994 Apr;80(4):771-9. PubMed PMID: 8024130. Epub 1994/04/01.

[12] Hopkins PM. Malignant hyperthermia: advances in clinical management and diagnosis. British J anaesth. 2000 Jul;85(1):118-28. PubMed PMID: 10928000. Epub 2000/08/06.

[13] Harrison GG. Control of the malignant hyperpyrexic syndrome in MHS swine by dantrolene sodium. BritJ anaesth. 1975 Jan;47(1):62-5.

[14] Paul-Pletzer K, Yamamoto T, Bhat MB, Ma J, Ikemoto N, Jimenez LS, et al. Identification of a dantrolene-binding sequence on the skeletal muscle ryanodine receptor. J biol chem. 2002 Sep 20;277(38):34918-23. PubMed PMID: 12167662. Epub 2002/08/09.

[15] MHANZ. MH Resource Kit 2012 [cited 2015 June 20]. Available from: http://www.anaesthesia.mh.org.au/mh-resource-kit/w1/i1002692/.

[16] MHAUS. Emergency Treatment for An Acute MH Event 2015 [cited 2015 Aug 15]. Available from: http://www.mhaus.org.

[17] Kugler Y, Russell WJ. Speeding dantrolene preparation for treating malignant hyperthermia. Anaesth intens care. 2011 Jan;39(1):84-8. PubMed PMID: 21375096. Epub 2011/03/08.

[18] Ellis FR, Halsall PJ, Ording H. A protocol for the investigation of malignant hyperpyrexia (MH) susceptibility. The European Malignant Hyperpyrexia Group. Brit J Anaesth. 1984 Nov;56(11):1267-9. PubMed PMID: 6487446. Epub 1984/11/01.

[19] Stowell KM. DNA testing for malignant hyperthermia: the reality and the dream. Anesth analg. 2014 Feb;118(2):397-406. PubMed PMID: 24445638. Epub 2014/01/22.

Categories
Review Articles

Systematic review article: Evidence for interventions to reduce the incidence of abusive infant head trauma

Background: Abusive Infant Head Trauma (AIHT) is preventable, but there are few reviews of interventions to prevent AIHT.  In the Australian health system context, only one review of AIHT was found. Its primary focus was to raise awareness of AIHT, detailing AIHT incidence and outcomes, but only briefly touching on prevention. [1] This literature review attempts to fill this gap by providing the findings of a systematic search of available studies of AIHT prevention programs and approaches at the primary, secondary, and tertiary level, which may be applicable in Australian settings. Methods: International peer-reviewed journal articles were systematically searched via MEDLINE-Ovid and PubMed databases. All papers that were not original research and were not published after the year 2000 were excluded from this review. Original research was further classified into intervention research, descriptive, and measurement research. The quality of intervention research studies was assessed using two assessment tools: EPHPP (quantitative studies) and CASP (qualitative studies). Results: The search found 50 papers. Thirty-two did not meet inclusion criteria, leaving a total of 18 original research papers.  Eight were intervention research (three strong, one moderate, and four weak), ten were descriptive research, and there were no measurement studies. Conclusion: The key to AIHT prevention is through universal primary prevention, with education increasing knowledge in parents and healthcare practitioners. Of the studied programs, the Period of PURPLE Crying Program© has been shown to be the most effective. However, further studies are required to assess the relevance of this program in Australian settings.

Background

Abusive Infant Head Trauma (AIHT) has significant morbidity and mortality outcomes. [2,3] Violent, manual shaking of an infant causes rapid and repetitive acceleration-deceleration and rotation of the head, leading to vascular and neural injuries. [2] Neurologic disability occurring in survivors can include cognitive, motor, visual, and behavioural disturbances. [2,4-6] Infants may also present with variable fractures including fractures of long bones, ribs, or vertebrae. [5] Identifying injuries of AIHT can result in children being removed from parents, loss of parental rights, and imprisonment. [4] In Australia, AIHT incidence has been estimated as 29.6 cases per 100,000 infants; this is based on hospitalised cases only. [3]

The peak incidence of AIHT occurs in the second month of life and corresponds to the normal development of increased crying in the infant. [7,8] Prolonged and inconsolable crying is reported as the most common trigger. Parents are the most common agents of infant shaking. [4,5,7,9] Therefore, AIHT is a good candidate for the development of a prevention strategy, with parents being the risk group and crying being the stimulus.

Evidence indicates that AIHT is preventable. [2,9-14] Efforts to find effective prevention strategies have increased with the growing recognition of AIHT’s clinical symptoms, its prevalence, and devastating consequences. [4] AIHT prevention strategies include primary, secondary, and tertiary methods. [9] By systematically searching and providing a summary of available research, this literature review aims to highlight what we do and do not know about AIHT prevention thereby increasing the awareness of AIHT in medical professionals and encouraging implementation of prevention programs in Australian healthcare settings.

Methods

International peer-reviewed journal articles were systematically searched via MEDLINE-Ovid and PubMed databases using the search terms: “shaken baby syndrome”, “shaken baby syndrome prevention”, “infant abusive head trauma”, and “period of purple crying program”. Article titles and abstracts were searched for AIHT prevention interventions. This search resulted in 50 articles, which were further analysed and classified. All review articles, program descriptions, discussion papers, commentaries, case reports, and literature published prior to the year 2000 were excluded from the search results. Original research published from 2000 was included in the review. The start date designated for the search was determined by the timeframe when prevention strategies were developed and researched (in the early 2000s). [9]

The quality of intervention research was then analysed using the Effective Public Health Practice Project assessment tool (EPHPP) for quantitative research, [16] and the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme tool (CASP) for qualitative research. [17] Consistent with the purpose of the appraisal tools to assess the effectiveness of public health programs and interventions, the quality of only intervention research studies that evaluate what works was assessed.  The EPHPP Quality Assessment Tool sections A to F (A. selection bias; B. study design; C. confounders; D. blinding; E. data collection methods; F. withdrawal and drop-outs) were coded strong, moderate, or weak according to the rating scale of the EPHPP dictionary. For qualitative studies, the CASP quality assessment tool was used to assess the clarity of study objectives, methodological quality, research design, data collection and analyses, ethical considerations, clarity of the statement of findings, and the value of the research. To assess the study quality of those using mixed-methods study design, the qualitative and quantitative components were assessed separately using both of the aforementioned tools.

Results

The search resulted in 50 articles. Of these, 32 were excluded as not being original research published after the year 2000, leaving a total of 18 original research papers. Of these, only 8 were intervention research studies, 10 were program descriptions, and there were no measurement research studies (Figure 1).

v7i1p1f1

Figure 1. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) flow diagram of search results. This diagram shows the flow of information through the different phases of the systematic search. It depicts the number of articles found, included, and excluded, and the reasons for exclusions.

<<Insert Figure 1>>

Applying the quality appraisal criteria resulted in assessments of the eight intervention studies. Three were rated strong, one moderate, and four weak (Table 1).

Table 1: AIHT intervention quantitative studies assessed using EPHPP. 

Study Selection bias Study design Confounders Blinding Data collection method Withdrawal and drop-outs Results
Barr et al. 2009a Strong Strong Strong Strong Moderate NA Strong
Barr et al. 2009b Strong Strong Strong Strong Strong NA Strong
Altman et al. 2011 Moderate Moderate Weak Weak Moderate Weak Weak
Dias et al. 2005 Strong Strong Strong Strong Moderate N/A Strong
Shephard et al. 2000 Weak Weak Weak Weak Weak Strong Weak
Stewart et al. 2011 Moderate Weak Weak Weak Moderate Weak Weak
Goulet et al. 2009 (quantitative component) Moderate Weak Weak Weak Weak Weak Weak
Russell et al. 2008 Weak Moderate Weak Moderate Weak Strong Moderate

 

Table 2: Qualitative studies assessed using CASP. 

Study Study objectives Methodological quality Research design Data collection and analyses Ethical considerations Statement of findings Value of the research
Goulet et al. 2008 (qualitative component) Clearly stated Appropriate Appropriate Poor Ethically approved Clearly stated Valuable

Discussion

The review of the available literature indicates that there is little evidence about what works to prevent or treat AIHT, and more than half of the intervention studies were of poor quality.

Primary prevention studies

Two of the strong intervention studies were randomised controlled trials conducted by Barr et al. (2009a, 2009b). They were studies of a universal primary prevention program of AIHT that targeted parents of infants and newborns, and sought to prevent shaking from occurring through education. [10,11] The prevention program was called the Period of PURPLE Crying program (PURPLE©) produced by the National Center of Shaken Baby Syndrome (Utah, USA). [4,5,8-12,14] PURPLE© stands for Peak of crying, Unpredictable crying that has no apparent reason, Resists soothing, Pain-like face, Long-lasting crying for 30 to 40 minutes or longer, and Evening crying. [10,14] The program included a ten-minute DVD and an eleven-page coloured booklet, targeting all parents of newborns.  It was an evidence-based program delivered in three instalments that used 25 years of research on normal infant crying to educate parents on crying characteristics, coping strategies, and the dangers of shaking. [14]

The two studies by Barr et al. found that administration of the PURPLE© materials had led to statistically significant improvements in maternal knowledge and behaviour relevant to shaking, compared to control material.  Compared to mothers that received the control materials, for mothers who received the PURPLE© program, knowledge about normal infant crying was 5% higher in the first study and 6% higher in the second study. [10,11] Sharing information was shown to be higher in mothers who received the PURPLE© program than those who received the controls; there was an 8% increase in sharing descriptions of crying, 13% increase in advice about walking away when frustrated, and 13% increase in warnings about the dangers of shaking. [10,11]

The strong intervention study by Dias et al. indicated that a universal hospital-based parent education program regarding the dangers of violent infant shaking, delivered prior to an infant’s discharge, significantly reduced the incidence of AIHT. All hospitals that provided maternity care in an eight-county region of western New York State were asked to provide parents with information describing the dangers of violent infant shaking and alternative responses to persistent infant crying. Program compliance was assessed by documenting the number of voluntary commitment statements signed by parents affirming their receipt and understanding of the materials, and returned by participating hospitals. Parents’ recall of the information was assessed by follow-up telephone interviews conducted with 10% of parents, seven months after the child’s birth. Finally, the regional incidence of AIHT was contrasted with the incidence during the six preceding years, and with statewide incidence rates during the study period. The study found a high voluntary compliance with the program, high recall of the information, and a decrease in AIHT by 47% amongst participating families during the six-year study, with no comparable decrease in the state. [9]

A weak retrospective descriptive study by Stewart et al., found that the three instalments of the PURPLE© program were crucial to AIHT prevention.  Stewart et al. compared patients presenting with cases of AIHT that presented to the London Children’s hospital (London, UK) from 1991 to 2010. Pre-trained maternity nurses delivered the program to parents.  Stewart et al. found a 47% increase in the knowledge of nurses on crying, post-PURPLE© training, and 78% said it would be easy to incorporate into their daily work schedule. Instalment one involved the DVD and booklet. Stewart et al. (2011) stated only 6.3% of families did not receive the program in the hospital, and needed to be educated during their home visits. [14] Instalment two was a reinforcement of the message delivered by a health nurse home visitor, paediatrician, family doctor, or other health practitioner at a public health clinic. It involved simply discussing with the parents the concepts taught in the program and giving parents a copy of the program if they had not collected one at the hospital.  Instalment three was a public education campaign. It provided information to the general public in an attempt to educate people in society more generally about inconsolable infant crying and the dangers of shaking. [10,11] Altman et al. conducted a weak intervention study showing that hospital-based parent education, delivered to all those with newborns, could significantly reduce the risk of sustaining an abusive head injury induced by shaking. [12] Further studies are required to gain evidence of the PURPLE© program’s effects on reducing the incidence of AIHT in Australia.

Literature available on AIHT prevention programs other than PURPLE© was extremely limited. A moderate-strength study conducted by Russell et al. (2008), compared types of AIHT prevention material. [13] The results showed that material delivered digitally via DVD, particularly material demonstrating alternative behaviours, was more successful in transferring awareness than interventions that involved only a brochure. DVDs significantly increased the potential for improving the population’s awareness of AIHT. This study was not specific for the period of PURPLE© crying program DVD, and suggests that digital footage that is Australian-focused may be utilised equally as effectively. [13] Parents watched the DVD in the hospital before taking it home with their newborn. The nurse recommended to parents that they review the materials at home, and share the information with other caregivers of their baby. [10,11]

In a weak intervention study, Shephard et al. found the “Don’t Shake the Baby” education package was helpful to the majority of mothers; 49% said that they were less inclined to shake their babies after reading it, and 91% said they thought other parents should receive the same information. [18] The package involved brochures and cards with suggested coping strategies during inconsolable, frustrating crying, and information on the dangers of shaking; as well as television and radio public service announcements and posters containing information about AIHT. [18] These materials could be adapted to suit different language and cultural groups.

Goulet et al. analysed the adequacy and relevance of the Perinatal Shaken Baby Syndrome Prevention Program (PAIHTPP) based on parental and nurse feedback in another weak intervention study. [2] The PAIHTPP used educational cue-cards to increase knowledge about infant crying, triggering of caregiver frustration, and its potential progression to shaking, while suggesting coping strategies for frustration. [2] Findings indicated PAIHTPP to be relevant in all birthing institutions involved in the study. [2] The majority of birthing institutions reported increased knowledge about infant crying, anger, coping strategies, and AIHT. [2]

Other AIHT prevention programs that are available, which have not been evaluated, include programs specific for fathers, especially fathers in the military, prison and youth halfway houses, and programs specific for high school students. The programs are educational and contain appropriate language and imagery for the target audience. [19]

 Secondary prevention studies

Secondary prevention programs target specific subsets of the population considered to be at higher risk for child maltreatment. [8] It has been found that an increase in parental or caregiver stress correlates with an increase in AIHT incidence. [2,14,20] Therefore, parents and carers categorised as being under stress can be targeted for secondary prevention programs. Parents who may be under increased stress include single parents, young parents, those that are drug-dependent, alcohol-dependent, have impulse disorders, control problems, low socioeconomic status, or isolated parents. [14,20] Stewart et al. indicated that geographical areas that may be at higher risk for AIHT should be targeted for extra advertising campaigns, specifically those delivered in instalment three of the PURPLE© program. [14] However, studies indicate that the focus of prevention should be primary and universal [10-13]; studies about secondary prevention programs were approximately 20 years old, and as such have not been included in this review. [21,22]

Tertiary prevention studies

Children who have been shaken and diagnosed with AIHT are targeted by tertiary prevention programs, which aim to prevent progression of injury and recurrence in the child affected and or other siblings. Diagnosis of AIHT is required before tertiary prevention can be implemented. Diagnosing AIHT is difficult due to its non-specific presenting symptoms and vague explanations made by perpetrators. [6] Reporting suspicion of shaking to departments of child protection can prevent further abuse to the child. [4,6]

According to research by King et al., the common clinical manifestations of AIHT are subdural effusion, retinal hemorrhages and cerebral oedema. [6] Cerebral oedema can be reduced through pharmacotherapy such as glucocorticoids, hyperosmotic agents, diuretics, and sedative-anesthetic agents to prevent progression of neurological damage. [15,23-25] Tertiary prevention through child protection case management is not specific to AIHT, but rather is managed like all traumatic brain injuries in children, through rehabilitation.

Conclusion
Literature on AIHT prevention is limited. Quality research in this area is needed because of the limited number of articles available, more than half of which are of limited quality. This review identified three qualitatively strong intervention studies, one moderate, and four weak, as well as ten program-description studies. These studies indicate that AIHT can be prevented through universal primary prevention techniques. These must be educational and ideally involve the use of a DVD in addition to written materials. Of the studied programs, the Period of PURPLE Crying Program© has been shown to be the most effective. Tertiary prevention programs through case management by child protection agencies aim to restore child function and prevent progression of neural damage through rehabilitation, and to prevent reoccurrence by legal investigation of the perpetrator. However, further studies are required to assess its impact on AIHT incidence. In particular, evaluation is needed of the relevance of the American-developed Period of PURPLE Crying program© in Australian settings.

This article is dedicated to Baby Joseph. Joseph did not receive any benefit from primary prevention efforts, and the effects of secondary and tertiary efforts to ameliorate the harm from his allegedly repeated shaking experiences have been limited and are ongoing.  His prognosis is guarded, and a return to his premorbid level of function is unlikely.  His case illustrates a great gulf between what is known about primary prevention and what is currently practised as primary prevention in most of Australia. Joseph’s situation is sadly and predictably, not unique. Primary prevention programs may lead to better baby outcomes into the future.

Acknowledgements
I wish to acknowledge public health researcher, Associate Professor Janya McCalman for mentoring me through the systematic review process and editing the paper. I wish to also thank rural generalist medical practitioner, Dr Bill Liley, who has mentored me through my medical degree, and who has a particular interest in preventing Shaken Baby Syndrome. Thanks also to the Commonwealth Government for funding my medical studies through a Remote Area Medical Undergraduate Scholarship.

Conflicts of interest
None declared.

References

[1] Liley W, Stephens A, Kaltner M, Larkins S, Franklin RC, Tsey K et al Infant abusive head trauma: incidence, outcomes and awareness. Aust Fam Physician. 2012;41(10):823.

[2] Goulet C, Frappier JY, Fortin S, Déziel L, Lampron A, Boulanger M. Development and evaluation of a shaken baby syndrome prevention program. JOGNN. 2009;38(1):7-21.

[3] Kaltner M. Abusive head trauma: incidence and associated factors in Queensland [PhD thesis]. Brisbane, Qld: University of Queensland; 2010.

[4] Christian CW, Block R. Abusive head trauma in infants and children. Pediatrics. 2009;123(5):1409-11.

[5] American Academy of Paediatrics: Committee on Child Abuse and Neglect. Shaken baby syndrome: rotational cranial injuries—technical report. Pediatrics. 2001;108:206–10.

[6] King WJ, MacKay M, Sirnick A. Shaken baby syndrome in Canada: clinical characteristics and outcomes of hospital cases. Can Med Assoc J. 2003;168(2):155-9.

[7] Talvik I, Alexander RC, Talvik T. Shaken baby syndrome and a baby’s cry. Acta Paediatr. 2008 June;97(6):782–5.

[8] Barr RG, Trent RB, Cross J. Age-related incidence curve of hospitalized shaken baby syndrome cases: convergent evidence for crying as a trigger to shaking. Child Abuse Neglect. 2006;30(1):7-16.

[9] Dias MS, Smith K, Mazur P, deGuehery K, Li V, Shaffer M. Preventing abusive head trauma among infants and young children: a hospital-based, parent education program. Pediatrics. 2005;115(4):470-7.

[10] Barr R, Rivara F, Barr M, Cummings B, Taylor J, Lengua L et al. Effectiveness of educational materials designed to change knowledge and behaviors regarding crying and shaken-baby syndrome of newborns: a randomized, controlled trial. 2009;123(3):972-80.

[11] Barr RG, Barr M, Fujiwara T, Conway J, Catherine N, Brant R. Do educational materials change knowledge and behavior about crying and shaken baby syndrome? A randomized controlled trial. 2009;180(7):727-33.

[12] Altman RL, Canter J, Patrick PA, Daley N, Butt N, Brand D. Parent education by maternity nurses and prevention of abusive head trauma. Pediatrics. 2011;128(5):1164-72.

[13] Russell BS, Trudeau J, Britner PA. Intervention type matters in primary prevention of abusive head injury: event history analysis results. Child Abuse Neglect. 2008;32(10):949-57.

[14] Stewart TC, Polgar D, Gilliland J, Tanner D, Murray G, Parry N et al. Shaken baby syndrome and a triple-dose strategy for its prevention. J Trauma Acute Care Surg. 2011;73(6):1801-7.

[15] Papangelou A, Lewin III JJ, Mirski MA, Stevens R. Pharmacologic management of brain edema. Current Treat Option N. 2009;11(1):64-73.

[16] McMaster University. Effective public health practice quality assessment tool for quantitative studies, 2008, McMaster University School of Nursing: Canada.

[17] Network, C.I. Critical Appraisal Skills Programme: Making sense of evidence about clinical effectiveness: qualitative research studies. 2010.

[18] Shepherd J, Sampson A. Don’t shake the baby’: towards a prevention strategy. Brit J Soc Work. 2000;30(6): 721-35.

[19] Bechtel K, Le K, Martin, KD. Impact of an educational intervention on caregivers’ beliefs about infant crying and knowledge of shaken baby syndrome. Acad Pediatr. 2011;11(6):481–6.

[20] Keenan HT, Runyan DK, Marshall SW, Nocera MA, Merten DF, Sinal SH. A population-based study of inflicted traumatic brain injury in young children. JAMA. 2003;290(5):621-6.

[21] Olds D, Henderson CR, Chamberlin R, Tatelbaum R. Preventing child abuse and neglect: a randomized trial of nurse home visitation. Pediatrics. 1986;78(1):65–78.

[22] Olds D, Eckenrode J, Henderson CR, Kitzman H, Powers J, Cole R. Long-term effects of home visitation on maternal life course and child abuse and neglect: 15year follow-up of a randomized trial. JAMA.1997;278(8):637–43.

[23] Galicich JH, French LA, Melby JC. Use of dexamethasone in treatment of cerebral edema associated with brain tumors. Lancet, 1961;81:46-53.

[24] Knapp JM. Hyperosmolar therapy in the treatment of severe head injury in children: mannitol and hypertonic saline. AACN .Clin Issues. 2005;16(2):199-211.

[25] Rhoney DH, Parker D. Use of sedative and analgesic agents in neurotrauma patients: effects on cerebral physiology. Neurol Res. 2001 Mar-Apr;23(2-3):237-59.

Categories
Letters

2015 Australasian Students’ Surgical Conference research presentations

The Australasian Students’ Surgical Conference (ASSC) is the leading surgical conference for medical students in Australia and New Zealand. ASSC is designed to coincide yearly with the RACS Annual Scientific Conference and was held this year in Perth, Western Australia from 1-3 May 2015.

Organised each year by medical students, in 2015 it provided 250 delegates with a unique opportunity to be educated about, and inspired to pursue, a surgical career through a program of keynote addresses, research presentations and a full day of skills based workshops.

The ASSC committee encourages fellow medical students to develop and challenge themselves professionally. This is a major objective of ASSC, as reflected throughout our entire program. This year, in collaboration with the Australian Medical Student Journal (AMSJ), the winning abstract has been offered publication.

We received an overwhelming response to our call for abstracts, with many outstanding submissions. Abstracts were de-identified, checked for eligibility criteria, and the format standardised prior to consideration by our panel and being offered a podium presentation. Congratulations to our research prize winners:

  • Best Research Presentation – Cameron Iain Wells, University of Auckland
  • Runner up Research Presentation – Damian James Ianno, University of Melbourne
  • Best Poster Display – Omar Khan Bangash, University of Western Australia

With such a phenomenal response, the 2015 ASSC committee is delighted for other participants to also have their research presented in the AMSJ.

The ASSC committee look forward to seeing you at the next ASSC!

Please download the pdf to read the research presentions.

Categories
Feature Articles

Cervical screening in Indigenous populations: Revisiting possibilities for selfcollection technique

Detection and triage of cervical cancer has undergone commendable advances since the introduction of the Papanicolaou (Pap) smear, Human Papilloma Virus (HPV) detection, and recent implementation of the HPV vaccine. Many Australian females have benefited from these public health advances, however as with many other health trends in Australia, the Indigenous population appears to be lagging behind. This article reviews cervical cancer incidence and mortality as well as its public health management in the Indigenous context. It also reiterates clear issues in the medical record system for identifying Indigenous status in screening and addresses the reasons for disparities in these health trends. In reintroducing the idea of self-collection techniques in the Indigenous context, it is hoped that its ability to overcome privacy and cultural issues associated with traditional Pap smear collection methods and its potential to benefit Indigenous uptake of cervical screening is highlighted. These benefits could be extended to all women who remain averse to the idea of traditional Pap smear collection procedure. This article also explores the possibility of developing a screening method involving the combination of tampon self-collection with ThinPrep and Hybrid Capture II DNA assay technology.

 Cervical cancer screening and prevention in the Indigenous context50

Cancer is a growing health issue for Indigenous populations in Australia and it is now being listed alongside cardiovascular disease as a focus for national health strategies to improve Indigenous health. [1] Despite recent trends of decreases in incidence and mortality for cervical cancer in the general population, Indigenous women suffer from higher rates of incidence (21.4 vs. 8.6 per 100,000) and mortality (9.0 vs. 1.9 per 100,000) according to the most recent report on cervical screening from the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare. [1] Reports suggest that Indigenous women also suffer from later detection of cervical cancers, with positive Pap smears on average showing more advanced cellular atypia. [2] It is suggested that incidence and mortality from cervical cancer is highly related to the frequency of screening undergone by the patient. [3] Hence, it is arguable that the best way to address the disparity in cervical cancer between Indigenous and non-Indigenous populations is to encourage screening uptake by Indigenous women.

Participation of Indigenous women in preventative measures regarding cervical cancer (Pap smears and HPV vaccine) is hard to quantify. One difficulty is that Indigenous status is not a mandatory field on pathology requisitions for Pap smears. [4,5] As a result, state and territory registers do not have reliable information to quantify the number of Indigenous women participating in screening programs. [4,6] Data taken from individual Indigenous health services and communities estimate the number of Indigenous women in those communities undergoing Pap smears ranges from 27-63% [4] with other studies report an increasing trend of women in the Northern Territory participating in cervical screening since 1999. [2] Other data has shown positive results for vaccine uptake amongst Indigenous Queensland adolescents in school-based programs as part of the national vaccination strategy. [7] This will benefit future generations of Indigenous women in regards to cervical cancer prevention. However, in considering health prevention strategies that more directly influence immediate cancer rates in Indigenous populations, it is arguably more important to consider the cervical cancer screening issues in women who did not receive the HPV vaccine in their adolescence.

The aforementioned health trends are attributed to complex and multifaceted explanations. Risk factors contributing to higher cervical cancer burden for Indigenous women reportedly may be related to health behaviours (e.g. smoking), other co-morbidities (e.g. diabetes), and sexually transmitted infection. [8] However, in terms of cervical cancer screening, reluctance to either participate in cancer screening, or return for follow up of abnormal results is an especially large contributor to the burden of disease. [9] Cultural barriers between the Indigenous community and the health system are also likely to be heavy contributors. A study of Indigenous women found that they have fearful and fatalistic attitudes toward cancer [9] and there is a heavy social stigma surrounding the topic of cervical cancer as it is a ‘dirty disease’. In fact, other gynecological problems are often ignored as they are associated with a sense of shame. [9]

When considering the prominent cultural barriers for Indigenous women, it can be proposed that the participation in screening amongst this demographic could be improved by implementing more culturally respectful methods of testing, health promotion, and education in communities to encourage uptake of screening methods. The latter part of this solution has been quite effectively implemented in certain areas of Australia through the efficient use of Aboriginal healthcare workers in collaboration with other government public health initiatives. [10] However, it appears we are still strongly limited by the screening technique itself. The most reasonable solution to avoiding the issue of physician-associated collection and invasion of personal privacy for Indigenous women (as with all women) lies in the development of a self-collection protocol. This avenue has been explored in the past by different studies with varying results; but in light of newly developing technology, now may be the time for re-examination.

Methods of self-collection technique

There are many possible methods of self-collection currently being explored, including tampons, dry swabs, and brushes. These aim to pick up sloughed off cervical cells in the vaginal canal for review.  A study by Budge et al. has explored the possibility of a tampon ‘self-collection’ technique to gather cervical cells for pathological review in place of the traditional Pap smear protocol. However, as identified by this study, an inherent problem with the efficacy of using tampon collection technique is that adequate collection of cells for review relies heavily on correct positioning of the tampon within the vaginal canal. [11] Harper et al. have contributed to the development of tampon collection by observing correlations between increased cervicovaginal exposure time and increased efficacy of the self-collection technique, finding comparable efficacy with traditional swab collection techniques. [12] Another study that looked at the efficacy of dry swab collection techniques, similar to tampon collection, observed that it was lacking in ability to pick up endocervical cells for cytological review. [13] It was also found that though self-collected samples provided comparable cytology concordance with physician-collected samples, its low sensitivity and negative predictive value prevents its use as a primary screening tool. [13] Hence there has been a movement to combine self-collection with other innovations to improve its viability as a screening tool for cervical cancer. The study by Budge et al. combined the use of tampon self-collection with ThinPrep technology to preserve the viable cells collected, the efficacy of which is discussed below.

ThinPrep

ThinPrep is proposed to help preserve accuracy where transport and storage issues may otherwise affect sensitivity of testing in a rural setting. [11] ThinPrep is characterized by the usual technique of collection of cells of the transitional zone of the cervix with a brush and the sample is then immediately immersed in a fixating agent to be delivered to a laboratory. [14] The mixture is then centrifuged, filtered, and processed to a mono-layered sample for histological analysis. [14] This method of preparation is said to provide a more easily-analysed sample, free of obscuring factors such as blood and mucous, overlapping cells or air-drying artefacts. [14] As a result, it has been concluded that ThinPrep does have the potential to increase sensitivity of testing if used correctly compared with conventional Pap smear methods. [15] However, Michael et al. suggests the ThinPrep method is not completely fault-proof. There have been cellular changes reported in ThinPrep samples compared to conventional smears. [16] Those cellular changes included smaller appearing cells, and nucleolar and cytoplasmic changes. Despite this, Michael et al. does note that general features of malignancies such as nuclear pleomorphism and membrane irregularities are well-preserved. [16] Currently, it appears that ThinPrep is only approved for use with traditional cervical cell collection methods. The use of ThinPrep with tampon collection remains a research initiative that has definite potential. If further research is conducted to support the efficacy of ThinPrep in better preserving collected samples we may have a very effective means of reducing disparities in quality of service to not only Indigenous, but all rurally located women in Australia.

Hybrid capture collection

Development of Hybrid Capture II (HC2) DNA testing assay sheds light on the possibility of using HPV DNA testing of cervicovaginal samples as new means of triage for the need to screen with cytological review. Putting this into practice would require facilitating the self-collection of samples and analysing them for infection with particular HPV subtypes, for example the HPV genotypes 16 and 18 which are the most strongly associated with development of cervical cancer. [17] Depending on the type of infection, further cytological analysis may be prompted, involving a traditional physician-collected Pap smear (in the absence of a self-collected specimen adequate for cytological review). Incorporating this step of ‘pre-screening’ may encourage women to become more receptive to making contact with the screening process.

Igidbashian et al. have tested the efficacy of combining the self-collection technique and the HC2 assay for detection of cervical cancer risk compared with traditional Pap smears. Their study shows that incorporation of HC2 allows increased sensitivity in detection of HPV infection compared with cytological review. [18] However, it also demonstrated detection of transient HPV infections which may not be relevant for the detection of cervical neoplasia. [18] Despite this, the study does allude to the ability of HPV testing to separate women into high risk and low risk groups of developing of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN). [18] This is supported by the work of Bulkman et al. which approves of the use of HC2 testing to allow earlier detection of more potentially severe lesions. [19] Cochrane Collaboration has not yet reviewed this matter in particular; but does provide some support for the use of HPV DNA testing via HC2 assay over repeat cytological review in the triage of women with minor cervical cell changes present on an initial cytological review. [21] The prognostic value of HPV testing for cervical carcinomas is also recognised in a study by Lai et al. which notes an association between HPV 18 infection and poorer prognosis of cervical cancer. [22]

There is insufficient research to support or refute the use of HPV DNA testing as a ‘pre-cytological screening’ tool; but it is arguably a worthwhile avenue of research given the current inclusion of HPV DNA testing in many guidelines. Furthermore, there is evidence to support the comparable efficacy of self-collected samples versus physician-collected samples in HPV infection detection as opposed to cytological analysis. [23] Incorporation of HPV DNA testing may power the possibility of self-collection techniques. The use of this in screening methods for cervical cancer has great potential to overcome many of the privacy issues surrounding a physician-conducted cervical swab in conservawomen.

Acceptability of self-collection techniques

Positive results regarding the acceptability of self-collection techniques has been demonstrated by Guan et al. in a study amongst a rural Chinese population [24], whose culture may have conservative elements similar to that seen in the Indigenous women of Australia. The study also suggests that self-collection techniques may be a promising alternative to traditional specimen collection in rural areas where there may be a lack of trained medical practitioners. [24] This idea is supported by findings of Budge et al. in observing many women voiced their approval that the tampon-collection technique was ‘less embarrassing’ and gave them ‘more control over [their] own health’. [11] Both these factors are pertinent indications for the value of developing and using self-collection techniques amongst Indigenous women. However, despite such promising research, previous systematic reviews of self-collection technique suggest there is still insufficient evidence to support their clinical use in place of the traditional methods  This would suggest it may be worthwhile for further research to be invested in this area – the combination of self-collection with ThinPrep and HC2 may be the answer to improving screening rates in rurally located Indigenous women.

Conclusion

Despite successes of previously implemented prevention strategies for cervical cancer in Australia; it is clear that once again, the Indigenous population is lagging behind, with Indigenous women suffering from a greater burden of disease due to cervical cancer compared to non-Indigenous women. This could be attributed to their lower access or uptake of the only current widely available and approved tool: Pap smears. The issues of invasiveness and breach of privacy surrounding Pap smear practice itself stands as a significant barrier between Indigenous women and their uptake of cervical cancer screening. Addressing the possible alternatives to traditional Pap smear collection may be pertinent to successfully overcoming particular cultural barriers to cervical screening. Concepts of tampon-collection technique, incorporation of ThinPrep and Hybrid Capture II assay technology all pose potential improvements in the area of self-collection methods. Successful development of a combined technique with appropriate health promotion could make incredible differences in uptake of cervical screening amongst all the generations of Indigenous women who missed out or may miss out on the HPV vaccine. It may also be helpful to make modifications to the records process for screening tests to mandatorily include Indigenous status of women to gain more reliable data.

Acknowledgements

None.

Conflict of interest

None declared.

Correspondence

D Quach: 93dquach@gmail.com

References :

[1] Prior D. The meaning of cancer for Australian Aboriginal women; changing the focus of cancer nursing. Eur J Oncol Nurs. Sep 2009 [cited 2014 April 26]; 13(4):280-286.

[2] Welfare AIoHa. AIHW Cervical Screening 2010-2011: data report. Canberra, Australia: Australian Institute of Health and Welfare 2013. [cited 2014 April 26].

[3] Condon JR, Armstrong BK, Barnes T, Zhao Y. Cancer incidence and survival for Indigenous Australians in the Northern Territory. Aust N Z J Public Health. Apr 2005 [cited 2014 April 26]; 29(2):123-128

[4] Wharton C, Rowlands L, Gertig D. Where are we today with cervical cancer in Australia? Cancer Firum. 2008 [cited 2014 April 26]; 32(2):76-80

[5] Condon JR, Armstrong BK, Barnes A et al. Cancer in Indigenous Australians: A Review. Cancer Causes and Control. 2003 [cited 2014 April 26]; 14: 109-121.

[6] Gertig DM, Brotherton JM, Saville M. Measuring human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination coverage and the role of the National HPV Vaccination Program Register, Australia. Sexual Health. Jun 2011 [cited 2014 April 26] 8(2):171-178.

[7] Binns PL, Condon JR. Participation in cervical screening by Indigenous women in the Northern Territory: a longitudinal study. Med J Aust. Nov 6 2006. [cited 2014 April 26];185(9):490-494

[8] Smith MA, Canfell K, Brotherton JM, Lew JB, Barnabas RV. The predicted impact of vaccination on human papillomavirus infections in Australia. Int J Cancer. Oct 15 2008 [cited 2014 April 26]; 123(8):1854-1863.

[9] Shannon GD, Franco OH, Powles J, et al. Cervical cancer in Indigenous women: The case of Australia. Maturitas. Nov 2011 [cited 2014 April 26]; 70(3):234-245.

[10] Clarke S, Pierce R. Aboriginal Well Women’s Screening Program: A Culturally Sensitive Approach to Aboriginal Women’s Health. South Australia

[11] Budge M, Halford J, Haran M, Mein J, Wright G. Comparison of a self-administered tampon ThinPrep test with conventional pap smears for cervical cytology. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol. Jun 2005 [cited 2014 April 26]; 45(3):215-219.

[12] Harper DM, Hildeshein A, Cobb JL et al. Collection Devices for Human Papillomavirus. Journal of Family Practice. 1999 [cited 2014 April 26]; 48(7): 531-535.

[13] Garcia F. Cross-sectional study of patient- and physician-collected cervical cytology and human papillomavirus. Obstetrics & Gynecology. 2003;[cited April 2 2015]; 102(2):266-72.

[14] Abulafia O, Pezzullo JC, Sherer DM. Performance of ThinPrep liquid-based cervical cytology in comparison with conventionally prepared Papanicolaou smears: a quantitative survey. Gynecol Oncol. Jul 2003 [cited 2014 April 26]; 90(1): 137-144..

[15] Stein SR. ThinPrep versus the conventional Papnicolaou test: a review of specimen adequacy, sensitivity, and cost-effectiveness. Primary Care Update for OB/GYNS. 2003 [cited 2014 April 25]; 10(6): 310-313

[16] Michael CW, Hunter B. Interpretation of Fine-Needle Aspirates Processed by the ThinPrep Technique: Cytologic Artifacts and Diagnostic Pitfalls Diagn Cytopathol. Jul 2000 [cited 2014 April 26];23(1):6-13.

[17] Brotherton JM. How much cervical cancer in Australia is vaccine preventable? A meta-analysis. Vaccine. 2007 [cited 2014 April 26]; 26: 250-256.

[18] Igidbashian S, Boveri S, Radice D et al. Performance of self-sampled HPV test in comparison with liquid based cytology. European Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Reproductive Biology. Forthcoming 2014 [cited 2014 April 26]

[19] Bulkmans NW, Berkhof J, Rozendaal L, et al. Human papillomavirus DNA testing for the detection of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 3 cancer: 5-year follow-up of a randomised controlled implementation trial. Lancet. Nov 24 2007 [cited 2014 April 26]; 370(9601):1764-1772.

[20] Wright TC Jr, Denny L, Kuhn L et al. HPV DNA testing of self collected vaginal samples compared with cytological screening to detect cervical cancer. Journal of American Medical Association. 2000 [cited 2014 April 26]; 283(1): 81-86.

[21] Arbyn M, Roelens J, Simoens C, et al. Human Papillomavirus testing versus repeat cytology for triage of minor cytological cervical lesions Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013 [cited 2014 April 6]; 3:CD008054.

[22] Lai CH, Chang CJ, Huang HJ, et al. Role of Human Papillomavirus Genotype in Prognosis of Early-Stage Cervical Cancer Undergoing Primary Surgery. J Clin Oncol. Aug 20 2007 [cited 2014 April 26]; 25(24):3628-3634.

[23] Haguenoer K, Giraudeau B, Gaudy-Graffin C, de Pinieux I, Dubois F, Trignol-Viguier N, et al. Accuracy of dry vaginal self-sampling for detecting high-risk human papillomavirus infection in cervical cancer screening: a cross-sectional study. Gynecol Oncol. 2014; [cited April 2 2015]; 134(2):302-8.

[24] Guan YY, Castle PE, Wang S et al. A cross-sectional study on the acceptability of self-collection for HPV testing among women in rural China. Sexually Transmitted Infection. May 29 2012[cited 2014 April 26]; 88(7):490-494.

[25] Stewart DE, Gagliardi A, Johnston M et al. Self-Collected Samples for Testing of Oncogenic Human Papillomavirus: A Systematic Review. J Obstet Gynaecol Can. Oct 2007 [cited 2014 April 26]; 29(10): 817-828.

Categories
Feature Articles

The magic number: The case for a 21-year-old minimum drinking age in Australia

The United States is unique among Western countries in setting the minimum legal drinking age at 21 years. The choice of 21 was largely driven by a powerful road-safety lobby group in the 1980s; however a wealth of clinical and epidemiological evidence has subsequently emerged in its favour. A highly-publicised article in the Medical Journal of Australia [1] recently proposed raising the Australian minimum drinking age from 18 to 21, citing both sociological and neurodevelopment arguments.  This essay reviews the three conditions that should be satisfied for such a legislative change to occur, and proposes an alternate license-based model for age regulation as a thought experiment.

Age-21 Laws in the 21st Century49

When prohibition ended in the United States in 1933 with the 21st Amendment, states were given autonomy to set their own alcohol regulations. This included the minimum legal drinking age. The commonest age chosen was 21 years (in 32 states), followed by 18 years (13 states), 20 years (3 states), and 16 years (in Ohio). [2] 21 was likely favoured because, at the time, this was the age of majority in most US states – the age when an individual was legally considered an adult, the age when they could vote in state elections. [3]

Forty years later, in the midst of the Vietnam War, the issue of drinking age emerged once again into the spotlight. A public campaign argued that it was nonsensical for a man to be conscripted to the army, be sent abroad to fight and die for his country, and yet not legally be permitted to have a drink. One by one, under strong public pressure, the states lowered the drinking age to 18 years. [3] This coincided with changes in the age of majority at a federal level. The 26th Amendment of 1971 gave 18-20 year-olds the right to vote in the United States – 18 years became the age of adulthood.

However, while voting rights persisted for 18-year-olds, this lowered drinking age lasted but one generation. In 1984, the Reagan administration passed the National Minimum Drinking Age Act, which raised the legal drinking age to 21 again. [4] To expedite the change, the federal government threatened significant infrastructure cuts to any states that did not comply. By 1988, alcohol was banned for under-21s in all 50 states and territories across America. Even Ohio.

The strongest lobby group in support of this raised drinking age was “Mothers Against Drunk Driving” (MADD) – a not-for-profit organisation run by mothers of the victims of alcohol-fuelled driving accidents, many of whom were under the age of 21. [5] MADD claims that this legislation has saved over 25,000 lives since 1988, purely from traffic-related morbidity. [6] Subsequent evidence has confirmed that a 21-year old drinking age has benefits far beyond road safety, reducing the incidence of alcohol dependence [7], alcohol-related violence [8], suicide [9], and risky sexual behaviours amongst youth. [10] More recent neurodevelopmental evidence has bolstered the case, demonstrating that alcohol exposure impairs neuronal maturation in under-21s. [11] Consequently, the US persists in this awkward legislative balance where individuals can vote, drive and enlist in the army at 18, but cannot yet purchase a beer.

This is not unique from an international perspective in that 6 other nations have a 21-year minimum drinking age: Sri Lanka, Indonesia, Kazakhstan, Oman, Pakistan and Palau. [12] In all these cases, the choice of 21 was driven far more by cultural and religious factors than epidemiological evidence. The closest other OECD nation is Japan, with a drinking age of 20. The vast majority of countries have chosen 18 years, in line with the standard age of legal majority. Switzerland, Belgium, Austria, Germany, and the Netherlands have all chosen an age of 16.

Advance Australia where?

Although it is clearly not the mainstream position internationally, public support is growing for a 21 year minimum drinking age in Australia. In 2010, 50.2% of respondents supported such a change, compared to 40.7% in 2004. [13] In a 2014 article in the Medical Journal of Australia, Toumbourou et al. elegantly assembled the case for a 21-year threshold [1]. The article gained significant media attention in May 2014, catapulting the issue of drinking age into the spotlight – not for reasons of youth enfranchisement (as in the Vietnam era), not for reasons of road safety, but with a comprehensive clinical and epidemiological argument behind it. The National Alliance for Action on Alcohol and the Australian Medical Association have added weight to this “age-21” campaign. But is this a realistic option for Australia? In the delicate balancing act between theoretical goals and practical realities, what age is the magic number? Is a single age too simple?

The burden of proof

Any case for age-21 legislation in Australia should demonstrate three key points:

  • That alcohol consumption at 18-21 years causes significant negative outcomes
  • That age-21 regulations are effective at reducing the alcohol intake of under-21s
  • That the benefit of alcohol restriction outweighs the value of preserving 18-21 year olds’ autonomy

The reason point (iii) is necessary is that points (i) and (ii) are likely true for all age groups: restricting alcohol purchase would presumably reduce alcohol consumption and therefore alcohol-related complications irrespective of age. As a society, we have made a policy decision to tolerate alcohol use despite its associated risks in the interests of public autonomy. So the real question here is whether under-21s are disproportionately affected by alcohol-related risks to the point that this autonomy should be overridden and all consumption legally forbidden. Is the 18-21 age group really so vulnerable?

Condition 1 – An age of vulnerability

There is accumulating evidence to suggest that 18-21 year olds are a population at extreme risk from alcohol-related complications based on neurodevelopmental, road-safety, and behavioural data.

1.Neurodevelopmental

Cross-sectional studies have shown that alcohol consumption during adolescence is associated with short- and long-term cognitive impairment, including deficits in information processing, memory, attention and executive function. [11, 14] This is especially true for binge drinking behaviours. [15] Structurally, there appears to be impaired white matter development in the prefrontal cortex and fronto-striatal circuitry, which has been demonstrated with CT [16], fMRI [17] and post-mortem data. [18] However, some critics have argued that these neurobiological variations may be pre-existing features that predispose individuals to alcohol experimentation, rather than the consequence of alcohol abuse. For example, in a recent review article Clark et al. [19] suggest that studies have not sufficiently controlled for confounding psychological variables, such as attention deficits and disruptive behaviours, which are known to be associated with early alcohol experimentation. To clarify the causal links, further longitudinal data is required assessing the baseline neurobiological status of adolescents before their first alcohol exposure.

2. Road Safety

A 2001 meta-analysis of 9 population studies found that raising the minimum legal drinking age from 18 to 21 caused a 12% reduction in overall road-related mortality. [20] This aligns with the data collected by MADD and the National Highway Safety Administration in the United States [6]. However, the question arises whether these improvements in road safety are age-specific. Would raising the drinking age to 25 also cause a 10% drop in accidents among 21-24 year-olds? The argument is that 18-21 year-old drivers are the least experienced, the least responsible, and therefore the most vulnerable to alcohol. However, there is a lack of rigorous data to demonstrate age-specificity. The legal alcohol limits for driving in Australia are somewhat age-dependent, with L- and P- drivers having a zero blood-alcohol tolerance, compared to 0.05% for full-licensees. Does a differential blood alcohol threshold provide adequate protection to account for the clear difference in risk profile between adolescents and older drivers? [21]

3. Risk behaviours

Beyond road-related accidents, there is strong evidence to suggest a broader correlation between alcohol use and risky behaviours. A survey of Australian 17-19 year olds on “Schoolies” showed that 64% had consumed more than 10 drinks on a single occasion, and 18% displayed risky sexual behaviours. [22] A survey of almost 9000 American adolescents 12-21 showed a striking correlation between alcohol excess and physical violence [23]; while Miller et al. argue that early alcohol consumption, especially in the form of binge drinking, may be a precursor of other illicit drug use. [24] Many studies also demonstrate a link between alcohol excess and suicidal behaviours in adolescents, however the causal direction has not been well characterised. [25] These are compelling arguments that demonstrate not only a deleterious effect of alcohol, but also a clear correlation between minimum age legislation and outcome data.

Condition 2 – The power of the law

Despite certain experimental shortfalls, the overarching trend across neurodevelopmental, road safety and behavioural data seems to support this notion of 18-21 year-olds being particularly vulnerable to alcohol. If we accept this to be true, then the second key burden of proof relates to whether an elevated age gap actually does translate into a reduction in early-age alcohol consumption. Some critics argue that higher age restrictions in fact drive alcohol use underground and lead to more dangerous patterns of consumption. [26] In other words, age-21 laws do not allow adolescents to learn safe drinking practices within a family context, instead forcing them to experiment independently, albeit at a later age. However, the data from large-scale European studies comparing adolescent drinking behaviours in the EU and US strongly suggest otherwise. The European School Survey Project on Alcohol and Other Drugs (ESPAD) found that a greater proportion of 10th-graders in Europe had consumed alcohol within the past 30 days (33% in the US versus 80% in Denmark, 75% in Germany, 64% in France). [26] Furthermore, a higher percentage had been intoxicated before age 13 (8% in the US versus 25% in Denmark, 14% in Germany, 9% in France). Of course, it is difficult to disentangle the effect of legislation in each of these countries from the influence of culture and tradition. However, on the surface it would appear that countries with lower drinking age consistently show earlier exposure to alcohol in adolescence.

New Zealand data have demonstrated that youth several years below the legal drinking age invariably gain access to alcoholic products through older friend circles and siblings [27] – a phenomenon that Tambourou et al. refer to as the “trickle-down” effect. [1] Evidence suggests that an upward shift in the legal drinking age not only reduces the number of 18-21 year olds consuming alcohol, but also significantly reduces the likelihood of 15-18 year olds acquiring it. In summary, the evidence supports the hypothesis that legal restrictions do translate into community practice.

Condition 3: A balancing act

Having satisfied the first two conditions, we arrive at the third and most challenging question: does the negative impact of alcohol amongst under-21s outweigh their personal autonomy as legal adults? Tangled up with this argument is the deeply-ingrained cultural idea that alcohol consumption is a mark of adulthood, a rite of passage. By instituting age-21 laws, the state would not only be removing personal autonomy, but also stamping out cultural aspects of the coming-of-age tradition. Is this fair, is it necessary, is it overly paternalistic? There is some evidence to suggest that raising the minimum legal drinking age causes a ‘reactance phenomenon’ where underage individuals drink more in response to the imposed restrictions. [28] However a large meta-analysis by Wagenaar et al. disputes this finding, demonstrating amongst 33 studies from 1960-2000 a strong inverse relationship between minimum drinking age and alcohol consumption rates. [29]

In spite of these data, there remains the fundamental philosophical issue of whether it is equitable to impose a blanket regulation across all under-21s when the negative statistics are driven by a small minority of excessive alcohol drinkers? Ultimately, these are questions of political philosophy more than clinical data – to what extent should the state protect individuals from themselves? There are no easy answers. This is a situation where public opinion must shape government policy.

An individualised system

One key problem is that public policy cannot take into account the diversity of the target population – with 18-21 year olds varying significantly in maturity, family support, and risk-taking behaviour. Given this variability, one might consider a system where alcohol regulations are personally tailored. As a thought experiment, consider the possibility of “alcohol licenses” for individuals. An 18-year-old might be required to pass a written examination on content similar to the current Responsible Service of Alcohol syllabus. There could be a point system, with points lost and licenses potentially revoked for alcohol-related misdemeanours. Perhaps even a provisional license system (like L- and P-plates) restricting the type and quantity of alcohol that could be purchased by youth. This would require a large bureaucratic infrastructure to support it; however it may be one option for creating a smoother pathway from adolescence into responsible alcohol use.

Conclusions

Toumbourou et al. conclude their article with a call-to-action for a multi-level advocacy campaign in support of age-21 regulations. [1] However, perhaps the real value is in the dialogue more than the outcome. Ultimately, drinking age is an arbitrary number that does not perfectly match the maturity levels of all individuals and certainly does not perfectly translate into alcohol consumption patterns. The important point is that society becomes aware of the risk of premature alcohol use, and that this knowledge becomes integrated into family education, peer dynamics, and youth culture. The real goal should be for adolescents to approach alcohol in a mature and sensible fashion. Regardless of where the Australian law ultimately settles, perhaps it takes a high-profile legislative debate in order to bring this conversation into the spotlight.

Acknowledgements

None.

Conflict of interest

None declared.

Correspondence

M Seneviratne: msen5354@uni.sydney.edu.au

References

[1] Toumbourou J, Jones S, Hickie B. Should the legal age for alcohol purchase be raised to 21? Med J Aust, 2014;200(10):568-70.

[2] Miron J, Tetelbaum E. Does the minimum legal drinking age save lives? Economic Inquiry 2009;47(2):317-36.

[3] The law relating to age of majority, the age of marriage and some connected subjects, in Working Paper No. 2. 1977, The Law Reform Commission.

[4] LegalFlip. Why is the Legal Drinking Age 21 in the United States? 2014; Available from: http://www.legalflip.com/Article.aspx?id=20&pageid=84.

[5] DeJong W, Blanchette J. Case closed: research evidence on the positive public health impact of the age 21 minimum legal drinking age in the United States. J Stud Alcohol  Drugs, 2014;Suppl 17:108-15.

[6] Lives saved in 2008 by restraint use and minimum drinking age laws – in National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. June 2009.

[7] Dawson DA, Goldstein RB, Chou SP, RuanW J, Grant BF. Age at first drink and the fi rst incidence of adult-onset DSM-IV alcohol use disorders. Alcoholism: Clin Exp Res 2008;322:149-60.

[8] Hingson R, Heeren T, Zakocs R. Age of drinking onset and involvement in physical fights after drinking. Pediatrics, 2001;108:872-77.

[9] Birckmayer J, Hemenway D. Minimum-age drinking laws and youth suicide, 1970-1990. Am J Public Health Res, 1999;89:1365-68.

[10] Hingson R, Heeren T, Winter MR, Wechsler H. Early age of first drunkenness as a factor in college students’ unplanned and unprotected sex attributable to drinking. Pediatrics, 2003;111:34-41.

[11] Squeglia L, Jacobus J, Tapert SF. The Influence of Substance Use on Adolescent Brain Development. Clin EEG Neurosci, 2009;40(1):31-38.

[12] Hanson GR, Venturelli PJ, Fleckenstein AE. Current statistics and trends in alcohol consumption, in Drugs and Society. 2015, Jones & Bartlett Publishing.

[13] National Drug Strategy Household Survey report, in AIHW Cat. No. PHE 145. 2010, Australian Institute of Health and Welfare.

[14] Hermens D, Lagopoulos J, Tobias-Webb J. Pathways to alcohol-induced brain impairment in young people: a review. Cortex, 2013;49:3-17.

[15] Carlen PL, Fornazzari L, Bennett J, Wikinson DA. Computerized tomographic scan assessment of alcoholic brain damage and its potential reversibility. Alcohol Clin Exp Res 1986;10:226-32.

[16] Agartz I BS, Hamma FJ, Svinhufvud K. Volumetry during acute alcohol withdrawal and abstinence: a descriptive study. Alcohol, 2003;38:71-78.

[17] Krill J, Halliday GM, Svoboda MD, Cartwright H. The cerebral cortex is damaged in chronic alcoholics. Neuroscience, 1997;73:993-98.

[18] Clark DB, Thatcher DL, Tapert SF. Alcohol, psychological dysregulation, and adolescent brain development. Alcoholism: Clin Exp Res, 2008; 32(3):375-385.

[19] Shults R, Elder RW, Sleet DA. Reviews of evidence regarding interventions to reduce alcohol-impaired driving. Am J Prev Med, 2001;21(4)Suppl 1:66-88.

[20] Jonah BA, Dawson NE. Youth and risk: age differences in risky driving, risk perception, and risk utility. Alcohol Drugs and Driving, 1987;3(3):13-29.

[21] Jones S BL, Robinson L. The schoolies experience: the role of expectancies, gender roles and social norms of recent school leavers. Wollongong, NSW: Centre for Health Initiatives, University of Wollongong, 2011.

[22] Swahn MH. Alcohol-consumption behaviors and risk for physical fighting and injuries among adolescent drinkers. Addictive Behaviors, 2004;29(5):959-963.

[23] Miller JW. .Binge drinking and associated health risk behaviors among high school students Pediatrics, 2007;119(1):76-85.

[24] Hallfors DD. Adolescent depression and suicide risk. Am J Prev Med, 2007;27(3):224-231.

[25]    Friese B, Grube JW. Youth drinking rates and problems: a comparison of European countries and the United States Prevention Research Center – Pacific Institute for Research and Evaluation.

[26] Kypri K, Dean J, Kirby S. ‘Think before you buy under-18s drink’: evaluation of a community alcohol intervention. Drug Alcohol Rev, 2004;24:13-20.

[27] Allen DN, Sprenkel DG, Vitale PA. Reactance theory and alcohol consumption laws: further confirmation among collegiate alcohol consumers. J Stud Alcohol, 1994; 55(1).55-67

[28] Wagenaar AC,Toomey TL. Effects of minimum drinking age laws: review and analyses of the literature from 1960 to 2000. J Stud Alcohol Suppl, 2002;(14):206-25.

Categories
Feature Articles

Clinical implications of the sex and gender differences associated with substance use disorders

Substance use disorders are exceedingly complex management issues which result in significant medical and social consequences. Epidemiological studies in the United States and Australia show that more men than women are affected by substance use disorders. However, there is evidence to suggest that women have distinctly different and potentially more hazardous patterns of substance use. These include: a greater tendency to escalate usage, relatively higher rates of relapse, and the telescoping phenomenon (which results in a more rapid progression from the initiation of substance use to drug dependence and adverse medical consequences). Proposed mechanisms for the variable impact of substance use disorders on men and women include biological and gender-based theories which incorporate environmental, psychological and social factors. Studies attribute the biological differences to direct and indirect oestrogen-mediated mechanisms, and the influence of dopamine on structures in the brain including the nucleus accumbens and striatal pathways. Psychosocial variables include psychiatric co-morbidities, family responsibilities, financial issues and perceptions of stigma. The differences in the progression and outcomes of substance use disorders between men and women pose the question as to whether their management can be enhanced by a gender-specific approach. This article outlines the various treatment facilities available in Australia and explores the types of facilities that women tend to use. Gender-specific programs and/or facilities have been shown to be most useful when they support sub-populations of women such as pregnant mothers, mothers with dependent children, and victims of domestic or sexual violence.

Introduction48

Both licit and illicit drug use contribute to a significant financial and disease burden in Australia. [1] Currently, epidemiological data suggests that more men are diagnosed with substance use disorders relative to women. [1-7] However, there are sex and gender differences which distinguish patterns of addiction and behavior in both groups. These sex differences have a biological basis, with associations between oestradiol-related central pathways and the propagation of drug seeking behaviours in women relative to men. [2,6,8]

The difference in the prevalence and impact of substance use disorders between genders incorporates environmental, psychological and social factors. Currently, fewer women access drug treatment programs relative to men. [9] This may be representative of the fact that fewer women suffer from substance use disorders, however it may also reflect hindrances towards seeking or accessing treatment. Such barriers towards treatment include increased perceptions of stigma, dependent family members, and financial circumstances. [10-12]

Therefore, although more men are diagnosed with substance use disorders, a different approach towards prevention and treatment may be required for women. A review of the current literature is necessary to question whether an argument can be made to support gender-specific programs to address substance use disorders.

Definitions, epidemiology and gender differences

The term ‘substance use disorder’ as defined in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders 5 (DSM-5) combines substance abuse and dependence associated with both licit and illicit drugs, which were previously distinguished in DSM-4. [13] Where possible, we refer to substance use disorders based on DSM-5 criteria. However, DSM-4 terminology is retained in order to maintain consistency with previous epidemiologic studies and data.

Differences in epidemiologic data, psychological factors, and clinical management may exist between the various types of substances; however, this article will focus on general principles in order to better understand sex and gender differences associated with substance use disorders and management options.

Licit drug use disorders refer to the legal use of legal drugs. Tobacco and alcohol are the most frequently used drugs – 15% of Australians over the age of 14 were daily smokers in 2010 while 24% were ex-smokers. [1] In 2012, approximately 78% of all Australians aged 14 and over drank alcohol during the year, with 18% drinking at harmful levels. [9]

Illicit substance use disorders, on the other hand, refer to the illegal use of legal drugs or use of illegal drugs. Although relatively uncommon compared to licit drugs, approximately 42% of Australians aged 14 and over reported using illicit drugs in their lifetime, with 15% reporting use in the last 12 months. [9] Cannabis, followed by ecstasy and hallucinogens were the most common illicit drugs used.

There are consistent reports that suggest a higher prevalence of substance abuse in men relative to women. [1-7] This is in keeping with data from the Australian Bureau of Statistics pertaining to Gender Indicators, which showed that men reported higher rates of substance use disorders in the year prior to data collection (7% males relative to 3% females) and throughout their lifetime (35% males relative to 14% females). [7] This is consistent with studies conducted in the United States (US) where, for example, a large survey of over 40,000 adults stated that men are twice as likely (13.8%) than women (7.1%) to address DSM-4 criteria for any drug use disorder.[3]

However, women have distinctly different patterns of drug use, which may be explained by a combination of sex and gender differences. [2,12] For instance, studies show that women tend to escalate drug use (relevant to alcohol, cannabis, opioids and cocaine) relative to men, which contributes to notion of the ‘telescoping phenomenon’. [2,6,12] The term suggests that the development of behavioural, psychological and medical consequences of a substance use disorder occur at a faster rate in women relative to men. [2,12] Notably, despite the use of relatively smaller quantities of drugs within a shorter timeframe, women show greater rates of adverse social and medical consequences. [3] Furthermore, Becker and Hu’s review [2] suggests that once drug addiction has been established, women find it more difficult to quit and are more prone to relapse following periods of abstinence in comparison with men.

Therefore, despite the fact that quantitatively more men may suffer from addiction, the differences in the pattern of drug seeking behaviour, escalation to use disorders, and treatment retention need to be addressed.

Sex differences

Sex differences relevant to drugs of addiction have been evidenced in both animal and human models. [2] Animal studies performed on rodents suggest that females are more likely to self-administer drugs of addiction (in this case cocaine) and have oestradiol-associated mechanisms to further propagate drug seeking mechanisms which are not present in male rodents. [2,6]

Oestrogen-mediated sex differences are evident in most phases of drug abuse including acquisition, maintenance, escalation and relapse. [2,8] Proposed mechanisms for this effect include direct interactions with the striatum and nucleus accumbens to facilitate dopamine release, and indirect interactions via sensitisation of receptors and changes in neuronal excitability. [6,8,14] The alterations in dopamine release act to regulate neurochemical responses and behaviours in favour of addiction, particularly to psychomotor stimulant drugs. [6,14]

Another contributing factor to the sex differences in drug addiction is the effect of the menstrual cycle on motivation behaviours. The impact of the menstrual cycle seems to be variable depending upon the timing of the cycle, hormone concentrations, and type of substance abused. For instance, increased euphoria, desire, and energy are enhanced when using cocaine in the follicular phase relative to the luteal phase. [2] In support of the notion that oestrogen plays a role in the perceived effects of drugs of addiction, the addition of oestradiol during the follicular phase resulted in a self-reported increase in the euphoric effects of dexamphetamine. [2]

Additionally, a review of 13 studies that investigated the impact of the menstrual cycle on smoking cessation suggested that women experience greater tobacco cravings and negative affect responses to tobacco withdrawal during the late luteal phase, where oestrogen and progesterone levels are diminishing. [2] The proposed mechanism for this is that the relatively higher oestrogen levels in the follicular phase may ‘alleviate some of the negative consequences’ associated with quitting smoking. Becker and Hu [2] support this theory by identifying a study that confirms the relationship between oestradiol, positive affect and decreased anxiety.

The variations in drug use and withdrawal symptoms during the menstrual cycle, such as increased euphoria when using cocaine during the follicular phase versus enhanced negative affect responses to tobacco withdrawal during the luteal phase, suggest that fluctuating oestrogen levels can have an impact on subjective experiences of substance use disorders.

It is difficult to truly isolate biological differences from psychosocial issues that may impact on the development and management of substance use disorders. However, there is evidence to support the significance of biological variations on the subjective experiences and outcomes associated with substance use disorders. These include the relationship between oestradiol and addiction behavior in animal studies, variations in drug-related experiences during the menstrual cycle, and the notion (detailed above) that women have a greater tendency to escalate drug use and develop adverse medical/psychological effects as a consequence of substance use disorders. The question remains as to whether the telescoping phenomenon in women requires a different management approach – are there any benefits of targeting women through specific programs or do mixed-gendered programs and facilities suffice?

Psychosocial differences

In addition to the identified biological differences in substance use disorders, psychosocial factors may contribute to variations in addiction behaviours, treatment initiation and outcomes. Such factors include, but are not limited to, psychiatric co-morbidities, dependent family members, financial issues and perceptions of stigma.

Studies suggest that women with substance abuse disorders are more likely to have a prior diagnosis of a psychiatric disorder relative to men, with more women meeting criteria for anxiety, depression, and eating disorders. [3] Potential contributing factors to this difference in mental health outcomes include higher rates of experienced trauma such as sexual abuse and/or intimate partner violence, disrupted family environments, and a perception of over-responsibility (such as caring for a child or other family members) in women relative to men. [3,10,11,15] The correlation between psychiatric disorders with substance use disorders urges the need for more holistic treatment. Specialised services that incorporate mental health into the management of substance use disorders have shown to yield better outcomes with respect to treatment retention and continuity of care. [16]

In addition to psychiatric co-morbidities, previous studies document a greater perception of stigma amongst female substance abusers, whereby women experienced higher levels of guilt, embarrassment and shame relative to males. [11,15,17,18] This has an impact on the willingness to seek and/or continue treatment not only for substance use disorders but other necessary community services. The Network of Alcohol and Other Drug Agencies (NADA) report suggests that women identified having difficulty accessing services such as pre-natal classes and housing support due to perceived stigma, discrimination and fear of judgment from child protection services. [11]

Social factors that hinder management of substance use disorders in women relative to men include: lower education levels and financial income, housing issues, interaction with child protection services, and dependent children and/or other dependent family members. [10-12] Green’s research [10] and NADA’s report [11] suggest that women experience relatively greater difficulty in finding time to attend regular treatment sessions due to family responsibilities and transport issues. The social factors mentioned above, in conjunction with the perception of stigma, act as significant barriers for women to access treatment. These need to be addressed in order to successfully promote women to seek initial treatment while providing necessary support to facilitate long-term management.

Current use of treatment facilities

Briefly, the types of treatment facilities in Australia as outlined by the AIHW’s report include [9]:

  • Assessment only, whereby agencies identify the severity of the issue and refer accordingly
  • Information and education only
  • Support and case management only
  • Counseling for individuals and groups through methods such as cognitive behavior therapy
  • Withdrawal management (home, in-patient, or out-patient)
  • Rehabilitation (residential treatment services, therapeutic communities or community-based rehabilitation)
  • Other holistic approaches, which include relapse prevention, living skills classes, safer using, etc.
  • Other health services include GP visits, hospital treatment and homelessness services.

In Australia, fewer women (32%) received treatment through alcohol and other drug treatment services relative to men (68%) in 2012-2013, which is consistent with studies conducted in the US where extensive research regarding the impact of gender on substance abuse is conducted. [9] It is unclear whether the reduced proportion of women seeking treatment is solely reflective of the relatively smaller number of women with addiction issues, or also inclusive of the financial and psychosocial factors that can prevent women from seeking treatment. [9]

Studies based in the US allow for the identification of gender differences between the types of facilities used for managing substance abuse disorders. Women are more likely to approach mental health or primary clinics rather than addiction treatment programs or specialty clinics. [3,19] It is proposed that this may be due to the perception that psychological distress and impairment associated in those substance use disorders may be better addressed by directly treating the mental health issue. [19]

There is limited research regarding the impact of this preference on treatment outcomes, however Mojtabai’s study [19] found that this pattern of treatment was less effective when compared to participants who sought help in specialty settings. [10] Management through facilities dedicated to substance use disorders was associated with a relatively reduced likelihood of continued substance use, with fewer participants reporting alcohol and substance use in the past month. [10,19] The study urges for better integration of substance use disorder management in the mental health system, and an efficient referral system across the ‘traditionally separate systems of care’. [19]

Future directions: utility of gender-based programs?

Services that provide comprehensive support by addressing medical, psychiatric and social issues (such as employment or child protection) have been shown to improve attendance, social adjustment and relapse rates in both men and women. [12,20] Previous research suggests that gender does not seem to predict patient retention, treatment completion, or patient prognosis once an individual begins treatment. [12] This seems to contradict the need for gender-specific programs, considering that treatment appears to offer equal benefit to both men and women. However, this needs to be considered in light of the fact that there are differences in the rates of treatment access between men and women, which may be explained in part by the psychosocial factors outlined above.

There is evidence to suggest the benefit of gender-specific programs or facilities in certain contexts. These include programs that focus on female-specific topics such as sexual abuse and body image, residential facilities for women with dependent family, and tailored care for pregnant mothers. [10,21] In 2005, the Drug and Alcohol Services Information System (DASIS) report in the US suggested that 41% of substance abuse treatment facilities that accepted female clients provided additional support programs specifically for women. [22] There are gender specific programs and facilities, including those dedicated to pregnant women, in most Australian states – although they may not be as numerous as those available in the US. For instance, out of 28 Network of Alcohol and Other Drug Agencies services in New South Wales, Australia, 7 provided women-only services. [11]

Gender specific psycho-education sessions on topics specific to women have received positive feedback in a few different studies. [11,16,19] These sessions allow for the discussion of more sensitive issues such as domestic violence, sexual abuse, parenting, weight and body image in a more comfortable scenario. [10,11,21] It is crucial that these programs are flexible and avoid the use of a confrontational style. [16] The presence of dynamic and interpersonal discussion is considered beneficial, and is suggested to occur more often and in an uninterrupted fashion in women-only programs. [16] The importance of self-expression without interruption is highlighted by the fact that unaddressed issues may result in adverse psychological effects. [16] Specific interventions that have been proven to be effective include but are not limited to: parenting skills for mothers on methadone maintenance, relapse prevention for women with post traumatic stress disorder, and relapse prevention for women with marital distress and alcohol dependence. [10,11,12]

Programs specific to women tend to offer facilities that allow for accompanying children (through child care support during clinics and day programs), and may also provide residential facilities for the client and dependent family.  Such facilities have been shown to have better treatment outcomes including longer lengths of stay. [11,12,16] Furthermore, family inclusive practices may have services that aim to repair relationships with children and family members thus enhancing support systems and the quality of the home environment.

Pregnant women with substance use disorders can be at high risk of numerous medical and social issues affecting their mental and physical health, which in turn impacts upon their risk of obstetric complications and the subsequent health of their baby. Pregnant women are more likely to: be of younger age, have previously given birth, have limited social supports (including limited financial stability) and have a concomitant psychiatric diagnosis. Such populations require a multitude of coordinated services and can significantly benefit from residential services, which allow for increased social support for themselves and dependent family. [11] Programs dedicated to pregnant and perinatal women have demonstrated significantly improved patient engagement and pregnancy outcomes. [12,23,24] Specific intervention programs that have yielded beneficial results for expecting mothers include alcohol interventions for pregnant women, contingency management to increase abstinence in pregnant women, and comprehensive service models for pregnant women such as access to prenatal care. [11] The benefit of customised care was highlighted by a study which recorded higher infant birth weights (2934 grams vs. 2539 grams) and a smaller proportion of neonatal intensive care admissions (10% vs. 26%) when comparing cocaine-dependent mothers who received twice-weekly addiction counseling with those who did not. [23]

In addition to gender-specific treatment, future directions may include a transition to more gender-sensitive services. [10] Suggested strategies include: matching therapist and client gender, mixed-gender group sessions concurrently led by both male and female leaders, and gender-specific treatment information or content. [10] The results of client and therapist gender matching are unclear. Some studies suggest that clients reported a sense of greater empathy resulting in longer treatment durations and lower rates of relapse, whilst other showed no difference in outcomes. [10]

Conclusion

There are documented sex differences with respect to substance use disorders through direct and indirect oestrogen-mediated mechanisms, the dopamine influence on nucleus accumbens and striatal pathways, and variable impacts of the menstrual cycle. These occur in addition to gender differences, which incorporate psychosocial variables such as psychiatric disorders, family environment, domestic violence, and social stigma. Currently, men experience higher rates of substance abuse relative to women; however, women are more likely to escalate drug use and suffer from biological and/or psychological consequences at lower doses and shorter durations of drug use. Additionally, women are less likely to enter treatment relative to men.

Studies provide inconclusive results regarding the benefits of gender-specific programs over those that have a gender-mix. However, there may be a need to support sub-populations of women including pregnant mothers, mothers with dependent children, and victims of domestic or sexual violence. Therefore, future directions include the need to increase awareness regarding substance use disorders, facilitate treatment for women in general, provide ongoing support to relevant subgroups, and consider a more gender-sensitive approach during management of substance use disorders.

Acknowledgements

The author wishes to acknowledge Dr. Christine Phillips and Dr. Elizabeth Sturgiss for their support and feedback.

Conflicts of Interest

None declared

Correspondence

A Jain: arunimajain12@gmail.com

References

[1] Australian Insitute of Health and Welfare. Drugs in Australia 2010: Tobacco, alcohol and other drugs. Canberra: AIHW; 2011.

[2] Becker JB, Hu M. Sex differences in drug abuse. Frontiers in Neuroendocrinology. 2008; 29(1):36-47.

[3] Back SE CR, Brady T. Substance Abuse in Women: Does Gender Matter [Internet] 2006. [updated 2006, cited 2015 March 12]; Available from: http://www.psychiatrictimes.com/substance-use-disorder/substance-abuse-women-does-gender-matter.

[4] Kessler RC, McGonagle KA, Zhao S, Nelson CB, Hughes M, Eshleman S, Wittchen HU, Kendler KS. Lifetime and 12-month prevalence of DSM-III-R psychiatric disorders in the United States. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 1994;51:8-19.

[5] Conway KP, Compton W, Stinson FS, Grant BF. Lifetime comorbidity of DSM-IV mood and anxiety disorders and specific drug use disorders: results from the national epidemiologic survey on alcohol and related conditions. J Clin Psychiatry. 2006;67:247-57.

[6] Roth ME, Cosgrove KP, Carroll ME. Sex differences in the vulnerability to drug abuse: a review of preclinical studies. Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews. 2004;28(6):533-46.

[7] Australian Bureau of Statistics. Mental Health: Key Series 2013 [Internet]. 2013 [cited 2015 March 12]; Available from: http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/Lookup/4125.0main+features3150Jan%202013.

[8] Carroll ME, Lynch WJ, Roth ME, Morgan AD, Cosgrove KP. Sex and estrogen influence drug abuse. Trends in Pharmacological Sciences. 2004;25(5):273-9.

[9] Australian Insitute of Health and Welfare. Alcohol and other drug treatment services in Australia 2012-13. Drug Treatment Series. Canberra: AIHW; 2014.

[10] Green C. Gender and use of substance abuse treatment services. [cited 2015 April 22]; Available from: http://pubs.niaaa.nih.gov/publications/arh291/55-62.htm

[11] Jenner L, Lee N, Cameron J, Harney A. Women’s alcohol and other drug services development program: needs analysis final report. Network of Alcohol and other Drug Agencies; 2014.

[12] Greenfield SF, Brooks AJ, Gordon SM, Green CA, Kropp F, McHugh RK, et al. Substance abuse treatment entry, retention, and outcome in women: a review of the literature. Drug Alcohol Dependence. 2007;86(1):1-21.

[13] American Psychiatric Association. Substance-related and addictive disorders [Internet]. 2013 [updated 2013; cited 2015 March 12];  Available from: http://www.dsm5.org/Documents/Substance%20Use%20Disorder%20Fact%20Sheet.pdf.

[14] Becker JB. Gender Differences in Dopaminergic Function in Striatum and Nucleus Accumbens. Pharmacology Biochemistry and Behavior. 1999;64(4):803-12.

[15] Nelson-Zlupko L KE, Dore MM. Gender differences in drug addiction and treatment: implications for social work intervention with substance-abusing women. Social work. 1995;40(1):45-54.

[16] Claus RE, Orwin RG, Kissin W, Krupski A, Campbell K, Stark K. Does gender-specific substance abuse treatment for women promote continuity of care? Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment. 2007;32(1):27-39.

[17] Brady KT, Randall CL. Gender differences in substance use disorders. The Psychiatric clinics of North America. 1999;22(2):241-52.

[18] Shimmin C. Understanding stigma through a gender lens. Canadian Women’s Health Network. 2009;11(2):14-7

[19] Mojtabai R. Use of specialty substance abuse and mental health services in adults with substance use disorders in the community. Drug and Alcohol Dependence. 2005;78(3):345-54.

[20] Marsh JC, Cao D, D’Aunno, T. Gender differences in the impact of comprehensive services in substance abuse treatment. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment. 2004;27:289-300.

[21] Lindsay AR, Warren CS, Velasquez SC, Lu M. A gender-specific approach to improving substance abuse treatment for women: the healthy steps to freedom program. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment. 2012;43(1):61-9.

[22] Center for Substance Abuse Treatment. Addressing the specific needs of women. Rockville:Drug and Alcohol Services Information System; 2009.

[23] McLellan TA Lewis DC, O’Brien CP, Kleber HD. Drug dependence, a chronic medical illness: implications for treatment, insurance, and outcomes evaluation. JAMA. 2000;284(13):1689-95

[24] Morris M, Seibold C. Drugs and having babies: An exploration of how a specialist clinic meets the needs of chemically dependent pregnant women. Midwifery. 2012;28:163-72.