Elevated TSH Levels: A Database Study of General Practitioners' Course of Action.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate general practitioners' course of action after detection of elevated thyroid stimulating hormone (TSH) levels regarding repeat testing, direct levothyroxine replacement, or neither. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective study of adults without prior evidence of thyroid disease and with a first detection of elevated TSH levels from January 1, 2015, to December 31, 2020, using data from electronic medical records of a Swiss primary care database. We determined the occurrence of either repeat TSH testing or direct levothyroxine initiation in primary care during 12-month follow-up and determined associations with demographic and clinical factors. RESULTS: Of the 1 591 patients included (median age 65 years, 64.4% female, median TSH 5.7 mIU/L), 34.3% received repeat TSH testing and 12.4% received direct levothyroxine replacement in primary care during follow-up. Repeat TSH testing showed the strongest association with overt hypothyroidism and was more common among patients with high primary care utilization and among patients aged 40-64 years compared to patients aged <40 years. Direct levothyroxine initiation was more likely for TSH levels >7 mIU/L, overt hypothyroidism, female patients, and nonurban practices. CONCLUSIONS: While the degree of thyroid dysfunction was the main driver of follow-up, we identified important gaps in the primary care-based monitoring of elevated TSH levels in young patients and in patients with infrequent consultations. We also observed potential overtreatment of women and patients in nonurban areas. Our findings highlight the need for standardization and dissemination of guidelines for the management of elevated TSH levels among general practitioners.

Deep vein thrombosis after sclerotherapy and endovenous laser ablation of varicose veins - an observational study.

Background: The risk of developing deep vein thrombosis (DVT) after endovenous ablation of varicose veins varies in the literature. Little is known about the characteristics of this complication and associated factors. This study aimed: 1) to study the occurrence of DVT after ultrasound-guided foam sclerotherapy (UGFS) alone or combined with endovenous laser ablation (EVLA) for lower-limb varicose veins; 2) to identify factors associated with DVT. Patients and methods: The study included all outpatients aged 18 years or older who underwent UGFS and EVLA or UGFS alone at the University Hospital of Zurich between 2011 and 2015. Data were extracted from the hospital electronic medical record. Patients were surveyed about their level of pain after the procedure and their level of satisfaction with the procedure. Duplex ultrasound was used to assess the deep venous system 7-10 days and 6-8 months after the procedure. Regression analysis was used to examine the association of patient and procedure characteristics with the development of DVT. Results: A total of 334 patients (561 procedures performed in 393 different sessions) were included: 73% of the patients underwent combined UGFS and EVLA and 27% underwent UGFS alone. DVT occurred in 24 (7.2%) patients, of whom 88% underwent combined procedures and 17% underwent interventions involving both the great and small saphenous veins on the same session. DVT occurred in 8.2% of patients receiving thromboprophylaxis and in 9.5% of patients not receiving thromboprophylaxis. DVT occurred in 5.2% of women and 11.9% of men. No factors associated with a diagnosis of DVT after intervention were identified. Pain and satisfaction levels did not differ between patients with and without DVT. Conclusions: This study adds to the knowledge of the risk of DVT following UGFS alone or combined with EVLA. Further studies are needed to revise thromboprophylaxis.

Effect of a patient-centred deprescribing procedure in older multimorbid patients in Swiss primary care - A cluster-randomised clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Management of patients with polypharmacy is challenging, and evidence for beneficial effects of deprescribing interventions is mixed. This study aimed to investigate whether a patient-centred deprescribing intervention of PCPs results in a reduction of polypharmacy, without increasing the number of adverse disease events and reducing the quality of life, among their older multimorbid patients. METHODS: This is a cluster-randomised clinical study among 46 primary care physicians (PCPs) with a 12 months follow-up. We randomised PCPs into an intervention and a control group. They recruited 128 and 206 patients if ≥60 years and taking ≥five drugs for ≥6 months. The intervention consisted of a 2-h training of PCPs, encouraging the use of a validated deprescribing-algorithm including shared-decision-making, in comparison to usual care. The primary outcome was the mean difference in the number of drugs per patient (dpp) between baseline and after 12 months. Additional outcomes focused on patient safety and quality of life (QoL) measures. RESULTS: Three hundred thirty-four patients, mean [SD] age of 76.2 [8.5] years participated. The mean difference in the number of dpp between baseline and after 12 months was 0.379 in the intervention group (8.02 and 7.64; p = 0.059) and 0.374 in the control group (8.05 and 7.68; p = 0.065). The between-group comparison showed no significant difference at all time points, except for immediately after the intervention (p = 0.002). There were no significant differences concerning patient safety nor QoL measures. CONCLUSION: Our straight-forward and patient-centred deprescribing procedure is effective immediately after the intervention, but not after 6 and 12 months. Further research needs to determine the optimal interval of repeated deprescribing interventions for a sustainable effect on polypharmacy at mid- and long-term. Integrating SDM in the deprescribing process is a key factor for success. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials, prospectively registered ISRCTN16560559 Date assigned 31/10/2014. The Prevention of Polypharmacy in Primary Care Patients Trial (4P-RCT).

Barriers and enablers for deprescribing among older, multimorbid patients with polypharmacy: an explorative study from Switzerland.

BACKGROUND: Polypharmacy is an increasing problem, leading to increased morbidity and mortality, especially in older, multimorbid patients. Consequently, there is a need for reduction of polypharmacy. The aim of this study was to explore attitudes, beliefs, and concerns towards deprescribing among older, multimorbid patients with polypharmacy who chose not to pursue at least one of their GP's offers to deprescribe. METHODS: Exploratory study using telephone interviews among patients of a cluster-randomized study in Northern Switzerland. The interview included a qualitative part consisting of questions in five pre-defined key areas of attitudes, beliefs, and concerns about deprescribing and an open explorative question. The quantitative part consisted of a rating of pre-defined statements in these areas. RESULTS: Twenty-two of 87 older, multimorbid patients with polypharmacy, to whom their GP offered a drug change, did not pursue all offers. Nineteen of these 22 were interviewed by telephone. The 19 patients were on average 76.9 (SD 10.0) years old, 74% female, and took 8.9 (SD 2.6) drugs per day. Drugs for acid-related disorders, analgesics and anti-inflammatory drugs were the three most common drug groups where patient involvement and the shared-decision-making (SDM) process led to the joint decision to not pursue the GPs offer. Eighteen of 19 patients fully trusted their GP, 17 of 19 participated in SDM even before this study and 8 of 19 perceived polypharmacy as a substantial burden. Conservatism/inertia and fragmented medical care were the main barriers towards deprescribing. No patient felt devalued as a consequence of the deprescribing offer. Our exploratory findings were supported by patients' ratings of predefined statements. CONCLUSION: We identified patient involvement in deprescribing and coordination of care as key issues for deprescribing among older multimorbid patients with polypharmacy. GPs concerns regarding patients' devaluation should not prevent them from actively discussing the reduction of drugs. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN16560559 .

Appropriateness of bone density measurement in Switzerland: a cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: According to the WHO, osteoporosis is one of the most important non- communicable diseases worldwide. Different screening procedures are controversially discussed, especially concerning the concomitant issues of overdiagnosis and harm caused by inappropriate Dual X-ray Absorptiometry (DXA). The aim of this study was to evaluate the frequency and appropriateness of DXA as screening measure in Switzerland considering individual risk factors and to evaluate covariates independently associated with potentially inappropriate DXA screening. METHODS: Retrospective cross-sectional study using insurance claim data of 2013. Among all patients with DXA screening, women < 65 and men < 70 years without osteoporosis or risk factors for osteoporosis were defined as receiving potentially inappropriate DXA. Statistics included descriptive measures and multivariable regressions to estimate associations of relevant covariates with potentially inappropriate DXA screening. RESULTS: Of 1,131,092 patients, 552,973 were eligible. Among those 2637 of 10,000 (26.4%) underwent potentially inappropriate DXA screening. Female sex (Odds ratio 6.47, CI 6.41-6.54) and higher age showed the strongest association with any DXA screening. Female gender (Odds ratio 1.84, CI 1.49-2.26) and an income among the highest 5% (Odds ratio 1.40, CI 1.01-1.98) were significantly positively associated with potentially inappropriate DXA screening, number of chronic conditions (Odds ratio 0.67, CI 0.65-0.70) and living in the central region of Switzerland (Odds ratio 0.67, CI 0.48-0.95) negatively. CONCLUSION: One out of four DXAs for screening purpose is potentially inappropriate. Stakeholders of osteoporosis screening campaigns should focus on providing more detailed information on appropriateness of DXA screening indications (e.g. age thresholds) in order to avoid DXA overuse.

Multimorbidity: can general practitioners identify the health conditions most important to their patients? Results from a national cross-sectional study in Switzerland.

BACKGROUND: Faced with patients suffering from more than one chronic condition, or multimorbidity, general practitioners (GPs) must establish diagnostic and treatment priorities. Patients also set their own priorities to handle the everyday burdens associated with their multimorbidity and these may be different from the priorities established by their GP. A shared patient-GP agenda, driven by knowledge of each other's priorities, would seem central to managing patients with multimorbidity. We evaluated GPs' ability to identify the health condition most important to their patients. METHODS: Data on 888 patients were collected as part of a cross-sectional Swiss study on multimorbidity in family medicine. For the main analyses on patients-GP agreement, data from 572 of these patients could be included. GPs were asked to identify the two conditions which their patient considered most important, and we tested whether either of them agreed with the condition mentioned as most important by the patient. In the main analysis, we studied the agreement rate between GPs and patients by grouping items medically-related into 46 groups of conditions. Socio-demographic and clinical variables were fitted into univariate and multivariate models. RESULTS: In 54.9% of cases, GPs were able to identify the health condition most important to the patient. In the multivariate model, the only variable significantly associated with patient-GP agreement was the number of chronic conditions: the higher the number of conditions, the less likely the agreement. CONCLUSION: GPs were able to correctly identify the health condition most important to their patients in half of the cases. It therefore seems important that GPs learn how to better adapt treatment targets and priorities by taking patients' perspectives into account.

Ambient temperature and kidney function in primary care patients.

INTRODUCTION: Exposure to high ambient temperatures is associated with a risk of acute kidney injury. However, evidence comes from emergency departments or extreme weather exposures. It is unclear whether temperature-related adverse kidney outcomes can also be detected at a community level in a temperate climate zone. METHODS: In a 9.5-year retrospective cohort study we correlated estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) values of Swiss adult primary care patients from the FIRE cohort (Family medicine Research using Electronic medical records) with same-day maximum local ambient temperature data. We investigated 5 temperature groups (< 15 °C, 15-19 °C, 20-24 °C, 25-29 °C and ≥ 30 °C) as well as possible interactions for patients with increased kidney vulnerability (chronic heart failure, diabetes, chronic kidney disease, therapy with renin-angiotensin-aldosterone-system (RAAS) inhibitors, diuretics or non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs). RESULTS: We included 18,000 primary care patients who altogether provided 132,176 creatinine measurements. In the unadjusted analysis, higher ambient temperatures were associated with lower eGFR across all age and vulnerability groups. In the adjusted models, we did not find a consistent association.The highest ambient temperature differences (> 25 or > 30 versus < 15 °C) were associated with marginally reduced kidney function only in patients with ≥ 3 risk factors for kidney vulnerability, with a maximum estimated glomerular filtration rate reduction of -2.9 ml/min/1.73m2 (SE 1.0), P 0.003. DISCUSSION: In a large primary care cohort from a temperate climate zone, we did not find an association between ambient temperatures and kidney function. A marginal inverse association in highly vulnerable patients is of unclear clinical relevance.

Potentially Inappropriate Medication Use in Primary Care in Switzerland.

Importance: Potentially inappropriate medication (PIM) exposes patients to an increased risk of adverse outcomes. Many lists of explicit criteria provide guidance on identifying PIM and recommend alternative prescribing, but the complexity of available lists limits their applicability and the amount of data available on PIM prescribing. Objective: To determine PIM prevalence and the most frequently prescribed PIMs according to 6 well-known PIM lists and to develop a best practice synthesis for clinicians. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study used anonymized electronic health record data of Swiss primary care patients aged 65 years or older with drug prescriptions from January 1, 2020, to December 31, 2021, extracted from a large primary care database in Switzerland, the FIRE project. Data analyses took place from October 2022 to September 2023. Exposure: PIM prescription according to PIM criteria operationalized for use with FIRE data. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcomes were PIM prevalence (percentage of patients with 1 or more PIMs) and PIM frequency (percentage of prescriptions identified as PIMs) according to the individual PIM lists and a combination of all 6 lists. The PIM lists used were the American 2019 Updated Beers criteria, the French list by Laroche et al, the Norwegian General Practice Norwegian (NORGEP) criteria, the German PRISCUS list, the Austrian list by Mann et al, and the EU(7) consensus list of 7 European countries. Results: This study included 115 867 patients 65 years or older (mean [SD] age, 76.0 [7.9] years; 55.8% female) with 1 211 227 prescriptions. Among all patients, 86 715 (74.8%) were aged 70 years or older, and 60 670 (52.4%) were aged 75 years or older. PIM prevalence among patients 65 years or older was 31.5% (according to Beers 2019), 15.4% (Laroche), 16.1% (NORGEP), 12.7% (PRISCUS), 31.2% (Mann), 37.1% (EU[7]), and 52.3% (combined list). PIM prevalence increased with age according to every PIM list (eg, according to Beers 2019, from 31.5% at age 65 years or older to 37.4% for those 75 years or older, and when the lists were combined, PIM prevalence increased from 52.3% to 56.7% in those 2 age groups, respectively). PIM frequency was 10.3% (Beers 2019), 3.9% (Laroche), 4.3% (NORGEP), 2.4% (PRISCUS), 6.7% (Mann), 9.7% (EU[7]), and 19.3% (combined list). According to the combined list, the 5 most frequently prescribed PIMs were pantoprazole (9.3% of all PIMs prescribed), ibuprofen (6.9%), diclofenac (6.3%), zolpidem (4.5%), and lorazepam (3.7%). Almost two-thirds (63.5%) of all PIM prescriptions belonged to 5 drug classes: analgesics (26.9% of all PIMs prescribed), proton pump inhibitors (12.1%), benzodiazepines and benzodiazepine-like drugs (11.2%), antidepressants (7.0%), and neuroleptics (6.3%). Conclusions and Relevance: In this cross-sectional study of adults aged 65 or older, PIM prevalence was high, varied considerably depending on the criteria applied, and increased consistently with age. However, only few drug classes accounted for the majority of all prescriptions that were PIM according to any of the 6 PIM lists, and by considering this manageable number of drug classes, clinicians could essentially comply with all 6 PIM lists. These results raise awareness of the most common PIMs and emphasize the need for careful consideration of their risks and benefits and targeted deprescribing.

Detection of natural autoimmunity to ghrelin in diabetes mellitus.

Objective: Ghrelin is an orexigenic peptide that becomes post-translationally modified. Natural autoantibodies to ghrelin (ghrelin-aAb) have been described in healthy subjects, in eating disorders and rheumatic diseases, with potential clinical relevance. Despite these important reports, the data base on the prevalence and physiological role is small and technical approaches for assessing ghrelin-aAb are few, encouraging respective research for improving knowledge on the potential endocrine significance. Methods: A novel immunoprecipitation assay was generated based on a fusion protein of human ghrelin with a reporter gene. Assay quality was verified with commercial antibodies. Assay characteristics and matrix effects were determined, including stability of natural ghrelin-aAb to freezing, signal linearity in dilution experiments, and comparison of different matrices. Three groups of serum samples were analyzed for ghrelin-aAb, comprising commercial sera from healthy subjects and patients with type 1 or type 2 diabetes mellitus. Results: The newly generated ghrelin-aAb assay proved sensitive, robust and reliable over a broad concentration range. Results from serum and plasma differed slightly. The signals from serum remained stable towards freezing and thawing, and in dilution experiments. Applying a mathematical criterion for outliers (P75 + 1.5-times IQR), an average prevalence of 11%-12% of positive samples was identified in the different human cohorts, with no significant sex-or disease-related difference. General significance: A novel diagnostic autoantibody assay detected ghrelin-aAb with a similar prevalence in diabetic patients and controls, suggesting that autoimmunity to ghrelin plays little role in diabetes mellitus, but may be of relevance in other diseases where ghrelin signaling is essential.

Quality outcome of diabetes care during COVID-19 pandemic: a primary care cohort study.

AIM: Management of diabetes care can be affected by COVID-19 pandemic control measures. This study aimed to determine the impact of the pandemic, during 17.03.2020-16.03.2021, on quality outcomes of diabetes care in general practice in Switzerland. METHODS: In this retrospective cohort study, diabetes mellitus patients (≥ 18 years) with at least one consultation at a general practitioner, during 17.03.2018-16.03.2019 (cohort 1) and 17.03.2019-16.03.2020 (cohort 2) were included and followed-up for two years. Quality indicators and outcomes of diabetes care, at patient and practitioner level, were compared before and during the pandemic. Logistic regression was performed to identify patient's risk factors for dropout from follow-up. RESULTS: Data from 191 practices, 23,903 patients, cohort 1 and 25,092 patients, cohort 2, were analyzed. The fraction of patients lost to follow-up, attributable to the pandemic, was 28% (95% confidence interval: 25%, 30%). During the pandemic, compared to the previous year, regular measurement of weight, HbA1c, blood pressure and serum creatinine were less frequent and less patients per practitioner reached HbA1c and blood pressure target outcomes. Factors associated with continuity of care during the pandemic were: patient age 41-80 years, longer diabetes duration, diagnosis of hypertension or dyslipidemia, influenza vaccination during the last year. Risk factors for dropout were age > 80 and receiving only insulin as anti-diabetic medication. CONCLUSION: A considerable quality reduction in diabetes mellitus care could be observed during the pandemic. Though the most vulnerable patients were not the most affected by the pandemic, key factors that might reduce dropout from follow-up were identified.

Evaluation of type 2 diabetes care management in nine primary care practices before and after implementation of the Criteria of Good Disease Management of Diabetes established by the Swiss Society of Endocrinology and Diabetology.

AIMS OF THE STUDY: Little is known about the quality of diabetes management of patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) in Swiss primary care. Based on the recommendations of the National Council Quality Assurance Programme, an interprofessional working group of the Swiss Society of Endocrinology and Diabetology (SSED) established population-based national criteria for good disease management of T2DM in primary health care (the diabetes score). The objective of this study was to assess whether the implementation of these criteria improve diabetes management in primary care. METHODS: The diabetes score comprises eight criteria including three biometric measurements, two lifestyle-specific items and screening of three diabetes-associated complications. Practices can evaluate adherence to the criteria based on a point system, with the recommended aim to achieve ≥70/100 points. Group practices and single practices were included in this study and started implementing the SSED criteria in January 2018. The resulting score was compared with data retrospectively obtained for 2017. The primary endpoint was the overall change in Diabetes Score between 2017 and 2018 at each practice, further stratified by practice type. The absolute effect on individual diabetes score criteria was assessed by pooling all patient-level data. RESULTS: Nine practices (six single and three group) participated in the study. In 2017 and 2018, the primary care practices treated 727 and 704 patients with T2DM, respectively, of whom 676 were treated both years. Around half of the patients were cared for in group practices and half in single practices. Between 2017 and 2018 the median (interquartile range) diabetes score improved from 40 (35, 65) to 55 (45, 70; p = 0.078). One practice (single) obtained a score ≥70 in 2017, three practices (all single) achieved this target in 2018. Pooling patient-level data, we observed a significant absolute improvement in the following criteria: number of regular diabetes check ups, body mass index, glycated haemoglobin, blood pressure, low density lipoprotein cholesterol and screenings for diabetes-associated complications (all p <0.05). However, the extent of the improvements were often insufficient to reach the prefixed targets of the diabetes score criteria on the practice level. CONCLUSION: Overall, the implementation of the SSED criteria in the current setting led to a modest, nonsignificant improvement of the diabetes score. Only three (all single practices) out of the nine practices reached the recommended 70-point target, indicating that further strategies are needed to improve diabetes care in primary care practice. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov (ID NCT04216875).

Effects of Rapid On-Site Evaluation on Diagnostic Accuracy of Thyroid Fine-Needle Aspiration.

INTRODUCTION: Fine-needle aspiration (FNA) is well-established for the evaluation of suspicious thyroid nodules. However, a significant proportion is nondiagnostic. Rapid on-site evaluation (ROSE) has been proposed to improve the overall adequacy of FNA. METHODS: Retrospective cohort study comparing adequacy of thyroid FNA findings pre- and postimplementation of ROSE at a tertiary center in Switzerland. Patients undergoing thyroid FNA from January 2016 to December 2019 were included. The primary outcome was the rate of nondiagnostic findings (Bethesda System for Reporting Thyroid Cytopathology category I). RESULTS: In total, 410 thyroid nodule FNAs were performed. Of those, 309 with standard FNA and 101 with ROSE. The majority of patients were female (71%), with a median age of 56 years (IQR 46-68) and a nodule diameter of 1.9 cm (IQR 1.2-2.9). Implementation of ROSE led to a decrease in nondiagnostic findings from 41.1% to 23.8%, with an odds ratio of 0.42 (95% CI: 0.24-0.72; p = 0.002). Implementation of ROSE was associated with significantly higher rates of Bethesda category III (27.7% vs. 19.1%), category IV (15.8% vs. 5.5%), and Bethesda category VI (6.9% vs. 2.3%). Repeated FNA was performed in 29.1% before and 20.8% after implementation of ROSE (p = 0.18). The mean number of FNA per nodule was reduced from 1.4 (0.6) to 1.2 (0.4) with ROSE (p = 0.04). CONCLUSIONS: Implementation of ROSE of thyroid nodule specimen improved diagnostic adequacy of FNA, reducing nondiagnostic findings. However, due to increased equivocal findings (Bethesda category III), there was no significant reduction of repeat FNA.

Canakinumab in patients with COVID-19 and type 2 diabetes - A multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.

Background: Patients with type 2 diabetes and obesity have chronic activation of the innate immune system possibly contributing to the higher risk of hyperinflammatory response to SARS-CoV2 and severe COVID-19 observed in this population. We tested whether interleukin-1ß (IL-1ß) blockade using canakinumab improves clinical outcome. Methods: CanCovDia was a multicenter, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial to assess the efficacy of canakinumab plus standard-of-care compared with placebo plus standard-of-care in patients with type 2 diabetes and a BMI > 25 kg/m2 hospitalised with SARS-CoV2 infection in seven tertiary-hospitals in Switzerland. Patients were randomly assigned 1:1 to a single intravenous dose of canakinumab (body weight adapted dose of 450-750 mg) or placebo. Canakinumab and placebo were compared based on an unmatched win-ratio approach based on length of survival, ventilation, ICU stay and hospitalization at day 29. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04510493. Findings: Between October 17, 2020, and May 12, 2021, 116 patients were randomly assigned with 58 in each group. One participant dropped out in each group for the primary analysis. At the time of randomization, 85 patients (74·6 %) were treated with dexamethasone. The win-ratio of canakinumab vs placebo was 1·08 (95 % CI 0·69-1·69; p = 0·72). During four weeks, in the canakinumab vs placebo group 4 (7·0%) vs 7 (12·3%) participants died, 11 (20·0 %) vs 16 (28·1%) patients were on ICU, 12 (23·5 %) vs 11 (21·6%) were hospitalised for more than 3 weeks, respectively. Median ventilation time at four weeks in the canakinumab vs placebo group was 10 [IQR 6.0, 16.5] and 16 days [IQR 14.0, 23.0], respectively. There was no statistically significant difference in HbA1c after four weeks despite a lower number of anti-diabetes drug administered in patients treated with canakinumab. Finally, high-sensitive CRP and IL-6 was lowered by canakinumab. Serious adverse events were reported in 13 patients (11·4%) in each group. Interpretation: In patients with type 2 diabetes who were hospitalised with COVID-19, treatment with canakinumab in addition to standard-of-care did not result in a statistically significant improvement of the primary composite outcome. Patients treated with canakinumab required significantly less anti-diabetes drugs to achieve similar glycaemic control. Canakinumab was associated with a prolonged reduction of systemic inflammation. Funding: Swiss National Science Foundation grant #198415 and University of Basel. Novartis supplied study medication.

Prescribing Patterns of Pain Medications in Unspecific Low Back Pain in Primary Care: A Retrospective Analysis.

Acute low back pain (LBP) is one of the most prevalent diseases worldwide. Since there is evidence of excessive prescriptions of analgesics, i.e., opioids, the aim of this study was to describe the use of pain medications in patients with LBP in the Swiss primary care setting. A retrospective, observational study was performed using medical prescriptions of 180 general practitioners (GP) during years 2009-2020. Patterns of pain medications (nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), paracetamol, and opioids) as well as co-medications were analyzed in patients with a LBP diagnosis. Univariable and multivariable regression analyses assessed GP and patient characteristics associated with the prescription of pain medication. Patients included were 10,331 (mean age 51.7 years, 51.2% female); 6449 (62.4%) received at least one pain medication and of these 86% receive NSAIDs and 22% opioids. GP characteristics (i.e., self-employment status) and patient characteristics (male gender and number of consultations) were associated with significantly higher odds of receiving any pain medication in multivariable analysis. 3719 patients (36%) received co-medications. Proton-pump-inhibitors and muscle relaxants were the most commonly used co-medications. In conclusion, two-thirds of LBP patients were treated with pain medications. Prescribing patterns were conservative, with little use of strong opioids and co-medications.

Impact of SARS-CoV-2 Lockdown on Glycaemic Control: A Retrospective Observational Cohort Study in a Tertiary Setting.

