We recently demonstrated that weight gain could be prevented in young people experiencing a first-episode of psychosis commencing treatment with antipsychotics. A 12-week, intensive lifestyle and life skills intervention – the Keeping the Body in Mind program, – was delivered by dedicated nursing, dietetic and exercise physiology clinicians, for new referrals with < one month of antipsychotic exposure. (Curtis et al., Early intervention in psychiatry, in press). At the conclusion of the intervention the 16 young people participating in the program experienced a mean weight gain of 1.8 kilograms, and a mean increase in waist circumference of 0.1 centimeters. The participants were followed up for two years after initial referral.

During the two-year follow-up, participants had continuing access to an in house gym and weekly cooking groups, but without the same intensity of follow-up. Two year follow-up data were obtained from 11 participants form the original cohort.

Mean weight gain at two-year follow-up was 0.90 (SD 8.7) kilograms, and this difference was not statistically significant [t (10) = 0.3, NS]. Waist circumference decreased by 0.7 (SD 7.7) centimeters, which was not t statistically significant [t (10) = 0.3, NS]. Nine of the participants (82%) did not experience clinically significant weight gain two years after initiation of antipsychotic medication.

This two-year follow-up data demonstrated that it is feasible to prevent weight gain in youth with first-episode psychosis over the first two years of treatment.

The authors have not supplied their declaration of competing interest.

In September 2006, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention was notified of cases of gram-negative bloodstream infection (BSI) occurring among outpatients who received an intravenous formulation of the prostanoid treprostinil. An investigation was conducted to determine rates of prostanoid-associated BSI in this patient population and possible risk factors for infection.

We performed a retrospective cohort study of patients who had received intravenous formulations of at least 1 of the 2 approved prostanoids (epoprostenol and treprostinil) from January 1, 2004, through late 2006. Chart reviews were conducted at 2 large centers for pulmonary arterial hypertension, and a survey of infection control practices was conducted at 1 center.

A total of 224 patients were given intravenous prostanoid treatment, corresponding to 146,093 treatment-days during the study period. Overall, there were 0.55 cases of BSI and 0.18 cases of BSI due to gram-negative organisms per 1,000 treatment-days. BSI rates were higher for patients who received intravenous treprostinil than for patients who received intravenous epoprostenol (1.13 vs. 0.42 BSIs per 1,000 treatment-days; P < .001), as were rates of BSI due to gram-negative organisms (0.81 vs. 0.04 BSIs per 1,000 treatment-days; P < .001). Adjusted hazard ratios for all BSIs and for BSIs due to gram-negative organisms were higher among patients given treatment with intravenous treprostinil. The survey identified no significant differences in medication-related infection control practices.

At 2 centers, BSI due to gram-negative pathogens was more common than previously reported and was more frequent among patients given treatment with intravenous treprostinil than among patients given treatment with intravenous epoprostenol. Whether similar results would be found at other centers for pulmonary arterial hypertension warrants further investigation. This investigation underscores the importance of surveillance and evaluation of healthcare-related adverse events in patients given treatment primarily as outpatients.

Disaster is a collective responsibility requiring coordinated response from all parts of society. This theme focused on coordination and management issues in a diverse range of scenarios.

Details of the methods used are provided in the preceding paper. The chairs moderated all presentations and produced a summary that was presented to an assembly of all of the delegates. Although the main points developed in Themes 1 and 4 were different from each other (as reported in the Results section), their implementation was similar. Therefore, the chairs of both groups presided over one workshop that resulted in the generation of a set of Action Plans that then were reported to the collective group of all delegates.

The main points developed during the presentations and discussions included: (1) the need for evidence-based assessments and planning, (2) the need for a shift in focus to health-sector readiness, (3) empowerment of survivors, (4) provision of relief for the caregivers, (5) address the incentives and disincentives to attain readiness, (6) engage in joint preparation, response, and training, (7) focus on prevention and mitigation of the damage from events, and (8) improve media relations. There exists a need for institutionalization of processes for learning from experiences obtained from disasters.

Action plans presented include: (1) creation of an Information and Data Clearinghouse on Disaster Management, (2) identification of incentives and disincentives for readiness and develop strategies and interventions, and (3) act on lessons learned from evidence-based research and practical experience.

There is an urgent need to proactively establish coordination and management procedures in advance of any crisis. A number of important insights for improvement in coordination and management during disasters emerged.