Long-term use and cost-effectiveness of secondary prevention drugs for heart disease in Western Australian seniors (WAMACH): a study protocol.

INTRODUCTION: Secondary prevention drugs for cardiac disease have been demonstrated by clinical trials to be effective in reducing future cardiovascular and mortality events (WAMACH is the Western Australian Medication Adherence and Costs in Heart disease study). Hence, most countries have adopted health policies and guidelines for the use of these drugs, and included them in government subsidised drug lists to encourage their use. However, suboptimal prescribing and non-adherence to these drugs remains a universal problem. Our study will investigate trends in dispensing patterns of drugs for secondary prevention of cardiovascular events and will also identify factors influencing these patterns. It will also assess the clinical and economic consequences of non-adherence and the cost-effectiveness of using these drugs. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This population-based cohort study will use longitudinal data on almost 40,000 people aged 65 years or older who were hospitalised in Western Australia between 2003 and 2008 for coronary heart disease, heart failure or atrial fibrillation. Linking of several State and Federal government administrative data sets will provide person-based information on drugs dispensed precardiac and postcardiac event, reasons for hospital admission, emergency department visits, mortality and medical visits. Dispensed drug trends will be described, drug adherence measured and their association with future all-cause/cardiovascular events will be estimated. The cost-effectiveness of these long-term therapies for cardiac disease and the impact of adherence will be evaluated. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Human Research Ethics Committee (HREC) approvals have been obtained from the Department of Health (Western Australian #2011/62 and Federal) and the University of Western Australia (RA/4/1/1130), in addition to HREC approvals from all participating hospitals. Findings will be published in peer-reviewed medical journals and presented at local, national and international conferences. Results will also be disseminated to consumer groups.

A systematic review and meta-analysis of alcohol consumption and injury risk as a function of study design and recall period.

BACKGROUND: It is well established that alcohol consumption is associated with an increased risk of injury. This systematic review and meta-analysis addresses important methodological issues commonly encountered in the alcohol and injury field by delineating the effect of study design and alcohol consumption recall period on effect size magnitude and by conducting gender-specific analyses. METHODS: We performed meta-analyses using random-effect models. Data sources were peer-reviewed studies on alcohol and injury from 1970 to 2009 from MEDLINE, PsychInfo, and on-line journals. Case-control or case-crossover emergency department (ED) studies reporting injury risk from alcohol consumption 6 hours before injury were included. RESULTS: The overall odds of injury were 2.799 (2.214 to 3.538, p < 0.001). For case-crossover studies, the odds were 3.815 (2.646 to 5.499, p < 0.001); for ED case-control studies, the odds were 1.977 (1.385 to 2.821, p < 0.001); and for population case-control designs, the odds were 3.145 (1.583 to 6.247, p < 0.005). The "usual frequency" recall period yielded an odds ratio of 4.235 (2.541 to 7.057, p < 0.001), compared to 2.320 (1.789 to 3.008, p < 0.001) for all other methods. There were significant differences in odds ratio magnitude when comparing studies by design and recall period. Females had higher odds of injury than males, 2.285 (1.361 to 3.836, p < 0.005) versus 1.071 (0.715 to 1.605, p = 0.737). CONCLUSIONS: Study design and alcohol consumption recall period have significant effects on effect size magnitude in estimating the risk of injury from alcohol consumption 6 hours prior to injury. For the "usual frequency" case-crossover design, significant moderator effects were found, resulting in overestimates of injury risk from alcohol. ED case-crossover designs tend to overestimate risk, and ED case-control designs tend to underestimate. We provide recommendations for future ED research.