Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 7 de 7
Filtrar
1.
Headache ; 63(10): 1359-1371, 2023.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37975482

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: To examine trends in diagnosis of headache and migraine in a large pediatric neurology cohort, and test whether an electronic health record (EHR)-integrated headache questionnaire can increase specificity of diagnosis and likelihood of prescribing migraine treatment. BACKGROUND: Under-diagnosis of migraine contributes to the burden of disease. As we founded our Pediatric Headache Program in 2013, we recognized that the proportion of patients with headache who were given a diagnosis of migraine was much lower than expected. METHODS: We developed a patient headache questionnaire, initially on paper (2013-2014), then in an electronic database (2014-2016), and finally integrated into our electronic health record (pilot: 2016, full: May 2017). We compared diagnoses and prescribed treatments for new patients who were given a headache diagnosis, looking at trends in the proportion of patients given specific diagnoses (migraine, etc.) versus the non-specific diagnosis, "headache." Next, we conducted a prospective cohort study to test for association between provider use of the form and the presence of a specific diagnosis, then for an association between specific diagnosis and prescription of migraine treatment. RESULTS: Between July 2011 and December 2022 the proportion of new headache patients who were given a diagnosis of migraine increased 9.7% and non-specific headache diagnoses decreased 21.0%. In the EHR cohort (June 2017-December 2022, n = 15,122), use of the provider form increased the rate of specific diagnosis to 87.2% (1839/2109) compared to 75.5% (5708/7560) without a patient questionnaire, nearly doubling the odds of making a specific diagnosis (odds ratio [OR] 1.90, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.65-2.19). Compared to those given only a non-specific headache diagnosis who were prescribed a migraine therapy 53.7% (1766/3286) of the time, 75.3% (8914/11836) of those given a specific diagnosis received a migraine therapy, more than doubling the odds of prescription (OR 2.39, 95% CI: 2.20-2.60). CONCLUSIONS: Interventions to improve specificity of diagnosis were effective and led to increased rates of prescription of migraine treatments. These results have been sustained over several years. This headache questionnaire was adapted into the Foundation system of EpicCare, so it is broadly available as a clinical and research tool for institutions that use this EHR software.


Asunto(s)
Trastornos Migrañosos , Neurología , Humanos , Niño , Estudios Prospectivos , Cefalea/diagnóstico , Cefalea/terapia , Trastornos Migrañosos/terapia , Trastornos Migrañosos/tratamiento farmacológico , Encuestas y Cuestionarios
2.
Nephrol Dial Transplant ; 36(4): 665-672, 2021 03 29.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31860093

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Left ventricular hypertrophy is causally implicated in the high risk of death and heart failure (HF) in chronic kidney disease (CKD) patients. Whether the left ventricular mass index (LVMI) adds meaningful predictive power for mortality and de novo HF to simple risk models has not been tested in the CKD population. METHODS: We investigated this problem in 1352 CKD patients enrolled in the Chronic Renal Insufficiency Cohort (CRIC). LVMI was measured by echocardiography and the risks for death and HF were estimated by the Study of Heart and Renal Protection (SHARP) score, a well-validated risk score in CKD patients. RESULTS: During a median follow-up of 7.7 years, 326 patients died and 208 had de novo HF. The LVMI and the SHARP score and a cross-validated model for HF (CRIC model) were all significantly (P < 0.001) related to the risk of death and HF. LVMI showed a discriminatory power for death (Harrell's C index 66%) inferior to that of the SHARP score (71%) and the same was true for the risk of HF both in the test (LVMI 72%, CRIC model 79%) and in the validation cohort (LVMI 71%, CRIC model 74%). LVMI increased very little the discriminatory (2-3%) and the risk reclassification power (3.0-4.8%) by the SHARP score and the CRIC model for HF for the same outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: In CKD, measurement of LVMI solely for the stratification of risk of death and perhaps for the risk of HF does not provide evident prognostic values in this condition.


Asunto(s)
Hipertrofia Ventricular Izquierda/patología , Insuficiencia Renal Crónica/complicaciones , Anciano , Estudios de Cohortes , Humanos , Hipertrofia Ventricular Izquierda/etiología , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Pronóstico , Factores de Riesgo
4.
Clin J Am Soc Nephrol ; 13(4): 585-595, 2018 04 06.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29475992

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Central BP measurements provide noninvasive measurement of aortic BP; our objectives were to examine the association of central and brachial BP measurements with risk of cardiovascular outcomes and mortality in patients with CKD and to determine the role of central BP measurement in conjunction with brachial BP in estimating cardiovascular risk. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS: In a prospective, longitudinal study (the Chronic Renal Insufficiency Cohort), central BP was measured in participants with CKD using the SphygmoCorPVx System. Cox proportional hazards models were used for analyses. RESULTS: Mean age of the participants (n=2875) was 60 years old. After a median follow-up of 5.5 years, participants in the highest quartile of brachial systolic BP (≥138 mm Hg) were at higher risk for the composite cardiovascular outcome (hazard ratio, 1.59; 95% confidence interval, 1.17 to 2.17; c statistic, 0.76) but not all-cause mortality (hazard ratio, 1.28; 95% confidence interval, 0.90 to 1.80) compared with those in the lowest quartile. Participants in the highest quartile of central systolic BP were also at higher risk for the composite cardiovascular outcome (hazard ratio, 1.69; 95% confidence interval, 1.24 to 2.31; c statistic, 0.76) compared with participants in the lowest quartile. CONCLUSIONS: We show that elevated brachial and central BP measurements are both associated with higher risk of cardiovascular disease outcomes in patients with CKD. Measurement of central BP does not improve the ability to predict cardiovascular disease outcomes or mortality in patients with CKD compared with brachial BP measurement.


Asunto(s)
Presión Arterial , Enfermedades Cardiovasculares/epidemiología , Insuficiencia Renal Crónica/fisiopatología , Anciano , Aorta , Arteria Braquial , Enfermedades Cardiovasculares/fisiopatología , Femenino , Insuficiencia Cardíaca/epidemiología , Insuficiencia Cardíaca/fisiopatología , Humanos , Estudios Longitudinales , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Infarto del Miocardio/epidemiología , Infarto del Miocardio/fisiopatología , Enfermedad Arterial Periférica/epidemiología , Enfermedad Arterial Periférica/fisiopatología , Modelos de Riesgos Proporcionales , Estudios Prospectivos , Medición de Riesgo , Accidente Cerebrovascular/epidemiología , Accidente Cerebrovascular/fisiopatología , Tasa de Supervivencia , Sístole
5.
Clin J Am Soc Nephrol ; 12(12): 2066-2073, 2017 Dec 07.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28716856

RESUMEN

Cardiovascular events, such as hospitalizations because of congestive heart failure, often occur repeatedly in patients with CKD. Many studies focus on analyses of the first occurrence of these events, and discard subsequent information. In this article, we review a number of statistical methods for analyzing ordered recurrent events of the same type, including Poisson regression and three commonly used survival models that are extensions of Cox proportional hazards regression. We illustrate the models by analyzing data from the Chronic Renal Insufficiency Cohort Study to identify risk factors for congestive heart failure hospitalizations in patients with CKD. We show that recurrent event analyses provide additional insights about the data compared with a standard survival analysis of time to the first event.


Asunto(s)
Insuficiencia Cardíaca/etiología , Hospitalización/estadística & datos numéricos , Modelos Estadísticos , Insuficiencia Renal Crónica/complicaciones , Humanos , Distribución de Poisson , Modelos de Riesgos Proporcionales , Recurrencia , Factores de Riesgo
6.
Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken) ; 69(12): 1845-1854, 2017 12.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28129484

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: The optimal timing of tumor necrosis factor antagonists before elective surgery is unknown. This study evaluated the association between infliximab timing and serious infection after elective hip or knee arthroplasty. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study evaluated US Medicare patients with rheumatoid arthritis, inflammatory bowel disease, psoriasis, psoriatic arthritis, or ankylosing spondylitis who received infliximab within 6 months of elective knee or hip arthroplasty from 2007 to 2013. Propensity-adjusted analyses examined whether infliximab stop timing (time between the most recent infusion and surgery) was associated with hospitalized infection within 30 days or prosthetic joint infection (PJI) within 1 year. RESULTS: Hospitalized infection within 30 days occurred after 270 of 4,288 surgeries (6.3%). Infliximab stop timing <4 weeks versus 8-12 weeks was not associated with an increase in infection within 30 days (propensity-adjusted odds ratio [OR] 0.90 [95% confidence interval (95% CI) 0.60-1.34]). The rate of PJI was 2.9 per 100 person-years and was not increased in patients with stop timing <4 weeks versus 8-12 weeks (hazard ratio [HR] 0.98 [95% CI 0.52-1.87]). Glucocorticoid dosage >10 mg/day was associated with increased risk of 30-day infection (OR 2.11 [95% CI 1.30-3.40]) and PJI (HR 2.70 [95% CI 1.30-5.60]). Other risk factors for infection included elderly age, comorbidities, revision surgery, and previous hospitalized infection. CONCLUSION: Administering infliximab within 4 weeks of elective knee or hip arthroplasty was not associated with a higher risk of short- or long-term serious infection compared to withholding infliximab for longer time periods. Glucocorticoid use, especially >10 mg/day, was associated with an increased infection risk.