We analysed the effects of Swiss national lockdown due to the COVID-19 pandemic on the glycaemic control in patients with diabetes mellitus. In a retrospective observational cohort study with observation period 16 December 2018-27 July 2020, we included tertiary care patients with diabetes and at least one glycated haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) measurement before and after the lockdown beginning. Main outcome measure was change in HbA1c after the lockdown. We included 1078 patients (86% diabetes type 2) with a mean HbA1c of 55.63 mmol/mol (7.24%). Glycaemic control was susceptible to seasonal changes with higher mean HbA1c in winter as compared to spring (57.49 mmol/mol (7.41%) vs. 55.52 mmol/mol (7.23%), p = 0.013). The lockdown did not affect the mean HbA1c values of all patients. However, we found a higher proportion of type 2 diabetes patients with a worsening HbA1c after the lockdown as compared to the year before (32% vs. 22.9%, p = 0.02). In a mixed-model regression multivariable analysis, inappropriate alcohol intake and hypothyroidism were associated with an increase in HbA1c after the lockdown. In conclusion, the national lockdown had no effect on overall mean HbA1c values but affected a proportion of type 2 diabetes patients with worsening HbA1c, whose individual risk factors were identified.

Real-World Effectiveness of Insulin Glargine 300 Initiation in Switzerland.

INTRODUCTION: Insulin glargine 300 U/mL (Gla-300; Toujeo®) is a second-generation once-daily basal insulin. Previous randomized controlled trials showed comparable HbA1c reductions with lower rates of hypoglycemia of Gla-300 versus Gla-100. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We report the 12 months results of the Swiss cohort of Toujeo-1, a prospective, observational multicenter study exploring the real-world effectiveness of Gla-300 in adult patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) uncontrolled (HbA1c 7.5-10%) on oral therapy and compared these to the overall Toujeo-1 cohort (conducted in Switzerland and Germany). Primary endpoint was the percentage of patients achieving individual HbA1c targets. Secondary endpoints included changes in HbA1c, fasting plasma glucose (FPG), body weight, insulin dose, incidence of hypoglycemia and overall safety. RESULTS: The analysis included 47 patients (14 women) with a mean age of 64.1 years and a diabetes duration of 8.4 years. Swiss physicians determined a higher HbA1c treatment target (7.4 vs. 7.0%) and patients received higher Gla-300 doses at baseline (20.2 vs. 14.7 units/day) and the 12-month follow-up (31.0 vs. 26.2 units/kg) than in the total cohort (n=721). After 12 months, the addition of Gla-300 reduced HbA1c by 1.5% (p<0.0001) to an HbA1c of 7.2%, and FPG by 3.3 mmol/L (p<0.0001) to an FPG of 7.1 mmol/L. At 12 months, 70.2% achieved their individual HbA1c target, more than in the overall Toujeo-1 cohort (49.9%). Body weight remained stable throughout. Only episodes of symptomatic, non-severe hypoglycemic events were documented (2.1%) with similar rates as for the overall Toujeo-1 population. CONCLUSION: In patients with T2D on oral therapy and newly treated with basal insulin, Gla-300 improves glycemic control with a low risk of hypoglycemia and no increase of body weight. The results for Switzerland are consistent with those reported for the overall Toujeo-1 cohort and reveal that treatment targets and approaches slightly differ between both countries.

Gout management in Swiss primary care - a retrospective observational study.

BACKGROUND: Gout is the most common form of inflammatory arthritis worldwide and its prevalence is rising. In Switzerland, there are no data available on the characteristics and treatment of gout patients. In this study, we aimed to describe numbers of patients affected by gout and hyperuricaemia and unveil approaches Swiss primary care physicians (PCPs) use for the management. METHODS: This was a retrospective observational study using electronic medical routine  data provided from 242 Swiss PCPs. Included were all their patients receiving urate-lowering therapy (ULT), with a diagnostic code for gout or who had a serum uric acid (SUA) measurement. According to their disease status, patients were classified into four subgroups (normal urate, hyperuricaemia, untreated gout, treated gout). For treatment analysis, patients with SUA measurements before and after ULT initiation were included. Comorbidities and risk factors for secondary causes relevant in the context of gout were collected. Outcomes were prevalence of gout and hyperuricaemia, characteristics of patients according to subgroup, number of SUA measurements, levels of SUA and patients who reached the treatment goal of a SUA level <360 µmol/l. RESULTS: We assessed 15,808 patients and classified them into the subgroups. This yielded a prevalence of 1.0% for gout and 1.2% for hyperuricaemia. 2642 patients were diagnosed with gout of whom 2420 (91.6%) received a ULT. Overall; 41.3% of patients with a gout treatment had at least one SUA measurement; 15.0% of patients with treated gout had a record of SUA measurements before and after ULT initiation; and 57.5% reached the treatment goal of <360 µmol/l after allopurinol treatment. CONCLUSION: Swiss gout patients received comprehensive treatment, which is reflected in a high number of patients treated with ULT, laboratory tests per person and a high treatment success rate, although there is no systematic approach to the treatment of gout.

Time trends in prostate cancer screening in Swiss primary care (2010 to 2017) - A retrospective study.

INTRODUCTION: Following years of controversy regarding screening for prostate cancer using prostate-specific antigen, evidence evolves towards a more restrained and preference-based use. This study reports the impact of landmark trials and updated recommendations on the incidence rate of prostate cancer screening by Swiss general practitioners. METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of primary care data, separated in 3 time periods based on dates of publications of important prostate-specific antigen screening recommendations. 1: 2010-mid 2012 including 2 updates; 2: mid 2012-mid 2014 including a Smarter Medicine recommendation; 3: mid-2014-mid-2017 maintenance period. Period 2 including the Smarter Medicine recommendation was defined as reference period. We further assessed the influence of patient's age and the number of prostate-specific-antigen (PSA) tests, by the patient and within each time period, on the mean PSA concentration. Uni- and multivariable analyses were used as needed. RESULTS: 36,800 men aged 55 to 75 years were included. 14.6% had ≥ 2 chronic conditions, 11.7% had ≥ 1 prostate-specific antigen test, (mean 2.60 ng/ml [SD 12.3]). 113,921 patient-years were covered. Data derived from 221 general practitioners, 33.5% of GP were women, mean age was 49.4 years (SD 10.0), 67.9% used prostate-specific antigen testing. Adjusted incidence rate-ratio (95%-CI) dropped significantly over time periods: Reference Period 2: incidence rate-ratio 1.00; Period 1: incidence rate-ratio 1.74 (1.59-1.90); Period 3: incidence rate-ratio 0.61 (0.56-0.67). A higher number of chronic conditions and a patient age between 60-69 years were significantly associated with higher screening rate. Increasing numbers of PSA testing per patient, as well as increasing age, were independently and significantly associated with an increase in the PSA value. CONCLUSION: Swiss general practitioners adapted screening behavior as early as evidence of a limited health benefit evolved, while using a risk-adapted approach whenever performing multiple testing. Updated recommendations might have helped to maintain this decrease. Further recommendations and campaigns should aimed at older patients with multimorbidity, to sustain a further decline in prostate-specific antigen screening practices.

Improving inappropriate medication and information transfer at hospital discharge: study protocol for a cluster RCT.

BACKGROUND: Inappropriate medication and polypharmacy increase morbidity, hospitalisation rate, costs and mortality in multimorbid patients. At hospital discharge of elderly patients, polypharmacy is often even more pronounced than at admission. However, the optimal discharge strategy in view of sustained medication appropriateness remains unclear. In particular, unreflectingly switching back to the pre-hospitalisation medication must be avoided. Therefore, both the patients and the follow-up physicians should be involved in the discharge process. In this study, we aim to test whether a brief medication review which takes the patients' priorities into account, combined with a standardised communication strategy at hospital discharge, leads to sustained medication appropriateness and extends readmission times among elderly multimorbid patients. METHODS: The study is designed as a two-armed, double-blinded, cluster-randomised trial, involving 42 senior hospital physicians (HPs) with their junior HPs and 2100 multimorbid patients aged 60 years or older. Using a randomised minimisation strategy, senior HPs will be assigned to either intervention or control group. Following instructions of the study team, the senior HPs in the intervention group will teach their junior HPs how to integrate a simple medication review tool combined with a defined communication strategy into their ward's discharge procedure. The untrained HPs in the control group will provide data on usual care, and their patients will be discharged following usual local routines. Primary outcome is the time until readmission within 6 months after discharge, and secondary outcomes cover readmission rates, number of emergency and GP visits, classes and numbers of drugs prescribed, proportions of potentially inappropriate medications, and the patients' quality of life after discharge. Additionally, the characteristics of both the HPs as well as the patients will be collected before the intervention. Process evaluation outcomes will be assessed parallel to the ongoing core study using qualitative research methods. DISCUSSION: So far, interventions to reduce polypharmacy are still scarce at the crucial interface between HPs and GPs. To our knowledge, this trial is the first to analyse the combination of a brief deprescribing intervention with a standardised communication strategy at hospital discharge and in the early post-discharge period. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN, ISRCTN18427377 . Registered 11 January 2018.