Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 6 de 6
Filtrar
1.
J Med Internet Res ; 26: e54008, 2024 Apr 08.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38587889

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Numerous prior opinion papers, administrative electronic health record data studies, and cross-sectional surveys of telehealth during the pandemic have been published, but none have combined assessments of video visit success monitoring with longitudinal assessments of perceived challenges to the rapid adoption of video visits during the pandemic. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to quantify (1) the use of video visits (compared with in-person and telephone visits) over time during the pandemic, (2) video visit successful connection rates, and (3) changes in perceived video visit challenges. METHODS: A web-based survey was developed for the dual purpose of monitoring and improving video visit implementation in our health care system during the COVID-19 pandemic. The survey included questions regarding rates of in-person, telephone, and video visits for clinician-patient encounters; the rate of successful connection for video visits; and perceived challenges to video visits (eg, software, hardware, bandwidth, and technology literacy). The survey was distributed via email to physicians, advanced practice professionals, and clinicians in May 2020. The survey was repeated in March 2021. Differences between the 2020 and 2021 responses were adjusted for within-respondent correlation across surveys and tested using generalized estimating equations. RESULTS: A total of 1126 surveys were completed (511 surveys in 2020 and 615 surveys in 2021). In 2020, only 21.7% (73/336) of clinicians reported no difficulty connecting with patients during video visits and 28.6% (93/325) of clinicians reported no difficulty in 2021. The distribution of the percentage of successfully connected video visits ("Over the past two weeks of scheduled visits, what percentage did you successfully connect with patients by video?") was not significantly different between 2020 and 2021 (P=.74). Challenges in conducting video visits persisted over time. Poor connectivity was the most common challenge reported by clinicians. This response increased over time, with 30.5% (156/511) selecting it as a challenge in 2020 and 37.1% (228/615) in 2021 (P=.01). Patients not having access to their electronic health record portals was also a commonly reported challenge (109/511, 21.3% in 2020 and 137/615, 22.3% in 2021, P=.73). CONCLUSIONS: During the pandemic, our health care delivery system rapidly adopted synchronous patient-clinician communication using video visits. As experience with video visits increased, the reported failure rate did not significantly decline, and clinicians continued to report challenges related to general network connectivity and patient access to technology.


Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Medios de Comunicación , Humanos , COVID-19/epidemiología , Pandemias , Estudios Transversales , Comunicación
2.
Hypertension ; 79(10): 2305-2315, 2022 10.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35880517

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Limited evidence exists regarding long-term effectiveness and safety of aldosterone antagonists (AAs) versus beta blockers (BBs) as fourth-line antihypertensive agents in patients with resistant hypertension (RH). We evaluated the comparative effectiveness and safety of aldosterone AA versus BB. METHODS: We conducted a real-world retrospective cohort study using IBM MarketScan commercial claims and Medicare Supplemental claims (2007-2019). Patients with RH entered the cohort (ie, index date) when they newly initiated either AA or BB. The effectiveness outcome was major adverse cardiovascular events. Safety outcomes were hyperkalemia, gynecomastia, and kidney function deterioration. Potential confounding was addressed by adjustment for baseline characteristics via stabilized inverse probability of treatment weighting (SIPTW) based on propensity scores. Cox proportional hazards regression with SIPTWs were used to estimate adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) and 95% CI comparing risk for outcomes between AA and BB groups. RESULTS: We identified 80 598 patients with RH (mean age: 61 years, 51% males), of which 6626 initiated AA and 73 972 initiated BB as the fourth antihypertensive agent. Among patients with RH, initiation of AA as a fourth-line antihypertensive agent did not significantly reduce major adverse cardiovascular event risk relative to BB initiation (aHR, 0.77 [95% CI, 0.50-1.19]) but did substantially increase the risk of hyperkalemia (aHR, 3.86 [95% CI, 2.78-5.34]), gynecomastia (aHR, 9.51 [95% CI, 5.69-15.89]), and kidney function deterioration (aHR, 1.63 [95% CI, 1.34-1.99]). CONCLUSIONS: Long-term clinical trials powered to assess major adverse cardiovascular events are necessary to understand the risk-benefit trade-off of AA as fourth-line therapy for RH.


Asunto(s)
Ginecomastia , Hiperpotasemia , Hipertensión , Antagonistas Adrenérgicos beta/efectos adversos , Anciano , Antihipertensivos/efectos adversos , Femenino , Ginecomastia/inducido químicamente , Ginecomastia/tratamiento farmacológico , Humanos , Hiperpotasemia/inducido químicamente , Hiperpotasemia/epidemiología , Hipertensión/inducido químicamente , Hipertensión/tratamiento farmacológico , Masculino , Medicare , Persona de Mediana Edad , Antagonistas de Receptores de Mineralocorticoides/efectos adversos , Estudios Retrospectivos , Estados Unidos/epidemiología
3.
Res Social Adm Pharm ; 17(8): 1478-1482, 2021 08.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33221267

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Speculation on benefits and harms of prescription, over-the-counter and complementary medications has been widespread during the SARS-CoV-2 (or COVID-19) pandemic. This community-based survey assessed self-reported changes in medications including those stopped, started, or if access had been impacted. METHODS: A survey was collected via Research Electronic Data Capture (REDCap). The survey was advertised in the community through social media, email lists, websites, and post-cards. Survey responses were collected between 5/21/2020 and 6/24/2020. Variables included demographic characteristics such as age, sex, race, marital status, education, employment, income, and community type. Questions related to medication changes included: "Have you started any medication due to COVID-19?", "Have you stopped any medication due to COVID-19?" and "Have you had issues getting your prescription medications?". Respondents aged 50 years or older were included. RESULTS: There were N = 1397 responses of which 1169 were older adults ≥50 years-old. Of these, 1141 responded to the medication changes survey questions and 28 had missing responses and were excluded from the survey sample for this analysis. Among these, 31 (2.7%) reported a medication change included 5 (0.4%) reported stopping a medication, 18 (1.6%) reported starting a medication, and 8 (0.7%) reported trouble obtaining medications. Medications started included mostly vitamins or other supplements including zinc (n = 9), vitamin C (6), and other supplements (3). Among prescription medications, antidepressants and anti-anxiety medications (4) were reported as well as aspirin (1), losartan (1), and low dose naltrexone (1). One respondent reported unidentified homeopathy. There were no significant differences between those with medication changes and those with none. CONCLUSIONS: In this community-based survey sample of over one thousand older adults, only a small percentage (2.7%; n = 31) reported any changes to medications during the pandemic. As essential workers during this crisis, pharmacists have played a critical role in providing medication information and continued access.


Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Medicamentos bajo Prescripción , Anciano , Humanos , Persona de Mediana Edad , Pandemias , SARS-CoV-2 , Encuestas y Cuestionarios
4.
Ann Vasc Surg ; 51: 284-297, 2018 Aug.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29655810

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Inferior vena cava filters (IVCFs) are indicated for therapeutic and prophylactic treatment of venous thromboembolism in patients when anticoagulation has failed or is contraindicated. Retrievable IVCFs are not always retrieved despite clinical recommendations. The purpose of this review is to compare results in the literature regarding interventions and to improve IVCF retrieval rates. METHODS: Articles were identified via the search terms "vena cava filters" and "inferior vena cava filters" in conjunction with "retrieval." Searches were repeated in MEDLINE/PubMed, Google Scholar, and Cochrane database. Exclusion criteria included duplicates, misidentified subject matter, study period before 2008, and lack of control group. Two independent reviewers screened key elements in the identified manuscripts, including the targeted intervention population, study design, IVCF retrieval rates, and other outcomes. A third reviewer corroborated results and consolidated findings. RESULTS: Seventeen articles were identified for review. Of these, 12 were physician-targeted interventions, and 8 were patient-targeted interventions (3 studies included both). IVCF retrieval rates varied substantially for each study, but all reviewed studies reported improvement in retrieval rate following intervention. Only 5 studies reported decreased IVCF indwell times in intervention groups. Reported complication rates from IVCF retrievals were low, ranging from 0 to 2%. CONCLUSIONS: IVCF retrieval rates were improved by all interventions in the reviewed studies. Findings suggest that IVCF retrieval rates can be best improved by tracking patients typically lost to follow-up. Literature suggests that successful tracking requires an individual or team of individuals who have been assigned dedicated clinical responsibility for coordinating care following IVCF placement.