Asunto(s)
Antirreumáticos/efectos adversos , Artroplastia de Reemplazo de Cadera/efectos adversos , Artroplastia de Reemplazo de Rodilla/efectos adversos , Articulación de la Cadera/cirugía , Prótesis de Cadera/efectos adversos , Infliximab/efectos adversos , Articulación de la Rodilla/cirugía , Prótesis de la Rodilla/efectos adversos , Infecciones Relacionadas con Prótesis/microbiología , Anciano , Antirreumáticos/administración & dosificación , Artroplastia de Reemplazo de Cadera/instrumentación , Artroplastia de Reemplazo de Rodilla/instrumentación , Distribución de Chi-Cuadrado , Esquema de Medicación , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Electivos , Femenino , Glucocorticoides/administración & dosificación , Glucocorticoides/efectos adversos , Articulación de la Cadera/fisiopatología , Humanos , Huésped Inmunocomprometido , Infliximab/administración & dosificación , Estimación de Kaplan-Meier , Articulación de la Rodilla/fisiopatología , Modelos Logísticos , Masculino , Medicare , Análisis Multivariante , Oportunidad Relativa , Puntaje de Propensión , Modelos de Riesgos Proporcionales , Infecciones Relacionadas con Prótesis/diagnóstico , Infecciones Relacionadas con Prótesis/inmunología , Estudios Retrospectivos , Factores de Riesgo , Factores de Tiempo , Resultado del Tratamiento , Estados Unidos
7.
Clin J Am Soc Nephrol ; 12(7): 1181-1189, 2017 Jul 07.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28242844

RESUMEN

Survival analysis is commonly used to evaluate factors associated with time to an event of interest (e.g., ESRD, cardiovascular disease, and mortality) among CKD populations. Time to the event of interest is typically observed only for some participants. Other participants have their event time censored because of the end of the study, death, withdrawal from the study, or some other competing event. Classic survival analysis methods, such as Cox proportional hazards regression, rely on the assumption that any censoring is independent of the event of interest. However, in most clinical settings, such as in CKD populations, this assumption is unlikely to be true. For example, participants whose follow-up time is censored because of health-related death likely would have had a shorter time to ESRD, had they not died. These types of competing events that cause dependent censoring are referred to as competing risks. Here, we first describe common circumstances in clinical renal research where competing risks operate and then review statistical approaches for dealing with competing risks. We compare two of the most popular analytical methods used in settings of competing risks: cause-specific hazards models and the Fine and Gray approach (subdistribution hazards models). We also discuss practical recommendations for analysis and interpretation of survival data that incorporate competing risks. To demonstrate each of the analytical tools, we use a study of fibroblast growth factor 23 and risks of mortality and ESRD in participants with CKD from the Chronic Renal Insufficiency Cohort Study.


Asunto(s)
Fallo Renal Crónico/mortalidad , Modelos Estadísticos , Insuficiencia Renal Crónica/mortalidad , Análisis de Supervivencia , Biomarcadores/sangre , Causas de Muerte , Progresión de la Enfermedad , Factor-23 de Crecimiento de Fibroblastos , Factores de Crecimiento de Fibroblastos/sangre , Humanos , Estimación de Kaplan-Meier , Fallo Renal Crónico/sangre , Fallo Renal Crónico/diagnóstico , Fallo Renal Crónico/terapia , Pronóstico , Modelos de Riesgos Proporcionales , Insuficiencia Renal Crónica/sangre , Insuficiencia Renal Crónica/diagnóstico , Insuficiencia Renal Crónica/terapia , Medición de Riesgo , Factores de Riesgo , Factores de Tiempo
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA