Flares in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus.

OBJECTIVE: SLE is characterized by relapses and remissions. We aimed to describe the frequency, type and time to flare in a cohort of SLE patients. METHODS: SLE patients with one or more 'A' or 'B' BILAG-2004 systems meeting flare criteria ('new' or 'worse' items) and requiring an increase in immunosuppression were recruited from nine UK centres and assessed at baseline and monthly for 9 months. Subsequent flares were defined as: severe (any 'A' irrespective of number of 'B' flares), moderate (two or more 'B' without any 'A' flares) and mild (one 'B'). RESULTS: Of the 100 patients, 94% were female, 61% White Caucasians, mean age (s.d.) was 40.7 years (12.7) and mean disease duration (s.d.) was 9.3 years (8.1). A total of 195 flares re-occurred in 76 patients over 781 monthly assessments (flare rate of 0.25/patient-month). There were 37 severe flares, 32 moderate flares and 126 mild flares. By 1 month, 22% had a mild/moderate/severe flare and 22% had a severe flare by 7 months. The median time to any 'A' or 'B' flare was 4 months. Severe/moderate flares tended to be in the system(s) affected at baseline, whereas mild flares could affect any system. CONCLUSION: . In a population with active SLE we observed an ongoing rate of flares from early in the follow-up period with moderate-severe flares being due to an inability to fully control the disease. This real-world population study demonstrates the limitations of current treatments and provides a useful reference population from which to inform future clinical trial design.

Screening for aspiration risk associated with dysphagia in acute stroke.

BACKGROUND: Stroke can affect people's ability to swallow, resulting in passage of some food and drink into the airway. This can cause choking, chest infection, malnutrition and dehydration, reduced rehabilitation, increased risk of anxiety and depression, longer hospital stay, increased likelihood of discharge to a care home, and increased risk of death. Early identification and management of disordered swallowing reduces risk of these difficulties. OBJECTIVES: Primary objective • To determine the diagnostic accuracy and the sensitivity and specificity of bedside screening tests for detecting risk of aspiration associated with dysphagia in people with acute stroke Secondary objectives • To assess the influence of the following sources of heterogeneity on the diagnostic accuracy of bedside screening tools for dysphagia - Patient demographics (e.g. age, gender) - Time post stroke that the study was conducted (from admission to 48 hours) to ensure only hyperacute and acute stroke swallow screening tools are identified - Definition of dysphagia used by the study - Level of training of nursing staff (both grade and training in the screening tool) - Low-quality studies identified from the methodological quality checklist - Type and threshold of index test - Type of reference test SEARCH METHODS: In June 2017 and December 2019, we searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, and the Health Technology Assessment (HTA) database via the Centre for Reviews and Dissemination; the reference lists of included studies; and grey literature sources. We contacted experts in the field to identify any ongoing studies and those potentially missed by the search strategy. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included studies that were single-gate or two-gate studies comparing a bedside screening tool administered by nurses or other healthcare professionals (HCPs) with expert or instrumental assessment for detection of aspiration associated with dysphagia in adults with acute stroke admitted to hospital. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently screened each study using the eligibility criteria and then extracted data, including the sensitivity and specificity of each index test against the reference test. A third review author was available at each stage to settle disagreements. The methodological quality of each study was assessed using the Quality Assessment of Studies of Diagnostic Accuracy (QUADAS-2) tool. We identified insufficient studies for each index test, so we performed no meta-analysis. Diagnostic accuracy data were presented as sensitivities and specificities for the index tests. MAIN RESULTS: Overall, we included 25 studies in the review, four of which we included as narratives (with no accuracy statistics reported). The included studies involved 3953 participants and 37 screening tests. Of these, 24 screening tests used water only, six used water and other consistencies, and seven used other methods. For index tests using water only, sensitivity and specificity ranged from 46% to 100% and from 43% to 100%, respectively; for those using water and other consistencies, sensitivity and specificity ranged from 75% to 100% and from 69% to 90%, respectively; and for those using other methods, sensitivity and specificity ranged from 29% to 100% and from 39% to 86%, respectively. Twenty screening tests used expert assessment or the Mann Assessment of Swallowing Ability (MASA) as the reference, six used fibreoptic endoscopic evaluation of swallowing (FEES), and 11 used videofluoroscopy (VF). Fifteen screening tools had an outcome of aspiration risk, 20 screening tools had an outcome of dysphagia, and two narrative papers did not report the outcome. Twenty-one screening tests were carried out by nurses, and 16 were carried out by other HCPs (not including speech and language therapists (SLTs)). We assessed a total of six studies as low risk across all four QUADAS-2 risk of bias domains, and we rated 15 studies as low concern across all three applicability domains. No single study demonstrated 100% sensitivity and specificity with low risk of bias for all domains. The best performing combined water swallow and instrumental tool was the Bedside Aspiration test (n = 50), the best performing water plus other consistencies tool was the Gugging Swallowing Screen (GUSS; n = 30), and the best water only swallow screening tool was the Toronto Bedside Swallowing Screening Test (TOR-BSST; n = 24). All tools demonstrated combined highest sensitivity and specificity and low risk of bias for all domains. However, clinicians should be cautious in their interpretation of these findings, as these tests are based on single studies with small sample sizes, which limits the estimates of reliability of screening tests. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: We were unable to identify a single swallow screening tool with high and precisely estimated sensitivity and specificity based on at least one trial with low risk of bias. However, we were able to offer recommendations for further high-quality studies that are needed to improve the accuracy and clinical utility of bedside screening tools.

Adherence and persistence to direct oral anticoagulants in atrial fibrillation: a population-based study.

BACKGROUND: Despite simpler regimens than vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation (AF), adherence (taking drugs as prescribed) and persistence (continuation of drugs) to direct oral anticoagulants are suboptimal, yet understudied in electronic health records (EHRs). OBJECTIVE: We investigated (1) time trends at individual and system levels, and (2) the risk factors for and associations between adherence and persistence. METHODS: In UK primary care EHR (The Health Information Network 2011-2016), we investigated adherence and persistence at 1 year for oral anticoagulants (OACs) in adults with incident AF. Baseline characteristics were analysed by OAC and adherence/persistence status. Risk factors for non-adherence and non-persistence were assessed using Cox and logistic regression. Patterns of adherence and persistence were analysed. RESULTS: Among 36 652 individuals with incident AF, cardiovascular comorbidities (median CHA2DS2VASc[Congestive heart failure, Hypertension, Age≥75 years, Diabetes mellitus, Stroke, Vascular disease, Age 65-74 years, Sex category] 3) and polypharmacy (median number of drugs 6) were common. Adherence was 55.2% (95% CI 54.6 to 55.7), 51.2% (95% CI 50.6 to 51.8), 66.5% (95% CI 63.7 to 69.2), 63.1% (95% CI 61.8 to 64.4) and 64.7% (95% CI 63.2 to 66.1) for all OACs, VKA, dabigatran, rivaroxaban and apixaban. One-year persistence was 65.9% (95% CI 65.4 to 66.5), 63.4% (95% CI 62.8 to 64.0), 61.4% (95% CI 58.3 to 64.2), 72.3% (95% CI 70.9 to 73.7) and 78.7% (95% CI 77.1 to 80.1) for all OACs, VKA, dabigatran, rivaroxaban and apixaban. Risk of non-adherence and non-persistence increased over time at individual and system levels. Increasing comorbidity was associated with reduced risk of non-adherence and non-persistence across all OACs. Overall rates of 'primary non-adherence' (stopping after first prescription), 'non-adherent non-persistence' and 'persistent adherence' were 3.5%, 26.5% and 40.2%, differing across OACs. CONCLUSIONS: Adherence and persistence to OACs are low at 1 year with heterogeneity across drugs and over time at individual and system levels. Better understanding of contributory factors will inform interventions to improve adherence and persistence across OACs in individuals and populations.