Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 6 de 6
Filtrar
1.
Kidney Med ; 6(10): 100893, 2024 Oct.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-39319210

RESUMEN

Rationale & Objective: The prevalence of chronic kidney disease (CKD) is known to increase with age; however, creatinine may be a less reliable filtration marker in older adults. Few studies have investigated the prevalence and progression of CKD using different filtration markers for estimating glomerular filtration rate (GFR). Study Design: A prospective observational cohort study. Setting & Participants: 6,393 White and African American participants aged 65-100 years from the Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities Study (ARIC) at Visit 5, followed longitudinally at Visits 6 and 7. Exposure and Outcome: The eGFR was estimated either by creatinine (eGFRcr), cystatin C (eGFRcys), creatinine and cystatin C (eGFRcr-cys), or using creatinine, cystatin C, and ß-2-microglobulin (eGFRcr-cys-b2m). CKD progression was defined as 30% decline in eGFR at follow-up visits. Analytical Approach: Logistic regression models, adjusted for sex, race and study center, diabetes, blood pressure, body mass index, prevalent cardiovascular disease, and heart failure. Results: At Visit 5, the mean age in the study population was 75.8 years, and the mean eGFR ranged from 71.2 to 61.2 mL/min/1.73m2 using eGFRcr or eGFRcys, respectively. The proportion with eGFR < 60 mL/min/1.73m2 was lowest with eGFRcr and highest with eGFRcys for all age groups, and prevalence increased with age for all markers. For example, the prevalence of eGFRcr < 60 mL/min/1.73m2 in ages 70-74 years ranged from 15% to 21% and in ages 85-89 years ranged from 38% to 46% at the different visits. The proportion with a 30% eGFR decline over a mean of 8 years in people who were originally aged 65-69 years ranged from 9% (eGFRcr)-18% (eGFRcys). More people with eGFRcr ≥ 60 mL/min/1.73m2 were reclassified to < 60 mL/min/1.73m2 when using eGFRcys (33%) compared with eGFRcr-cys (12%) or eGFRcr-cys-b2m (18%). The proportion with 30% eGFR decline was lowest with eGFRcr and highest with eGFRcys, with greater incidence in older age groups for all markers. Limitations: No direct measurement of GFR. Not all participants survived or attended subsequent follow-up visits. Conclusions: The prevalence and progression of CKD increase with age, but estimates vary with the filtration marker used. The eGFRcr gave the lowest estimate of CKD at 15% for people aged 65-69 years at Visit 5 while eGFRcys gave the highest estimates of CKD at 26% for that same population.


The study examines different filtration markers for glomerular filtration rate (GFR) equations in older adults. Filtration markers can be affected by age-varying characteristics like muscle mass, so it is important to investigate potential discrepancies in eGFR with different markers. We evaluated eGFR using creatinine, cystatin C, both, and alongside ß-2-microglobulin to determine kidney disease prevalence and progression. The main takeaway from this study is that there is variation in prevalence of kidney disease in older adults depending on what filtration marker is used in estimating GFR. Our study falls in line with international kidney guidelines to measure cystatin C more in clinical care, as we may be missing some older adults with kidney disease.

2.
Hypertension ; 2024 Sep 04.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-39229711

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: The prevalence of hypertension and uncontrolled hypertension may differ by age and sex. METHODS: We included participants in the Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities study at seven study visits over 33 years (visit 1: 15 636 participants; mean age, 54 years; 55% women), estimating sex differences in prevalence of hypertension (systolic blood pressure ≥130 mm Hg; diastolic blood pressure ≥80 mm Hg; or self-reported antihypertension medication use) and uncontrolled hypertension (systolic blood pressure ≥140 mm Hg or diastolic blood pressure ≥90 mm Hg) using unadjusted and comorbidity-adjusted models. RESULTS: The prevalence of hypertension increased from 40% (ages, 43-46 years) to 93% (ages, 91-94 years). Within hypertensive individuals, the prevalence of uncontrolled hypertension was higher in men (33%) than women (23%) at ages 43 to 46 years but became higher in women than men starting at ages 61 to 64, with 56% of women and 40% men having uncontrolled hypertension at ages 91 to 94. This sex difference was not explained by differences in coronary heart disease, diabetes, body mass index, estimated glomerular filtration rate, number of antihypertension medications, classes of medications, or adherence to medications. In both sexes, uncontrolled hypertension was associated with a higher risk for chronic kidney disease progression (hazard ratio, 1.5 [1.2-1.9]; P=4.5×10-4), heart failure (hazard ratio, 1.6 [1.4-2.0]; P=8.1×10-7), stroke (hazard ratio, 2.1 [1.6-2.8]; P=1.8×10-8), and mortality (hazard ratio, 1.5 [1.3-1.6]; P=6.2×10-19). CONCLUSIONS: Sex differences in the prevalence of hypertension and uncontrolled hypertension vary by age, with the latter having implications for health throughout the life course.

3.
J Am Coll Cardiol ; 84(8): 683-693, 2024 Aug 20.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-39142721

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors reduce heart failure (HF) hospitalizations, recurrent cardiovascular events, and chronic kidney disease (CKD) progression, and thus constitute a Class 1a recommendation in people with diabetes and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, HF, or CKD and in people with severe albuminuria or HF, regardless of diabetes status. OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to comprehensibly characterize the rate of SGLT2 inhibitor prescriptions among people with a Class 1a recommendation for SGLT2 inhibitor use. METHODS: Among 3,189,827 adults from 28 U.S. health systems within Optum Labs Data Warehouse between April 1, 2022, and March 31, 2023, we assessed SGLT2 inhibitor prescription rates, stratified by presence of diabetes and Class 1a recommendation. RESULTS: Among 716,387 adults with diabetes, 63.4% had a Class 1a recommendation for SGLT2 inhibitor therapy. There was little difference by Class 1a recommendation status (present: 11.9%; 95% CI: 11.9%-12.0% vs absent: 11.4%; 95% CI: 11.3%-11.6%; standardized mean difference: 1.3%). Among 2,473,440 adults without diabetes, 6.2% had a Class 1a recommendation for SGLT2 inhibitor therapy, and 3.1% (3.0%-3.2%) of those received a prescription. Internists/family practitioners initiated SGLT2 inhibitor prescriptions most commonly among people with diabetes, whereas specialists initiated SGLT2 inhibitor prescriptions most commonly among people without diabetes. No health system had >25% SGLT2 inhibitor prescription rate among people with a Class 1a recommendation. Health systems with higher proportions of patients with commercial insurance and lower proportions with Medicare had higher SGLT2 inhibitor prescription rates. CONCLUSIONS: In this analysis of U.S. data from 2022 to 2023, SGLT2 inhibitor prescription among people with a Class 1a recommendation is low. Interventions are needed to increase uptake of guideline-recommended SGLT2 inhibitor use.


Asunto(s)
Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2 , Pautas de la Práctica en Medicina , Inhibidores del Cotransportador de Sodio-Glucosa 2 , Humanos , Inhibidores del Cotransportador de Sodio-Glucosa 2/uso terapéutico , Estados Unidos/epidemiología , Masculino , Femenino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2/tratamiento farmacológico , Pautas de la Práctica en Medicina/estadística & datos numéricos , Anciano , Adulto , Prescripciones de Medicamentos/estadística & datos numéricos
4.
J Dev Behav Pediatr ; 45(4): e378-e383, 2024.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-39259268

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: Owing to the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, many developmental-behavioral pediatric (DBP) practices adopted telehealth for care delivery. However, telehealth access and use for families with a preferred language other than English (PLOE) is an equity concern. Therefore, our study objective is to compare rates of telehealth utilization and visit completion by preferred family language among patients seen for DBP assessments during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: We completed a descriptive chart review using electronic health record data at 4 academic DBP practices to examine visits for patients up to 5 years seen for new-patient appointments between April 2020 and April 2021. We compared rates of in-person and telehealth visits by preferred family language and visit outcome (completed or missed). RESULTS: A total of 3241 visits were scheduled between April 2020 and April 2021; 48.2% were for in-person and 51.8% for telehealth. Families reported the following languages: 90.5% English, 6.2% Spanish, and 3.3% other language. Missed visits accounted for 7.6% of scheduled visits. The relative percentage of in-person versus telehealth visits varied significantly by site (p < 0.001) and preferred family language (p < 0.001). English-speaking patients had 2.10 times the odds of being scheduled for telehealth compared with patients with PLOE, adjusting for site. Statistically significant differences were not found for visit outcome (completed or missed) by visit type (in-person or telehealth) (p = 0.79), including after accounting for PLOE status (p = 0.83). CONCLUSION: At the height of the pandemic, most English-speaking families were scheduled for new DBP evaluations by telehealth, but fewer families with PLOE were. Attention to language to ensure telehealth access equity is critical.


Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Telemedicina , Humanos , Telemedicina/estadística & datos numéricos , Preescolar , Masculino , Femenino , Lactante , Disparidades en Atención de Salud/estadística & datos numéricos , Lenguaje , Pediatría/estadística & datos numéricos , Niño
5.
J Dev Behav Pediatr ; 44(6): e397-e411, 2023 08 01.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37315107

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Telehealth uptake increased dramatically during the COVID-19 pandemic, including for autism spectrum disorder (ASD) assessment by developmental-behavioral pediatric (DBP) clinicians. However, little is known about the acceptability of telehealth or its impact on equity in DBP care. OBJECTIVE: Engage providers and caregivers to glean their perspectives on the use of telehealth for ASD assessment in young children, exploring acceptability, benefits, concerns, and its potential role in ameliorating or exacerbating disparities in access to and quality of DBP care. METHODS: This multimethod study used surveys and semistructured interviews to describe provider and family perspectives around the use of telehealth in DBP evaluation of children younger than 5 years with possible ASD between 3/2020 and 12/2021. Surveys were completed by 13 DBP clinicians and 22 caregivers. Semistructured interviews with 12 DBP clinicians and 14 caregivers were conducted, transcribed, coded, and analyzed thematically. RESULTS: Acceptance of and satisfaction with telehealth for ASD assessments in DBP were high for clinicians and most caregivers. Pros and cons concerning assessment quality and access to care were noted. Providers raised concerns about equity of telehealth access, particularly for families with a preferred language other than English. CONCLUSION: This study's results can inform the adoption of telehealth in DBP in an equitable manner beyond the pandemic. DBP providers and families desire the ability to choose telehealth care for different assessment components. Unique factors related to performing observational assessments of young children with developmental and behavioral concerns make telehealth particularly well-suited for DBP care.


Asunto(s)
Trastorno del Espectro Autista , COVID-19 , Telemedicina , Humanos , Niño , Preescolar , Trastorno del Espectro Autista/diagnóstico , Trastorno del Espectro Autista/terapia , Cuidadores , Pandemias , COVID-19/epidemiología , Telemedicina/métodos
6.
JMIR Res Protoc ; 9(8): e16711, 2020 Aug 17.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32459653

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Poor adherence to inhaled corticosteroid medications for children with high-risk asthma is both well documented and poorly understood. It has a disproportionate prevalence and impact on children of minority demographics in urban settings. Financial incentives have been shown to be a compelling method to engage those in a high-risk asthma population, but whether adherence can be maintained by offering financial incentives and how these incentives can be used to sustain high adherence are unknown. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to determine the marginal effects of a financial incentive-based intervention on inhaled corticosteroid adherence, health care system use, and costs. METHODS: Participants include children aged 5 to 12 years who have had either at least two hospitalizations or one hospitalization and one emergency department visit for asthma in the year prior to their enrollment (and their caregivers). Participants are given an electronic inhaler sensor in order to track their medication use over a period of 7 months. After a 1-month period of observation, participants are randomized to 1 of 3 arms for a 3-month period. Participants in arm 1 receive daily text message reminders, feedback, and gain-framed, nominal financial incentives; participants in arm 2 receive daily text message reminders and feedback only, and participants in arm 3 receive no reminders, feedback, or incentives. All participants are subsequently observed for an additional 3-month period with no reminders, feedback, or incentives to assess whether any sustained effects are apparent. RESULTS: Study enrollment began in September 2019 with a target sample size of N=125 children. As of June 2020, 61 children have been enrolled. Data collection is estimated to be completed in June 2022, and analyses will be completed by June 2023. CONCLUSIONS: This study will provide data that will help to determine whether a financial incentive-based mobile health intervention for promoting inhaled corticosteroid use can be effective in patients with high-risk asthma over longer periods. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrial.gov NCT03907410; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03907410. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/16711.

SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA