Outpatient antipsychotic use and severe COVID-19: avoiding the impact of age in a real-world data study.

BACKGROUND: The association between use of antipsychotics and COVID-19 outcomes is inconsistent, which may be linked to use of these drugs in age-related diseases. Furthermore, there is little evidence as regards their effect in the non-geriatric population . We aim to assess the association between antipsychotic use and risk of disease progression and hospitalisation due to COVID-19 among the general population, stratifying by age. METHODS: We conducted a population-based, multiple case-control study to assess: (1) risk of hospitalisation, with cases being patients with a PCR(+)test who required hospitalisation and controls being subjects without a PCR(+) test; and (2) risk of progression to hospitalisation, with cases being the same as those used in the hospitalisation substudy and controls being non-hospitalised PCR(+) patients. We calculated adjusted odds-ratios (aOR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI), both overall and stratified by age. RESULTS: Antipsychotic treatment in patients <65 years was not associated with a higher risk of hospitalisation due to COVID-19 (aOR 0.94 [95%CI 0.69-1.27]) and disease progression among PCR(+) patients (aOR 0.96 [95%CI 0.70-1.33]). For patients aged ≥65 years, however, there was a significant, increased risk of hospitalisation (aOR 1.58 [95%CI 1.38-1.80]) and disease progression (aOR 1.31 [95%CI 1.12-1.55]). CONCLUSIONS: The results of our large-scale real world data study suggest that antipsychotic use is not associated with a greater risk of hospitalisation due to COVID-19 and progression to hospitalisation among patients younger than 65 years. The effect found in the over-65-year age group might be associated with off-label use of antipsychotics.

Impact of prior antihypertensive treatment on COVID-19 outcomes, by active ingredient.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the impact of prior chronic treatment with angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs)/ angiotensin-receptor blockers (ARBs), both as a group and by active ingredient, on severity (risk of hospitalization and mortality), progression of and susceptibility to COVID-19. METHODS: We conducted a multiple population-based case-control study in Galicia (north-west Spain). The study data were sourced from medical, administrative and clinical databases. We assessed: (1) risk of hospitalization, by selecting all patients hospitalized due to COVID-19 with PCR + as cases, and a random sample of subjects without a PCR + as controls; (2) COVID-19 mortality risk; (3) risk of disease progression; and (4) susceptibility to SARS-CoV-2, considering all patients with PCR + as cases, and the same subjects used in the previous model as controls. Adjusted odds ratios (aORs) were calculated. RESULTS: ACEIs and ARBs were shown to decrease the risk of hospitalization (aOR = 0.78 [95%CI 0.69-0.89] and aOR = 0.80 [95%CI 0.72-0.90] respectively), risk of mortality (aOR = 0.71 [95%CI 0.52-0.98] and aOR = 0.69 [95%CI 0.52-0.91] respectively), and susceptibility to the virus (aOR = 0.88 [95%CI 0.82-0.94] and aOR = 0.92 [95%CI 0.86-0.97] respectively). By active ingredient: use of enalapril was associated with a significantly lower risk of hospitalization (aOR = 0.72 [95%CI 0.61-0.85]), mortality (aOR = 0.59 [95%CI 0.38-0.92]) and susceptibility to COVID-19 (aOR = 0.86 [95%CI 0.79-0.94]); and use of candesartan was associated with a decreased risk of hospitalization (aOR = 0.76 [95%CI 0.60-0.95]), mortality (aOR = 0.36 [95%CI 0.17-0.75]) and disease progression (aOR = 0.73 [95%CI 0.56-0.95]). CONCLUSION: This large-scale real-world data study suggest that enalapril and candesartan are associated with a considerable reduction in risk of severe COVID19 outcomes.

Dipsticks and point-of-care Microscopy to reduce antibiotic use in women with an uncomplicated Urinary Tract Infection (MicUTI): protocol of a randomised controlled pilot trial in primary care.

INTRODUCTION: Uncomplicated urinary tract infections (uUTIs) in women are common infections encountered in primary care. Evidence suggests that rapid point-of-care tests (POCTs) to detect bacteria and erythrocytes in urine at presentation may help primary care clinicians to identify women with uUTIs in whom antibiotics can be withheld without influencing clinical outcomes. This pilot study aims to provide preliminary evidence on whether a POCT informed management of uUTI in women can safely reduce antibiotic use. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This is an open-label two-arm parallel cluster-randomised controlled pilot trial. 20 general practices affiliated with the Bavarian Practice-Based Research Network (BayFoNet) in Germany were randomly assigned to deliver patient management based on POCTs or to provide usual care. POCTs consist of phase-contrast microscopy to detect bacteria and urinary dipsticks to detect erythrocytes in urine samples. In both arms, urine samples will be obtained at presentation for POCTs (intervention arm only) and microbiological analysis. Women will be followed-up for 28 days from enrolment using self-reported symptom diaries, telephone follow-up and a review of the electronic medical record. Primary outcomes are feasibility of patient enrolment and retention rates per site, which will be summarised by means and SDs, with corresponding confidence and prediction intervals. Secondary outcomes include antibiotic use for UTI at day 28, time to symptom resolution, symptom burden, number of recurrent and upper UTIs and re-consultations and diagnostic accuracy of POCTs versus urine culture as the reference standard. These outcomes will be explored at cluster-levels and individual-levels using descriptive statistics, two-sample hypothesis tests and mixed effects models or generalised estimation equations. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The University of Würzburg institutional review board approved MicUTI on 16 December 2022 (protocol n. 109/22-sc). Study findings will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications, conferences, reports addressed to clinicians and the local citizen's forums. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05667207.

Comparing AGS Beers 2019, STOPP version 2, and EU(7)-PIM list in Portuguese older adults in primary health care.

PURPOSE: This study aims to identify PIM prevalence in older adults according to the 2019 Beers criteria, Screening Tool of Older Person's Prescriptions version 2 (STOPP v2) criteria, and the Portuguese EU(7)-PIM list and also to analyze the concordance between these criteria. METHODS: A retrospective study was conducted among 1200 Portuguese older adults (≥ 65 years old), users of primary health care. Demographic, clinical, and pharmacological data were collected concerning the period between April 2021 and August 2022. A comparative analysis was performed between the three PIM identification criteria, and the concordance was determined according to the Lin concordance correlation coefficient. RESULTS: The mean age was 76.3 (SD 7.7) years old and 57.6% of the older adults were females. Our findings indicate varying prevalence rates among these criteria with 63.8% (95% CI 61.0-66.6%), 66.8% (95% CI 64.1-69.5%), and 50.1% (95% CI 47.2-53.0%) of the older adults take at least one PIM according to the EU(7)-PIM list, Beers 2019, and STOPP v2 criteria, respectively. The highest prevalence observed was for proton pump inhibitors according to EU(7)-PIM list (30.1%, 95% CI 27.6-32.9) and Beers criteria (30.1%, 95% CI 27.6-32.9) and alprazolam according to STOPP v2 criteria (10.1%, 95% CI 8.4-11.9%). A poor concordance between criteria was observed (< 0.834). The highest concordance coefficient was found between the EU(7)-PIM list and the Beers criteria (0.833), and the lowest between the EU(7)-PIM list and STOPP criteria (0.735). CONCLUSION: This study reveals varying prevalence rates of PIM in older adults, as assessed by different criteria, and highlights the need for targeted interventions and improved prescribing practices. In the future, studies should focus on the occurrence of negative outcomes in older adults associated with PIM consumption.

Barriers and facilitators of health professionals in adopting digital health-related tools for medication appropriateness: A systematic review.

Objective: Digital health is described as the use and development of all types of digital technologies to improve health outcomes. It could be used to prevent medication errors, a priority for health systems worldwide. However, the adoption of such tools remains slow. This study aims to identify factors (attitudes, knowledge and beliefs) acting as barriers and/or facilitators reported by healthcare professionals (HCPs) for the adoption of digital health-related tools for medication appropriateness. Methods: A systematic review was performed by searching the literature in the MEDLINE PubMed, and EMBASE scientific databases for original articles regarding qualitative and quantitative data. Results: Fifteen articles were included and a total of 125 barriers and 108 facilitators were identified, consolidated and categorized into technical (n = 48), organizational (n = 12), economical (n = 4), user-related (n = 34), and patient-related (n = 8) components. The most often reported barriers and facilitators were technical component-related ones concerning the need for additional training (n = 6), the time consumed (n = 6), and the easy way of using or learning how to use the tools (n = 9), respectively. Regarding setting analysis, agreement with clinical decision recommendations and impact on the doctor-patient relationship were more valued in primary care, while the user interface and system design were in the hospital. Conclusions: The barriers and facilitators identified in this study provide relevant information to developers and it can be used as a starting point for the designing of successful digital health-related tools, specifically related to medication appropriateness. Future research includes economic evaluation-focused studies and in-depth case studies of specific barriers and facilitators.

Impact of prior use of antiplatelets on COVID-19 susceptibility, progression, and severity: a population-based study.

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: Hypercoagulability and thromboembolism are processes that arise from severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection and are responsible for a high degree of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)-related morbidity and mortality. This study sought to assess the effect of antiplatelet drugs on COVID-19 severity (risk of hospitalization and mortality), susceptibility to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection, and progression to severe COVID-19. METHODS: We conducted a population-based case-control study in a northwestern region of Spain in 2020. The study involved 3060 participants with a positive polymerase chain reaction test who were hospitalized, 26 757 participants with a positive polymerase chain reaction test who were not hospitalized, and 56 785 healthy controls. RESULTS: Triflusal seemed to be associated with a significant increase in risk of hospitalization (aOR, 1.97; 95%CI, 1.27-3.04) and susceptibility to infection (OR, 1.45; 95%CI, 1.07-1.96). It also appeared to lead to a nonsignificant increase in the risk of mortality (OR, 2.23; 95%CI, 0.89-5.55) and/or progression to more severe disease stages (OR, 1.42; 95%CI, 0.8-2.51). Aspirin seemed to be associated with a statistically significant decrease in susceptibility to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection (OR, 0.92; 95%CI, 0.86-0.98). CONCLUSIONS: Triflusal use appears to increase the risk of susceptibility to COVID-19 infection and an even higher risk of hospitalization, whereas the other antiplatelets could be associated with a reduction in the risk of the various outcomes or have no effect on risk. These findings could support reconsideration of triflusal prescription in COVID-19 pandemic situations.

Magnitude and Determinants of Long-term Use of Proton Pump Inhibitors Among Portuguese Older Adults in Primary Health Care.

PURPOSE: Proton Pump Inhibitors (PPIs) have been associated with several adverse effects of particular concern in older populations. Their use for a period longer than 8 weeks is not recommended for older adults. Strategies to discontinue PPIs have been offered; however, their use remains high. This study aims to characterize PPI use in Portuguese older people and to identify the factors associated with potentially inappropriate use. METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted on 1200 randomly selected older adults (≥65 years of age), users of primary health care facilities in the Regional Health Administration (Administração Regional de Saúde of Centro [ARSC]) of Portugal between April 2021 and August 2022. Data concerning their characteristics and PPI use were provided by the Shared Services of the Health Ministry (Serviços Partilhados do Ministério da Saúde) and collected retrospectively. Associations between independent variables and PPI use were investigated by logistic regression analysis. FINDINGS: Of the older adults, 37.92% were receiving PPIs and 78.68% of them were taking them for a longer period than recommended; 49.79% were taking PPIs without having any digestive system-related disease. Multivariate analysis showed that the prolonged use of PPIs was not associated with any specific pattern, although inappropriate PPI use is high among Portuguese older adults. IMPLICATIONS: Long-term PPI use in older adults is widespread and does not fit any particular patient profile; therefore, cross-cutting educational interventions should be designed independently of the patient's pathologic condition or treatment.

Effect of dapagliflozin on COVID-19 infection and risk of hospitalization.

BACKGROUND: Dapagliflozin has been proposed as a potential treatment for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) by reducing cytokine production and inflammation. However, there are limited data on its effectiveness. We aimed to evaluate the impact of dapagliflozin on COVID-19 severity (including hospitalization risk, ICU admission, in-hospital death and progression to severe COVID-19) and its potential on susceptibility to COVID-19 infection. METHODS: We conducted a population-based case-control study. For aim 1, we assessed COVID-19 severity in cases (positive PCR patients requiring hospitalization) and matched controls (negative PCR patients or positive PCR patients not requiring hospitalization). For aim 2, we compared positive PCR cases (hospitalized and non-hospitalized) with controls. Adjusted odds ratios (aORs) were calculated using a generalized linear mixed model. RESULTS: We analysed 86 602 subjects: 3060 were hospitalized cases, 26 757 were non-hospitalized cases and 56 785 were controls. Among the hospitalized COVID-19 patients, 228 were admitted to the ICU and 413 died. Dapagliflozin had no effect on the risk of hospitalization (aOR 0.98; 95% CI 0.65-1.48; P = 0.915), ICU admissions (aOR 1.21; 95% CI 0.34-4.25; P = 0.767) or in-hospital death (aOR 1.33; 95% CI 0.53-3.30; P = 0.543). Dapagliflozin reduced the risk of progression to severe COVID-19 by 35%, but this was not statistically significant (aOR 0.65; 95% CI 0.40-1.06; P = 0.086). Dapagliflozin was associated with a 30% increased risk of susceptibility to COVID-19 infection (aOR 1.31; 95% CI 1.05-1.62; P = 0.015). CONCLUSIONS: Use of dapagliflozin prior to SARS-CoV-2 infection was not associated with an increased risk of hospitalization, ICU admission, mortality or progression to severe COVID-19. However, it was associated with an increased risk of susceptibility to COVID-19 infection.

Outpatient atorvastatin use and severe COVID-19 outcomes: A population-based study.

Evidence of the effect of statins on patients with coronavirus disease (2019) COVID-19 is inconsistent. The aim of this study was to evaluate the association between chronic use of statins-both overall and by active ingredient-and severe outcomes of COVID-19 (risk of hospitalization and mortality), progression to severe outcomes, and susceptibility to the virus. We conducted a population-based case-control study with data from electronic records to assess the risk of (1) hospitalization: cases were patients admitted due to COVID-19 and controls were subjects without COVID-19; (2) mortality: cases were hospitalized patients who died due to COVID-19 and controls were subjects without COVID-19; (3) progression: cases were hospitalized COVID-19 subjects and controls were nonhospitalized COVID-19 patients; and (4) susceptibility: cases were patients with COVID-19 (both hospitalized and nonhospitalized) and controls were subjects without COVID-19. We collected data on 2821 hospitalized cases, 26 996 nonhospitalized cases, and 52 318 controls. Chronic use of atorvastatin was associated with a decreased risk of hospitalization (adjusted odds ratios [aOR] = 0.83; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.74-0.92) and mortality (aOR = 0.70; 95% CI: 0.53-0.93), attributable in part to a lower risk of susceptibility to the virus (aOR = 0.91; 95% CI: 0.86-0.96). Simvastatin was associated with a reduced risk of mortality (aOR = 0.59; 95% CI: 0.40-0.87). The wide degree of heterogeneity observed in the estimated odds ratios (ORs) of the different statins suggests that there is no class effect. The results of this real-world study suggest that chronic use of atorvastatin (and to a lesser degree, of simvastatin) is associated with a decrease in risk of severe COVID-19 outcomes.

Asbestos exposure and small cell lung cancer: Systematic review and meta-analysis.

Asbestos is a mineral that is carcinogenic to humans. Its use has been banned in many occidental countries yet it is still produced in the United States, and materials that contain asbestos remain in many occupational settings and indoor environments. Even though asbestos carcinogenicity is well known, there is scant literature on its specific effects regarding small cell lung cancer (SCLC). We therefore conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to determine SCLC risk among workers exposed to asbestos. A systematic search of the literature was conducted to identify studies which reported occupational exposure to asbestos and SCLC-related deaths and/or incidence. We identified seven case-control studies that included 3,231 SCLC cases; four studies reported smoking-adjusted risks. A significantly increased risk of SCLC (pooled OR 1.89; 95% CI, 1.25-2.86) was observed on pooling studies on men (six studies) that displayed moderate heterogeneity (I2 = 46.0%). Overall, our synthesis suggests that occupational exposure to asbestos significantly increases the risk of SCLC on men.

Factors Associated with Underreporting of Adverse Drug Reactions by Health Care Professionals: A Systematic Review Update.

