Impulse control disorders in patients with dopamine agonist-treated prolactinomas and nonfunctioning pituitary adenomas: a case-control study.

OBJECTIVE: We aimed to assess the prevalence of impulse control disorders (ICDs) in patients with prolactin-secreting adenomas treated with dopamine agonists (DAs), to identify associated factors and to compare it with a group of patients with nonfunctioning pituitary adenoma. SUBJECTS, DESIGN AND MEASUREMENT: In a postal survey, 77 patients from Group A (patients with prolactinomas and present or past use of DAs) and 70 patients from Group B (patients with nonfunctioning pituitary adenoma and no history of DA therapy) responded to a questionnaire on compulsive shopping, pathologic gambling, hypersexuality and punding. Associated clinical information was obtained through the survey and review of medical electronic records. RESULTS: The total ICD prevalence was 24·68% in Group A and 17·1% in Group B (P = 0·31). Group A had an increased rate of hypersexuality (P = 0·03). Subgroup analysis revealed that men in Group A had a significantly increased frequency of total ICDs when compared with men in Group B (27·7 vs 3·7%, P = 0·01). No differences in rates of total ICDs were found between women of Groups A and B (20 vs 25·6%, P = 0·78). No association with type, dose or duration of treatment with DA was noted. CONCLUSIONS: Males with prolactinomas treated with DAs were 9·9 times more likely to develop an ICD than their counterparts with nonfunctioning pituitary adenomas. Until prospective studies on the relationship of DA use in patients with prolactinoma and ICDs are available, the authors propose that patients with prolactinoma be forewarned of possible ICD development with DA therapy.

Body mass index and the development of amiodarone-induced thyrotoxicosis in adults with congenital heart disease--a cohort study.

INTRODUCTION: Amiodarone-induced thyrotoxicosis (AIT) is a recognized complication of amiodarone treatment with limited management options. Its predisposing factors are incompletely defined yet a higher prevalence was reported in adults with congenital heart disease (CHD). Therefore we sought to determine the incidence and risk factors for AIT in adults with CHD. METHODS: At a tertiary care center we followed a historical cohort of amiodarone-treated CHD patients for the period 1987-2009. Follow-up concluded at AIT diagnosis or with last thyroid assessment on amiodarone. Cumulative incidence of AIT was calculated. AIT association with nutritional status was hypothesized a priori. RESULTS: AIT developed in 23/169 patients or 13.6%. The AIT incidence peaked in the 3rd year at 7.7%. AIT patients had a lower body mass index (BMI) at AMIO initiation compared with the rest of the cohort (mean ± standard deviation: 21.9 ± 2.9 vs. 25.1 ± 5.0; p<0.001). Patients with BMI<21 were more likely to develop thyrotoxicosis (RR=6.1) compared to those with BMI>25 (p<0.001). Presence of goiter was strongly associated with AIT (RR 3.6, p=0.002). Affected patients had a trend for higher cyanotic heart disease prevalence (34.8% vs. 17.8%, p=0.059). On multivariate analysis body mass index and goiter remained independent predictors of outcome. CONCLUSIONS: BMI<21 at initiation of amiodarone therapy and presence of goiter are strong predictors of AIT in this population. Its incidence is time dependent. These predictors can be used clinically in assessing overall impact of amiodarone therapy in congenital heart disease patients.

A treatment decision aid may increase patient trust in the diabetes specialist. The Statin Choice randomized trial.

AIMS: Decision aids in practice may affect patient trust in the clinician, a requirement for optimal diabetes care. We sought to determine the impact of a decision aid to help patients with diabetes decide about statins (Statin Choice) on patients' trust in the clinician. METHODS: We randomized 16 diabetologists and 98 patients with type 2 diabetes referred to a subspecialty diabetes clinic to use the Statin Choice decision aid or a patient pamphlet about dyslipidaemia, and then to receive these materials from either the clinician during the visit or a researcher prior to the visit. Providers and patients were blinded to the study hypothesis. Immediately after the clinical encounter, patients completed a survey including questions on trust (range 0 to total trust = 100), knowledge, and decisional conflict. Researchers reviewed videotaped encounters and assessed patient participation (using the OPTION scale) and visit length. RESULTS: Overall mean trust score was 91 (median 97.2, IQR 86, 100). After adjustment for patient characteristics, results suggested greater total trust (trust = 100) with the decision aid [odds ratio (OR) 1.77, 95% CI 0.94, 3.35]. Total trust was associated with knowledge (for each additional knowledge point, OR 1.3, 95% CI 1.1, 1.6), patient participation (for each additional point in the OPTION scale, OR 1.1, 95% CI 1.1, 1.2), and decisional conflict (for every 5-point decrease in conflict, OR 1.5, 95% CI 1.2, 1.9). Total trust was not associated with visit length, which the decision aid did not significantly affect. There was no significant effect interaction across the trial factors. CONCLUSIONS: Preliminary evidence suggests that decision aids do not have a large negative impact on trust in the physician and may increase trust through improvements in the decision-making process.