The QOSMOS Study: Pharmacist-Led Multicentered Observational Study on Quality of Life in Multiple Sclerosis.

Health-related quality of life is frequently included in patient-reported outcomes aimed at evaluating the effectiveness of disease-modifying drugs for multiple sclerosis, but recent data about Italian patients are missing. A multicenter observational and cross-sectional study was performed by students of hospital pharmacy to update existing data on quality of life and to correlate it with the pharmacological and medical history of patients. Quality of life (QoL) was assessed using the MS-QoL54 questionnaire, and the pharmacist collected patients' characteristics, medical and pharmacological history, and Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS). Three hundred and forty-nine patients with multiple sclerosis were recruited from 16 centers between May 2018 and June 2019 (median age = 44.1 years; 68.9% women). The composite indexes of physical and mental well-being showed direct correlation with each other (R = 0.826; p < 0.001), and EDSS disability was an independent negative predictor of both indexes (R2 = 35.08% p < 0.001 and R2 = 15.74% p < 0.001, respectively). A trend of association between Physical Health Composite Score and different classes of oral disease-modifying drugs (DMDs) was observed. Our study found a decrease in QoL correlated with teriflunomide, which deserves further investigation. This experience demonstrates that joint action between scientific society and students association can be successful in conducting a no-profit multicenter observational study in a real-world setting.

[Therapeutic drug plans: how many and which ones? Overview of a prescriptive and care appropriateness tool.] / Piani Terapeutici dei farmaci: quanti e quali? Fotografia di uno strumento di appropriatezza prescrittiva e assistenziale.

Therapeutic plans (TPs) were introduced in Italy in 2004 in order to ensure the continuity in the prescription of new drugs between specialist physicians and general practitioners (GPs). Over the years this prescription tool was updated several times: starting from a paper form without any template ("paper TP") to a template defined by AIFA to collect specific clinical information, up to a web-based form to collect all information into a database. Over time-critical issues concerning its usefulness have been raised, especially when AIFA established several extensions for TP validity to ensure the social distancing required by the covid-19 pandemic. Therefore, after several years from their establishment, pending adoption of necessary implementing of Ministerial Decree of 25th March 2020, a check of the actual impact of TPs is required, in order to plan their review. This study provide a detailed overview of all TPs active in Italy at the 11th May 2020. From Farmadati database, all drugs reimbursed by the National Health Service (class A drugs) and requiring TP were selected. The consumption of these drugs has been derived from OsMed Reports that make available data of medicines consumption and expenditure in the general population in Italy. The analysis showed that TP is required for the prescription of 935 medicinal products (9.6% of class-A drugs) and 147 different active substances (belonging to 34 different Therapeutic Groups and 66 subgroups). Out of these, 67 (46%) required a paper TP without any template, 72 (49%) a paper TP on AIFA template, and 8 (5%) a web-based TP. The Therapeutic Group with the largest number of active ingredients with TP were antidiabetics (19.7%), followed by immunomodulating and immunosuppressants (9.5%) and medications for asthma and COPD (6.8%). Consumption analysis of drugs with TP showed that this prescription tool covers 943,899,598 DDD per year, equal to 2,586,026 DDD/day. This means that TPs have a very high impact in terms of the prevalence of patients treated on the entire care process. Of all annual DDDs prescribed on TP, 46.8% concerned drugs with TP on template AIFA, 34.5% drugs with web-based TP, while the remaining 18.7% drugs with paper TP without a template. This analysis may provide the basis for an analytical case-by-case review of TP maintenance needs, trying to maximize the benefits of this tool and to reduce its possible adverse effects. This review could be helpful to ensure the appropriateness in the drug uses, to enhance the role of general medicine, and to simplify the pathways of millions of patients ensuring the continuity of their care.

An Observational Veneto Research on Ventilator-Associated Pneumonia (OVeRVAP): attributable mortality and cumulative incidence of ventilator-associated pneumonia.

BACKGROUND: The relationship between ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) and mortality varies from study to study, and its entity is uncertain due a considerable variation in the attributable mortality. The aim of this study was to evaluate the relationship between VAP frequency and mortality in a cohort of mechanically ventilated patients. METHODS: A multicenter prospective observational study was conducted in 21 Intensive Care Units (ICUs). The patients were recruited from 2008 to 2010 within randomly selected periods. 842 patients of 2595 admitted, met the eligibility criteria and were enrolled in the study. The study's primary outcome was death by any cause in one of the ICUs. We modelled VAP occurrence as a time-dependent covariate and fitted a competing risk analysis model. We estimated the attributable mortality of VAP as the population-attributable fraction of ICU mortality. RESULTS: A total of 121 patients developed VAP (14.4%), for an incidence rate of 15.7 cases per 1000 ventilator days; of the 175 patients (20.8%) who died during the study period, 31 (25.6%) had VAP. The ICU mortality rate in the patients who developed VAP was 22.6 per 1000 ventilator days (95% CI: 15.9-32.1). We estimated an attributable mortality of 8.4%. CONCLUSIONS: In 8.4% of cases, VAP was the leading cause of death in our study. This indicates that the patients died more frequently with VAP rather than because of it.

Multicentre comparison Of shock efficacy using single-vs. Dual-coil lead systems and Anodal vs. cathodaL polarITY defibrillation in patients undergoing transvenous cardioverter-defibrillator implantation. The MODALITY study.

PURPOSE: An optimal active-can lead configuration during implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) placement is important to obtain an adequate defibrillation safety margin. The purpose of this multicenter study was to evaluate the rate of the first shock success at defibrillation testing according to the type of lead implant (single vs. dual coil) and shock polarity (cathodal and anodal) in a large series of consecutive patients who received transvenous ICDs. METHODS: This was a multicenter study enrolling 469 consecutive patients. Single- versus dual-coil leads and cathodal versus anodal polarity were evaluated at defibrillation testing. In all cases, the value of the energy for the first shock was set to 20 J less than the maximum energy deliverable from the device. RESULTS: A total of 469 patients underwent defibrillation testing: 158 (34 %) had dual-coil and 311 (66 %) had single-coil lead systems configuration, 254 (54 %) received anodal shock and 215 (46 %) received cathodal shock. In 35 (7.4 %) patients, the shock was unsuccessful. No significant differences in the outcome of defibrillation testing using single- versus dual-coil lead were observed but the multivariate analysis showed an increased risk of shock failure using cathodal shock polarity (OR 2.37, 95 % CI 1.12-5.03). CONCLUSIONS: Both single- and dual-coil transvenous ICD lead systems were associated with high rates of successful ICD implantation, and we found no significant differences in ventricular arrhythmias interruption between the two ICD lead systems configuration. Instead, anodal defibrillation was more likely to be successful than cathodal defibrillation.