There is an epidemic of obesity in adults in rural America. It is estimated that about 19% of the population resides in rural areas, which encompasses 97% of America's total landmass. Although rural America makes up a fraction of America's total population, it has been estimated that the prevalence of obesity is approximately 6.2 times higher than in urban America. This illustrates an apparent disparity that exists between the rural population and urban populations that needs to be examined.The prevalence of obesity, especially in rural America, is a growing concern in the medical community in recent years. Obesity has been identified as a significant risk factor for cardiovascular disease, cancer, and type 2 diabetes mellitus, which are leading causes of morbidity and mortality in the US. To better understand the disparity in the prevalence of adult obesity between rural and urban America, researchers have identified risk factors that are associated with the high incidence and prevalence of obesity in the rural American adult population. Low income and lack of physical activity have been identified as factors that predispose rural Americans to increased risk of obesity, arguing that low-income Americans may not have access to the resources available to assist them in weight reduction. With rural Americans being at an income disadvantage, it creates a risk for obesity, which further predisposes them to chronic diseases such as hypertension, obstructive sleep apnea (OSA), diabetes, and coronary artery disease.As obesity continues to rise among the American population, the burden on the rural population is incredibly evident. Despite ongoing efforts by the US government and strategies implemented by the Common Community Measures for Obesity Prevention, there is still much to be done to tackle the epidemic. With an existing strategy in place, such as the 12 Common Community Measures for Obesity Prevention (COCOMO) strategies to fight obesity with physical activity, Americans are a step closer to conquering this epidemic. However, until other disparities such as income are addressed, rural Americans may continue to be severely impacted by the rising incidence of obesity and subsequent higher mortality rates from associated diseases.

Locked-in syndrome (LIS) is a neurological disorder in which there is damage to the ventral pons and caudal midbrain. An ischemic cause, such as basilar artery occlusion, can often lead to LIS. LIS has three subtypes: classical, partial, and total. There is loss of motion in the four extremities in classical LIS, loss of horizontal gaze, and aphasia. In partial LIS, the patient still has some motor function. Complete LIS has the worst outcome because patients cannot blink or have vertical gaze, thus rendering them incapable of communicating. Most cases of LIS occur due to ischemic infarcts. These patients require a great deal of physical rehabilitation to regain partial motor ability and a means to communicate. While the clinical features and pathophysiology are known, the prognosis and long-term treatment remain unknown.We conducted a systematic review using the Meta-Analysis Of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) protocol. We use an advanced PubMed strategy using the inclusion criteria of observational studies or clinical trials conducted in the last 20 years, written in English, and conducted on humans. We excluded systematic reviews, literature reviews, metanalysis, and studies that did not meet the outcomes of our objectives.The prognosis of LIS is not good, and most patients remain locked in, with poor quality of life, especially motor functions. Respiratory failure and depression are big comorbidities. In the acute setting, patients benefit from rapid intervention. The subacute treatment needs to manage aggressively to improve functional scores best. The long-term treatment focus is on the quality of life and managing comorbidities.

Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) is a term that encompasses conditions characterized by chronic inflammation of the gastrointestinal tract (GIT). It includes Crohn's disease and ulcerative colitis. Major scientific organizations interested in gastrointestinal systems or GIT-focused organizations worldwide release guidelines for diagnosing, classifying, managing, and treating IBD. However, there are subtle differences among each of these guidelines. This review evaluates four evidence-based guidelines in the management of IBD and seeks to highlight the differences and similarities between them. The main differences in the evaluated guidelines were in diagnosis and treatment recommendations. The diagnosing recommendations were comparable amongst the four guidelines; however, some were more specific about limiting the number of interventions necessary to confirm a diagnosis. Regarding treatment options, each guideline had clear suggestions about what was considered ideal. Although the treatment options were identical, the main differences existed in the recommended diets and initial therapy in patients with moderate disease. Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) recommend evidence-based practice from opinion leaders in clinical decision-making. Rather than dictating a one-size-fits-all approach in IBD management, reviewing various guidelines can enhance the cross-pollination of ideas amongst clinicians to improve decision-making. Clearly describing and appraising evidence-based reasoning for scientific recommendations remain driving factors for quality patient care. The effectiveness of CPGs in improving health and the complexities of their formation requires constant review to maximize constructive criticisms and explore possible improvements.

Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is an inflammatory process in the lungs that induces nonhydrostatic protein-rich pulmonary edema. ARDS occurs in roughly half of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pneumonia patients, with most of them requiring intensive care. Oxygen saturation, partial pressure of the oxygen, and the fraction of the inspired oxygen are health indicators that may indicate a severe illness necessitating further investigation. As treatments have evolved, a typical pattern of ARDS has likewise evolved. In cases where mechanical ventilation is required, the use of low tidal volumes (<6 ml/kg ideal body weight) and airway pressures (plateau pressure <30 cmH 2 O) was recommended. For patients with moderate/severe ARDS (partial pressure to fractional inspired oxygen ratio <20), prone positioning was recommended for at least 16 hours per day. By contrast, high-frequency oscillation was not recommended. The use of inhaled vasodilators was recommended in patients with persistent hypoxemia despite invasive ventilation and prone position until extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO). The use of a conservative fluid management strategy was suggested for all patients. Mechanical ventilation with high positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) was suggested for patients with ARDS with a ratio of arterial oxygen partial pressure to fractional inspired oxygen (PF) ratios. ECMO was suggested as an adjunct to protective mechanical ventilation for patients with severe ARDS. In the absence of adequate evidence, research recommendations were made for corticosteroids and extracorporeal carbon dioxide removal. While decades of research have been conducted, treatment options for underlying pathologies remain limited, and mechanical ventilation, which removes carbon dioxide from the body, remains essential to achieving better clinical outcomes. This review aims to identify the best ARDS treatments that are currently available.

Japanese encephalitis (JE) continues to be one of the world's most serious infections with no definitive treatment or guidelines. The high morbidity and mortality rate among symptomatic patients warrant the need for further investigation in this regard. Our review focuses on the recent updates on Japanese encephalitis treatment. For that reason, we used an advanced PubMed search with JE and drugs like minocycline, interferon, ribavirin, immunoglobulin, dexamethasone, and acyclovir. All research was done in full papers written in the English language and conducted in humans. This review aims to compare and analyze recent papers regarding JE treatment to guide healthcare providers with the latest information and make evidence-based decisions when presented with this infection. Overall, only minocycline had promising results because one of the two studies showed statistically significant results. The second study showed positive trends in children over 12 years and patients who survived on the first day of hospitalization. The study with intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG) did not improve the outcomes; however, it increased the levels of neutralizing antibodies. Further study with higher doses may change the outcomes in patients with JE. The other drugs failed to show promising results.