This study investigates the impact of primary care utilisation of a symptom-based head and neck cancer risk calculator (Head and Neck Cancer Risk Calculator version 2) in the post-coronavirus disease 2019 period on the number of primary care referrals and cancer diagnoses.

The number of referrals from April 2019 to August 2019 and from April 2020 to July 2020 (pre-calculator) was compared with the number from the period January 2021 to August 2022 (post-calculator) using the chi-square test. The patients’ characteristics, referral urgency, triage outcome, Head and Neck Cancer Risk Calculator version 2 score and cancer diagnosis were recorded.

In total, 1110 referrals from the pre-calculator period were compared with 1559 from the post-calculator period. Patient characteristics were comparable for both cohorts. More patients were referred on the cancer pathway in the post-calculator cohort (pre-calculator patients 51.1 per cent vs post-calculator 64.0 per cent). The cancer diagnosis rate increased from 2.7 per cent in the pre-calculator cohort to 3.3 per cent in the post-calculator cohort. A lower rate of cancer diagnosis in the non-cancer pathway occurred in the cohort managed using the Head and Neck Cancer Risk Calculator version 2 (10 per cent vs 23 per cent, p = 0.10).

Head and Neck Cancer Risk Calculator version 2 demonstrated high sensitivity in cancer diagnosis. Further studies are required to improve the predictive strength of the calculator.

Monoclonal antibody (mAb) treatment for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has been underutilized due to logistical challenges, lack of access, and variable treatment awareness among patients and health-care professionals. The use of telehealth during the pandemic provides an opportunity to increase access to COVID-19 care.

This is a single-center descriptive study of telehealth-based patient self-referral for mAb therapy between March 1, 2021, and October 31, 2021, at Baltimore Convention Center Field Hospital (BCCFH).

Among the 1001 self-referral patients, the mean age was 47, and most were female (57%). White (66%), and had a primary care provider (PCP) (62%). During the study period, self-referrals increased from 14/mo in March to 427 in October resulting in a 30-fold increase. Approximately 57% of self-referred patients received a telehealth visit, and of those 82% of patients received mAb infusion therapy. The median time from self-referral to onsite infusion was 2 d (1-3 IQR).

Our study shows the integration of telehealth with a self-referral process improved access to mAb infusion. A high proportion of self-referrals were appropriate and led to timely treatment. This approach helped those without traditional avenues for care and avoided potential delay for patients seeking referral from their PCPs.

Childhood adversity and cannabis use are considered independent risk factors for psychosis, but whether different patterns of cannabis use may be acting as mediator between adversity and psychotic disorders has not yet been explored. The aim of this study is to examine whether cannabis use mediates the relationship between childhood adversity and psychosis.

Data were utilised on 881 first-episode psychosis patients and 1231 controls from the European network of national schizophrenia networks studying Gene–Environment Interactions (EU-GEI) study. Detailed history of cannabis use was collected with the Cannabis Experience Questionnaire. The Childhood Experience of Care and Abuse Questionnaire was used to assess exposure to household discord, sexual, physical or emotional abuse and bullying in two periods: early (0–11 years), and late (12–17 years). A path decomposition method was used to analyse whether the association between childhood adversity and psychosis was mediated by (1) lifetime cannabis use, (2) cannabis potency and (3) frequency of use.

The association between household discord and psychosis was partially mediated by lifetime use of cannabis (indirect effect coef. 0.078, s.e. 0.022, 17%), its potency (indirect effect coef. 0.059, s.e. 0.018, 14%) and by frequency (indirect effect coef. 0.117, s.e. 0.038, 29%). Similar findings were obtained when analyses were restricted to early exposure to household discord.

Harmful patterns of cannabis use mediated the association between specific childhood adversities, like household discord, with later psychosis. Children exposed to particularly challenging environments in their household could benefit from psychosocial interventions aimed at preventing cannabis misuse.

While cannabis use is a well-established risk factor for psychosis, little is known about any association between reasons for first using cannabis (RFUC) and later patterns of use and risk of psychosis.

We used data from 11 sites of the multicentre European Gene-Environment Interaction (EU-GEI) case–control study. 558 first-episode psychosis patients (FEPp) and 567 population controls who had used cannabis and reported their RFUC.

We ran logistic regressions to examine whether RFUC were associated with first-episode psychosis (FEP) case–control status. Path analysis then examined the relationship between RFUC, subsequent patterns of cannabis use, and case–control status.

Controls (86.1%) and FEPp (75.63%) were most likely to report ‘because of friends’ as their most common RFUC. However, 20.1% of FEPp compared to 5.8% of controls reported: ‘to feel better’ as their RFUC (χ2 = 50.97; p < 0.001). RFUC ‘to feel better’ was associated with being a FEPp (OR 1.74; 95% CI 1.03–2.95) while RFUC ‘with friends’ was associated with being a control (OR 0.56; 95% CI 0.37–0.83). The path model indicated an association between RFUC ‘to feel better’ with heavy cannabis use and with FEPp-control status.

Both FEPp and controls usually started using cannabis with their friends, but more patients than controls had begun to use ‘to feel better’. People who reported their reason for first using cannabis to ‘feel better’ were more likely to progress to heavy use and develop a psychotic disorder than those reporting ‘because of friends’.

With regionalized trauma care, medical transport times can be prolonged, requiring paramedics to manage patient care and symptoms. Our objective was to evaluate pain management during air transport of trauma patients.

We conducted a 12-month review of electronic paramedic records from a provincial critical care transport agency. Patients were included if they were ≥18 years old and underwent air transport to a trauma centre, and excluded if they were Glasgow Coma Scale score <14, intubated, or accompanied by a physician or nurse. Demographics, injury description, and transportation parameters were recorded. Outcomes included pain assessment via 11-point numerical rating scale, patterns of analgesia administration, and analgesia-related adverse events. Results were reported as mean ± standard deviation, [range], (percentage).

We included 372 patients: 47.0 years old; 262 males; 361 blunt injuries. Transport duration was 82.4 ± 46.3 minutes. In 232 (62.4%) patients who received analgesia, baseline numerical rating scale was 5.9 ± 2.5. Fentanyl was most commonly administered at 44.3 [25–60] mcg. Numerical rating scale after first analgesia dose decreased by 1.1 [-2–7]. Thereafter, 171 (73.7%) patients received 2.4 [1-18] additional doses. While 44 (23.4%) patients had no change in numerical rating scale after first analgesia dose, subsequent doses resulted in no change in numerical rating scale in over 65% of patients. There were 43 adverse events recorded, with nausea the most commonly reported (39.5%).

Initial and subsequent dose(s) of analgesic had minimal effect on pain as assessed via numerical rating scale, likely due in part to inadequate dosing. Future research is required to determine and address the barriers to proper analgesia.