No abstract

No abstract

Objective: To survey drug use by breastfeeding women, and to compare this with nonbreastfeeding women. In addition, we were interested whether drug use was of influence on the decision to give breastfeeding, and the other way around. Design and setting: During a 6-week period in 2002, a questionnaire was handed out to all women with a child not older than 6 months, who visited a Well-Baby Clinic in the province of Friesland, the Netherlands, eventually resulting in 549 returned questionnaires (response 43%). Results: In all, 82.1% of the participants breastfed their baby at least at any time during the first 6 months after birth. More than half (65.9%) of all breastfeeding women had used drugs; however, they used drugs less frequently than nonbreastfeeding women (79.6%). The pattern of drug use differed: oral contraceptives, iron preparations, drugs for peptic ulcer, and several psychotropic drugs were more frequently used by nonbreastfeeding women, while vitamins were more frequently used by breastfeeding women. Drugs play an important role in women's decision to start or continue breastfeeding: women frequently hesitated to use drugs during breastfeeding, stopped either breastfeeding or drug use to avoid combining the two, took a measure to minimise exposure to the child, did not use any drug because of breastfeeding, or did not breastfeed because of drug use. Conclusions: Drugs are frequently though reluctantly used during breastfeeding, and play an important role in the decision to start and stop breastfeeding. Information how to deal with drugs seems therefore indispensable in efforts to promote breastfeeding.

We conclude from the RCT data that statins do not lower UAE in subjects selected because of an elevated UAE instead of hyperlipidaemia. In the observational cohort study, the use of statins similarly was not associated with a fall in UAE; UAE instead increased. Statin treatment was not associated with a significant change in GFR in these subjects with only modestly impaired GFR.

Aims To determine structure, activities and drug selection processes used by Dutch hospital drug and therapeutics (D & T) committees. Methods A pretested structured survey questionnaire based on the Australian process and impact indicators, previous research, and consultation of professionals was developed. Subsequently, D & T committees that met predefined selection criteria were asked to participate. Results The overall response rate was 70% (38/54). D & T committees varied considerably in size and representation of clinical expertise. Although responsibilities were theoretically alike, actual responsibilities were frequently passed on to other authorities, such as pharmacy staff. Few committees used detailed guidelines or decision supportive matrices to establish transparency in drug selection. With respect to drug selection, the value scores on the information resources used, the factors involved, and the selection criteria used varied. Hospital pharmacists were likely to be most involved and to have the greatest impact. A consensus was most difficult to achieve for drugs used in cardiology, oncology, and psychiatry. Interference of industrial marketing strategies on drug selection was recognized and identified. Conclusions Our results indicate that Dutch hospital D & T committees differ with respect to their clinical expertise and their activities, a situation comparable with that observed in other countries. Furthermore, the lack of transparency in drug selection was considerable. These findings clarify the differences previously found between Dutch hospital drug formularies.

Objective To investigate the utilization of antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) in Dutch children and compare this with guidelines on the treatment of epilepsy in children.Method From the Dutch Interaction Database (IADB.nl) we selected children aged 0-19 years who received at least one prescription for an AED (ATC-code beginning with N03A) between 1997 and 2005. We calculated cumulative incidences and prevalences per 1000 children per year, stratified by age-category, sex and type of AED, and the total number of months each patient received at least one prescription of AEDs, and we counted the number of person-months and AEDs prescribed. For each AED, proportions of person-months were calculated for monoand combination therapy. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis was used to analyse the duration of AED use, stratified by sex. Results The overall prevalence of the prescription of AEDs to children was constant at approximately 4.0 per 1000 children during the years of the study. The overall cumulative incidence from 1997-2005 was 0.67 per 1000 children. When stratified by age category or sex, there were no relevant differences in incidence or prevalence. Valproic acid was the most frequently prescribed drug, followed by carbamazepine and lamotrigine. In 20.3% of all personmonths, patients received combination therapy; of these, 34.2% received combination therapy for 3 person-months or less. The older AEDs were prescribed more often as monotherapy than combination therapy, in contrast with the newer AEDs, for which the opposite was true. The 50% survival probability (= time period when 50% of children had stopped using AEDs) was around 2 years, with a significantly lower discontinuation of treatment for girls than boys (P = 0.04). Conclusion The overall cumulative incidence of AEDs was determined to be 0.67 per 1000 children, and the prevalence 4.0 per 1000 children. The most frequently prescribed drug is valproic acid, followed by carbamazepine and lamotrigine. The prescribing of AEDs seems to be in conformity with the overall recommendations of the guidelines on the treatment of epilepsy in children.

Most of the publications on isotretinoin, pregnancy and compliance with the pregnancy prevention programme (PPP) originate from North America. Information specific for the European situation is very limited. The aim of this study was to identify publications describing the use of isotretinoin in humans and the compliance with the PPP in Europe, a systematic search in Medline and Embase was conducted using the terms 'isotretinoin, pregnancy (and Europe)'. Furthermore, a manual search in publications was performed. A total of 17 publications were identified. Publications consisted of case reports of exposed pregnancies, surveys among dermatologists or pharmacists and database studies evaluating compliance with the PPP. The studies and surveys dealt with groups of patients exposed to isotretinoin before or during pregnancy and/or compliance with the isotretinoin PPP. Where the information was provided, in 6-26% of cases isotretinoin was prescribed in full accordance with the PPP. Pregnancy incidence was seen in 0·2-1·0 per 1000 women of childbearing age using isotretinoin. Between 65% and 87% of these pregnancies were terminated. This review of studies in Europe performed to date shows failures in the implementation of the PPP. Therefore, the isotretinoin PPP must be scrutinized to identify whether new measures should be taken or whether the failures in the implementation need to be corrected. New measures should take into account the definition of the ultimate goal of a PPP and the acceptable burden. In the meantime, stakeholders could make a start with adjustments in the implementation of the PPP by taking responsibility and enhancing the performance by explicit instructions, monitoring the performance and adjusting, if necessary.

Because compliance to proper use of folic acid was poor, food fortification in the Netherlands must be seriously considered. The Dutch Health Council wants to limit the fortification of food products to those products that are especially aimed for women who wish to become pregnant. The fortification of specific products instead of staple foods is a missed chance to reduce NTDs and possibly other birth defects and cardiovascular defects as well.