Asunto(s)
Remoción de Dispositivos/métodos , Implantación de Prótesis/instrumentación , Filtros de Vena Cava , Vena Cava Inferior , Cuidados Posteriores , Prestación Integrada de Atención de Salud , Remoción de Dispositivos/efectos adversos , Humanos , Grupo de Atención al Paciente , Diseño de Prótesis , Implantación de Prótesis/efectos adversos , Factores de Tiempo , Resultado del Tratamiento , Vena Cava Inferior/diagnóstico por imagen
5.
J Manag Care Spec Pharm ; 23(9): 958-967, 2017 Sep.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28854077

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Few studies have assessed adherence to non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs), especially using contemporary data now that multiple NOACs are available. OBJECTIVE: To compare adherence and treatment patterns among NOACs for stroke prevention in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF). METHODS: Incident and treatment-naive NVAF patients were identified during 2013-2014 from a large claims database in this retrospective cohort study. Patients were included who initiated rivaroxaban, dabigatran, or apixaban within 30 days after diagnosis. Adherence to the index medication and adherence to any oral anticoagulant was assessed using the proportion of days covered (PDC) at 3, 6, and 9 months. The number of switches and gaps in therapy were also evaluated. Analyses were stratified by stroke risk scores, and a logistic regression model was used to control for factors that may predict high adherence. RESULTS: Dabigatran had lower adherence (PDC = 0.76, 0.64, 0.57) compared with rivaroxaban (PDC = 0.83, 0.73, 0.66; P < 0.001) and apixaban (PDC = 0.82, 0.72, 0.66; P < 0.001) at 3, 6, and 9 months of follow-up and twice the number of switches to either other anticoagulants or antiplatelet therapy. Adherence was higher overall as stroke risk increased, and dabigatran had consistently lower adherence compared with the other NOACs. Multivariable logistic regression predicting PDC ≥ 0.80 showed rivaroxaban users with higher odds of high adherence compared with dabigatran or rivaroxaban across all time periods. Adjusted analyses showed that increasing age and comorbid hypertension and diabetes were associated with higher adherence. CONCLUSIONS: In this real-world analysis of adherence to NOACs, rivaroxaban and apixaban had favorable unadjusted adherence profiles compared with dabigatran, while rivaroxaban users had higher odds of high adherence (PDC ≥ 0.80) among the NOACs in adjusted analyses. Clinicians and managed care organizations should consider the implications of lower adherence on clinical outcomes and quality assessment. DISCLOSURES: This project was supported by the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences, National Institutes of Health, through grant number UL1TR000117. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the NIH. The authors have nothing to disclose. Study concept and design were contributed by Brown and Shewale. Brown and Talbert collected the data, and data analysis was performed primarily by Brown, along with Shewale and Talbert. The manuscript was written primarily by Brown, along with Shewale, and revised by all the authors.


