Neurology

A new study of educational attainment among U.K. primary and secondary schoolchildren born prematurely now provides some reassurance about the longer-term outcomes for many of these children.

For the study, published in the open-access journal PLOS ONE, researchers from the University of Oxford with colleagues from the University of Leicester and City University, London, used data from 11,695 children in the population-based UK Millennium Cohort Study, which included children born in England from Sept. 1, 2000 to Aug. 31, 2001. They analyzed data on educational attainment in primary school, at age 11, for 6,950 pupils and in secondary school, at age 16, for 7,131 pupils.

Preterm birth is a known risk factor for developmental impairment, lower educational performance and reduced academic attainment, with the impact proportional to the degree of prematurity. Not every child born prematurely will experience learning or developmental challenges, but studies of children born before 34 weeks gestation have shown that they are more likely to have cognitive difficulties, particularly poorer reading and maths skills, at primary school, and to have special educational needs by the end of primary education.
 

Elevated risk of all preterm children in primary school

Until now, few studies have followed these children through secondary school or examined the full spectrum of gestational ages at birth. Yet as neonatal care advances and more premature babies now survive, an average primary class in the United Kingdom now includes two preterm children.

Among the primary school children overall, 17.7% had not achieved their expected level in English and mathematics at age 11. Children born very preterm, before 32 weeks or at 32-33 weeks gestation, were more than twice as likely as full term children to fail to meet these benchmarks, with adjusted relative risks of 2.06 and 2.13, respectively. Those born late preterm, at 34-36 weeks, or early term, at 37-38 weeks, were at lesser risk, with RRs of 1.18 and 1.21, respectively.

By the end of secondary school, 45.2% of pupils had not passed the benchmark of at least five General Certificate of Secondary Education (GCSE) examinations, including English and mathematics. The RR for children born very preterm, compared with full term children, was 1.26, with 60% of students in this group failing to achieve five GCSEs. However, children born at gestations between 32 and 38 weeks were not at elevated risk, compared with children born at full term.
 

Risk persists to secondary level only for very preterm children

A similar pattern was seen with English and mathematics analyzed separately, with no additional risk of not passing among children born at 32 weeks or above, but adjusted RRs of 1.33 for not passing English and 1.42 for not passing maths among pupils who had been born very preterm, compared with full term children.

“All children born before full term are more likely to have poorer attainment during primary school, compared with children born full term (39-41 weeks), but only children born very preterm (before 32 weeks) remain at risk of poor attainment at the end of secondary schooling,” the researchers concluded.

“Further studies are needed in order to confirm this result,” they acknowledge. They suggested their results could be explained by catch-up in academic attainment among children born moderately or late preterm or at early term. However, “very preterm children appear to be a high-risk group with persistent difficulties in terms of educational outcomes,” they said, noting that even this risk was of lower magnitude than the reduced attainment scores they found among pupils eligible for free school meals, meaning those from disadvantaged socioeconomic backgrounds.
 

Extra educational support needed

The researchers concluded: “Children born very preterm may benefit from screening for cognitive and language difficulties prior to school entry to guide the provision of additional support during schooling.” In addition, those born very preterm “may require additional educational support throughout compulsory schooling.”

Commenting on the study, Caroline Lee-Davey, chief executive of premature baby charity Bliss, told this news organization: “Every child who is born premature is unique, and their development and achievements will be individual to them. However, these new findings are significant and add to our understanding of how prematurity is related to longer-term educational attainment, particularly for children who were born very preterm.”

“Most importantly, they highlight the need for all children who were born premature – and particularly those who were born before 32 weeks – to have access to early support. This means ensuring all eligible babies receive a follow-up check at 2 and 4 years as recommended by NICE and for early years and educational professionals to be aware of the relationship between premature birth and development.”

“We know how concerning these findings might be for families with babies and very young children right now. That’s why Bliss has developed a suite of information to support families as they make choices about their child’s education.”

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape UK.

A new study of educational attainment among U.K. primary and secondary schoolchildren born prematurely now provides some reassurance about the longer-term outcomes for many of these children.

For the study, published in the open-access journal PLOS ONE, researchers from the University of Oxford with colleagues from the University of Leicester and City University, London, used data from 11,695 children in the population-based UK Millennium Cohort Study, which included children born in England from Sept. 1, 2000 to Aug. 31, 2001. They analyzed data on educational attainment in primary school, at age 11, for 6,950 pupils and in secondary school, at age 16, for 7,131 pupils.

Preterm birth is a known risk factor for developmental impairment, lower educational performance and reduced academic attainment, with the impact proportional to the degree of prematurity. Not every child born prematurely will experience learning or developmental challenges, but studies of children born before 34 weeks gestation have shown that they are more likely to have cognitive difficulties, particularly poorer reading and maths skills, at primary school, and to have special educational needs by the end of primary education.
 

Elevated risk of all preterm children in primary school

Until now, few studies have followed these children through secondary school or examined the full spectrum of gestational ages at birth. Yet as neonatal care advances and more premature babies now survive, an average primary class in the United Kingdom now includes two preterm children.

Among the primary school children overall, 17.7% had not achieved their expected level in English and mathematics at age 11. Children born very preterm, before 32 weeks or at 32-33 weeks gestation, were more than twice as likely as full term children to fail to meet these benchmarks, with adjusted relative risks of 2.06 and 2.13, respectively. Those born late preterm, at 34-36 weeks, or early term, at 37-38 weeks, were at lesser risk, with RRs of 1.18 and 1.21, respectively.

By the end of secondary school, 45.2% of pupils had not passed the benchmark of at least five General Certificate of Secondary Education (GCSE) examinations, including English and mathematics. The RR for children born very preterm, compared with full term children, was 1.26, with 60% of students in this group failing to achieve five GCSEs. However, children born at gestations between 32 and 38 weeks were not at elevated risk, compared with children born at full term.
 

Risk persists to secondary level only for very preterm children

A similar pattern was seen with English and mathematics analyzed separately, with no additional risk of not passing among children born at 32 weeks or above, but adjusted RRs of 1.33 for not passing English and 1.42 for not passing maths among pupils who had been born very preterm, compared with full term children.

“All children born before full term are more likely to have poorer attainment during primary school, compared with children born full term (39-41 weeks), but only children born very preterm (before 32 weeks) remain at risk of poor attainment at the end of secondary schooling,” the researchers concluded.

“Further studies are needed in order to confirm this result,” they acknowledge. They suggested their results could be explained by catch-up in academic attainment among children born moderately or late preterm or at early term. However, “very preterm children appear to be a high-risk group with persistent difficulties in terms of educational outcomes,” they said, noting that even this risk was of lower magnitude than the reduced attainment scores they found among pupils eligible for free school meals, meaning those from disadvantaged socioeconomic backgrounds.
 

Extra educational support needed

The researchers concluded: “Children born very preterm may benefit from screening for cognitive and language difficulties prior to school entry to guide the provision of additional support during schooling.” In addition, those born very preterm “may require additional educational support throughout compulsory schooling.”

Commenting on the study, Caroline Lee-Davey, chief executive of premature baby charity Bliss, told this news organization: “Every child who is born premature is unique, and their development and achievements will be individual to them. However, these new findings are significant and add to our understanding of how prematurity is related to longer-term educational attainment, particularly for children who were born very preterm.”

“Most importantly, they highlight the need for all children who were born premature – and particularly those who were born before 32 weeks – to have access to early support. This means ensuring all eligible babies receive a follow-up check at 2 and 4 years as recommended by NICE and for early years and educational professionals to be aware of the relationship between premature birth and development.”

“We know how concerning these findings might be for families with babies and very young children right now. That’s why Bliss has developed a suite of information to support families as they make choices about their child’s education.”

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape UK.

A new study of educational attainment among U.K. primary and secondary schoolchildren born prematurely now provides some reassurance about the longer-term outcomes for many of these children.

For the study, published in the open-access journal PLOS ONE, researchers from the University of Oxford with colleagues from the University of Leicester and City University, London, used data from 11,695 children in the population-based UK Millennium Cohort Study, which included children born in England from Sept. 1, 2000 to Aug. 31, 2001. They analyzed data on educational attainment in primary school, at age 11, for 6,950 pupils and in secondary school, at age 16, for 7,131 pupils.

Preterm birth is a known risk factor for developmental impairment, lower educational performance and reduced academic attainment, with the impact proportional to the degree of prematurity. Not every child born prematurely will experience learning or developmental challenges, but studies of children born before 34 weeks gestation have shown that they are more likely to have cognitive difficulties, particularly poorer reading and maths skills, at primary school, and to have special educational needs by the end of primary education.
 

Elevated risk of all preterm children in primary school

Until now, few studies have followed these children through secondary school or examined the full spectrum of gestational ages at birth. Yet as neonatal care advances and more premature babies now survive, an average primary class in the United Kingdom now includes two preterm children.

Among the primary school children overall, 17.7% had not achieved their expected level in English and mathematics at age 11. Children born very preterm, before 32 weeks or at 32-33 weeks gestation, were more than twice as likely as full term children to fail to meet these benchmarks, with adjusted relative risks of 2.06 and 2.13, respectively. Those born late preterm, at 34-36 weeks, or early term, at 37-38 weeks, were at lesser risk, with RRs of 1.18 and 1.21, respectively.

By the end of secondary school, 45.2% of pupils had not passed the benchmark of at least five General Certificate of Secondary Education (GCSE) examinations, including English and mathematics. The RR for children born very preterm, compared with full term children, was 1.26, with 60% of students in this group failing to achieve five GCSEs. However, children born at gestations between 32 and 38 weeks were not at elevated risk, compared with children born at full term.
 

Risk persists to secondary level only for very preterm children

A similar pattern was seen with English and mathematics analyzed separately, with no additional risk of not passing among children born at 32 weeks or above, but adjusted RRs of 1.33 for not passing English and 1.42 for not passing maths among pupils who had been born very preterm, compared with full term children.

“All children born before full term are more likely to have poorer attainment during primary school, compared with children born full term (39-41 weeks), but only children born very preterm (before 32 weeks) remain at risk of poor attainment at the end of secondary schooling,” the researchers concluded.

“Further studies are needed in order to confirm this result,” they acknowledge. They suggested their results could be explained by catch-up in academic attainment among children born moderately or late preterm or at early term. However, “very preterm children appear to be a high-risk group with persistent difficulties in terms of educational outcomes,” they said, noting that even this risk was of lower magnitude than the reduced attainment scores they found among pupils eligible for free school meals, meaning those from disadvantaged socioeconomic backgrounds.
 

Extra educational support needed

The researchers concluded: “Children born very preterm may benefit from screening for cognitive and language difficulties prior to school entry to guide the provision of additional support during schooling.” In addition, those born very preterm “may require additional educational support throughout compulsory schooling.”

Commenting on the study, Caroline Lee-Davey, chief executive of premature baby charity Bliss, told this news organization: “Every child who is born premature is unique, and their development and achievements will be individual to them. However, these new findings are significant and add to our understanding of how prematurity is related to longer-term educational attainment, particularly for children who were born very preterm.”

“Most importantly, they highlight the need for all children who were born premature – and particularly those who were born before 32 weeks – to have access to early support. This means ensuring all eligible babies receive a follow-up check at 2 and 4 years as recommended by NICE and for early years and educational professionals to be aware of the relationship between premature birth and development.”

“We know how concerning these findings might be for families with babies and very young children right now. That’s why Bliss has developed a suite of information to support families as they make choices about their child’s education.”

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape UK.

Rural patients with early onset dementia are more likely than urban patients to rely solely on primary care physicians or nurse practitioners for the initial diagnosis and treatment of the disease, a new study has found.

Patients in rural areas are also less likely to see psychologists and undergo neuropsychological testing, according to the study, published in JAMA Network Open.

Patients who forgo such specialist visits and testing may be missing information about their condition that could help them prepare for changes in job responsibilities and future care decisions, said Wendy Yi Xu, PhD, of The Ohio State University, Columbus, who led the research.

“A lot of them are still in the workforce,” Dr. Xu said. Patients in the study were an average age of 56 years, well before the conventional age of retirement.
 

Location, location, location

To examine rural versus urban differences in the use of diagnostic tests and health care visits for early onset Alzheimer’s disease and related dementias, Dr. Xu and colleagues analyzed commercial claims data from 2012-2018. They identified more than 71,000 patients aged 40-64 years with those conditions and focused on health care use by 7,311 patients in urban areas and 1,119 in rural areas within 90 days of a new dementia diagnosis.

The proportion who received neuropsychological testing was 19% among urban patients and 16% among rural patients. Psychological assessments, which are less specialized and detailed than neuropsychological testing, and brain imaging occurred at similar rates in both groups. Similar proportions of rural and urban patients visited neurologists (17.7% and 17.96%, respectively) and psychiatrists (6.02% and 6.47%).

But more urban patients than rural patients visited a psychologist, at 19% versus 15%, according to the researchers.

Approximately 18% of patients in rural areas saw a primary care provider without visiting other specialists, compared with 13% in urban areas.

The researchers found that rural patients were significantly less likely to undergo neuropsychological testing (odds ratio, 0.83; 95% confidence interval, 0.70-0.98) or see a psychologist (OR, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.60-0.85).

Similarly, rural patients had significantly higher odds of having only primary care providers involved in the diagnosis of dementia and symptom management (OR, 1.40; 95% CI, 1.19-1.66).
 

Addressing workforce deficiencies

More primary care training in dementia care and collaboration with specialist colleagues could help address differences in care, Dr. Xu’s group writes. Such efforts are already underway.

In 2018, the Alzheimer’s Association launched telementoring programs focused on dementia care using the Project ECHO (Extension for Community Healthcare Outcomes) model. Researchers originally developed Project ECHO at the University of New Mexico in 2003 to teach primary care clinicians in remote settings how to treat patients infected with the hepatitis C virus.

With the Alzheimer’s and Dementia Care ECHO Program for Clinicians, primary care clinicians can participate in interactive case-based video conferencing sessions to better understand dementia and how to provide high-quality care in community settings, according to the association.

The program covers guidelines for diagnosis, disclosure, and follow-up; the initiation of care planning; managing disease-related challenges; and resources for patients and caregivers.

Since 2018, nearly 100 primary care practices in the United States have completed training in dementia care using Project ECHO, said Morgan Daven, vice president of health systems for the Alzheimer’s Association. Many cases featured in the program are challenging, he added.

“With primary care being on the front lines, it is really important that primary care physicians are equipped to do what they can to detect or diagnose and know when to refer,” Mr. Daven said.

The association has compiled other resources for clinicians as well.

A 2020 report from the association examined the role that primary care physicians play in dementia care. One survey found that 82% of primary care physicians consider themselves on the front lines of providing care for patients with dementia.

Meanwhile, about half say medical professionals are not prepared to meet rising demands associated with Alzheimer’s disease and dementia care.

Mr. Daven said the geographic disparities Dr. Xu and colleagues found are unsurprising. More than half of primary care physicians who care for people with Alzheimer’s disease say dementia specialists in their communities cannot meet demand. The problem is more urgent in rural areas. Roughly half of nonmetropolitan counties in the United States lack a practicing psychologist, according to a 2018 study published in the American Journal of Preventive Medicine.

“We really need to approach this on both sides – build the capacity in primary care, but we also need to address the dementia care specialty shortages,” Mr. Daven said.

The lack of obvious differences in access to neurologists in the new study “was surprising, given the more than fourfold difference between urban and rural areas in the supply of neurologists,” the researchers note. Health plans may maintain more access to neurologists than psychologists because of relatively higher reimbursement for neurologists, they observed.

One of the study coauthors disclosed ties to Aveanna Healthcare, a company that delivers home health and hospice care.

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

Rural patients with early onset dementia are more likely than urban patients to rely solely on primary care physicians or nurse practitioners for the initial diagnosis and treatment of the disease, a new study has found.

Patients in rural areas are also less likely to see psychologists and undergo neuropsychological testing, according to the study, published in JAMA Network Open.

Patients who forgo such specialist visits and testing may be missing information about their condition that could help them prepare for changes in job responsibilities and future care decisions, said Wendy Yi Xu, PhD, of The Ohio State University, Columbus, who led the research.

“A lot of them are still in the workforce,” Dr. Xu said. Patients in the study were an average age of 56 years, well before the conventional age of retirement.
 

Location, location, location

To examine rural versus urban differences in the use of diagnostic tests and health care visits for early onset Alzheimer’s disease and related dementias, Dr. Xu and colleagues analyzed commercial claims data from 2012-2018. They identified more than 71,000 patients aged 40-64 years with those conditions and focused on health care use by 7,311 patients in urban areas and 1,119 in rural areas within 90 days of a new dementia diagnosis.

The proportion who received neuropsychological testing was 19% among urban patients and 16% among rural patients. Psychological assessments, which are less specialized and detailed than neuropsychological testing, and brain imaging occurred at similar rates in both groups. Similar proportions of rural and urban patients visited neurologists (17.7% and 17.96%, respectively) and psychiatrists (6.02% and 6.47%).

But more urban patients than rural patients visited a psychologist, at 19% versus 15%, according to the researchers.

Approximately 18% of patients in rural areas saw a primary care provider without visiting other specialists, compared with 13% in urban areas.

The researchers found that rural patients were significantly less likely to undergo neuropsychological testing (odds ratio, 0.83; 95% confidence interval, 0.70-0.98) or see a psychologist (OR, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.60-0.85).

Similarly, rural patients had significantly higher odds of having only primary care providers involved in the diagnosis of dementia and symptom management (OR, 1.40; 95% CI, 1.19-1.66).
 

Addressing workforce deficiencies

More primary care training in dementia care and collaboration with specialist colleagues could help address differences in care, Dr. Xu’s group writes. Such efforts are already underway.

In 2018, the Alzheimer’s Association launched telementoring programs focused on dementia care using the Project ECHO (Extension for Community Healthcare Outcomes) model. Researchers originally developed Project ECHO at the University of New Mexico in 2003 to teach primary care clinicians in remote settings how to treat patients infected with the hepatitis C virus.

With the Alzheimer’s and Dementia Care ECHO Program for Clinicians, primary care clinicians can participate in interactive case-based video conferencing sessions to better understand dementia and how to provide high-quality care in community settings, according to the association.

The program covers guidelines for diagnosis, disclosure, and follow-up; the initiation of care planning; managing disease-related challenges; and resources for patients and caregivers.

Since 2018, nearly 100 primary care practices in the United States have completed training in dementia care using Project ECHO, said Morgan Daven, vice president of health systems for the Alzheimer’s Association. Many cases featured in the program are challenging, he added.

“With primary care being on the front lines, it is really important that primary care physicians are equipped to do what they can to detect or diagnose and know when to refer,” Mr. Daven said.

The association has compiled other resources for clinicians as well.

A 2020 report from the association examined the role that primary care physicians play in dementia care. One survey found that 82% of primary care physicians consider themselves on the front lines of providing care for patients with dementia.

Meanwhile, about half say medical professionals are not prepared to meet rising demands associated with Alzheimer’s disease and dementia care.

Mr. Daven said the geographic disparities Dr. Xu and colleagues found are unsurprising. More than half of primary care physicians who care for people with Alzheimer’s disease say dementia specialists in their communities cannot meet demand. The problem is more urgent in rural areas. Roughly half of nonmetropolitan counties in the United States lack a practicing psychologist, according to a 2018 study published in the American Journal of Preventive Medicine.

“We really need to approach this on both sides – build the capacity in primary care, but we also need to address the dementia care specialty shortages,” Mr. Daven said.

The lack of obvious differences in access to neurologists in the new study “was surprising, given the more than fourfold difference between urban and rural areas in the supply of neurologists,” the researchers note. Health plans may maintain more access to neurologists than psychologists because of relatively higher reimbursement for neurologists, they observed.

One of the study coauthors disclosed ties to Aveanna Healthcare, a company that delivers home health and hospice care.

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

Rural patients with early onset dementia are more likely than urban patients to rely solely on primary care physicians or nurse practitioners for the initial diagnosis and treatment of the disease, a new study has found.

Patients in rural areas are also less likely to see psychologists and undergo neuropsychological testing, according to the study, published in JAMA Network Open.

Patients who forgo such specialist visits and testing may be missing information about their condition that could help them prepare for changes in job responsibilities and future care decisions, said Wendy Yi Xu, PhD, of The Ohio State University, Columbus, who led the research.

“A lot of them are still in the workforce,” Dr. Xu said. Patients in the study were an average age of 56 years, well before the conventional age of retirement.
 

Location, location, location

To examine rural versus urban differences in the use of diagnostic tests and health care visits for early onset Alzheimer’s disease and related dementias, Dr. Xu and colleagues analyzed commercial claims data from 2012-2018. They identified more than 71,000 patients aged 40-64 years with those conditions and focused on health care use by 7,311 patients in urban areas and 1,119 in rural areas within 90 days of a new dementia diagnosis.

The proportion who received neuropsychological testing was 19% among urban patients and 16% among rural patients. Psychological assessments, which are less specialized and detailed than neuropsychological testing, and brain imaging occurred at similar rates in both groups. Similar proportions of rural and urban patients visited neurologists (17.7% and 17.96%, respectively) and psychiatrists (6.02% and 6.47%).

But more urban patients than rural patients visited a psychologist, at 19% versus 15%, according to the researchers.

Approximately 18% of patients in rural areas saw a primary care provider without visiting other specialists, compared with 13% in urban areas.

The researchers found that rural patients were significantly less likely to undergo neuropsychological testing (odds ratio, 0.83; 95% confidence interval, 0.70-0.98) or see a psychologist (OR, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.60-0.85).

Similarly, rural patients had significantly higher odds of having only primary care providers involved in the diagnosis of dementia and symptom management (OR, 1.40; 95% CI, 1.19-1.66).
 

Addressing workforce deficiencies

More primary care training in dementia care and collaboration with specialist colleagues could help address differences in care, Dr. Xu’s group writes. Such efforts are already underway.

In 2018, the Alzheimer’s Association launched telementoring programs focused on dementia care using the Project ECHO (Extension for Community Healthcare Outcomes) model. Researchers originally developed Project ECHO at the University of New Mexico in 2003 to teach primary care clinicians in remote settings how to treat patients infected with the hepatitis C virus.

With the Alzheimer’s and Dementia Care ECHO Program for Clinicians, primary care clinicians can participate in interactive case-based video conferencing sessions to better understand dementia and how to provide high-quality care in community settings, according to the association.

The program covers guidelines for diagnosis, disclosure, and follow-up; the initiation of care planning; managing disease-related challenges; and resources for patients and caregivers.

Since 2018, nearly 100 primary care practices in the United States have completed training in dementia care using Project ECHO, said Morgan Daven, vice president of health systems for the Alzheimer’s Association. Many cases featured in the program are challenging, he added.

“With primary care being on the front lines, it is really important that primary care physicians are equipped to do what they can to detect or diagnose and know when to refer,” Mr. Daven said.

The association has compiled other resources for clinicians as well.

A 2020 report from the association examined the role that primary care physicians play in dementia care. One survey found that 82% of primary care physicians consider themselves on the front lines of providing care for patients with dementia.

Meanwhile, about half say medical professionals are not prepared to meet rising demands associated with Alzheimer’s disease and dementia care.

Mr. Daven said the geographic disparities Dr. Xu and colleagues found are unsurprising. More than half of primary care physicians who care for people with Alzheimer’s disease say dementia specialists in their communities cannot meet demand. The problem is more urgent in rural areas. Roughly half of nonmetropolitan counties in the United States lack a practicing psychologist, according to a 2018 study published in the American Journal of Preventive Medicine.

“We really need to approach this on both sides – build the capacity in primary care, but we also need to address the dementia care specialty shortages,” Mr. Daven said.

The lack of obvious differences in access to neurologists in the new study “was surprising, given the more than fourfold difference between urban and rural areas in the supply of neurologists,” the researchers note. Health plans may maintain more access to neurologists than psychologists because of relatively higher reimbursement for neurologists, they observed.

One of the study coauthors disclosed ties to Aveanna Healthcare, a company that delivers home health and hospice care.

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

Taking ‘not enough hours in the day’ to new heights

It’s no secret that there’s a big doctor shortage in the United States. Going through medical school is long, expensive, and stressful, and it’s not like those long, stressful hours stop once you finally do get that degree. There is, however, an excellent reason to take that dive into doctorhood: You’ll gain mastery over time itself.

A study from the University of Chicago, Johns Hopkins University, and Imperial College London has revealed the truth. By using data pulled from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, the researchers found that primary care physicians who see an average number of patients and follow all the current national guidelines for preventive care, chronic disease care, and acute care – plus administrative tasks – must work 26.7 hours a day. That works out to 14.1 hours of preventive care, 7.2 hours of chronic disease care, 2.2 hours of acute care, and 3.2 hours of documentation and inbox management.

liseykina/thinkstockphotos

Astute readers may note that this is a bit more than the traditional 8-hour workday. It is, in fact, more hours than there actually are in a day. As it turns out, Doctor Strange is more of a documentary than …

Hang on, we’re receiving word that doctors are not in fact wizards who can bend time and space to their will, nor are they sitting on a stash of Time-Turners they saved from the Ministry of Magic before Voldemort destroyed them all. They are, according to the study, overworked and overburdened with too many things and too little time. This is why outcomes haven’t improved despite technological advances and why burnout is so common. We’d be burned out too, having to work temporally impossible hours.

The study authors suggested a team-based approach to medicine that would spread the workload out to nurses, physician assistants, dietitians, etc., estimating that about two-thirds of what a primary care physician does can be handled by someone else. A team-based approach would reduce the physician’s required hours down to 9.3 hours a day, which is at least physically possible. It’s either that or we make the day longer, which sounds like the plot of an episode of Futurama. Swap overwork for global warming and a longer day for a longer year and it is actually the plot of an episode of Futurama.
 

After a hard day of thinking, brains need their rest

Do you ever feel like you have no more capacity to think or make any more decisions after a long day at work? Do you need a few extra cups of coffee to even make it through the day, even though you’re mostly just sitting around talking and typing? Have we got the research for you: Mental exhaustion is an actual thing. Imagine that double whammy of having a job that’s physically and mentally demanding.

A recent study in Current Biology explained why we feel so exhausted after doing something mentally demanding for several hours. Over that time, glutamate builds up in synapses of the prefrontal cortex, which affects our decision making and leads to cognitive lethargy. Your brain eventually becomes more interested in tasks that are less mentally fatiguing, and that’s probably why you’re reading this LOTME right now instead of getting back to work.

“Our findings show that cognitive work results in a true functional alteration – accumulation of noxious substances – so fatigue would indeed be a signal that makes us stop working but for a different purpose: to preserve the integrity of brain functioning,” senior author Mathias Pessiglione of Pitié-Salpêtrière University, Paris, said in a written statement.

©thinkstockphotos.com

The group of researchers conducted studies by using magnetic resonance spectroscopy to look at two groups of people over the course of a workday: One group had mentally tasking jobs and one didn’t. Those who had to think harder for their jobs had more signs of fatigue, such as reduced pupil dilation and glutamate in synapses of the prefrontal cortex. They also looked for more rewards that required less thinking.

For those whose mentally exhausting jobs probably won’t get better or change, the researchers suggest getting as much rest as possible. Those who don’t have that option will have to continue drinking those 7 cups of coffee a day. ... and reading LOTME.

Hmm, might be a new tagline for us in there somewhere. LOTME: Tired brains love us? When you’re too tired to think, think of LOTME? You can’t spell mental exhaustion without L-O-T-M-E?
 

Testosterone shows its warm and fuzzy side

Stereotypically, men are loud, knuckle-dragging Neanderthals. The hair coming out of our faces is kind of a dead giveaway, right? We grunt, we scratch, we start wars, we watch sports on TV. But why? It’s the testosterone. Everyone knows that. Testosterone makes men aggressive … or does it?

Since this sort of research generally isn’t done with actual men, investigators at Emory University used Mongolian gerbils. The advantage being that males exhibit cuddling behavior after females become pregnant and they don’t watch a lot of sports on TV. They introduced a male and female gerbil, who then formed a pair bond and the female became pregnant. When the male started displaying cuddling behaviors, the researchers injected him with testosterone, expecting to see his antisocial side.

“Instead, we were surprised that a male gerbil became even more cuddly and prosocial with his partner. He became like ‘super partner,’ ” lead author Aubrey Kelly, PhD, said in a written statement from the university.

Aubrey Kelly

For the next experiment, the female was removed and another male was introduced to a male who had already received a testosterone injection. That male was surprisingly unaggressive toward the intruder, at least initially. Then he received a second injection of testosterone. “It was like they suddenly woke up and realized they weren’t supposed to be friendly in that context,” Dr. Kelly said.

The testosterone seemed to influence the activity of oxytocin, the so-called “love hormone,” the investigators suggested. “It’s surprising because normally we think of testosterone as increasing sexual behaviors and aggression. But we’ve shown that it can have more nuanced effects, depending on the social context.”

The researchers were not as surprised when their use of the phrase “super partner” led to a bidding war between DC and Marvel. Then came the contact from the Department of Defense, wondering about weaponized testosterone: Would it be possible for some sort of bomb to turn Vlad “the Impaler” Putin into Vlad “the Cuddler” Putin?
 

Are instruments spreading the sounds of COVID?

COVID restrictions are practically a thing of the past now. With more people laxed on being in close proximity to each other and the CDC not even recommending social distancing anymore, live concerts and events are back in full swing. But with new variants on the rise and people being a little more cautious, should we be worried about musical instruments spreading COVID?

Yes and no.

A study published in Physics of Fluids looked at wind instruments specifically and how much aerosol is produced and dispersed when playing them. For the study, the investigators measured fog particles with a laser and aerosol concentration with a particle counter to see how fast these particles decay in the air from the distance of the instrument.

PxHere

Musicians in an orchestra typically would sit close together to produce the best sound, but with COVID that became an issue, senior author Paulo Arratia of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, noted in a separate written statement. By looking at the distance traveled by the particles coming from a single instrument and how quickly they decayed, they could determine if sitting in close proximity is an actual threat.

Well, the threat was no greater than talking to someone face to face. Particle exit speeds were lower than for a cough or a sneeze, and the maximum decay length was 2 meters from the instrument’s opening.

But that’s just one instrument: What kind of impact does a whole orchestra have on a space? The researchers are looking into that too, but for now they suggest that musicians continue to stay 6 feet away from each other.

So, yeah, there is a threat, but it’s probably safer for you to see that orchestra than have someone sneeze on you.

Music to our ears.

Taking ‘not enough hours in the day’ to new heights

It’s no secret that there’s a big doctor shortage in the United States. Going through medical school is long, expensive, and stressful, and it’s not like those long, stressful hours stop once you finally do get that degree. There is, however, an excellent reason to take that dive into doctorhood: You’ll gain mastery over time itself.

A study from the University of Chicago, Johns Hopkins University, and Imperial College London has revealed the truth. By using data pulled from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, the researchers found that primary care physicians who see an average number of patients and follow all the current national guidelines for preventive care, chronic disease care, and acute care – plus administrative tasks – must work 26.7 hours a day. That works out to 14.1 hours of preventive care, 7.2 hours of chronic disease care, 2.2 hours of acute care, and 3.2 hours of documentation and inbox management.

liseykina/thinkstockphotos

Astute readers may note that this is a bit more than the traditional 8-hour workday. It is, in fact, more hours than there actually are in a day. As it turns out, Doctor Strange is more of a documentary than …

Hang on, we’re receiving word that doctors are not in fact wizards who can bend time and space to their will, nor are they sitting on a stash of Time-Turners they saved from the Ministry of Magic before Voldemort destroyed them all. They are, according to the study, overworked and overburdened with too many things and too little time. This is why outcomes haven’t improved despite technological advances and why burnout is so common. We’d be burned out too, having to work temporally impossible hours.

The study authors suggested a team-based approach to medicine that would spread the workload out to nurses, physician assistants, dietitians, etc., estimating that about two-thirds of what a primary care physician does can be handled by someone else. A team-based approach would reduce the physician’s required hours down to 9.3 hours a day, which is at least physically possible. It’s either that or we make the day longer, which sounds like the plot of an episode of Futurama. Swap overwork for global warming and a longer day for a longer year and it is actually the plot of an episode of Futurama.
 

After a hard day of thinking, brains need their rest

Do you ever feel like you have no more capacity to think or make any more decisions after a long day at work? Do you need a few extra cups of coffee to even make it through the day, even though you’re mostly just sitting around talking and typing? Have we got the research for you: Mental exhaustion is an actual thing. Imagine that double whammy of having a job that’s physically and mentally demanding.

A recent study in Current Biology explained why we feel so exhausted after doing something mentally demanding for several hours. Over that time, glutamate builds up in synapses of the prefrontal cortex, which affects our decision making and leads to cognitive lethargy. Your brain eventually becomes more interested in tasks that are less mentally fatiguing, and that’s probably why you’re reading this LOTME right now instead of getting back to work.

“Our findings show that cognitive work results in a true functional alteration – accumulation of noxious substances – so fatigue would indeed be a signal that makes us stop working but for a different purpose: to preserve the integrity of brain functioning,” senior author Mathias Pessiglione of Pitié-Salpêtrière University, Paris, said in a written statement.

©thinkstockphotos.com

The group of researchers conducted studies by using magnetic resonance spectroscopy to look at two groups of people over the course of a workday: One group had mentally tasking jobs and one didn’t. Those who had to think harder for their jobs had more signs of fatigue, such as reduced pupil dilation and glutamate in synapses of the prefrontal cortex. They also looked for more rewards that required less thinking.

For those whose mentally exhausting jobs probably won’t get better or change, the researchers suggest getting as much rest as possible. Those who don’t have that option will have to continue drinking those 7 cups of coffee a day. ... and reading LOTME.

Hmm, might be a new tagline for us in there somewhere. LOTME: Tired brains love us? When you’re too tired to think, think of LOTME? You can’t spell mental exhaustion without L-O-T-M-E?
 

Testosterone shows its warm and fuzzy side

Stereotypically, men are loud, knuckle-dragging Neanderthals. The hair coming out of our faces is kind of a dead giveaway, right? We grunt, we scratch, we start wars, we watch sports on TV. But why? It’s the testosterone. Everyone knows that. Testosterone makes men aggressive … or does it?

Since this sort of research generally isn’t done with actual men, investigators at Emory University used Mongolian gerbils. The advantage being that males exhibit cuddling behavior after females become pregnant and they don’t watch a lot of sports on TV. They introduced a male and female gerbil, who then formed a pair bond and the female became pregnant. When the male started displaying cuddling behaviors, the researchers injected him with testosterone, expecting to see his antisocial side.

“Instead, we were surprised that a male gerbil became even more cuddly and prosocial with his partner. He became like ‘super partner,’ ” lead author Aubrey Kelly, PhD, said in a written statement from the university.

Aubrey Kelly

For the next experiment, the female was removed and another male was introduced to a male who had already received a testosterone injection. That male was surprisingly unaggressive toward the intruder, at least initially. Then he received a second injection of testosterone. “It was like they suddenly woke up and realized they weren’t supposed to be friendly in that context,” Dr. Kelly said.

The testosterone seemed to influence the activity of oxytocin, the so-called “love hormone,” the investigators suggested. “It’s surprising because normally we think of testosterone as increasing sexual behaviors and aggression. But we’ve shown that it can have more nuanced effects, depending on the social context.”

The researchers were not as surprised when their use of the phrase “super partner” led to a bidding war between DC and Marvel. Then came the contact from the Department of Defense, wondering about weaponized testosterone: Would it be possible for some sort of bomb to turn Vlad “the Impaler” Putin into Vlad “the Cuddler” Putin?
 

Are instruments spreading the sounds of COVID?

COVID restrictions are practically a thing of the past now. With more people laxed on being in close proximity to each other and the CDC not even recommending social distancing anymore, live concerts and events are back in full swing. But with new variants on the rise and people being a little more cautious, should we be worried about musical instruments spreading COVID?

Yes and no.

A study published in Physics of Fluids looked at wind instruments specifically and how much aerosol is produced and dispersed when playing them. For the study, the investigators measured fog particles with a laser and aerosol concentration with a particle counter to see how fast these particles decay in the air from the distance of the instrument.

PxHere

Musicians in an orchestra typically would sit close together to produce the best sound, but with COVID that became an issue, senior author Paulo Arratia of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, noted in a separate written statement. By looking at the distance traveled by the particles coming from a single instrument and how quickly they decayed, they could determine if sitting in close proximity is an actual threat.

Well, the threat was no greater than talking to someone face to face. Particle exit speeds were lower than for a cough or a sneeze, and the maximum decay length was 2 meters from the instrument’s opening.

But that’s just one instrument: What kind of impact does a whole orchestra have on a space? The researchers are looking into that too, but for now they suggest that musicians continue to stay 6 feet away from each other.

So, yeah, there is a threat, but it’s probably safer for you to see that orchestra than have someone sneeze on you.

Music to our ears.

Taking ‘not enough hours in the day’ to new heights

It’s no secret that there’s a big doctor shortage in the United States. Going through medical school is long, expensive, and stressful, and it’s not like those long, stressful hours stop once you finally do get that degree. There is, however, an excellent reason to take that dive into doctorhood: You’ll gain mastery over time itself.

A study from the University of Chicago, Johns Hopkins University, and Imperial College London has revealed the truth. By using data pulled from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, the researchers found that primary care physicians who see an average number of patients and follow all the current national guidelines for preventive care, chronic disease care, and acute care – plus administrative tasks – must work 26.7 hours a day. That works out to 14.1 hours of preventive care, 7.2 hours of chronic disease care, 2.2 hours of acute care, and 3.2 hours of documentation and inbox management.

liseykina/thinkstockphotos

Astute readers may note that this is a bit more than the traditional 8-hour workday. It is, in fact, more hours than there actually are in a day. As it turns out, Doctor Strange is more of a documentary than …

Hang on, we’re receiving word that doctors are not in fact wizards who can bend time and space to their will, nor are they sitting on a stash of Time-Turners they saved from the Ministry of Magic before Voldemort destroyed them all. They are, according to the study, overworked and overburdened with too many things and too little time. This is why outcomes haven’t improved despite technological advances and why burnout is so common. We’d be burned out too, having to work temporally impossible hours.

The study authors suggested a team-based approach to medicine that would spread the workload out to nurses, physician assistants, dietitians, etc., estimating that about two-thirds of what a primary care physician does can be handled by someone else. A team-based approach would reduce the physician’s required hours down to 9.3 hours a day, which is at least physically possible. It’s either that or we make the day longer, which sounds like the plot of an episode of Futurama. Swap overwork for global warming and a longer day for a longer year and it is actually the plot of an episode of Futurama.
 

After a hard day of thinking, brains need their rest

Do you ever feel like you have no more capacity to think or make any more decisions after a long day at work? Do you need a few extra cups of coffee to even make it through the day, even though you’re mostly just sitting around talking and typing? Have we got the research for you: Mental exhaustion is an actual thing. Imagine that double whammy of having a job that’s physically and mentally demanding.

A recent study in Current Biology explained why we feel so exhausted after doing something mentally demanding for several hours. Over that time, glutamate builds up in synapses of the prefrontal cortex, which affects our decision making and leads to cognitive lethargy. Your brain eventually becomes more interested in tasks that are less mentally fatiguing, and that’s probably why you’re reading this LOTME right now instead of getting back to work.

“Our findings show that cognitive work results in a true functional alteration – accumulation of noxious substances – so fatigue would indeed be a signal that makes us stop working but for a different purpose: to preserve the integrity of brain functioning,” senior author Mathias Pessiglione of Pitié-Salpêtrière University, Paris, said in a written statement.

©thinkstockphotos.com

The group of researchers conducted studies by using magnetic resonance spectroscopy to look at two groups of people over the course of a workday: One group had mentally tasking jobs and one didn’t. Those who had to think harder for their jobs had more signs of fatigue, such as reduced pupil dilation and glutamate in synapses of the prefrontal cortex. They also looked for more rewards that required less thinking.

For those whose mentally exhausting jobs probably won’t get better or change, the researchers suggest getting as much rest as possible. Those who don’t have that option will have to continue drinking those 7 cups of coffee a day. ... and reading LOTME.

Hmm, might be a new tagline for us in there somewhere. LOTME: Tired brains love us? When you’re too tired to think, think of LOTME? You can’t spell mental exhaustion without L-O-T-M-E?
 

Testosterone shows its warm and fuzzy side

Stereotypically, men are loud, knuckle-dragging Neanderthals. The hair coming out of our faces is kind of a dead giveaway, right? We grunt, we scratch, we start wars, we watch sports on TV. But why? It’s the testosterone. Everyone knows that. Testosterone makes men aggressive … or does it?

Since this sort of research generally isn’t done with actual men, investigators at Emory University used Mongolian gerbils. The advantage being that males exhibit cuddling behavior after females become pregnant and they don’t watch a lot of sports on TV. They introduced a male and female gerbil, who then formed a pair bond and the female became pregnant. When the male started displaying cuddling behaviors, the researchers injected him with testosterone, expecting to see his antisocial side.

“Instead, we were surprised that a male gerbil became even more cuddly and prosocial with his partner. He became like ‘super partner,’ ” lead author Aubrey Kelly, PhD, said in a written statement from the university.

Aubrey Kelly

For the next experiment, the female was removed and another male was introduced to a male who had already received a testosterone injection. That male was surprisingly unaggressive toward the intruder, at least initially. Then he received a second injection of testosterone. “It was like they suddenly woke up and realized they weren’t supposed to be friendly in that context,” Dr. Kelly said.

The testosterone seemed to influence the activity of oxytocin, the so-called “love hormone,” the investigators suggested. “It’s surprising because normally we think of testosterone as increasing sexual behaviors and aggression. But we’ve shown that it can have more nuanced effects, depending on the social context.”

The researchers were not as surprised when their use of the phrase “super partner” led to a bidding war between DC and Marvel. Then came the contact from the Department of Defense, wondering about weaponized testosterone: Would it be possible for some sort of bomb to turn Vlad “the Impaler” Putin into Vlad “the Cuddler” Putin?
 

Are instruments spreading the sounds of COVID?

COVID restrictions are practically a thing of the past now. With more people laxed on being in close proximity to each other and the CDC not even recommending social distancing anymore, live concerts and events are back in full swing. But with new variants on the rise and people being a little more cautious, should we be worried about musical instruments spreading COVID?

Yes and no.

A study published in Physics of Fluids looked at wind instruments specifically and how much aerosol is produced and dispersed when playing them. For the study, the investigators measured fog particles with a laser and aerosol concentration with a particle counter to see how fast these particles decay in the air from the distance of the instrument.

PxHere

Musicians in an orchestra typically would sit close together to produce the best sound, but with COVID that became an issue, senior author Paulo Arratia of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, noted in a separate written statement. By looking at the distance traveled by the particles coming from a single instrument and how quickly they decayed, they could determine if sitting in close proximity is an actual threat.

Well, the threat was no greater than talking to someone face to face. Particle exit speeds were lower than for a cough or a sneeze, and the maximum decay length was 2 meters from the instrument’s opening.

But that’s just one instrument: What kind of impact does a whole orchestra have on a space? The researchers are looking into that too, but for now they suggest that musicians continue to stay 6 feet away from each other.

So, yeah, there is a threat, but it’s probably safer for you to see that orchestra than have someone sneeze on you.

Music to our ears.

Varicella zoster virus (VZV) infection may activate dormant herpes simplex virus (HSV-1), leading to neuroinflammation and accumulation of Alzheimer’s disease (AD)–related proteins in the brain, new research suggests.

“Our results suggest one pathway to Alzheimer’s disease, caused by a VZV infection which creates inflammatory triggers that awaken HSV in the brain,” lead author Dana Cairns, PhD, research associate, department of biomedical engineering at Tufts University, Boston, said in a news release.

The findings were published online  in Journal of Alzheimer’s Disease.
 

‘One-two punch’

Previous research has suggested a correlation between HSV-1 and AD and involvement of VZV. However, the sequence of events that the viruses create to set the disease in motion has been unclear.

“We think we now have evidence of those events,” co–senior author David Kaplan, PhD, chair of the department of biomedical engineering at Tufts, said in the release.

Working with co–senior author Ruth Itzhaki, PhD, University of Oxford, United Kingdom, the researchers infected human-induced neural stem cells (hiNSCs) and 3D brain tissue models with HSV-1 and/or VZV. Dr. Itzhaki was one of the first to hypothesize a connection between herpes virus and AD.

The investigators found that HSV-1 infection of hiNSCs induces amyloid-beta and P-tau accumulation: the main components of AD plaques and neurofibrillary tangles, respectively.

On the other hand, VZV infection of cultured hiNSCs did not lead to amyloid-beta and P-tau accumulation but instead resulted in gliosis and increased levels of proinflammatory cytokines.

“Strikingly,” VZV infection of cells quiescently infected with HSV-1 caused reactivation of HSV-1, leading to AD-like changes, including amyloid-beta and P-tau accumulation, the investigators report.

This suggests that VZV is unlikely to be a direct cause of AD but rather acts indirectly via reactivation of HSV-1, they add.

Similar findings emerged in similar experiments using 3D human brain tissue models.

“It’s a one-two punch of two viruses that are very common and usually harmless, but the lab studies suggest that if a new exposure to VZV wakes up dormant HSV-1, they could cause trouble,” Dr. Cairns said.

The researchers note that vaccination against VZV has been shown previously to reduce risk for dementia. It is possible, they add, that the vaccine is helping to stop the cycle of viral reactivation, inflammation, and neuronal damage.
 

‘A first step’

Heather M. Snyder, PhD, vice president of Medical & Scientific Relations at the Alzheimer’s Association, said that the study “is using artificial systems with the goal of more clearly and more deeply understanding” the assessed associations.

She added that although it is a first step, it may provide valuable direction for follow-up research.

“This is preliminary work that first needs replication, validation, and further development to understand if any association that is uncovered between viruses and Alzheimer’s/dementia has a mechanistic link,” said Dr. Snyder.

She noted that several past studies have sought to help the research field better understand the links between different viruses and Alzheimer’s and other forms of dementia.

“There have been some challenges in evaluating these associations in our current model systems or in individuals for a number of reasons,” said Dr. Snyder.

However, “the COVID-19 pandemic has created an opportunity to examine and investigate the relationships between different viruses and Alzheimer’s and other dementias by following individuals in more common and well-established ways,” she added.

She reported that her organization is “leading and working with a large global network of studies and investigators to address some of these questions” from during and after the COVID pandemic.

“The lessons we learn and share may inform our understanding of how other viruses are, or are not, connected to Alzheimer’s and other dementia,” Dr. Snyder said.

More information on the Alzheimer’s Association International Cohort Study of Chronic Neurological Sequelae of SARS-CoV-2 is available online.

The study was funded by the National Institutes of Health. Dr. Cairns, Dr. Kaplan, Dr. Itzhaki, and Dr. Snyder have reported no relevant financial relationships.

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

Varicella zoster virus (VZV) infection may activate dormant herpes simplex virus (HSV-1), leading to neuroinflammation and accumulation of Alzheimer’s disease (AD)–related proteins in the brain, new research suggests.

“Our results suggest one pathway to Alzheimer’s disease, caused by a VZV infection which creates inflammatory triggers that awaken HSV in the brain,” lead author Dana Cairns, PhD, research associate, department of biomedical engineering at Tufts University, Boston, said in a news release.

The findings were published online  in Journal of Alzheimer’s Disease.
 

‘One-two punch’

Previous research has suggested a correlation between HSV-1 and AD and involvement of VZV. However, the sequence of events that the viruses create to set the disease in motion has been unclear.

“We think we now have evidence of those events,” co–senior author David Kaplan, PhD, chair of the department of biomedical engineering at Tufts, said in the release.

Working with co–senior author Ruth Itzhaki, PhD, University of Oxford, United Kingdom, the researchers infected human-induced neural stem cells (hiNSCs) and 3D brain tissue models with HSV-1 and/or VZV. Dr. Itzhaki was one of the first to hypothesize a connection between herpes virus and AD.

The investigators found that HSV-1 infection of hiNSCs induces amyloid-beta and P-tau accumulation: the main components of AD plaques and neurofibrillary tangles, respectively.

On the other hand, VZV infection of cultured hiNSCs did not lead to amyloid-beta and P-tau accumulation but instead resulted in gliosis and increased levels of proinflammatory cytokines.

“Strikingly,” VZV infection of cells quiescently infected with HSV-1 caused reactivation of HSV-1, leading to AD-like changes, including amyloid-beta and P-tau accumulation, the investigators report.

This suggests that VZV is unlikely to be a direct cause of AD but rather acts indirectly via reactivation of HSV-1, they add.

Similar findings emerged in similar experiments using 3D human brain tissue models.

“It’s a one-two punch of two viruses that are very common and usually harmless, but the lab studies suggest that if a new exposure to VZV wakes up dormant HSV-1, they could cause trouble,” Dr. Cairns said.

The researchers note that vaccination against VZV has been shown previously to reduce risk for dementia. It is possible, they add, that the vaccine is helping to stop the cycle of viral reactivation, inflammation, and neuronal damage.
 

‘A first step’

Heather M. Snyder, PhD, vice president of Medical & Scientific Relations at the Alzheimer’s Association, said that the study “is using artificial systems with the goal of more clearly and more deeply understanding” the assessed associations.

She added that although it is a first step, it may provide valuable direction for follow-up research.

“This is preliminary work that first needs replication, validation, and further development to understand if any association that is uncovered between viruses and Alzheimer’s/dementia has a mechanistic link,” said Dr. Snyder.

She noted that several past studies have sought to help the research field better understand the links between different viruses and Alzheimer’s and other forms of dementia.

“There have been some challenges in evaluating these associations in our current model systems or in individuals for a number of reasons,” said Dr. Snyder.

However, “the COVID-19 pandemic has created an opportunity to examine and investigate the relationships between different viruses and Alzheimer’s and other dementias by following individuals in more common and well-established ways,” she added.

She reported that her organization is “leading and working with a large global network of studies and investigators to address some of these questions” from during and after the COVID pandemic.

“The lessons we learn and share may inform our understanding of how other viruses are, or are not, connected to Alzheimer’s and other dementia,” Dr. Snyder said.

More information on the Alzheimer’s Association International Cohort Study of Chronic Neurological Sequelae of SARS-CoV-2 is available online.

The study was funded by the National Institutes of Health. Dr. Cairns, Dr. Kaplan, Dr. Itzhaki, and Dr. Snyder have reported no relevant financial relationships.

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

Varicella zoster virus (VZV) infection may activate dormant herpes simplex virus (HSV-1), leading to neuroinflammation and accumulation of Alzheimer’s disease (AD)–related proteins in the brain, new research suggests.

“Our results suggest one pathway to Alzheimer’s disease, caused by a VZV infection which creates inflammatory triggers that awaken HSV in the brain,” lead author Dana Cairns, PhD, research associate, department of biomedical engineering at Tufts University, Boston, said in a news release.

The findings were published online  in Journal of Alzheimer’s Disease.
 

‘One-two punch’

Previous research has suggested a correlation between HSV-1 and AD and involvement of VZV. However, the sequence of events that the viruses create to set the disease in motion has been unclear.

“We think we now have evidence of those events,” co–senior author David Kaplan, PhD, chair of the department of biomedical engineering at Tufts, said in the release.

Working with co–senior author Ruth Itzhaki, PhD, University of Oxford, United Kingdom, the researchers infected human-induced neural stem cells (hiNSCs) and 3D brain tissue models with HSV-1 and/or VZV. Dr. Itzhaki was one of the first to hypothesize a connection between herpes virus and AD.

The investigators found that HSV-1 infection of hiNSCs induces amyloid-beta and P-tau accumulation: the main components of AD plaques and neurofibrillary tangles, respectively.

On the other hand, VZV infection of cultured hiNSCs did not lead to amyloid-beta and P-tau accumulation but instead resulted in gliosis and increased levels of proinflammatory cytokines.

“Strikingly,” VZV infection of cells quiescently infected with HSV-1 caused reactivation of HSV-1, leading to AD-like changes, including amyloid-beta and P-tau accumulation, the investigators report.

This suggests that VZV is unlikely to be a direct cause of AD but rather acts indirectly via reactivation of HSV-1, they add.

Similar findings emerged in similar experiments using 3D human brain tissue models.

“It’s a one-two punch of two viruses that are very common and usually harmless, but the lab studies suggest that if a new exposure to VZV wakes up dormant HSV-1, they could cause trouble,” Dr. Cairns said.

The researchers note that vaccination against VZV has been shown previously to reduce risk for dementia. It is possible, they add, that the vaccine is helping to stop the cycle of viral reactivation, inflammation, and neuronal damage.
 

‘A first step’

Heather M. Snyder, PhD, vice president of Medical & Scientific Relations at the Alzheimer’s Association, said that the study “is using artificial systems with the goal of more clearly and more deeply understanding” the assessed associations.

She added that although it is a first step, it may provide valuable direction for follow-up research.

“This is preliminary work that first needs replication, validation, and further development to understand if any association that is uncovered between viruses and Alzheimer’s/dementia has a mechanistic link,” said Dr. Snyder.

She noted that several past studies have sought to help the research field better understand the links between different viruses and Alzheimer’s and other forms of dementia.

“There have been some challenges in evaluating these associations in our current model systems or in individuals for a number of reasons,” said Dr. Snyder.

However, “the COVID-19 pandemic has created an opportunity to examine and investigate the relationships between different viruses and Alzheimer’s and other dementias by following individuals in more common and well-established ways,” she added.

She reported that her organization is “leading and working with a large global network of studies and investigators to address some of these questions” from during and after the COVID pandemic.

“The lessons we learn and share may inform our understanding of how other viruses are, or are not, connected to Alzheimer’s and other dementia,” Dr. Snyder said.

More information on the Alzheimer’s Association International Cohort Study of Chronic Neurological Sequelae of SARS-CoV-2 is available online.

The study was funded by the National Institutes of Health. Dr. Cairns, Dr. Kaplan, Dr. Itzhaki, and Dr. Snyder have reported no relevant financial relationships.

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

The transcript has been edited for clarity.

Welcome to Impact Factor, your weekly dose of commentary on a new medical study. I’m Dr. F. Perry Wilson of the Yale School of Medicine.

Once again, we’re doing an informal journal club to talk about a really interesting study, “A Neuro-metabolic Account of Why Daylong Cognitive Work Alters the Control of Economic Decisions,” that just came out. It tries to answer the question of why our brains wear out. I’m going to put myself in the corner here. Let’s walk through this study, which appears in Current Biology, by lead author Antonius Wiehler from Paris.

The big question is what’s going on with cognitive fatigue. If you look at chess players who are exerting a lot of cognitive effort, it’s well documented that over hours of play, they get worse and make more mistakes. It takes them longer to make decisions. The question is, why?

Why does your brain get tired?

To date, it’s been a little bit hard to tease that out. Now, there is some suggestion of what is responsible for this. The cognitive control center of the brain is probably somewhere in the left lateral prefrontal cortex (LLPC).

The prefrontal cortex is responsible for higher-level thinking. It’s what causes you to be inhibited. It gets shut off by alcohol and leads to impulsive behaviors. The LLPC, according to functional MRI studies, has reduced activity as people become more and more cognitively fatigued. The LLPC helps you think through choices. As you become more fatigued, this area of the brain isn’t working as well. But why would it not work as well? What is going on in that particular part of the brain? It doesn’t seem to be something simple, like glucose levels; that’s been investigated and glucose levels are pretty constant throughout the brain, regardless of cognitive task. This paper seeks to tease out what is actually going on in the LLPC when you are becoming cognitively tired.

They did an experiment where they induced cognitive fatigue, and it sounds like a painful experiment. For more than 6 hours, volunteers completed sessions during which they had to perform cognitive switching tasks. Investigators showed participants a letter, in either red or green, and the participant would respond with whether it was a vowel or a consonant or whether it was a capital or lowercase letter, based on the color. If it’s red, say whether it’s a consonant or vowel. If it’s green, say whether it’s upper- or lowercase.

It’s hard, and doing it for 6 hours is likely to induce a lot of cognitive fatigue. They had a control group as well, which is really important here. The control group also did a task like this for 6 hours, but for them, investigators didn’t change the color as often – perhaps only once per session. For the study group, they were switching colors back and forth quite a lot. They also incorporated a memory challenge that worked in a similar way.

So, what are the readouts of this study? They had a group who went through the hard cognitive challenge and a group who went through the easy cognitive challenge. They looked at a variety of metrics. I’ll describe a few.

The first is performance decrement. Did they get it wrong? What percentage of the time did the participant say “consonant” when they should have said “lowercase?”

• Have a 25% chance of earning $50 OR a 95% chance of earning $17.30?
• Earn $50, but your next task session will be hard or earn $40 and your next task session will be easy?

Participants had to figure out the better odds – what should they be choosing here? They had to tease out whether they preferred lower cost lower-risk choices – when they are cognitively fatigued, which has been shown in prior studies.

Dr. Wilson is an associate professor of medicine and director of the Clinical and Translational Research Accelerator at Yale University, New Haven, Conn. He reported no relevant conflicts of interest.

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

The transcript has been edited for clarity.

Welcome to Impact Factor, your weekly dose of commentary on a new medical study. I’m Dr. F. Perry Wilson of the Yale School of Medicine.

Once again, we’re doing an informal journal club to talk about a really interesting study, “A Neuro-metabolic Account of Why Daylong Cognitive Work Alters the Control of Economic Decisions,” that just came out. It tries to answer the question of why our brains wear out. I’m going to put myself in the corner here. Let’s walk through this study, which appears in Current Biology, by lead author Antonius Wiehler from Paris.

The big question is what’s going on with cognitive fatigue. If you look at chess players who are exerting a lot of cognitive effort, it’s well documented that over hours of play, they get worse and make more mistakes. It takes them longer to make decisions. The question is, why?

Why does your brain get tired?

To date, it’s been a little bit hard to tease that out. Now, there is some suggestion of what is responsible for this. The cognitive control center of the brain is probably somewhere in the left lateral prefrontal cortex (LLPC).

The prefrontal cortex is responsible for higher-level thinking. It’s what causes you to be inhibited. It gets shut off by alcohol and leads to impulsive behaviors. The LLPC, according to functional MRI studies, has reduced activity as people become more and more cognitively fatigued. The LLPC helps you think through choices. As you become more fatigued, this area of the brain isn’t working as well. But why would it not work as well? What is going on in that particular part of the brain? It doesn’t seem to be something simple, like glucose levels; that’s been investigated and glucose levels are pretty constant throughout the brain, regardless of cognitive task. This paper seeks to tease out what is actually going on in the LLPC when you are becoming cognitively tired.

They did an experiment where they induced cognitive fatigue, and it sounds like a painful experiment. For more than 6 hours, volunteers completed sessions during which they had to perform cognitive switching tasks. Investigators showed participants a letter, in either red or green, and the participant would respond with whether it was a vowel or a consonant or whether it was a capital or lowercase letter, based on the color. If it’s red, say whether it’s a consonant or vowel. If it’s green, say whether it’s upper- or lowercase.

It’s hard, and doing it for 6 hours is likely to induce a lot of cognitive fatigue. They had a control group as well, which is really important here. The control group also did a task like this for 6 hours, but for them, investigators didn’t change the color as often – perhaps only once per session. For the study group, they were switching colors back and forth quite a lot. They also incorporated a memory challenge that worked in a similar way.

So, what are the readouts of this study? They had a group who went through the hard cognitive challenge and a group who went through the easy cognitive challenge. They looked at a variety of metrics. I’ll describe a few.

The first is performance decrement. Did they get it wrong? What percentage of the time did the participant say “consonant” when they should have said “lowercase?”

• Have a 25% chance of earning $50 OR a 95% chance of earning $17.30?
• Earn $50, but your next task session will be hard or earn $40 and your next task session will be easy?

Participants had to figure out the better odds – what should they be choosing here? They had to tease out whether they preferred lower cost lower-risk choices – when they are cognitively fatigued, which has been shown in prior studies.

Dr. Wilson is an associate professor of medicine and director of the Clinical and Translational Research Accelerator at Yale University, New Haven, Conn. He reported no relevant conflicts of interest.

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

The transcript has been edited for clarity.

Welcome to Impact Factor, your weekly dose of commentary on a new medical study. I’m Dr. F. Perry Wilson of the Yale School of Medicine.

Once again, we’re doing an informal journal club to talk about a really interesting study, “A Neuro-metabolic Account of Why Daylong Cognitive Work Alters the Control of Economic Decisions,” that just came out. It tries to answer the question of why our brains wear out. I’m going to put myself in the corner here. Let’s walk through this study, which appears in Current Biology, by lead author Antonius Wiehler from Paris.

The big question is what’s going on with cognitive fatigue. If you look at chess players who are exerting a lot of cognitive effort, it’s well documented that over hours of play, they get worse and make more mistakes. It takes them longer to make decisions. The question is, why?

Why does your brain get tired?

To date, it’s been a little bit hard to tease that out. Now, there is some suggestion of what is responsible for this. The cognitive control center of the brain is probably somewhere in the left lateral prefrontal cortex (LLPC).

The prefrontal cortex is responsible for higher-level thinking. It’s what causes you to be inhibited. It gets shut off by alcohol and leads to impulsive behaviors. The LLPC, according to functional MRI studies, has reduced activity as people become more and more cognitively fatigued. The LLPC helps you think through choices. As you become more fatigued, this area of the brain isn’t working as well. But why would it not work as well? What is going on in that particular part of the brain? It doesn’t seem to be something simple, like glucose levels; that’s been investigated and glucose levels are pretty constant throughout the brain, regardless of cognitive task. This paper seeks to tease out what is actually going on in the LLPC when you are becoming cognitively tired.

They did an experiment where they induced cognitive fatigue, and it sounds like a painful experiment. For more than 6 hours, volunteers completed sessions during which they had to perform cognitive switching tasks. Investigators showed participants a letter, in either red or green, and the participant would respond with whether it was a vowel or a consonant or whether it was a capital or lowercase letter, based on the color. If it’s red, say whether it’s a consonant or vowel. If it’s green, say whether it’s upper- or lowercase.

It’s hard, and doing it for 6 hours is likely to induce a lot of cognitive fatigue. They had a control group as well, which is really important here. The control group also did a task like this for 6 hours, but for them, investigators didn’t change the color as often – perhaps only once per session. For the study group, they were switching colors back and forth quite a lot. They also incorporated a memory challenge that worked in a similar way.

So, what are the readouts of this study? They had a group who went through the hard cognitive challenge and a group who went through the easy cognitive challenge. They looked at a variety of metrics. I’ll describe a few.

The first is performance decrement. Did they get it wrong? What percentage of the time did the participant say “consonant” when they should have said “lowercase?”

• Have a 25% chance of earning $50 OR a 95% chance of earning $17.30?
• Earn $50, but your next task session will be hard or earn $40 and your next task session will be easy?

Participants had to figure out the better odds – what should they be choosing here? They had to tease out whether they preferred lower cost lower-risk choices – when they are cognitively fatigued, which has been shown in prior studies.

Dr. Wilson is an associate professor of medicine and director of the Clinical and Translational Research Accelerator at Yale University, New Haven, Conn. He reported no relevant conflicts of interest.

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

People dealing with hearing loss will be able to buy hearing aids without a doctor’s prescription as soon as mid-October.

The White House announced today that the Food and Drug Administration will move forward with plans to make hearing aids available over the counter in pharmacies, other retail locations, and online.

This major milestone aims to make hearing aids easier to buy and more affordable, potentially saving families thousands of dollars.

An estimated 28.8 million U.S. adults could benefit from using hearing aids, according to numbers from the National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders. But only about 16% of people aged 20-69 years who could be helped by hearing aids have ever used them.

The risk for hearing loss increases with age. Among Americans ages 70 and older, only 30% who could hear better with these devices have ever used them, the institute reports.

Once the FDA final rule takes effect, Americans with mild to moderate hearing loss will be able to buy a hearing aid without a doctor’s exam, prescription, or fitting adjustment.

President Joe Biden announced in 2021 he intended to allow hearing aids to be sold over the counter without a prescription to increase competition among manufacturers. Congress also passed bipartisan legislation in 2017 requiring the FDA to create a new category for hearing aids sold directly to consumers. Some devices intended for minors or people with severe hearing loss will remain available only with a prescription.

“This action makes good on my commitment to lower costs for American families, delivering nearly $3,000 in savings to American families for a pair of hearing aids and giving people more choices to improve their health and wellbeing,” the president said in a statement announcing the news.

The new over-the-counter hearing aids will be considered medical devices. To avoid confusion, the FDA explains the differences between hearing aids and personal sound amplification products (PSAPs). For example, PSAPs are considered electronic devices designed for people with normal hearing to use in certain situations, like birdwatching or hunting.

A version of this article first appeared on WebMD.com.

People dealing with hearing loss will be able to buy hearing aids without a doctor’s prescription as soon as mid-October.

The White House announced today that the Food and Drug Administration will move forward with plans to make hearing aids available over the counter in pharmacies, other retail locations, and online.

This major milestone aims to make hearing aids easier to buy and more affordable, potentially saving families thousands of dollars.

An estimated 28.8 million U.S. adults could benefit from using hearing aids, according to numbers from the National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders. But only about 16% of people aged 20-69 years who could be helped by hearing aids have ever used them.

The risk for hearing loss increases with age. Among Americans ages 70 and older, only 30% who could hear better with these devices have ever used them, the institute reports.

Once the FDA final rule takes effect, Americans with mild to moderate hearing loss will be able to buy a hearing aid without a doctor’s exam, prescription, or fitting adjustment.

President Joe Biden announced in 2021 he intended to allow hearing aids to be sold over the counter without a prescription to increase competition among manufacturers. Congress also passed bipartisan legislation in 2017 requiring the FDA to create a new category for hearing aids sold directly to consumers. Some devices intended for minors or people with severe hearing loss will remain available only with a prescription.

“This action makes good on my commitment to lower costs for American families, delivering nearly $3,000 in savings to American families for a pair of hearing aids and giving people more choices to improve their health and wellbeing,” the president said in a statement announcing the news.

The new over-the-counter hearing aids will be considered medical devices. To avoid confusion, the FDA explains the differences between hearing aids and personal sound amplification products (PSAPs). For example, PSAPs are considered electronic devices designed for people with normal hearing to use in certain situations, like birdwatching or hunting.

A version of this article first appeared on WebMD.com.

People dealing with hearing loss will be able to buy hearing aids without a doctor’s prescription as soon as mid-October.

The White House announced today that the Food and Drug Administration will move forward with plans to make hearing aids available over the counter in pharmacies, other retail locations, and online.

This major milestone aims to make hearing aids easier to buy and more affordable, potentially saving families thousands of dollars.

An estimated 28.8 million U.S. adults could benefit from using hearing aids, according to numbers from the National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders. But only about 16% of people aged 20-69 years who could be helped by hearing aids have ever used them.

The risk for hearing loss increases with age. Among Americans ages 70 and older, only 30% who could hear better with these devices have ever used them, the institute reports.

Once the FDA final rule takes effect, Americans with mild to moderate hearing loss will be able to buy a hearing aid without a doctor’s exam, prescription, or fitting adjustment.

President Joe Biden announced in 2021 he intended to allow hearing aids to be sold over the counter without a prescription to increase competition among manufacturers. Congress also passed bipartisan legislation in 2017 requiring the FDA to create a new category for hearing aids sold directly to consumers. Some devices intended for minors or people with severe hearing loss will remain available only with a prescription.

“This action makes good on my commitment to lower costs for American families, delivering nearly $3,000 in savings to American families for a pair of hearing aids and giving people more choices to improve their health and wellbeing,” the president said in a statement announcing the news.

The new over-the-counter hearing aids will be considered medical devices. To avoid confusion, the FDA explains the differences between hearing aids and personal sound amplification products (PSAPs). For example, PSAPs are considered electronic devices designed for people with normal hearing to use in certain situations, like birdwatching or hunting.

A version of this article first appeared on WebMD.com.

Among children born prematurely, rates of school readiness were lower, compared with rates for children born full term, new data indicate.

In a Canadian cohort study that included more than 60,000 children, 35% of children born prematurely had scores on the Early Development Instrument (EDI) that indicated they were vulnerable to developmental problems, compared with 28% of children born full term.

“Our take-home message is that being born prematurely, even if all was well, is a risk factor for not being ready for school, and these families should be identified early, screened for any difficulties, and offered early intervention,” senior author Chelsea A. Ruth, MD, assistant professor of pediatrics and child health at the University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, told this news organization.

The findings were published online in JAMA Pediatrics.
 

Gestational age gradient

The investigators examined two cohorts of children who were in kindergarten at the time of data collection. One of them, the population-based cohort, included children born between 2000 and 2011 whose school readiness was assessed using the EDI data. Preterm birth was defined as a gestational age (GA) of less than 37 weeks. The other, the sibling cohort, was a subset of the population cohort and included children born prematurely and their closest-in-age siblings who were born full term.

The main outcome was vulnerability in the EDI, which was defined as having a score below the 10th percentile of the Canadian population norms for one or more of the five EDI domains. These domains are physical health and well-being, social competence, emotional maturity, language and cognitive development, and communication skills and general knowledge.

A total of 63,277 children were included in the analyses, of whom 4,352 were born prematurely (mean GA, 34 weeks; 53% boys) and 58,925 were born full term (mean GA, 39 weeks; 51% boys).

After data adjustment, 35% of children born prematurely were vulnerable in the EDI, compared with 28% of those born full term (adjusted odds ratio, 1.32).

The investigators found a clear GA gradient. Children born at earlier GAs (< 28 weeks or 28-33 weeks) were at higher risk of being vulnerable than those born at later GAs (34-36 weeks) in any EDI domain (48% vs. 40%) and in each of the five EDI domains. Earlier GA was associated with greater risk for vulnerability in physical health and well-being (34% vs. 22%) and in the Multiple Challenge Index (25% vs. 17%). It also was associated with greater risk for need for additional support in kindergarten (22% vs. 5%).

Furthermore, 12% of children born at less than 28 weeks’ gestation were vulnerable in two EDI domains, and 8% were vulnerable in three domains. The corresponding proportions were 9% and 7%, respectively, for those born between 28 and 33 weeks and 7% and 5% for those born between 34 and 36 weeks.

“The study confirmed what we see in practice, that being born even a little bit early increases the chance for not being ready for school, and the earlier a child is born, the more likely they are to have troubles,” said Dr. Ruth.
 

Cause or manifestation?

In the population cohort, prematurity (< 34 weeks’ GA: AOR, 1.72; 34-36 weeks’ GA: AOR, 1.23), male sex (AOR, 2.24), small for GA (AOR, 1.31), and various maternal medical and sociodemographic factors were associated with EDI vulnerability.

In the sibling subset, EDI outcomes were similar for children born prematurely and their siblings born full term, except for the communication skills and general knowledge domain (AOR, 1.39) and the Multiple Challenge Index (AOR, 1.43). Male sex (AOR, 2.19) was associated with EDI vulnerability in this cohort as well, as was maternal age at delivery (AOR, 1.53).

“Whether prematurity is a cause or a manifestation of an altered family ecosystem is difficult to ascertain,” Lauren Neel, MD, a neonatologist at Emory University, Atlanta, and colleagues write in an accompanying editorial. “However, research on this topic is much needed, along with novel interventions to change academic trajectories and care models that implement these findings in practice. As we begin to understand the factors in and interventions for promoting resilience in preterm-born children, we may need to change our research question to this: Could we optimize resilience and long-term academic trajectories to include the family as well?”
 

Six crucial years

Commenting on the study, Veronica Bordes Edgar, PhD, associate professor of psychiatry and pediatrics at the University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center’s Peter O’Donnell Jr. Brain Institute, Dallas, said, “None of the findings surprised me, but I was very pleased that they looked at such a broad sample.”

Pediatricians should monitor and screen children for early academic readiness, since these factors are associated with later academic outcomes, Dr. Edgar added. “Early intervention does not stop at age 3, but rather the first 6 years are so crucial to lay the foundation for future success. The pediatrician can play a role in preparing children and families by promoting early reading, such as through Reach Out and Read, encouraging language-rich play, and providing guidance on early childhood education and developmental needs.

“Further examination of long-term outcomes for these children to capture the longitudinal trend would help to document what is often observed clinically, in that children who start off with difficulties do not always catch up once they are in the academic environment,” Dr. Edgar concluded.

The study was supported by Research Manitoba and the Children’s Research Institute of Manitoba. Dr. Ruth, Dr. Neel, and Dr. Edgar have disclosed no relevant financial relationships.

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

Among children born prematurely, rates of school readiness were lower, compared with rates for children born full term, new data indicate.

In a Canadian cohort study that included more than 60,000 children, 35% of children born prematurely had scores on the Early Development Instrument (EDI) that indicated they were vulnerable to developmental problems, compared with 28% of children born full term.

“Our take-home message is that being born prematurely, even if all was well, is a risk factor for not being ready for school, and these families should be identified early, screened for any difficulties, and offered early intervention,” senior author Chelsea A. Ruth, MD, assistant professor of pediatrics and child health at the University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, told this news organization.

The findings were published online in JAMA Pediatrics.
 

Gestational age gradient

The investigators examined two cohorts of children who were in kindergarten at the time of data collection. One of them, the population-based cohort, included children born between 2000 and 2011 whose school readiness was assessed using the EDI data. Preterm birth was defined as a gestational age (GA) of less than 37 weeks. The other, the sibling cohort, was a subset of the population cohort and included children born prematurely and their closest-in-age siblings who were born full term.

The main outcome was vulnerability in the EDI, which was defined as having a score below the 10th percentile of the Canadian population norms for one or more of the five EDI domains. These domains are physical health and well-being, social competence, emotional maturity, language and cognitive development, and communication skills and general knowledge.

A total of 63,277 children were included in the analyses, of whom 4,352 were born prematurely (mean GA, 34 weeks; 53% boys) and 58,925 were born full term (mean GA, 39 weeks; 51% boys).

After data adjustment, 35% of children born prematurely were vulnerable in the EDI, compared with 28% of those born full term (adjusted odds ratio, 1.32).

The investigators found a clear GA gradient. Children born at earlier GAs (< 28 weeks or 28-33 weeks) were at higher risk of being vulnerable than those born at later GAs (34-36 weeks) in any EDI domain (48% vs. 40%) and in each of the five EDI domains. Earlier GA was associated with greater risk for vulnerability in physical health and well-being (34% vs. 22%) and in the Multiple Challenge Index (25% vs. 17%). It also was associated with greater risk for need for additional support in kindergarten (22% vs. 5%).

Furthermore, 12% of children born at less than 28 weeks’ gestation were vulnerable in two EDI domains, and 8% were vulnerable in three domains. The corresponding proportions were 9% and 7%, respectively, for those born between 28 and 33 weeks and 7% and 5% for those born between 34 and 36 weeks.

“The study confirmed what we see in practice, that being born even a little bit early increases the chance for not being ready for school, and the earlier a child is born, the more likely they are to have troubles,” said Dr. Ruth.
 

Cause or manifestation?

In the population cohort, prematurity (< 34 weeks’ GA: AOR, 1.72; 34-36 weeks’ GA: AOR, 1.23), male sex (AOR, 2.24), small for GA (AOR, 1.31), and various maternal medical and sociodemographic factors were associated with EDI vulnerability.

In the sibling subset, EDI outcomes were similar for children born prematurely and their siblings born full term, except for the communication skills and general knowledge domain (AOR, 1.39) and the Multiple Challenge Index (AOR, 1.43). Male sex (AOR, 2.19) was associated with EDI vulnerability in this cohort as well, as was maternal age at delivery (AOR, 1.53).

“Whether prematurity is a cause or a manifestation of an altered family ecosystem is difficult to ascertain,” Lauren Neel, MD, a neonatologist at Emory University, Atlanta, and colleagues write in an accompanying editorial. “However, research on this topic is much needed, along with novel interventions to change academic trajectories and care models that implement these findings in practice. As we begin to understand the factors in and interventions for promoting resilience in preterm-born children, we may need to change our research question to this: Could we optimize resilience and long-term academic trajectories to include the family as well?”
 

Six crucial years

Commenting on the study, Veronica Bordes Edgar, PhD, associate professor of psychiatry and pediatrics at the University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center’s Peter O’Donnell Jr. Brain Institute, Dallas, said, “None of the findings surprised me, but I was very pleased that they looked at such a broad sample.”

Pediatricians should monitor and screen children for early academic readiness, since these factors are associated with later academic outcomes, Dr. Edgar added. “Early intervention does not stop at age 3, but rather the first 6 years are so crucial to lay the foundation for future success. The pediatrician can play a role in preparing children and families by promoting early reading, such as through Reach Out and Read, encouraging language-rich play, and providing guidance on early childhood education and developmental needs.

“Further examination of long-term outcomes for these children to capture the longitudinal trend would help to document what is often observed clinically, in that children who start off with difficulties do not always catch up once they are in the academic environment,” Dr. Edgar concluded.

The study was supported by Research Manitoba and the Children’s Research Institute of Manitoba. Dr. Ruth, Dr. Neel, and Dr. Edgar have disclosed no relevant financial relationships.

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

Among children born prematurely, rates of school readiness were lower, compared with rates for children born full term, new data indicate.

In a Canadian cohort study that included more than 60,000 children, 35% of children born prematurely had scores on the Early Development Instrument (EDI) that indicated they were vulnerable to developmental problems, compared with 28% of children born full term.

“Our take-home message is that being born prematurely, even if all was well, is a risk factor for not being ready for school, and these families should be identified early, screened for any difficulties, and offered early intervention,” senior author Chelsea A. Ruth, MD, assistant professor of pediatrics and child health at the University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, told this news organization.

The findings were published online in JAMA Pediatrics.
 

Gestational age gradient

The investigators examined two cohorts of children who were in kindergarten at the time of data collection. One of them, the population-based cohort, included children born between 2000 and 2011 whose school readiness was assessed using the EDI data. Preterm birth was defined as a gestational age (GA) of less than 37 weeks. The other, the sibling cohort, was a subset of the population cohort and included children born prematurely and their closest-in-age siblings who were born full term.

The main outcome was vulnerability in the EDI, which was defined as having a score below the 10th percentile of the Canadian population norms for one or more of the five EDI domains. These domains are physical health and well-being, social competence, emotional maturity, language and cognitive development, and communication skills and general knowledge.

A total of 63,277 children were included in the analyses, of whom 4,352 were born prematurely (mean GA, 34 weeks; 53% boys) and 58,925 were born full term (mean GA, 39 weeks; 51% boys).

After data adjustment, 35% of children born prematurely were vulnerable in the EDI, compared with 28% of those born full term (adjusted odds ratio, 1.32).

The investigators found a clear GA gradient. Children born at earlier GAs (< 28 weeks or 28-33 weeks) were at higher risk of being vulnerable than those born at later GAs (34-36 weeks) in any EDI domain (48% vs. 40%) and in each of the five EDI domains. Earlier GA was associated with greater risk for vulnerability in physical health and well-being (34% vs. 22%) and in the Multiple Challenge Index (25% vs. 17%). It also was associated with greater risk for need for additional support in kindergarten (22% vs. 5%).

Furthermore, 12% of children born at less than 28 weeks’ gestation were vulnerable in two EDI domains, and 8% were vulnerable in three domains. The corresponding proportions were 9% and 7%, respectively, for those born between 28 and 33 weeks and 7% and 5% for those born between 34 and 36 weeks.

“The study confirmed what we see in practice, that being born even a little bit early increases the chance for not being ready for school, and the earlier a child is born, the more likely they are to have troubles,” said Dr. Ruth.
 

Cause or manifestation?

In the population cohort, prematurity (< 34 weeks’ GA: AOR, 1.72; 34-36 weeks’ GA: AOR, 1.23), male sex (AOR, 2.24), small for GA (AOR, 1.31), and various maternal medical and sociodemographic factors were associated with EDI vulnerability.

In the sibling subset, EDI outcomes were similar for children born prematurely and their siblings born full term, except for the communication skills and general knowledge domain (AOR, 1.39) and the Multiple Challenge Index (AOR, 1.43). Male sex (AOR, 2.19) was associated with EDI vulnerability in this cohort as well, as was maternal age at delivery (AOR, 1.53).

“Whether prematurity is a cause or a manifestation of an altered family ecosystem is difficult to ascertain,” Lauren Neel, MD, a neonatologist at Emory University, Atlanta, and colleagues write in an accompanying editorial. “However, research on this topic is much needed, along with novel interventions to change academic trajectories and care models that implement these findings in practice. As we begin to understand the factors in and interventions for promoting resilience in preterm-born children, we may need to change our research question to this: Could we optimize resilience and long-term academic trajectories to include the family as well?”
 

Six crucial years

Commenting on the study, Veronica Bordes Edgar, PhD, associate professor of psychiatry and pediatrics at the University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center’s Peter O’Donnell Jr. Brain Institute, Dallas, said, “None of the findings surprised me, but I was very pleased that they looked at such a broad sample.”

Pediatricians should monitor and screen children for early academic readiness, since these factors are associated with later academic outcomes, Dr. Edgar added. “Early intervention does not stop at age 3, but rather the first 6 years are so crucial to lay the foundation for future success. The pediatrician can play a role in preparing children and families by promoting early reading, such as through Reach Out and Read, encouraging language-rich play, and providing guidance on early childhood education and developmental needs.

“Further examination of long-term outcomes for these children to capture the longitudinal trend would help to document what is often observed clinically, in that children who start off with difficulties do not always catch up once they are in the academic environment,” Dr. Edgar concluded.

The study was supported by Research Manitoba and the Children’s Research Institute of Manitoba. Dr. Ruth, Dr. Neel, and Dr. Edgar have disclosed no relevant financial relationships.

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

How do a baby’s body and brain respond when their mother sings a lullaby?

Shannon de l’Etoile, PhD, is hoping to find out. Dr. de l’Etoile, professor of music therapy at the University of Miami, began watching interactions between typically functioning mothers and infants, mothers with postpartum depression and their babies, and mothers and infants with Down Syndrome.

The infants she studied became highly attentive to their mothers’ singing and showed “a contented state of arousal,” she said. Mothers, meanwhile, became more engaged with their babies.

To examine the issue more scientifically, Dr. de l’Etoile has launched a study of infant-directed singing, a method connecting babies and mothers through song. With the help of a nearly $20,000 grant from the Grammy Museum – a Los Angeles nonprofit that hosts and funds exhibits and other music programs – Dr. de l’Etoile plans to recruit 20 women whose children attend programming at the Linda Ray Intervention Center at the University of Miami. The early intervention program targets children under age 2 who have disabilities or slower development, or who may have been exposed to drugs in utero. The study will last 1 year, with plans for an extension. 

“By helping the mothers to become more sensitive, we are simultaneously helping infants learn how to regulate, so that by the time they’re in preschool, they can manage their behavior and have a successful, positive experience,” Dr. de l’Etoile said. She hopes her project will help women gain the confidence they need for families emotionally.

Mothers who practice infant-directed singing communicate with their babies through a variety of songs, from happy, playful versions of the ABCs, to more somber, drawn-out lullabies. In turn, their babies learn the emotional cues that go along with songs, potentially going from crying to playing, or watching their mother attentively.

Later in life, children raised with infant-directed singing might sing to themselves when they are stressed or need to go to sleep, Dr. de l’Etoile said. 

A caregiving method like singing may be less intuitive for women facing basic survival challenges, like maintaining safe housing or putting food on the table, Dr. d’Etoile said.

Interest in studying infant-directed singing has grown in the past few years, although according to Sandra Trehub, PhD, an expert in infant-directed singing, studies of the phenomenon began in the early 1990s. In her own work, Dr. Trehub found that infants appear to be more engaged with parents who sing directly to them than those who sing around but not at them.

Dr. Trehub said singing can be an additional resource for a mother to overcome socioeconomic hardships and bond with their child.

“Songs sung to an infant repeatedly become almost like a special signal between mother and child, a way for them to bond with each other,” she said.

Isabel Santana Chica, MS, executive director of the Linda Ray Intervention Center, expressed enthusiasm for the project.

“Music is a great way to support language, social, and emotional development,” Ms. Chica said. “My hope is that through infant-directed singing, mothers will have one additional tool to connect to their infants and enhance development.”

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

How do a baby’s body and brain respond when their mother sings a lullaby?

Shannon de l’Etoile, PhD, is hoping to find out. Dr. de l’Etoile, professor of music therapy at the University of Miami, began watching interactions between typically functioning mothers and infants, mothers with postpartum depression and their babies, and mothers and infants with Down Syndrome.

The infants she studied became highly attentive to their mothers’ singing and showed “a contented state of arousal,” she said. Mothers, meanwhile, became more engaged with their babies.

To examine the issue more scientifically, Dr. de l’Etoile has launched a study of infant-directed singing, a method connecting babies and mothers through song. With the help of a nearly $20,000 grant from the Grammy Museum – a Los Angeles nonprofit that hosts and funds exhibits and other music programs – Dr. de l’Etoile plans to recruit 20 women whose children attend programming at the Linda Ray Intervention Center at the University of Miami. The early intervention program targets children under age 2 who have disabilities or slower development, or who may have been exposed to drugs in utero. The study will last 1 year, with plans for an extension. 

“By helping the mothers to become more sensitive, we are simultaneously helping infants learn how to regulate, so that by the time they’re in preschool, they can manage their behavior and have a successful, positive experience,” Dr. de l’Etoile said. She hopes her project will help women gain the confidence they need for families emotionally.

Mothers who practice infant-directed singing communicate with their babies through a variety of songs, from happy, playful versions of the ABCs, to more somber, drawn-out lullabies. In turn, their babies learn the emotional cues that go along with songs, potentially going from crying to playing, or watching their mother attentively.

Later in life, children raised with infant-directed singing might sing to themselves when they are stressed or need to go to sleep, Dr. de l’Etoile said. 

A caregiving method like singing may be less intuitive for women facing basic survival challenges, like maintaining safe housing or putting food on the table, Dr. d’Etoile said.

Interest in studying infant-directed singing has grown in the past few years, although according to Sandra Trehub, PhD, an expert in infant-directed singing, studies of the phenomenon began in the early 1990s. In her own work, Dr. Trehub found that infants appear to be more engaged with parents who sing directly to them than those who sing around but not at them.

Dr. Trehub said singing can be an additional resource for a mother to overcome socioeconomic hardships and bond with their child.

“Songs sung to an infant repeatedly become almost like a special signal between mother and child, a way for them to bond with each other,” she said.

Isabel Santana Chica, MS, executive director of the Linda Ray Intervention Center, expressed enthusiasm for the project.

“Music is a great way to support language, social, and emotional development,” Ms. Chica said. “My hope is that through infant-directed singing, mothers will have one additional tool to connect to their infants and enhance development.”

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

How do a baby’s body and brain respond when their mother sings a lullaby?

Shannon de l’Etoile, PhD, is hoping to find out. Dr. de l’Etoile, professor of music therapy at the University of Miami, began watching interactions between typically functioning mothers and infants, mothers with postpartum depression and their babies, and mothers and infants with Down Syndrome.

The infants she studied became highly attentive to their mothers’ singing and showed “a contented state of arousal,” she said. Mothers, meanwhile, became more engaged with their babies.

To examine the issue more scientifically, Dr. de l’Etoile has launched a study of infant-directed singing, a method connecting babies and mothers through song. With the help of a nearly $20,000 grant from the Grammy Museum – a Los Angeles nonprofit that hosts and funds exhibits and other music programs – Dr. de l’Etoile plans to recruit 20 women whose children attend programming at the Linda Ray Intervention Center at the University of Miami. The early intervention program targets children under age 2 who have disabilities or slower development, or who may have been exposed to drugs in utero. The study will last 1 year, with plans for an extension. 

“By helping the mothers to become more sensitive, we are simultaneously helping infants learn how to regulate, so that by the time they’re in preschool, they can manage their behavior and have a successful, positive experience,” Dr. de l’Etoile said. She hopes her project will help women gain the confidence they need for families emotionally.

Mothers who practice infant-directed singing communicate with their babies through a variety of songs, from happy, playful versions of the ABCs, to more somber, drawn-out lullabies. In turn, their babies learn the emotional cues that go along with songs, potentially going from crying to playing, or watching their mother attentively.

Later in life, children raised with infant-directed singing might sing to themselves when they are stressed or need to go to sleep, Dr. de l’Etoile said. 

A caregiving method like singing may be less intuitive for women facing basic survival challenges, like maintaining safe housing or putting food on the table, Dr. d’Etoile said.

Interest in studying infant-directed singing has grown in the past few years, although according to Sandra Trehub, PhD, an expert in infant-directed singing, studies of the phenomenon began in the early 1990s. In her own work, Dr. Trehub found that infants appear to be more engaged with parents who sing directly to them than those who sing around but not at them.

Dr. Trehub said singing can be an additional resource for a mother to overcome socioeconomic hardships and bond with their child.

“Songs sung to an infant repeatedly become almost like a special signal between mother and child, a way for them to bond with each other,” she said.

Isabel Santana Chica, MS, executive director of the Linda Ray Intervention Center, expressed enthusiasm for the project.

“Music is a great way to support language, social, and emotional development,” Ms. Chica said. “My hope is that through infant-directed singing, mothers will have one additional tool to connect to their infants and enhance development.”

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

New research provides novel insight into how mindfulness alters pain-related activity in the brain, in findings that point to more targeted pain management.

In a randomized trial, more than 100 healthy individuals were assigned to an 8-week mindfulness-based stress reduction (MBSR) program, a health improvement program (HEP) of the same length, or a waiting list.

Scanning participants’ brains during a heat-based stimulus pain task showed those who completed the MBSR had a reduction in a brain signature linked to the sensory intensity of pain.

A complex condition

Dr. Wielgosz told this news organization that pain is “complex,” with multiple stages and several phases between the time signals are sent from pain receptors and the experience of pain.

“The way that mindfulness affects pain processing has more to do with the way the brain interprets pain signals.”

The investigators note that understanding the neurocognitive mechanisms underlying the efficacy of nonpharmacologic pain interventions is a “high-priority objective for improving pain treatment.”

Evidence from brief laboratory interventions and cross-sectional studies suggests that mindfulness training is associated with alterations in both sensory processing and cognitive-emotional regulatory networks, the investigators note.

“However, no such study has yet been conducted on a standardized, full-length, and widely used clinical intervention, such as MBSR,” they add.
 

Thermal pain task

The randomized, active-control trial included 115 healthy, meditation-naive individuals (61.7% women; average age, 48.3 years). Just over half (58%) had a graduate degree and their mean score on the Hollingshead index was 58.3, indicting a higher socioeconomic status.

All were randomly assigned to an 8-week MBSR course, an 8-week HEP course as an active control group, or a waiting-list control group with no intervention.

The MBSR involved instruction and practice in continuous focused attention on the breath, bodily sensations, and mental content while in seated postures, walking, and doing yoga.

The HEP matched the MBSR in terms of its length, structure, and nonspecific therapeutic elements, which included a supportive group atmosphere, expert instruction, and positive expectancy for benefit.

To examine the interventions’ effect on the pain experience, participants underwent a pain task in which they had 20 thermal stimuli applied to the inside of the left wrist for 12 seconds, including 8 seconds at peak temperature.

The stimuli were separated by a distractor task and intervals for cued anticipation, recovery, and subjective ratings of intensity and unpleasantness on a scale of 0-20.

During the task, participants underwent MRI to assess the neurologic pain signature (NPS) and the stimulus intensity independent pain signature-1 (SIIPS-1) within the brain.

The NPS is activated by various types of pain stimuli, while responding minimally or not at all to “emotionally evocative stimuli” relating to pain or to placebo treatment, the researchers note.

In contrast, the SIIPS-1 is activated in response to aspects of pain unrelated to the stimulus itself. It incorporates a “broader range of cognitive and emotional modulatory circuits,” including those related to expectancy and cognitive processes to modulate the pain experience.
 

Neural signatures

Results showed that in all groups, age was significantly negatively associated with both NPS (P = .001) and SIIPS-1 response (P < .001), although not subjective pain reports, and was subsequently included in all analyses of neural signatures.

Persons in the MBSR group had a significant decrease in the NPS, compared with those in the HEP group (P = .05), and from pre- to postintervention assessments (P = .023).

Those in the MBSR group also had “marginal” decreases in the NPS vs. the waiting list group (P = .096), and in the SIIPS-1 relative to both the HEP (P = .089) and waiting list groups (P = .087).

In subjective pain ratings, the MBSR group showed a marginal decrease, compared with the waiting list group (P = .078), and from the pre- to postintervention assessments (P = .028).

The HEP group also had marginal decreases in pain unpleasantness vs. the waiting list group (P = .043), and from the pre- to postintervention assessments for pain intensity (P = .046) and unpleasantness (P = .007).

The researchers also assessed 30 long-term meditators who had undertaken at least 3 years of formal experience with meditation, including participating in multiple intensive retreats and ongoing daily practice, and compared them with meditation-naive individuals.

Long-term meditators reported significantly less pain intensity and unpleasantness than those who had not undergone the training (P < .001).

In addition, a higher number of practice hours during a retreat was linked to a greater reduction in pain ratings. This association remained even after adjustment for gender and respiration rate.

However, the number of daily practice hours was not significantly associated with pain ratings among long-term meditators.

Although there were no average differences in neural signature responses between long-term meditators and individuals who were naive to the technique, there was an inverse relationship between hours on retreat and SIIPS-1 response (P = .027).
 

‘We’re seeing the biology change’

Commenting for this news organization, Fadel Zeidan, PhD, associate professor of anesthesiology, University of California, San Diego, said that in attenuating the experience of pain, mindfulness engages “very novel” mechanisms.

However, the “most remarkable thing about this study” is that the pain effect occurred when the participants were not meditating, “which gives rise to the notion that mental training is just like physical training,” said Dr. Zeidan, who was not involved with the research.

He noted that the notion was not appreciated previously, “because we weren’t able to see the changes,” as they were based on self-report alone.

However, combining those reports with brain imaging and other objective methods means that “we’re actually seeing the biology change,” Dr. Zeidan said.

He added that mindfulness is different from other techniques for modulating the pain experience, because it is self-facilitated.

“People can learn this technique, ideally, for free online. They can learn the recipe, and it’s one of the only techniques out there that can be used immediately to assuage one’s own pain,” he said.

“There’s nothing else out there on this planet that could immediately reduce one’s own pain. You have to wait 45 minutes for Tylenol, distraction can only work for so long, and you can’t really placebo yourself,” Dr. Zeidan added.

The study was funded by a National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine grant, National Institute of Mental Health grants, a Fetzer Institute grant, and a John Templeton Foundation grant, as well as a core grant to the Waisman Center from the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development to Albee Messing. Dr. Wielgosz and Dr. Zeidan have reported no relevant financial relationships. Disclosures for the coinvestigators are listed in the original article.

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

New research provides novel insight into how mindfulness alters pain-related activity in the brain, in findings that point to more targeted pain management.

In a randomized trial, more than 100 healthy individuals were assigned to an 8-week mindfulness-based stress reduction (MBSR) program, a health improvement program (HEP) of the same length, or a waiting list.

Scanning participants’ brains during a heat-based stimulus pain task showed those who completed the MBSR had a reduction in a brain signature linked to the sensory intensity of pain.

A complex condition

Dr. Wielgosz told this news organization that pain is “complex,” with multiple stages and several phases between the time signals are sent from pain receptors and the experience of pain.

“The way that mindfulness affects pain processing has more to do with the way the brain interprets pain signals.”

The investigators note that understanding the neurocognitive mechanisms underlying the efficacy of nonpharmacologic pain interventions is a “high-priority objective for improving pain treatment.”

Evidence from brief laboratory interventions and cross-sectional studies suggests that mindfulness training is associated with alterations in both sensory processing and cognitive-emotional regulatory networks, the investigators note.

“However, no such study has yet been conducted on a standardized, full-length, and widely used clinical intervention, such as MBSR,” they add.
 

Thermal pain task

The randomized, active-control trial included 115 healthy, meditation-naive individuals (61.7% women; average age, 48.3 years). Just over half (58%) had a graduate degree and their mean score on the Hollingshead index was 58.3, indicting a higher socioeconomic status.

All were randomly assigned to an 8-week MBSR course, an 8-week HEP course as an active control group, or a waiting-list control group with no intervention.

The MBSR involved instruction and practice in continuous focused attention on the breath, bodily sensations, and mental content while in seated postures, walking, and doing yoga.

The HEP matched the MBSR in terms of its length, structure, and nonspecific therapeutic elements, which included a supportive group atmosphere, expert instruction, and positive expectancy for benefit.

To examine the interventions’ effect on the pain experience, participants underwent a pain task in which they had 20 thermal stimuli applied to the inside of the left wrist for 12 seconds, including 8 seconds at peak temperature.

The stimuli were separated by a distractor task and intervals for cued anticipation, recovery, and subjective ratings of intensity and unpleasantness on a scale of 0-20.

During the task, participants underwent MRI to assess the neurologic pain signature (NPS) and the stimulus intensity independent pain signature-1 (SIIPS-1) within the brain.

The NPS is activated by various types of pain stimuli, while responding minimally or not at all to “emotionally evocative stimuli” relating to pain or to placebo treatment, the researchers note.

In contrast, the SIIPS-1 is activated in response to aspects of pain unrelated to the stimulus itself. It incorporates a “broader range of cognitive and emotional modulatory circuits,” including those related to expectancy and cognitive processes to modulate the pain experience.
 

Neural signatures

Results showed that in all groups, age was significantly negatively associated with both NPS (P = .001) and SIIPS-1 response (P < .001), although not subjective pain reports, and was subsequently included in all analyses of neural signatures.

Persons in the MBSR group had a significant decrease in the NPS, compared with those in the HEP group (P = .05), and from pre- to postintervention assessments (P = .023).

Those in the MBSR group also had “marginal” decreases in the NPS vs. the waiting list group (P = .096), and in the SIIPS-1 relative to both the HEP (P = .089) and waiting list groups (P = .087).

In subjective pain ratings, the MBSR group showed a marginal decrease, compared with the waiting list group (P = .078), and from the pre- to postintervention assessments (P = .028).

The HEP group also had marginal decreases in pain unpleasantness vs. the waiting list group (P = .043), and from the pre- to postintervention assessments for pain intensity (P = .046) and unpleasantness (P = .007).

The researchers also assessed 30 long-term meditators who had undertaken at least 3 years of formal experience with meditation, including participating in multiple intensive retreats and ongoing daily practice, and compared them with meditation-naive individuals.

Long-term meditators reported significantly less pain intensity and unpleasantness than those who had not undergone the training (P < .001).

In addition, a higher number of practice hours during a retreat was linked to a greater reduction in pain ratings. This association remained even after adjustment for gender and respiration rate.

However, the number of daily practice hours was not significantly associated with pain ratings among long-term meditators.

Although there were no average differences in neural signature responses between long-term meditators and individuals who were naive to the technique, there was an inverse relationship between hours on retreat and SIIPS-1 response (P = .027).
 

‘We’re seeing the biology change’

Commenting for this news organization, Fadel Zeidan, PhD, associate professor of anesthesiology, University of California, San Diego, said that in attenuating the experience of pain, mindfulness engages “very novel” mechanisms.

However, the “most remarkable thing about this study” is that the pain effect occurred when the participants were not meditating, “which gives rise to the notion that mental training is just like physical training,” said Dr. Zeidan, who was not involved with the research.

He noted that the notion was not appreciated previously, “because we weren’t able to see the changes,” as they were based on self-report alone.

However, combining those reports with brain imaging and other objective methods means that “we’re actually seeing the biology change,” Dr. Zeidan said.

He added that mindfulness is different from other techniques for modulating the pain experience, because it is self-facilitated.

“People can learn this technique, ideally, for free online. They can learn the recipe, and it’s one of the only techniques out there that can be used immediately to assuage one’s own pain,” he said.

“There’s nothing else out there on this planet that could immediately reduce one’s own pain. You have to wait 45 minutes for Tylenol, distraction can only work for so long, and you can’t really placebo yourself,” Dr. Zeidan added.

The study was funded by a National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine grant, National Institute of Mental Health grants, a Fetzer Institute grant, and a John Templeton Foundation grant, as well as a core grant to the Waisman Center from the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development to Albee Messing. Dr. Wielgosz and Dr. Zeidan have reported no relevant financial relationships. Disclosures for the coinvestigators are listed in the original article.

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

New research provides novel insight into how mindfulness alters pain-related activity in the brain, in findings that point to more targeted pain management.

In a randomized trial, more than 100 healthy individuals were assigned to an 8-week mindfulness-based stress reduction (MBSR) program, a health improvement program (HEP) of the same length, or a waiting list.

Scanning participants’ brains during a heat-based stimulus pain task showed those who completed the MBSR had a reduction in a brain signature linked to the sensory intensity of pain.

A complex condition

Dr. Wielgosz told this news organization that pain is “complex,” with multiple stages and several phases between the time signals are sent from pain receptors and the experience of pain.

“The way that mindfulness affects pain processing has more to do with the way the brain interprets pain signals.”

The investigators note that understanding the neurocognitive mechanisms underlying the efficacy of nonpharmacologic pain interventions is a “high-priority objective for improving pain treatment.”

Evidence from brief laboratory interventions and cross-sectional studies suggests that mindfulness training is associated with alterations in both sensory processing and cognitive-emotional regulatory networks, the investigators note.

“However, no such study has yet been conducted on a standardized, full-length, and widely used clinical intervention, such as MBSR,” they add.
 

Thermal pain task

The randomized, active-control trial included 115 healthy, meditation-naive individuals (61.7% women; average age, 48.3 years). Just over half (58%) had a graduate degree and their mean score on the Hollingshead index was 58.3, indicting a higher socioeconomic status.

All were randomly assigned to an 8-week MBSR course, an 8-week HEP course as an active control group, or a waiting-list control group with no intervention.

The MBSR involved instruction and practice in continuous focused attention on the breath, bodily sensations, and mental content while in seated postures, walking, and doing yoga.

The HEP matched the MBSR in terms of its length, structure, and nonspecific therapeutic elements, which included a supportive group atmosphere, expert instruction, and positive expectancy for benefit.

To examine the interventions’ effect on the pain experience, participants underwent a pain task in which they had 20 thermal stimuli applied to the inside of the left wrist for 12 seconds, including 8 seconds at peak temperature.

The stimuli were separated by a distractor task and intervals for cued anticipation, recovery, and subjective ratings of intensity and unpleasantness on a scale of 0-20.

During the task, participants underwent MRI to assess the neurologic pain signature (NPS) and the stimulus intensity independent pain signature-1 (SIIPS-1) within the brain.

The NPS is activated by various types of pain stimuli, while responding minimally or not at all to “emotionally evocative stimuli” relating to pain or to placebo treatment, the researchers note.

In contrast, the SIIPS-1 is activated in response to aspects of pain unrelated to the stimulus itself. It incorporates a “broader range of cognitive and emotional modulatory circuits,” including those related to expectancy and cognitive processes to modulate the pain experience.
 

Neural signatures

Results showed that in all groups, age was significantly negatively associated with both NPS (P = .001) and SIIPS-1 response (P < .001), although not subjective pain reports, and was subsequently included in all analyses of neural signatures.

Persons in the MBSR group had a significant decrease in the NPS, compared with those in the HEP group (P = .05), and from pre- to postintervention assessments (P = .023).

Those in the MBSR group also had “marginal” decreases in the NPS vs. the waiting list group (P = .096), and in the SIIPS-1 relative to both the HEP (P = .089) and waiting list groups (P = .087).

In subjective pain ratings, the MBSR group showed a marginal decrease, compared with the waiting list group (P = .078), and from the pre- to postintervention assessments (P = .028).

The HEP group also had marginal decreases in pain unpleasantness vs. the waiting list group (P = .043), and from the pre- to postintervention assessments for pain intensity (P = .046) and unpleasantness (P = .007).

The researchers also assessed 30 long-term meditators who had undertaken at least 3 years of formal experience with meditation, including participating in multiple intensive retreats and ongoing daily practice, and compared them with meditation-naive individuals.

Long-term meditators reported significantly less pain intensity and unpleasantness than those who had not undergone the training (P < .001).

In addition, a higher number of practice hours during a retreat was linked to a greater reduction in pain ratings. This association remained even after adjustment for gender and respiration rate.

However, the number of daily practice hours was not significantly associated with pain ratings among long-term meditators.

Although there were no average differences in neural signature responses between long-term meditators and individuals who were naive to the technique, there was an inverse relationship between hours on retreat and SIIPS-1 response (P = .027).
 

‘We’re seeing the biology change’

Commenting for this news organization, Fadel Zeidan, PhD, associate professor of anesthesiology, University of California, San Diego, said that in attenuating the experience of pain, mindfulness engages “very novel” mechanisms.

However, the “most remarkable thing about this study” is that the pain effect occurred when the participants were not meditating, “which gives rise to the notion that mental training is just like physical training,” said Dr. Zeidan, who was not involved with the research.

He noted that the notion was not appreciated previously, “because we weren’t able to see the changes,” as they were based on self-report alone.

However, combining those reports with brain imaging and other objective methods means that “we’re actually seeing the biology change,” Dr. Zeidan said.

He added that mindfulness is different from other techniques for modulating the pain experience, because it is self-facilitated.

“People can learn this technique, ideally, for free online. They can learn the recipe, and it’s one of the only techniques out there that can be used immediately to assuage one’s own pain,” he said.

“There’s nothing else out there on this planet that could immediately reduce one’s own pain. You have to wait 45 minutes for Tylenol, distraction can only work for so long, and you can’t really placebo yourself,” Dr. Zeidan added.

The study was funded by a National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine grant, National Institute of Mental Health grants, a Fetzer Institute grant, and a John Templeton Foundation grant, as well as a core grant to the Waisman Center from the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development to Albee Messing. Dr. Wielgosz and Dr. Zeidan have reported no relevant financial relationships. Disclosures for the coinvestigators are listed in the original article.

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

Gun attacks in classrooms across the nation have led principals and other school leaders to implement “active shooter” drills to try to increase the safety of their students and faculty.

The drills can range from staging lockdowns and sheltering in place to quasi dramas with mock shooters roaming the halls. Although the goals of these training exercises are important, equally important are the potential negative effects of drills on students’ mental health, according to doctors with expertise in pediatrics and mental health.

“Dramatic simulation of an active shooter event at school would be expected to provoke the same stress response as the real thing,” said Peter L. Loper Jr., MD, a pediatrician and psychiatrist, in an interview. “While ensuring their physical safety is very important, we must be intentional about making sure that we are not doing so at the expense of their psychosocial or emotional safety.”

“Children may not be able to differentiate a dramatic drill from a real event,” emphasized Dr. Loper, of the neuropsychiatry and behavioral science departments at the University of South Carolina, Columbia. “The parts of the brain responsible for our flight-fight-or-freeze response would interpret both simulated and real events identically and produce the same neurohormonal stress-response.”

Indeed, a study published in the journal Humanities & Social Sciences Communications suggested children experienced mental health problems related to participating in active shooter drills. In the large study, a team of statisticians from the Georgia Institute of Technology found that students reported a 42% increase in stress and anxiety and a 38.7% increase in depression during the 90 days following active shooter drills, compared with the 90 days before the drills.

The authors of this study, including Mai ElSherief, PhD, drew these conclusions after analyzing 54 million social media posts before and after drills in 114 schools across 33 states. The researchers analyzed the language of the social media posts by teachers, parents, and students and found increased use of the words hope, love, home, school, kids, community, support, and help after the drills. The researchers considered posting with these terms in the aftermath of the drills to be indicative of having high anxiety.

They included examples of how high stress, anxiety, and depression manifested in specific posts from parents in their report. The following is an example of a poster expressing high anxiety and stress: “are we really gonna normalize school shooter drills?! holy sh* there has to be a real way to avoid these tragedies. sh*t like this cannot be normalized. teachers injured after being shot with plastic pellets ‘execution style’ in active shooter drill.”

The authors also shared this post to serve as an example of a person who seems depressed: “and now we are revisiting the trauma on our kids, forcing them to act out school drills monthly. i don’t get why gen x parents buy into this concept wholeheartedly. things need to change.”

The published material did not include posts from students, but the researchers’ analysis of the content of posts overall showed increased concerns for health and increased concerns about death during the period after drills, compared with before drills.

The authors also conducted focus groups in communities in which drills occurred, and many teachers and parents reported anecdotal evidence of children who were nervous long after the drills were over, with some showing extreme reactions such as panic over a standard fire alarm at school. Overall, the results show that school shooter drills can negatively affect school communities over prolonged periods of time, they concluded.

According to a statement from the American Academy of Pediatrics, “there is a need to be cautious about the potential psychological risks and other unintended consequences of directly involving children in live exercises and drills.”

“These risks and consequences are especially a concern when children are deceived and led to believe there is an actual attack and not a drill,” wrote David Schonfeld, MD, the lead author of the statement on Participation of Children and Adolescents in Live Crisis Drills and Exercises, and colleagues.
 

Managing the fallout

Physicians can help students experiencing mental health problems from these drills, according to doctors interviewed for this piece.

It’s important for providers to know that stress will show up differently in children than in adults, said Chelsea Younghans, MD, a psychiatrist and military officer in Bethesda, Md., in an interview.

“They may see children with headaches, stomach aches, or nonspecific complaints. They may also see children who have not had difficulty with sleep present with nightmares or bed wetting,” she added.

For teens and preteens, validated tools such as the Child PTSD Symptom Scale (CPSS-5) and Child and Adolescent Trauma Screen (CATS) to assess PTSD in youth, may help serve as a starting point for a conversation between providers and their older child population, she noted.

Children who exhibit avoidance or withdrawal behaviors including consistent school refusal, an increase in reassurance-seeking behaviors, or somatic symptoms like vague abdominal pain or headaches that prevent school attendance after participating in a drill, may need more robust mental health services, Dr. Loper noted.

Dr. Schonfeld, who is also director of the National Center for School Crisis and Bereavement at Children’s Hospital Los Angeles, called for health care providers to be available to help children process traumatic reactions to these exercises.

Agreeing with Dr. Schonfeld, Dr. Younghans said: “It is vital to debrief with students and staff after drills, making sure that students have a safe space and ample time to speak with trusted staff. As children will undoubtedly have questions and concerns, creating open lines of communication will help alleviate any traumatic effect these drills may have.”
 

Communicating with various stakeholders

Experts also gave recommendations for how clinicians communicate with leaders in their area’s school districts and other members of their communities about these training exercises.

“For primary care providers, it is important to establish meaningful relationships within your community and patient population as much as possible,” Dr. Younghans said. “Having a good relationship with the local schools and being part of the conversation can help increase school and community awareness on the impact these drills can have on students and staff,” she added.

For those pediatricians or other health care providers who serve as consultants to schools, Dr. Schonfeld advised they ask about policies related to exercises and drills, such as what are the limits to what children might be exposed to in a drill, and what requirements there might be at the local and state level in terms of frequency and what the drills will and will not involve.

He also noted that clinicians should encourage school leaders to consider the fact that kids may have personal histories of trauma that are completely unknown to the school when they design these exercises.

School staff and health care providers should explain the nature and reasons for drills, invite family members to express concerns, and make accommodations if necessary for some children to participate in drills in a more limited way, noted Dr. Schonfeld, who is also clinical professor of pediatrics at the University of Southern California, Los Angeles.

“I think health care providers should work with legislators, so that if they require a drill, it must be done in a way that is physically and emotionally safe,” he added.
 

Executing better drills for students’ mental health

Experts also advised on ways to execute these drills that will be least damaging to students.

The AAP statement on Participation of Children and Adolescents in Live Crisis Drills and Exercises, for example, advocates eliminating high-intensity drills, prohibiting deception in drills, and providing accommodations based on children’s vulnerabilities.

Dr. Schonfeld also emphasized, in an interview, that training for an attack need not be extremely realistic to be effective.

“When you are preparing for a crisis, the drills and exercises are for children to practice and develop mastery over something they don’t know how to do fully yet,” said Dr. Schonfeld.

Citing a suggestion from a 2020 report conducted by Everytown for Gun Safety on keeping schools safe from gun violence, Dr. Younghans said, “Schools should be in clear communication with communities and families regarding when drills will be happening,” and advised ensuring that the explanation of drills is developmentally appropriate to the age of the children participating.

The report also recommends conducting drills that do not simulate an actual incident, combining drills with trauma-informed approaches to address students’ well-being during and for a sustained period after the drills, and tracking data on the efficacy and effects of drills.

Dr. Loper suggested ways that clinicians and parents can help navigate the tricky territory of school safety drills.

In his view, they should not be random or unexpected, and anticipatory guidance should be given regarding any visual or auditory stimuli, such as flashing lights or sirens, alarms, or announcements.

“A preventive approach should be utilized to ensure that any child who is experiencing extreme drill-distress be excused from any future disaster drills to prevent retraumatization,” Dr. Loper said.

Physicians interviewed for this piece also provided tips on how to talk about these events with children in a way that is beneficial to their mental health.

“What we want to do is [have a] calm discussion [with kids] about what we are doing and why we are doing it” and guide them through the movements, Dr. Schonfeld said.

When teaching children how to respond to an emergency, some elements of uncertainty need to be discussed. Children need to anticipate “what you might do if you are not in the classroom if something occurs, such as being in the bathroom, or out at recess,” he continued.

Dr. Younghans recommended that parents and staff schedule time to prepare children for the drill and practice in advance, and that behavioral health providers, counselors, and/or primary care providers should be involved in the planning and execution of the drill.

The Georgia Tech study was supported through a grant from Everytown for Gun Safety.

The study authors and experts interviewed for this piece had no financial conflicts to disclose.

Gun attacks in classrooms across the nation have led principals and other school leaders to implement “active shooter” drills to try to increase the safety of their students and faculty.

The drills can range from staging lockdowns and sheltering in place to quasi dramas with mock shooters roaming the halls. Although the goals of these training exercises are important, equally important are the potential negative effects of drills on students’ mental health, according to doctors with expertise in pediatrics and mental health.

“Dramatic simulation of an active shooter event at school would be expected to provoke the same stress response as the real thing,” said Peter L. Loper Jr., MD, a pediatrician and psychiatrist, in an interview. “While ensuring their physical safety is very important, we must be intentional about making sure that we are not doing so at the expense of their psychosocial or emotional safety.”

“Children may not be able to differentiate a dramatic drill from a real event,” emphasized Dr. Loper, of the neuropsychiatry and behavioral science departments at the University of South Carolina, Columbia. “The parts of the brain responsible for our flight-fight-or-freeze response would interpret both simulated and real events identically and produce the same neurohormonal stress-response.”

Indeed, a study published in the journal Humanities & Social Sciences Communications suggested children experienced mental health problems related to participating in active shooter drills. In the large study, a team of statisticians from the Georgia Institute of Technology found that students reported a 42% increase in stress and anxiety and a 38.7% increase in depression during the 90 days following active shooter drills, compared with the 90 days before the drills.

The authors of this study, including Mai ElSherief, PhD, drew these conclusions after analyzing 54 million social media posts before and after drills in 114 schools across 33 states. The researchers analyzed the language of the social media posts by teachers, parents, and students and found increased use of the words hope, love, home, school, kids, community, support, and help after the drills. The researchers considered posting with these terms in the aftermath of the drills to be indicative of having high anxiety.

They included examples of how high stress, anxiety, and depression manifested in specific posts from parents in their report. The following is an example of a poster expressing high anxiety and stress: “are we really gonna normalize school shooter drills?! holy sh* there has to be a real way to avoid these tragedies. sh*t like this cannot be normalized. teachers injured after being shot with plastic pellets ‘execution style’ in active shooter drill.”

The authors also shared this post to serve as an example of a person who seems depressed: “and now we are revisiting the trauma on our kids, forcing them to act out school drills monthly. i don’t get why gen x parents buy into this concept wholeheartedly. things need to change.”

The published material did not include posts from students, but the researchers’ analysis of the content of posts overall showed increased concerns for health and increased concerns about death during the period after drills, compared with before drills.

The authors also conducted focus groups in communities in which drills occurred, and many teachers and parents reported anecdotal evidence of children who were nervous long after the drills were over, with some showing extreme reactions such as panic over a standard fire alarm at school. Overall, the results show that school shooter drills can negatively affect school communities over prolonged periods of time, they concluded.

According to a statement from the American Academy of Pediatrics, “there is a need to be cautious about the potential psychological risks and other unintended consequences of directly involving children in live exercises and drills.”

“These risks and consequences are especially a concern when children are deceived and led to believe there is an actual attack and not a drill,” wrote David Schonfeld, MD, the lead author of the statement on Participation of Children and Adolescents in Live Crisis Drills and Exercises, and colleagues.
 

Managing the fallout

Physicians can help students experiencing mental health problems from these drills, according to doctors interviewed for this piece.

It’s important for providers to know that stress will show up differently in children than in adults, said Chelsea Younghans, MD, a psychiatrist and military officer in Bethesda, Md., in an interview.

“They may see children with headaches, stomach aches, or nonspecific complaints. They may also see children who have not had difficulty with sleep present with nightmares or bed wetting,” she added.

For teens and preteens, validated tools such as the Child PTSD Symptom Scale (CPSS-5) and Child and Adolescent Trauma Screen (CATS) to assess PTSD in youth, may help serve as a starting point for a conversation between providers and their older child population, she noted.

Children who exhibit avoidance or withdrawal behaviors including consistent school refusal, an increase in reassurance-seeking behaviors, or somatic symptoms like vague abdominal pain or headaches that prevent school attendance after participating in a drill, may need more robust mental health services, Dr. Loper noted.

Dr. Schonfeld, who is also director of the National Center for School Crisis and Bereavement at Children’s Hospital Los Angeles, called for health care providers to be available to help children process traumatic reactions to these exercises.

Agreeing with Dr. Schonfeld, Dr. Younghans said: “It is vital to debrief with students and staff after drills, making sure that students have a safe space and ample time to speak with trusted staff. As children will undoubtedly have questions and concerns, creating open lines of communication will help alleviate any traumatic effect these drills may have.”
 

Communicating with various stakeholders

Experts also gave recommendations for how clinicians communicate with leaders in their area’s school districts and other members of their communities about these training exercises.

“For primary care providers, it is important to establish meaningful relationships within your community and patient population as much as possible,” Dr. Younghans said. “Having a good relationship with the local schools and being part of the conversation can help increase school and community awareness on the impact these drills can have on students and staff,” she added.

For those pediatricians or other health care providers who serve as consultants to schools, Dr. Schonfeld advised they ask about policies related to exercises and drills, such as what are the limits to what children might be exposed to in a drill, and what requirements there might be at the local and state level in terms of frequency and what the drills will and will not involve.

He also noted that clinicians should encourage school leaders to consider the fact that kids may have personal histories of trauma that are completely unknown to the school when they design these exercises.

School staff and health care providers should explain the nature and reasons for drills, invite family members to express concerns, and make accommodations if necessary for some children to participate in drills in a more limited way, noted Dr. Schonfeld, who is also clinical professor of pediatrics at the University of Southern California, Los Angeles.

“I think health care providers should work with legislators, so that if they require a drill, it must be done in a way that is physically and emotionally safe,” he added.
 

Executing better drills for students’ mental health

Experts also advised on ways to execute these drills that will be least damaging to students.

The AAP statement on Participation of Children and Adolescents in Live Crisis Drills and Exercises, for example, advocates eliminating high-intensity drills, prohibiting deception in drills, and providing accommodations based on children’s vulnerabilities.

Dr. Schonfeld also emphasized, in an interview, that training for an attack need not be extremely realistic to be effective.

“When you are preparing for a crisis, the drills and exercises are for children to practice and develop mastery over something they don’t know how to do fully yet,” said Dr. Schonfeld.

Citing a suggestion from a 2020 report conducted by Everytown for Gun Safety on keeping schools safe from gun violence, Dr. Younghans said, “Schools should be in clear communication with communities and families regarding when drills will be happening,” and advised ensuring that the explanation of drills is developmentally appropriate to the age of the children participating.

The report also recommends conducting drills that do not simulate an actual incident, combining drills with trauma-informed approaches to address students’ well-being during and for a sustained period after the drills, and tracking data on the efficacy and effects of drills.

Dr. Loper suggested ways that clinicians and parents can help navigate the tricky territory of school safety drills.

In his view, they should not be random or unexpected, and anticipatory guidance should be given regarding any visual or auditory stimuli, such as flashing lights or sirens, alarms, or announcements.

“A preventive approach should be utilized to ensure that any child who is experiencing extreme drill-distress be excused from any future disaster drills to prevent retraumatization,” Dr. Loper said.

Physicians interviewed for this piece also provided tips on how to talk about these events with children in a way that is beneficial to their mental health.

“What we want to do is [have a] calm discussion [with kids] about what we are doing and why we are doing it” and guide them through the movements, Dr. Schonfeld said.

When teaching children how to respond to an emergency, some elements of uncertainty need to be discussed. Children need to anticipate “what you might do if you are not in the classroom if something occurs, such as being in the bathroom, or out at recess,” he continued.

Dr. Younghans recommended that parents and staff schedule time to prepare children for the drill and practice in advance, and that behavioral health providers, counselors, and/or primary care providers should be involved in the planning and execution of the drill.

The Georgia Tech study was supported through a grant from Everytown for Gun Safety.

The study authors and experts interviewed for this piece had no financial conflicts to disclose.

Gun attacks in classrooms across the nation have led principals and other school leaders to implement “active shooter” drills to try to increase the safety of their students and faculty.

The drills can range from staging lockdowns and sheltering in place to quasi dramas with mock shooters roaming the halls. Although the goals of these training exercises are important, equally important are the potential negative effects of drills on students’ mental health, according to doctors with expertise in pediatrics and mental health.

“Dramatic simulation of an active shooter event at school would be expected to provoke the same stress response as the real thing,” said Peter L. Loper Jr., MD, a pediatrician and psychiatrist, in an interview. “While ensuring their physical safety is very important, we must be intentional about making sure that we are not doing so at the expense of their psychosocial or emotional safety.”

“Children may not be able to differentiate a dramatic drill from a real event,” emphasized Dr. Loper, of the neuropsychiatry and behavioral science departments at the University of South Carolina, Columbia. “The parts of the brain responsible for our flight-fight-or-freeze response would interpret both simulated and real events identically and produce the same neurohormonal stress-response.”

Indeed, a study published in the journal Humanities & Social Sciences Communications suggested children experienced mental health problems related to participating in active shooter drills. In the large study, a team of statisticians from the Georgia Institute of Technology found that students reported a 42% increase in stress and anxiety and a 38.7% increase in depression during the 90 days following active shooter drills, compared with the 90 days before the drills.

The authors of this study, including Mai ElSherief, PhD, drew these conclusions after analyzing 54 million social media posts before and after drills in 114 schools across 33 states. The researchers analyzed the language of the social media posts by teachers, parents, and students and found increased use of the words hope, love, home, school, kids, community, support, and help after the drills. The researchers considered posting with these terms in the aftermath of the drills to be indicative of having high anxiety.

They included examples of how high stress, anxiety, and depression manifested in specific posts from parents in their report. The following is an example of a poster expressing high anxiety and stress: “are we really gonna normalize school shooter drills?! holy sh* there has to be a real way to avoid these tragedies. sh*t like this cannot be normalized. teachers injured after being shot with plastic pellets ‘execution style’ in active shooter drill.”

The authors also shared this post to serve as an example of a person who seems depressed: “and now we are revisiting the trauma on our kids, forcing them to act out school drills monthly. i don’t get why gen x parents buy into this concept wholeheartedly. things need to change.”

The published material did not include posts from students, but the researchers’ analysis of the content of posts overall showed increased concerns for health and increased concerns about death during the period after drills, compared with before drills.

The authors also conducted focus groups in communities in which drills occurred, and many teachers and parents reported anecdotal evidence of children who were nervous long after the drills were over, with some showing extreme reactions such as panic over a standard fire alarm at school. Overall, the results show that school shooter drills can negatively affect school communities over prolonged periods of time, they concluded.

According to a statement from the American Academy of Pediatrics, “there is a need to be cautious about the potential psychological risks and other unintended consequences of directly involving children in live exercises and drills.”

“These risks and consequences are especially a concern when children are deceived and led to believe there is an actual attack and not a drill,” wrote David Schonfeld, MD, the lead author of the statement on Participation of Children and Adolescents in Live Crisis Drills and Exercises, and colleagues.
 

Managing the fallout

Physicians can help students experiencing mental health problems from these drills, according to doctors interviewed for this piece.

It’s important for providers to know that stress will show up differently in children than in adults, said Chelsea Younghans, MD, a psychiatrist and military officer in Bethesda, Md., in an interview.

“They may see children with headaches, stomach aches, or nonspecific complaints. They may also see children who have not had difficulty with sleep present with nightmares or bed wetting,” she added.

For teens and preteens, validated tools such as the Child PTSD Symptom Scale (CPSS-5) and Child and Adolescent Trauma Screen (CATS) to assess PTSD in youth, may help serve as a starting point for a conversation between providers and their older child population, she noted.

Children who exhibit avoidance or withdrawal behaviors including consistent school refusal, an increase in reassurance-seeking behaviors, or somatic symptoms like vague abdominal pain or headaches that prevent school attendance after participating in a drill, may need more robust mental health services, Dr. Loper noted.

Dr. Schonfeld, who is also director of the National Center for School Crisis and Bereavement at Children’s Hospital Los Angeles, called for health care providers to be available to help children process traumatic reactions to these exercises.

Agreeing with Dr. Schonfeld, Dr. Younghans said: “It is vital to debrief with students and staff after drills, making sure that students have a safe space and ample time to speak with trusted staff. As children will undoubtedly have questions and concerns, creating open lines of communication will help alleviate any traumatic effect these drills may have.”
 

Communicating with various stakeholders

Experts also gave recommendations for how clinicians communicate with leaders in their area’s school districts and other members of their communities about these training exercises.

“For primary care providers, it is important to establish meaningful relationships within your community and patient population as much as possible,” Dr. Younghans said. “Having a good relationship with the local schools and being part of the conversation can help increase school and community awareness on the impact these drills can have on students and staff,” she added.

For those pediatricians or other health care providers who serve as consultants to schools, Dr. Schonfeld advised they ask about policies related to exercises and drills, such as what are the limits to what children might be exposed to in a drill, and what requirements there might be at the local and state level in terms of frequency and what the drills will and will not involve.

He also noted that clinicians should encourage school leaders to consider the fact that kids may have personal histories of trauma that are completely unknown to the school when they design these exercises.

School staff and health care providers should explain the nature and reasons for drills, invite family members to express concerns, and make accommodations if necessary for some children to participate in drills in a more limited way, noted Dr. Schonfeld, who is also clinical professor of pediatrics at the University of Southern California, Los Angeles.

“I think health care providers should work with legislators, so that if they require a drill, it must be done in a way that is physically and emotionally safe,” he added.
 

Executing better drills for students’ mental health

Experts also advised on ways to execute these drills that will be least damaging to students.

The AAP statement on Participation of Children and Adolescents in Live Crisis Drills and Exercises, for example, advocates eliminating high-intensity drills, prohibiting deception in drills, and providing accommodations based on children’s vulnerabilities.

Dr. Schonfeld also emphasized, in an interview, that training for an attack need not be extremely realistic to be effective.

“When you are preparing for a crisis, the drills and exercises are for children to practice and develop mastery over something they don’t know how to do fully yet,” said Dr. Schonfeld.

Citing a suggestion from a 2020 report conducted by Everytown for Gun Safety on keeping schools safe from gun violence, Dr. Younghans said, “Schools should be in clear communication with communities and families regarding when drills will be happening,” and advised ensuring that the explanation of drills is developmentally appropriate to the age of the children participating.

The report also recommends conducting drills that do not simulate an actual incident, combining drills with trauma-informed approaches to address students’ well-being during and for a sustained period after the drills, and tracking data on the efficacy and effects of drills.

Dr. Loper suggested ways that clinicians and parents can help navigate the tricky territory of school safety drills.

In his view, they should not be random or unexpected, and anticipatory guidance should be given regarding any visual or auditory stimuli, such as flashing lights or sirens, alarms, or announcements.

“A preventive approach should be utilized to ensure that any child who is experiencing extreme drill-distress be excused from any future disaster drills to prevent retraumatization,” Dr. Loper said.

Physicians interviewed for this piece also provided tips on how to talk about these events with children in a way that is beneficial to their mental health.

“What we want to do is [have a] calm discussion [with kids] about what we are doing and why we are doing it” and guide them through the movements, Dr. Schonfeld said.

When teaching children how to respond to an emergency, some elements of uncertainty need to be discussed. Children need to anticipate “what you might do if you are not in the classroom if something occurs, such as being in the bathroom, or out at recess,” he continued.

Dr. Younghans recommended that parents and staff schedule time to prepare children for the drill and practice in advance, and that behavioral health providers, counselors, and/or primary care providers should be involved in the planning and execution of the drill.

The Georgia Tech study was supported through a grant from Everytown for Gun Safety.

The study authors and experts interviewed for this piece had no financial conflicts to disclose.