Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
Mais filtros

Métodos Terapêuticos e Terapias MTCI
Base de dados
País/Região como assunto
Ano de publicação
Tipo de documento
País de afiliação
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
Cephalalgia ; 42(11-12): 1255-1264, 2022 10.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35642092

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: The heterogeneity of migraine has been reported extensively, with identified subgroups usually based on symptoms. Grouping individuals with migraine and similar comorbidity profiles has been suggested, however such segmentation methods have not been tested using real-world clinical data. OBJECTIVE: To gain insights into natural groupings of patients with migraine using latent class analysis based on electronic health record-determined comorbidities. METHODS: Retrospective electronic health record data analysis of primary-care patients at Sutter Health, a large open healthcare system in Northern California, USA. We identified migraine patients over a five-year time period (2015-2019) and extracted 29 comorbidities. We then applied latent class analysis to identify comorbidity-based natural subgroups. RESULTS: We identified 95,563 patients with migraine and found seven latent classes, summarized by their predominant comorbidities and population share: fewest comorbidities (61.8%), psychiatric (18.3%), some comorbidities (10.0%), most comorbidities - no cardiovascular (3.6%), vascular (3.1%), autoimmune/joint/pain (2.2%), and most comorbidities (1.0%). We found minimal demographic differences across classes. CONCLUSION: Our study found groupings of migraine patients based on comorbidity that have the potential to be used to guide targeted treatment strategies and the development of new therapies.


Assuntos
Transtornos de Enxaqueca , Atenção Plena , Estudos de Coortes , Comorbidade , Humanos , Transtornos de Enxaqueca/diagnóstico , Estudos Retrospectivos
2.
Headache ; 61(3): 462-484, 2021 Mar.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33368248

RESUMO

OBJECTIVE: To characterize patients who utilize services for migraine in a large integrated health care network, and describe patterns of care and utilization. BACKGROUND: Within health care systems, migraine is a common reason for seeking primary and neurology care, but relatively little is documented about who seeks care and the factors that explain variation in utilization. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study using electronic health record (EHR) data from Sutter Health primary care (PC) patients who had at least one office visit to a PC clinic between 2013 and 2017. Migraine status was ascertained from diagnosis codes and medication orders. Control status was assigned to those with no evidence of care for any type of headache. We divided the primary care migraine cohort into two groups: those who received all their care for migraine from PC (denoted PC-M) and those who had ≥1 encounter with a neurologist for migraine (denoted N-M). Migraine cases were also designated as having preexisting migraine if they had an encounter with a migraine diagnosis within (±) 6 months of their first study period PC visit and, otherwise, designated as first migraine consult. Two levels of contrasts included: patients with migraine and controls; and within the group of patients with migraine, PC-M and N-M groups. Comorbid conditions were determined from EHR encounter diagnosis codes. RESULTS: We identified 94,149 patients with migraine (including 21,525 N-M and 72,624 PC-M) and 1,248,763 controls. Comorbidities: Proportions of psychiatric [29.8% (n = 28,054) vs. 11.8% (n = 147,043)], autoimmune [(4.4% (n = 4162) vs. 2.6% (n = 31,981)], pain [13.2% (n = 12,439) vs. 5.8% (n = 72,049)], respiratory [24.6% (n = 23,186) vs. 12.3% (n = 153,692)], neurologic [2.9% (n = 2688) vs. 0.9% (n = 11,321)], and cerebrovascular [1.0% (n = 945) vs. 0.6% (n = 7500)] conditions were higher in the migraine group compared to controls, all p < 0.001. Among patients with migraine, the N-M group was similar to the PC-M group in sex, age, ethnicity, and marital status, but were more likely to have preexisting migraine (49.9% (n = 10,734) vs. 36.2% (n = 26,317), p < 0.001). Proportions of comorbid conditions were higher among the N-M group than the PC-M group {psychiatric [38.5% (n = 8291) vs. 27.2% (n = 19,763)], autoimmune [6.3% (n = 1365) vs. 3.9% (n = 2797)], pain [19.6% (n = 4218) vs. 11.3% (n = 8211)], respiratory [30.3% (n = 6516) vs. 23.0% (n = 16,670)], neurologic [6.0% (n = 1288) vs. 1.9% (n = 1400)], cardiovascular [9.7% (n = 2091) vs. 7.0% (n = 5076)], and cerebrovascular [2.3% (n = 500) vs. 0.6% (n = 445)], all p < 0.001}. Medications: During the study period, 82.6% (n = 77,762) of patients with migraine received ≥1 prescription order for an acute migraine medication [89.4% (n = 19,250) of N-M vs. 80.6% (n = 58,512) of PC]. Opioids were prescribed to 52.9% (n = 49,837) of patients with migraine [63.5% (n = 13,669) for N-M and 49.8% (n = 36,168) for PC-M patients). During the study period, 61.4% (n = 57,810) of patients received ≥1 prescription for a migraine preventive medication [81.4% (n = 17,521) of N-M and 55.5% (n = 40,289) of PC-M patients]. The most commonly prescribed classes of preventive medications were antidepressants. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with migraine in a large health system, those who were also cared for in neurology were more likely to receive both acute and preventive medication migraine orders than those patients who did not see a neurologist, with triptans and antidepressants the most commonly prescribed classes of acute and preventive pharmacotherapies, respectively. Opioids were prescribed to approximately half of the total sample and more common in the N-M group. Adjusting for demographics, patients with migraine had higher rates of nearly every comorbidity we assessed and were more likely to utilize services compared to those without migraine. Overall, patients with migraine also cared for in neurology practices used more of all health care resource types under consideration and had more medical issues, which may be due in some part to a more severe, frequent and disabling disease state compared to those who sought care exclusively from PC practices.


Assuntos
Utilização de Instalações e Serviços/estatística & dados numéricos , Transtornos de Enxaqueca/tratamento farmacológico , Neurologistas/estatística & dados numéricos , Atenção Primária à Saúde/estatística & dados numéricos , Adolescente , Adulto , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , California/epidemiologia , Comorbidade , Prestação Integrada de Cuidados de Saúde/estatística & dados numéricos , Registros Eletrônicos de Saúde/estatística & dados numéricos , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Transtornos de Enxaqueca/epidemiologia , Estudos Retrospectivos , Adulto Jovem
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA