RESUMO
INTRODUCTION: Patient and public involvement (PPI) in research is an embedded practice in clinical research, however, its role in preclinical or laboratory-based research is less well established and presents specific challenges. This study aimed to explore the perspectives of two key stakeholder groups, preclinical researchers and clinicians on PPI in preclinical research, using spinal cord research as a case study. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews were conducted online with 11 clinicians and 11 preclinical researchers all working in the area of spinal cord injury (SCI). Interviews were transcribed verbatim and analysed thematically. FINDINGS: Nine themes were developed through analysis. Participants' perspectives included that people living with SCI had a right to be involved, that PPI can improve the relevance of preclinical research, and that PPI can positively impact the experiences of researchers. They identified the distance between lab-based research and the daily experiences of living with SCI to be a barrier and proactive management of accessibility and the motivated and networked SCI community as key facilitators. To develop strong partnerships, participants suggested setting clear expectations, ensuring good communication, and demonstrating respect for the time of PPI contributors involved in the research. CONCLUSIONS: While traditionally PPI has been more commonly associated with clinical research, participants identified several potential benefits of PPI in preclinical spinal cord research that have applicability to preclinical researchers more broadly. Preclinical spinal researchers should explore how to include PPI in their work. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: This study was conducted as part of a broader project aiming to develop an evidence base for preclinical PPI that draws on a 5-year preclinical research programme focused on the development of advanced biomaterials for spinal cord repair as a case study. A PPI Advisory Panel comprising seriously injured rugby players, clinicians, preclinical researchers, and PPI facilitators collaborated as co-authors on the conceptualisation, design of the interview protocol, data analysis and writing of this manuscript.
Assuntos
Entrevistas como Assunto , Participação do Paciente , Pesquisadores , Traumatismos da Medula Espinal , Humanos , Traumatismos da Medula Espinal/terapia , Feminino , Masculino , Participação da Comunidade , Pesquisa Qualitativa , Adulto , Pesquisa Biomédica , Pessoa de Meia-IdadeRESUMO
OBJECTIVES: To produce a consensus list of the top 10 signs and symptoms suggestive of adverse drug events (ADEs) for monitoring in residents of long-term care facilities (LTCFs) who use antipsychotics, benzodiazepines, or antidepressants. DESIGN: A 3-round Delphi study. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Geriatricians, psychiatrists, pharmacologists, general practitioners, pharmacists, nurses, and caregivers from 13 Asia Pacific, European, and North American countries. METHODS: Three survey rounds were completed between April and June 2023. In Round 1, participants indicated their level of agreement on a 9-point Likert scale on whether 41 signs or symptoms identified in a systematic review should be routinely monitored. Participants considered signs and symptoms that reduce quality of life or cause significant harm, are observable or measurable by nurses or care workers, and can be assessed at a single time point. Round 1 statements were included in a list for prioritization in Round 3 if ≥ 70% of participants responded ≥7 on the Likert scale. Statements were excluded if ≤ 30% of participants responded ≥7. In Round 2, participants indicated their level of agreement with statements that did not reach initial consensus, plus amended statements based on Round 1 participant feedback. Round 2 statements were included in Round 3 if ≥ 50% of the participants responded ≥7 on the Likert scale. In Round 3, participants prioritized the signs and symptoms. RESULTS: Forty-four participants (93.6%) completed all 3 rounds. Four of 41 signs and symptoms reached consensus for inclusion after Round 1, and 9 after Round 2. The top 10 signs and symptoms prioritized in Round 3 were recent falls, daytime drowsiness or sleepiness, abnormal movements (eg, shaking or stiffness), confusion or disorientation, balance problems, dizziness, postural hypotension, reduced self-care, restlessness, and dry mouth. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: The top 10 signs and symptoms provide a basis for proactive monitoring for psychotropic ADEs.
RESUMO
INTRODUCTION: There is currently limited guidance for researchers on Patient and Public Involvement (PPI) for preclinical spinal cord research, leading to uncertainty about design and implementation. This study aimed to develop evidence-informed principles to support preclinical spinal cord researchers to incorporate PPI into their research. METHODS: This study used a modified Delphi method with the aim of establishing consensus on a set of principles for PPI in spinal cord research. Thirty-eight stakeholders including researchers, clinicians and people living with spinal cord injury took part in the expert panel. Participants were asked to rate their agreement with a series of statements relating to PPI in preclinical spinal cord research over two rounds. As part of Round 2, they were also asked to rate statements as essential or desirable. RESULTS: Thirty-eight statements were included in Round 1, after which five statements were amended and two additional statements were added. After Round 2, consensus (> 75% agreement) was reached for a total of 27 principles, with 13 rated as essential and 14 rated as desirable. The principles with highest agreement related to diversity in representation among PPI contributors, clarity of the purpose of PPI and effective communication. CONCLUSION: This research developed a previously unavailable set of evidence-informed principles to inform PPI in preclinical spinal cord research. These principles provide guidance for researchers seeking to conduct PPI in preclinical spinal cord research and may also inform PPI in other preclinical disciplines. PATIENT AND PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT STATEMENT: This study was conducted as part of a project aiming to develop PPI in preclinical spinal cord injury research associated with an ongoing research collaboration funded by the Irish Rugby Football Union Charitable Trust (IRFU CT) and the Science Foundation Ireland Centre for Advanced Materials and BioEngineering Research (SFI AMBER), with research conducted by the Tissue Engineering Research Group (TERG) at the RCSI University of Medicine and Health Sciences. The project aims to develop an advanced biomaterials platform for spinal cord repair and includes a PPI Advisory Panel comprising researchers, clinicians and seriously injured rugby players to oversee the work of the project. PPI is included in this study through the involvement of members of the PPI Advisory Panel in the conceptualisation of this research, review of findings, identification of key points for discussion and preparation of the study manuscript as co-authors.
Assuntos
Técnica Delphi , Participação do Paciente , Traumatismos da Medula Espinal , Humanos , Traumatismos da Medula Espinal/terapia , Participação da Comunidade/métodos , Masculino , Consenso , Feminino , Pesquisa Biomédica , Participação dos InteressadosRESUMO
Regulatory authorities must balance ensuring evidence of efficacy and safety of new drugs. Various regulatory pathways, such as the accelerated approval program in the United States (US), allow authorities to quickly approve drugs for severely ill patients by granting market authorization based on surrogate end points and pending confirmatory trials. In this cross-sectional study, we considered 23 indications of cancer drugs that received accelerated approval by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) but were subsequently withdrawn as of April 2023. Our investigation extended to assessing the regulatory status of these accelerated approvals in the European Union (EU) and Japan, examining relevant regulatory documents and identifying factors contributing to the withdrawal in the United States. Comparing regions, we found that for 52% (12/23) and 30% (7/23) of withdrawn accelerated approvals in the United States, sponsors had also sought marketing authorization from the European Medicines Agency (EMA) and Japan's Pharmaceuticals and Medical Devices Agency (PMDA), respectively. As of the April 30, 2023 study cutoff date, 83% (10/12) of drug-indication pairs remained approved by the EMA, while the PMDA retained 100% (7/7). For these indications, the time from FDA withdrawal until the study cutoff date ranged from 0.23 years to 11.45 years for EMA approvals (median: 1.28 years) and 1.10 years to 11.45 years for PMDA approvals (median: 3.22 years). These findings highlight substantial regulatory discrepancies concerning cancer drugs with unconfirmed benefits. Addressing these discrepancies may involve requiring pharmaceutical companies to confirm clinical benefits using more robust end points and fostering international harmonization in regulators' assessment.
Assuntos
Antineoplásicos , Aprovação de Drogas , United States Food and Drug Administration , Aprovação de Drogas/legislação & jurisprudência , Japão , Estados Unidos , Humanos , Antineoplásicos/uso terapêutico , Estudos Transversais , Europa (Continente) , União Europeia , Neoplasias/tratamento farmacológicoRESUMO
INTRODUCTION: Problematic polypharmacy is the prescribing of five or more medications potentially inappropriately. Unintentional prescribing cascades represent an under-researched aspect of problematic polypharmacy and occur when an adverse drug reaction (ADR) is misinterpreted as a new symptom resulting in the initiation of a new medication. The aim of this study was to elicit key stakeholders' perceptions of and attitudes towards problematic polypharmacy, with a focus on prescribing cascades. METHODS: qualitative one-to-one semi-structured interviews were conducted with predefined key stakeholder groups. Inductive thematic analysis was employed. RESULTS: Thirty-one stakeholders were interviewed: six patients, two carers, seven general practitioners, eight pharmacists, four hospital doctors, two professional organisation representatives and two policymakers. Three main themes were identified: (i) ADRs and prescribing cascades-a necessary evil. Healthcare professionals (HCPs) expressed concern that experiencing an ADR would negatively impact patients' confidence in their doctor. However, patients viewed ADRs pragmatically as an unpredictable risk. (ii) Balancing the risk/benefit tipping point. The complexity of prescribing decisions in the context of polypharmacy made balancing this tipping point challenging. Consequently, HCPs avoided medication changes. (iii) The minefield of medication reconciliation. Stakeholders, including patients and carers, viewed medication reconciliation as a perilous activity due to systemic communication deficits. CONCLUSION: Stakeholders believed that at a certain depth of polypharmacy, the risk that a new symptom is being caused by an existing medication becomes incalculable. Therefore, in the absence of harm, medication changes were avoided. However, medication reconciliation post hospital discharge compelled prescribing decisions and was seen as a high-risk activity by stakeholders.
Assuntos
Atitude do Pessoal de Saúde , Prescrição Inadequada , Polimedicação , Pesquisa Qualitativa , Humanos , Masculino , Feminino , Idoso , Prescrição Inadequada/prevenção & controle , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Participação dos Interessados , Efeitos Colaterais e Reações Adversas Relacionados a Medicamentos/psicologia , Padrões de Prática Médica , Entrevistas como Assunto , Conhecimentos, Atitudes e Prática em Saúde , Reconciliação de Medicamentos , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Cuidadores/psicologia , Medição de Risco , Percepção , FarmacêuticosRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Cow's milk allergy (CMA) overdiagnosis in young children appears to be increasing and has not been well characterised. We used a clinical trial population to characterise CMA overdiagnosis and identify individual-level and primary care practice-level risk factors. METHODS: We analysed data from 1394 children born in England in 2014-2016 (BEEP trial, ISRCTN21528841). Participants underwent formal CMA diagnosis at ≤2 years. CMA overdiagnosis was defined in three separate ways: parent-reported milk reaction; primary care record of milk hypersensitivity symptoms; and primary care record of low-allergy formula prescription. RESULTS: CMA was formally diagnosed in 19 (1.4%) participants. CMA overdiagnosis was common: 16.1% had parent-reported cow's milk hypersensitivity, 11.3% primary care recorded milk hypersensitivity and 8.7% had low-allergy formula prescription. Symptoms attributed to cow's milk hypersensitivity in participants without CMA were commonly gastrointestinal and reported from a median age of 49 days. Low-allergy formula prescriptions in participants without CMA lasted a median of 10 months (interquartile range 1, 16); the estimated volume consumed was a median of 272 litres (26, 448). Risk factors for CMA overdiagnosis were high practice-based low-allergy formula prescribing in the previous year and maternal report of antibiotic prescription during pregnancy. Exclusive formula feeding from birth was associated with increased low-allergy formula prescription. There was no evidence that practice prescribing of paediatric adrenaline auto-injectors or anti-reflux medications, or maternal features such as anxiety, age, parity and socioeconomic status were associated with CMA overdiagnosis. CONCLUSION: CMA overdiagnosis is common in early infancy. Risk factors include high primary care practice-based low-allergy formula prescribing and maternal report of antibiotic prescription during pregnancy.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Quality of life (QoL) is an important outcome to capture in clinical trials evaluating deprescribing interventions. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to conduct a scoping review to examine how QoL has been measured in deprescribing trials among older people and identify potentially relevant QoL scales, to better inform QoL measurement in future deprescribing trials. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Google Scholar, Epistemonikos, ClinicalTrials.gov, and reference lists of eligible studies (from inception to October 2023). We included randomized and non-randomized comparative studies with a control group that evaluated deprescribing and polypharmacy reduction interventions in people ≥ 65 years of age and measured QoL as an outcome. We also included studies describing the development and validation of QoL scales related to deprescribing, polypharmacy, or medication burden in adults ≥ 18 years of age. Two independent reviewers screened titles and abstracts, then full texts. Two independent reviewers extracted data from 25% of eligible studies in order to verify agreement, then a single reviewer extracted data from the remaining studies, which a second reviewer cross-checked. We critically appraised scales based on the COSMIN checklist. RESULTS: We retrieved 7290 articles, of which 52 were eligible for inclusion, including 44 deprescribing trials and eight scale development studies. From these studies, we found 21 scales that have been used in the context of deprescribing/polypharmacy (12 generic scales used in clinical trials and nine medication-specific scales). Variations of the generic EQ-5D were the most used scales. The measurement properties of scales for capturing changes in QoL from deprescribing were uncertain. Medication-specific QoL scales have not been employed in deprescribing clinical trials and thus, their performance in this context is also not clear. CONCLUSIONS: Several existing QoL scales have been applied to the context of deprescribing/polypharmacy clinical trials, and new scales specific to the problem have been proposed. If deprescribing does impact QoL, our findings suggest it is uncertain whether existing QoL scales can practically and reliably capture such a change or whether any scale is best. However, this review compares various aspects of the scales that researchers and clinicians can consider in decisions about measuring QoL in deprescribing trials, and in planning future research. PROTOCOL REGISTRATION: Open Science Framework: osf.io/aez6w.
Assuntos
Desprescrições , Polimedicação , Qualidade de Vida , Humanos , Ensaios Clínicos como AssuntoRESUMO
INTRODUCTION: Over the past decade, polypharmacy has increased dramatically. Measurable harms include falls, fractures, cognitive impairment, and death. The associated costs are massive and contribute substantially to low-value health care. Deprescribing is a promising solution, but there are barriers. Establishing a network to address polypharmacy can help overcome barriers by connecting individuals with an interest and expertise in deprescribing and can act as an important source of motivation and resources. AREAS COVERED: Over the past decade, several deprescribing networks were launched to help tackle polypharmacy, with evidence of individual and collective impact. A network approach has several advantages; it can spark interest, ideas and enthusiasm through information sharing, meetings and conversations with the public, providers, and other key stakeholders. In this special report, the details of how four deprescribing networks were established across the globe are detailed. EXPERT OPINION: Networks create links between people who lead existing and/or budding deprescribing practices and policy initiatives, can influence people with a shared passion for deprescribing, and facilitate sharing of intellectual capital and tools to take initiatives further and strengthen impact.This report should inspire others to establish their own deprescribing networks, a critical step in accelerating a global deprescribing movement.
Assuntos
Desprescrições , Prescrição Inadequada , Polimedicação , Humanos , Prescrição Inadequada/prevenção & controle , Disseminação de Informação , Política de SaúdeRESUMO
INTRODUCTION: Deprescribing (medication dose reduction or cessation) is an integral component of appropriate prescribing. The extent to which deprescribing recommendations are included in clinical practice guidelines is unclear. This scoping review aimed to identify guidelines that contain deprescribing recommendations, qualitatively explore the content and format of deprescribing recommendations and estimate the proportion of guidelines that contain deprescribing recommendations. METHODS: Bibliographic databases and Google were searched for guidelines published in English from January 2012 to November 2022. Guideline registries were searched from January 2017 to February 2023. Two reviewers independently screened records from databases and Google for guidelines containing one or more deprescribing recommendations. A 10% sample of the guideline registries was screened to identify eligible guidelines and estimate the proportion of guidelines containing a deprescribing recommendation. Guideline and recommendation characteristics were extracted and language features of deprescribing recommendations including content, form, complexity and readability were examined using a conventional content analysis and the SHeLL Health Literacy Editor tool. RESULTS: 80 guidelines containing 316 deprescribing recommendations were included. Deprescribing recommendations had substantial variability in their format and terminology. Most guidelines contained recommendations regarding for who (75%, n=60), what (99%, n=89) and when or why (91%, n=73) to deprescribe, however, fewer guidelines (58%, n=46) contained detailed guidance on how to deprescribe. Approximately 29% of guidelines identified from the registries sample (n=14/49) contained one or more deprescribing recommendations. CONCLUSIONS: Deprescribing recommendations are increasingly being incorporated into guidelines, however, many guidelines do not contain clear and actionable recommendations on how to deprescribe which may limit effective implementation in clinical practice. A co-designed template or best practice guide, containing information on aspects of deprescribing recommendations that are essential or preferred by end-users should be developed and employed. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: osf.io/fbex4.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Patient and public involvement in research (PPI) has many benefits including increasing relevance and impact. While using PPI in clinical research is now an established practice, the involvement of patients and the public in pre-clinical research, which takes place in a laboratory setting, has been less frequently described and presents specific challenges. This study aimed to explore the perspectives of seriously injured rugby players' who live with a spinal cord injury on PPI in pre-clinical research. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews were conducted via telephone with 11 seriously injured rugby players living with spinal cord injury on the island of Ireland. A purposive sampling approach was used to identify participants. Selected individuals were invited to take part via gatekeeper in a charitable organisation that supports seriously injured rugby players. Interviews were transcribed verbatim and analysed thematically. FINDINGS: Six themes were identified during analysis: 'appreciating potential benefits of PPI despite limited knowledge', 'the informed perspectives of people living with spinal cord injury can improve pre-clinical research relevance', 'making pre-clinical research more accessible reduces the potential for misunderstandings to occur', 'barriers to involvement include disinterest, accessibility issues, and fear of losing hope if results are negative', 'personal contact and dialogue helps people feel valued in pre-clinical research, and 'PPI can facilitate effective dissemination of pre-clinical research as desired by people living with spinal cord injury.' CONCLUSION: People affected by spinal cord injury in this study desire further involvement in pre-clinical spinal cord injury research through dialogue and contact with researchers. Sharing experiences of spinal cord injury can form the basis of PPI for pre-clinical spinal cord injury research.
Assuntos
Participação do Paciente , Traumatismos da Medula Espinal , Humanos , Traumatismos da Medula Espinal/psicologia , Masculino , Participação do Paciente/psicologia , Adulto , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Pesquisa Biomédica , Entrevistas como Assunto , Feminino , Irlanda , Futebol Americano/lesões , Participação da ComunidadeRESUMO
The major determinant of blood culture (BC) diagnostic performance is blood volume, and pediatric sample volumes are frequently low. We aimed to assess BC volumes in our institution, design an intervention to increase volumes, and assess its impact. All pediatric BCs submitted over a 7-month period to the microbiology laboratory in a university hospital (including emergency department, pediatric ward, and neonatal unit) were included. A pre-intervention period assessed current practice. A multi-faceted intervention (education, guideline introduction, active feedback strategies) was collaboratively designed by all stakeholders. Impact was assessed in a post-intervention period. The main outcome measures included the percentage of samples adequately filled using three measures of sample adequacy (1) manufacturer-recommended minimum validated volume-> 0.5 ml, (2) manufacturer-recommended optimal minimum volume-> 1.0 ml, (3) newly introduced age-specific recommendations. Three hundred ninety-eight pre-intervention and 388 post-intervention samples were included. Initial volumes were low but increased significantly post-intervention (median 0.77 ml vs. 1.52 ml), with multivariable regression analysis estimating volumes increased 89% post-intervention. There were significant increases in all measures of volume adequacy, including an increase in age-appropriate filling (20.4-53.1%), with less improvement in those aged > 3 years. Overall, 68.4% of pathogens were from adequately filled cultures, while 76% of contaminants were from inadequately filled cultures. A pathogen was detected in a higher proportion of adequately filled than inadequately filled cultures (9.4% vs. 2.2%, p < 0.001). Conclusion: Blood volume impacts BC sensitivity, with lower volumes yielding fewer pathogens and more contaminants. Focused intervention can significantly improve volumes to improve diagnostic performance. What is Known: ⢠Blood volume is the major determinant of blood culture positivity, and yet pediatric blood culture volumes are frequently low, resulting in missed pathogens and increased contamination. What is New: ⢠Adequately filled (for age) blood cultures have a pathogen detection rate three times higher than inadequately filled blood cultures. ⢠This interventional study shows that collaboratively designed multi-modal interventions including focus on accurate volume measurement can lead to significant increases in blood volumes and improve blood culture diagnostic performance.
Assuntos
Hemocultura , Humanos , Hemocultura/métodos , Lactente , Pré-Escolar , Recém-Nascido , Criança , Masculino , Feminino , AdolescenteRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Escherichia coli is the predominant urinary pathogen in children. Irish and international studies have demonstrated increasing antimicrobial resistance (AMR) to antibiotics such as co-amoxiclav. AIMS: We aimed to (1) examine the AMR patterns of paediatric urinary E. coli isolates, from both hospital and community sources, over a 10-year period; (2) assess the effectiveness of Children's Health Ireland (CHI) antimicrobial guidance given local susceptibility data; and (3) review the clinical management of an admitted patient sub-set over a 6-year period. METHODS: Pure growth of urinary E. coli from patients aged ≤ 14 from 2012 to 2021 were analysed for AMR. Differences in susceptibility rates were assessed. A retrospective chart review conducted on inpatients aged ≥ 2 months to ≤ 14 years, 2016-2021. RESULTS: E. coli accounted for 70.8% of likely significant positive pure growth cultures (9314 isolates). Susceptibility to co-amoxiclav significantly increased over time, from 66.7% to 80.4% (2016-2021, p < 0.001). Nitrofurantoin and cefalexin had significantly higher susceptibility rates than trimethoprim (< 70% annually). 85.1% of isolates were susceptible to the combination of co-amoxiclav and gentamicin, recommended for those > 2months and systemically unwell. The additional gain in empiric susceptibility provided by gentamicin above that provided by co-amoxiclav alone has fallen from 16.4% to 6.7% (2016-2021). The 222 clinical cases reviewed showed improved antimicrobial guideline compliance over time. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides important regional AMR data. Co-amoxiclav susceptibility increased significantly over time, contrasting with previous studies. This was temporally associated with stewardship measures reducing co-amoxiclav prescribing. Decreasing utility of gentamicin supports recent CHI guideline updates reducing gentamicin use.
Assuntos
Antibacterianos , Infecções por Escherichia coli , Escherichia coli , Infecções Urinárias , Humanos , Infecções Urinárias/tratamento farmacológico , Infecções Urinárias/microbiologia , Estudos Retrospectivos , Infecções por Escherichia coli/tratamento farmacológico , Criança , Lactente , Antibacterianos/uso terapêutico , Escherichia coli/efeitos dos fármacos , Escherichia coli/isolamento & purificação , Pré-Escolar , Feminino , Masculino , Adolescente , Testes de Sensibilidade Microbiana , Combinação Amoxicilina e Clavulanato de Potássio/uso terapêutico , Farmacorresistência Bacteriana , Irlanda/epidemiologia , Nitrofurantoína/uso terapêutico , Trimetoprima/uso terapêuticoRESUMO
INTRODUCTION: The epidemiology and management of oral cavity cancer have changed considerably in recent decades. This study examines epidemiological and management trends in oral cavity squamous cell carcinoma (OCSCC). METHODS: A retrospective cohort study of data from the National Cancer Registry of Ireland between 1994 and 2014. RESULTS: A total of 2725 patients were identified. The most common subsites were the tongue (34 %, n = 1025), lip (19 %, n = 575), floor of mouth (FOM) (18 %, n = 550), and retromolar trigone (RMT) (6 %, n = 189). The incidence of OCSCC remained largely unchanged (3.14 cases/100000/year) during the study period. 5-year disease-specific survival (DSS) was 58.6 % overall, varying between subsites (lip 85 %, RMT 62.9 %, tongue 54.7 %, and FOM 47.3 %). DSS improved over the study period (p = 0.03), in particular for tongue primaries (p = 0.007). Primary surgery significantly improved DSS versus radiotherapy (HR 0.28, p < 0.0001). Survival of T4 disease managed surgically was superior to that of T1 disease managed with radiotherapy. In node positive patients, chemotherapy improved overall survival (HR 0.8 p = 0.038) but not DSS (HR 0.87 p = 0.215). CONCLUSION: Primary surgery remains the standard of care in the management of OCSCC. Prognosis has improved in line with an increase in the use of primary surgery in the same time frame, though the incidence remains unchanged.
Assuntos
Carcinoma de Células Escamosas , Neoplasias Bucais , Humanos , Masculino , Irlanda/epidemiologia , Feminino , Estudos Retrospectivos , Neoplasias Bucais/terapia , Neoplasias Bucais/epidemiologia , Neoplasias Bucais/mortalidade , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Idoso , Carcinoma de Células Escamosas/terapia , Carcinoma de Células Escamosas/epidemiologia , Carcinoma de Células Escamosas/mortalidade , Incidência , Sistema de Registros , Taxa de Sobrevida , Adulto , Estadiamento de Neoplasias , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Estudos de CoortesRESUMO
BACKGROUND: This study aimed to determine the prevalence of potentially inappropriate prescribing (PIP) and potential prescribing omissions (PPOs) and their association with ADR-related hospital admissions in patients aged ≥ 65 years admitted acutely to the hospital. METHODS: Information on medications and morbidities was extracted from the Adverse Drug Reactions in an Ageing Population (ADAPT) cohort (N = 798: N = 361 ADR-related admissions; 437 non-ADR-related admissions). PIP and PPOs were assessed using Beers Criteria 2019 and STOPP/START version 2. Multivariable logistic regression (adjusted odds ratios (aOR), 95%CI) was used to examine the association between PIP, PPOs and ADR-related admissions, adjusting for covariates (age, gender, comorbidity, polypharmacy). RESULTS: In total, 715 (90%; 95% CI 87-92%) patients had ≥1 Beers Criteria, 555 (70%; 95% CI 66-73%) had ≥ 1 STOPP criteria and 666 patients (83%; 95% CI 81-86%) had ≥ 1 START criteria. Being prescribed at least one Beers (aOR = 1.66, 95% CI = 1.00-2.77), or meeting STOPP (aOR = 1.07, 95% CI = 0.79-1.45) or START (aOR = 0.72; 95%CI = 0.50-1.06) criteria or the number of PIP/PPO criteria met was not significantly associated with ADR-related admissions. Patients prescribed certain drug classes (e.g., antiplatelet agents, diuretics) per individual PIP criteria were more likely to have an ADR-related admission. CONCLUSION: There was a high prevalence of PIP and PPOs in this cohort but no association with ADR-related admissions.