Asunto(s)
Anticoagulantes/uso terapéutico , Fibrilación Atrial/tratamiento farmacológico , Dabigatrán/uso terapéutico , Cumplimiento de la Medicación/estadística & datos numéricos , Pirazoles/uso terapéutico , Piridonas/uso terapéutico , Rivaroxabán/uso terapéutico , Accidente Cerebrovascular/prevención & control , Administración Oral , Anciano , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Estudios Retrospectivos
6.
J Manag Care Spec Pharm ; 22(11): 1319-1329, 2016 Nov.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27783556

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) are widely used for prevention of stroke secondary to nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF). Increased use of NOACs is partially a result of simplified regimens compared with warfarin, which has been associated with poor adherence and persistence to therapy. Few studies have assessed adherence to NOACs, especially using contemporary data now that multiple NOACs are available. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate adherence to NOACs in a cohort of newly diagnosed NVAF patients who are commercially insured. METHODS: Incident, treatment-naïve NVAF patients were identified in 2013 from a large claims database. Patients were included who initiated rivaroxaban, dabigatran, or apixaban within 30 days after diagnosis. Subjects were required to have 12 months of pre-index information to assess demographic and clinical characteristics (comorbidities, CHA2 DS2-VASc, and HAS-BLED scores). Adherence to the index medication and adherence to any oral anticoagulant was assessed using proportion of days covered (PDC) at 3, 6, and 9 months. The number of switches and gaps in therapy were also evaluated. Analyses were stratified by stroke risk scores, and a logistic regression model was used to control for factors that may predict high adherence (PDC ≥ 0.80). RESULTS: A total of 3,455 rivaroxaban, 1,264 dabigatran, and 504 apixaban users were included with no major clinical or demographic differences between groups. At 3, 6, and 9 months of follow-up, dabigatran had lower adherence (PDC = 0.77, 0.67, and 0.62) compared with rivaroxaban (PDC = 0.84, 0.75, and 0.70; P < 0.001) and apixaban (PDC = 0.82, 0.75, and 0.71; P < 0.001), as well as nearly twice the number of switches to either other anticoagulants or antiplatelet therapy. At 9 months, 55.0% of rivaroxaban initiators had PDC ≥ 0.80, which was comparable with 56.8% for apixaban and significantly greater than 46.7% for dabigatran (P < 0.001). Adherence was higher overall as stroke risk increased and showed dabigatran had consistently lower adherence compared with the other NOACs. Overall adherence to any oral anticoagulants, allowing for switches to another NOAC or warfarin, was not dependent on the index medication (9-month PDC = 0.74, 0.71, and 0.74 for rivaroxaban, dabigatran, and apixaban initiators). Adjusted analyses showed that increasing age and comorbid hypertension and diabetes were associated with higher adherence. Compared with rivaroxaban, dabigatran initiators had nearly 30% lower odds of being adherent to their index medication, and no differences were observed between apixaban and rivaroxaban. At 9 months, there were no differences between NOACs for overall adherence to oral anticoagulants. CONCLUSIONS: In this real-world analysis of adherence to NOACs, rivaroxaban and apixaban had favorable profiles compared with dabigatran, and rivaroxaban appeared to have higher overall adherence among the NOACs. Clinicians and managed care organizations should consider the implications of lower adherence on clinical outcomes as well as quality assessment. DISCLOSURES: The project described was supported by the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences, National Institutes of Health, through grant number UL1TR000117. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the NIH. Brown reports receiving a training fellowship from Human and Pfizer. Study concept and design were contributed by Brown and Shewale. Talbert took the lead in data collection, along with Brown, and data interpretation was primarily performed by Brown, along with Shewale. The manuscript was written primarily by Brown, along with Shewale, and revised by all the authors.


Asunto(s)
Fibrilación Atrial/tratamiento farmacológico , Dabigatrán/administración & dosificación , Cumplimiento de la Medicación , Pirazoles/administración & dosificación , Piridonas/administración & dosificación , Rivaroxabán/administración & dosificación , Accidente Cerebrovascular/prevención & control , Administración Oral , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Anticoagulantes/administración & dosificación , Fibrilación Atrial/epidemiología , Estudios de Cohortes , Estudios de Seguimiento , Humanos , Revisión de Utilización de Seguros , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Accidente Cerebrovascular/epidemiología , Estados Unidos/epidemiología
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA