LTHOUGH NUMEROUS STUDies have evaluated the patterns and quality of prescription medication use among the elderly, 1-5 information related to the incidence of preventable adverse drug events in the ambulatory geriatric population is limited. Even though most medication errors do not result in injury, 6,7 the extensive use of medications by the geriatric population suggests that sizeable numbers of older persons are affected. The prevalence of prescription medication use among the ambulatory adult population increases with advancing age. A recent national survey of the US noninstitutionalized adult population indicated that more than 90% of persons aged 65 years or older used at least 1 medication per week. 8 More than 40% used 5 or more different medications per week, and Author Affiliations and Financial Disclosures are listed at the end of this article.
Objective To provide guidance for the management of gout, including indications for and optimal use of urate‐lowering therapy (ULT), treatment of gout flares, and lifestyle and other medication recommendations. Methods Fifty‐seven population, intervention, comparator, and outcomes questions were developed, followed by a systematic literature review, including network meta‐analyses with ratings of the available evidence according to the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology, and patient input. A group consensus process was used to compose the final recommendations and grade their strength as strong or conditional. Results Forty‐two recommendations (including 16 strong recommendations) were generated. Strong recommendations included initiation of ULT for all patients with tophaceous gout, radiographic damage due to gout, or frequent gout flares; allopurinol as the preferred first‐line ULT, including for those with moderate‐to‐severe chronic kidney disease (CKD; stage >3); using a low starting dose of allopurinol (≤100 mg/day, and lower in CKD) or febuxostat (<40 mg/day); and a treat‐to‐target management strategy with ULT dose titration guided by serial serum urate (SU) measurements, with an SU target of <6 mg/dl. When initiating ULT, concomitant antiinflammatory prophylaxis therapy for a duration of at least 3–6 months was strongly recommended. For management of gout flares, colchicine, nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs, or glucocorticoids (oral, intraarticular, or intramuscular) were strongly recommended. Conclusion Using GRADE methodology and informed by a consensus process based on evidence from the current literature and patient preferences, this guideline provides direction for clinicians and patients making decisions on the management of gout.
Objective To provide guidance for the management of gout, including indications for and optimal use of urate‐lowering therapy (ULT), treatment of gout flares, and lifestyle and other medication recommendations. Methods Fifty‐seven population, intervention, comparator, and outcomes questions were developed, followed by a systematic literature review, including network meta‐analyses with ratings of the available evidence according to the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology, and patient input. A group consensus process was used to compose the final recommendations and grade their strength as strong or conditional. Results Forty‐two recommendations (including 16 strong recommendations) were generated. Strong recommendations included initiation of ULT for all patients with tophaceous gout, radiographic damage due to gout, or frequent gout flares; allopurinol as the preferred first‐line ULT, including for those with moderate‐to‐severe chronic kidney disease (CKD; stage >3); using a low starting dose of allopurinol (≤100 mg/day, and lower in CKD) or febuxostat (<40 mg/day); and a treat‐to‐target management strategy with ULT dose titration guided by serial serum urate (SU) measurements, with an SU target of <6 mg/dl. When initiating ULT, concomitant antiinflammatory prophylaxis therapy for a duration of at least 3–6 months was strongly recommended. For management of gout flares, colchicine, nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs, or glucocorticoids (oral, intraarticular, or intramuscular) were strongly recommended. Conclusion Using GRADE methodology and informed by a consensus process based on evidence from the current literature and patient preferences, this guideline provides direction for clinicians and patients making decisions on the management of gout.
Purpose To perform a systematic review of the validity of algorithms for identifying cerebrovascular accidents (CVAs) or transient ischemic attacks (TIAs) using administrative and claims data. Methods PubMed and Iowa Drug Information Service (IDIS) searches of the English language literature were performed to identify studies published between 1990 and 2010 that evaluated the validity of algorithms for identifying CVAs (ischemic and hemorrhagic strokes, intracranial hemorrhage and subarachnoid hemorrhage) and/or TIAs in administrative data. Two study investigators independently reviewed the abstracts and articles to determine relevant studies according to pre-specified criteria. Results A total of 35 articles met the criteria for evaluation. Of these, 26 articles provided data to evaluate the validity of stroke, 7 reported the validity of TIA, 5 reported the validity of intracranial bleeds (intracerebral hemorrhage and subarachnoid hemorrhage), and 10 studies reported the validity of algorithms to identify the composite endpoints of stroke/TIA or cerebrovascular disease. Positive predictive values (PPVs) varied depending on the specific outcomes and algorithms evaluated. Specific algorithms to evaluate the presence of stroke and intracranial bleeds were found to have high PPVs (80% or greater). Algorithms to evaluate TIAs in adult populations were generally found to have PPVs of 70% or greater. Conclusions The algorithms and definitions to identify CVAs and TIAs using administrative and claims data differ greatly in the published literature. The choice of the algorithm employed should be determined by the stroke subtype of interest.
Prevention efforts to reduce ADEs should be targeted toward older adults with multiple medical conditions or taking multiple medications, nonopioid analgesics, anticoagulants, diuretics, and antiseizure medications.
Purpose To identify and describe the validity of algorithms used to detect heart failure (HF) using administrative and claims data sources. Methods Systematic review of PubMed and Iowa Drug Information Service (IDIS) searches of the English language were performed to identify studies published between 1990 and 2010 that evaluated the validity of algorithms for the identification of patients with HF using and claims data. Abstracts and articles were reviewed by two study investigators to determine their relevance based on predetermined criteria. Results The initial search strategy identified 887 abstracts. Of these, 499 full papers were reviewed and 35 studies included data to evaluate the validity of identifying patients with HF. Positive predictive values (PPVs) were in the acceptable to high range, with most being very high (>90%). Studies that included patients with a primary hospital discharge diagnosis of ICD-9 code 428.X had the highest PPV and specificity for HF. PPVs for this algorithm ranged from 84% - 100%. This algorithm, however, may compromise sensitivity since many HF patients are managed on an outpatient basis. The most common ‘gold standard’ for the validation of HF was the Framingham Heart Study criteria. Conclusions The algorithms and definitions employed to identify HF using administrative and claims data perform well, particularly when using a primary hospital discharge diagnosis. Attention should be paid to whether patients who are managed on an outpatient basis are included in the study sample. Including outpatient codes in the described algorithms would increase the sensitivity for identifying new cases of HF.
Background Use of several immunomodulatory agents has been associated with reduced cardiovascular (CV) events in epidemiologic studies of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). However, it is unknown whether time-averaged disease activity in RA correlates with CV events. Methods We studied patients with RA followed in a longitudinal US-based registry. Time-averaged disease activity was assessed using the area under the curve of the Clinical Disease Activity Index, a validated measure of rheumatoid arthritis disease activity, assessed during follow-up. Age, gender, diabetes, hypertension, hyperlipidemia, body mass index, family history of myocardial infarction (MI), aspirin use, NSAID use presence of CV disease, and baseline immunomodulator use were assessed at baseline. Cox proportional hazards regression models were examined to determine the risk of a composite CV endpoint that included MI, stroke, and CV death. Results 24,989 subjects followed for a median of 2.7 years were included in these analyses. During follow-up, we observed 422 confirmed CV endpoints for an incidence rate of 9.08 (95% confidence interval, CI, 7.90 – 10.26) per 1,000 person-years. In models adjusting for variables noted above, a 10-point reduction in time-averaged Clinical Disease Activity Index was associated with a 26% reduction in CV risk (95% confidence interval 17-34%). These results were robust in subgroup analyses stratified by presence of CV disease, use of corticosteroids, use of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs or selective COX-2 inhibitors, change in RA treatment, and also when restricted to events adjudicated as definite or probable. Conclusions Reduced time-averaged disease activity in RA is associated with fewer CV events.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.