Association Between Electronic Device Use at Bedtime and COVID-19 Vaccine-Related Adverse Events During the COVID-19 Pandemic in Korean Adults: A Nationwide Cross-Sectional Population-Based Study

BACKGROUND

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has led to heightened mood disturbances linked to increased electronic device use at bedtime (EUB). General anxiety may contribute to an increased likelihood of experiencing nocebo responses, which have been reported to be associated with COVID-19 vaccine-related adverse events (CAEs). However, no related studies have been conducted to examine this association to date.

METHODS

We executed a nationwide cross-sectional study to explore these correlations during the pandemic. Using data from the 2022 National Sleep Survey of South Korea, we analyzed the sleep health of 4,000 adults aged 20-69 years between January and February 2022. Shift workers and those with severe sleep disorders were excluded. Participants with EUB more than four days a week were labeled as high frequency EUB, and those reporting CAEs after both vaccine doses were marked as having a presence of CAEs. The survey also included details about anthropometric data, socioeconomic status, and sleep status.

RESULTS

Of the 3,702 participants, 92.6% had received two or more vaccine doses, with 41.2% experiencing CAEs. Furthermore, 73.7% had a high EUB frequency. Factors associated with CAE reporting included younger age, female sex, and high EUB frequency, while heavy alcohol use was found to be less likely to be associated with CAE reporting. Notably, a high EUB frequency was significantly associated with reported CAEs (odds ratio, 1.223; 95% confidence interval, 1.028-1.455; P = 0.023).

CONCLUSION

A nationwide online survey conducted in South Korea during the pandemic found that individuals who engaged in the relatively frequent use of electronic devices during bedtime had worse sleep quality and increased COVID-19-related adverse events compared with those using these devices less frequently. These findings have the potential to enhance our understanding of the impact of the use of electronic devices at bedtime on health.

[Nocebo placebo, the hidden side of our treatments]

NOCEBO PLACEBO, THE HIDDEN SIDE OF OUR TREATMENTS. Our knowledge of the placebo effect and its opposite, the nocebo effect, has changed dramatically in the last 20 years. Any treatment activity induces this type of effect. The placebo groups in clinical studies have biases that profoundly alter their neutrality. The nocebo effect is omnipresent in daily practice, it contributes to induce many of the adverse drug effects. The use of «impure» placebos is also widespread in daily practice. The placebo effect has an objectivable and reproducible neurobiological substrate. Its therapeutic effects are well documented. Disorders, symptoms involving the central nervous system (CNS) respond more easily to placebo. These new data make it possible to improve clinical practices by developing the quality of relationships with patients and families as well as the methodology of clinical trials.

Monitoring the transition of patients on biologics in rheumatoid arthritis: Consensus guidance for pharmacists

Background:

Recent approvals for novel agents such as the small molecule Janus kinase inhibitors (JAKi), combined with the advent of biosimilars has widened the gamut of available therapeutic options in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). This combined with the introduction of mandatory non- medical switches to biosimilars in some jurisdictions by both public and private payors has led to a significant increase in the volume of therapeutic changes for patients. Pharmacists are well positioned to ensure effective and safe transitions, however there is a significant unmet need for objective and subjective clinical guidance around therapy as well disease state monitoring in RA that facilitates best practices throughout the patient journey.

Objective:

In this paper we aim to create a consensus derived monitoring algorithm for pharmacists to facilitate best practices throughout therapeutic transitions from originator biologic to other originator biologics, biosimilars, and Janus kinase inhibitors in RA.

Methods:

The Nominal Group Technique (NGT) was used to understand if consensus could be found among the participants. Clinically relevant questions were developed to capture solutions to the identified unmet need. The faculty considered the questions as individuals, and privately generated answers/ideas. After discussion and consideration, the participants ranked the ideas and established a consensus.

Results:

Based on the outcome of the consensus discussions, an algorithm was created to help guide pharmacists through therapeutic transitions in RA. The tool covers important topics such as pre-transition considerations, avoiding the nocebo effect for biosimilars, specific considerations for each drug or class, monitoring efficacy, and when to refer.

Conclusions:

New classes of anti-rheumatic drugs including JAKi, along with the introduction of biosimilars are presenting more opportunity for therapeutic changes and monitoring in patients with RA. We hope our evidence-based consensus derived guidance tool will assist frontline pharmacists in supporting their patients to a successful therapeutic transition in RA.

The nocebo effect as a source of bias in the assessment of treatment effects

The term nocebo effect refers to the harmful outcomes that result from people’s negative beliefs, anticipations, or experiences related to the treatment rather than the pharmacological properties of the treatment. These outcomes may include a worsening of symptoms, a lack of expected improvement, or adverse events, and they may occur after the active treatment and the placebo that is supposed to imitate it.  The nocebo effect is always unwanted and may distort estimates of treatment effectiveness and safety; moreover, it may cause discontinuation of therapy or withdrawal from a trial.

The nocebo effect may be unintentionally evoked by the explanations given by healthcare professionals during a clinical consultation or consent procedures, or by information from other patients, the media, or the Internet. Moreover, it may be a consequence of previous bad experiences with the treatment, through learning and conditioning, and the conditioning may happen without patients’ conscious awareness. In trial settings, a study design, for example lack of blinding, may introduce bias from the nocebo effect.

Unlike the placebo effect, which is usually taken into consideration while interpreting treatment outcomes and controlled for in clinical trials, the nocebo effect is under-recognised by clinical researchers and clinicians. This is worrying, because the nocebo phenomenon is common and may have potentially negative consequences for the results of clinical treatment and trials. It is therefore important that doctors and medical researchers consider any potential nocebo effect while assessing the treatment effect and try to minimise it through careful choice and phrasing of treatment-related information given to patients.