INTRODUCTION: Underreporting is a major limitation of the voluntary reporting system of adverse drug reactions (ADRs). A 2009 systematic review showed the knowledge and attitudes of health professionals were strongly related with underreporting of ADRs. OBJECTIVE: Our aim was to update our previous systematic review to determine factors (sociodemographic, knowledge and attitudes) associated with the underreporting of ADRs by healthcare professionals. METHODS: We searched the MEDLINE and EMBASE databases for studies published between 2007 and 2021 that met the following inclusion criteria: (1) published in English, French, Portuguese or Spanish; (2) involving health professionals; and (3) the goal was to evaluate factors associated with underreporting of ADRs through spontaneous reporting. RESULTS: Overall, 65 papers were included. While health professional sociodemographic characteristics did not influence underreporting, knowledge and attitudes continue to show a significant effect: (1) ignorance (only serious ADRs need to be reported) in 86.2%; (2) lethargy (procrastination, lack of interest, and other excuses) in 84.6%; (3) complacency (the belief that only well tolerated drugs are allowed on the market) in 46.2%; (4) diffidence (fear of appearing ridiculous for reporting merely suspected ADRs) in 44.6%; and (5) insecurity (it is nearly impossible to determine whether or not a drug is responsible for a specific adverse reaction) in 33.8%, and the absence of feedback in 9.2%. In this review, the non-obligation to reporting and confidentiality emerge as new reasons for underreporting. CONCLUSIONS: Attitudes regarding the reporting of adverse reactions continue to be the main determinants of underreporting. Even though these are potentially modifiable factors through educational interventions, minimal changes have been observed since 2009. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: PROSPERO registration number CRD42021227944.

Factors associated with underreporting of adverse drug reactions by patients: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Spontaneous reporting is the most used method to monitor post-marketing safety information. Although patient involvement in spontaneous reporting has increased overtime, little is known about factors associated with patients' adverse drug reaction (ADR) reporting. AIM: To identify and assess the sociodemographic characteristics, attitudes and knowledge that influence spontaneous reporting and the reasons associated with ADR underreporting by patients. METHOD: A systematic review was conducted according to PRISMA guidelines. A search on the MEDLINE and EMBASE scientific databases was performed to retrieve studies published between 1 January 2006 and 1 November 2022. Studies were included if they addressed knowledge and attitudes associated with ADR underreporting. RESULTS: A total of 2512 citations were identified, of which 13 studies were included. Sociodemographic characteristics were frequently identified with ADR reporting in 6 studies, being age (3/13) and level of education (3/13) the most often reported. Older age groups (2/13) and individuals with higher level of education (3/13) were more likely to report ADRs. Underreporting was shown to be motivated by reasons related to knowledge, attitudes, and excuses. Ignorance (10/13), complacency (6/13), and lethargy (6/13) were the most frequent reasons for not reporting. CONCLUSION: This study highlighted the scarcity of research conducted with the aim of assessing ADR underreporting by patients. Knowledge, attitudes, and excuses were commonly observed in the decision to report ADRs. These motives are characteristics that can be changed; hence strategies must be designed to raise awareness, continually educate, and empower this population to change the paradigm of underreporting.

Repurposing selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors for severity of COVID-19: A population-based study.

The World Health Organization has proposed that a search be made for alternatives to vaccines for the prevention and treatment of COVID-19, with one such alternative being selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs). This study thus sought to assess: the impact of previous treatment with SSRI antidepressants on the severity of COVID-19 (risk of hospitalisation, admission to an intensive care unit [ICU], and mortality), its influence on susceptibility to SARS-CoV-2 and progression to severe COVID-19. We conducted a population-based multiple case-control study in a region in the north-west of Spain. Data were sourced from electronic health records. Adjusted odds ratios (aORs) and 95%CIs were calculated using multilevel logistic regression. We collected data from a total of 86,602 subjects: 3060 cases PCR+, 26,757 non-hospitalised cases PCR+ and 56,785 controls (without PCR+). Citalopram displayed a statistically significant decrease in the risk of hospitalisation (aOR=0.70; 95% CI 0.49-0.99, p = 0.049) and progression to severe COVID-19 (aOR=0.64; 95% CI 0.43-0.96, p = 0.032). Paroxetine was associated with a statistically significant decrease in risk of mortality (aOR=0.34; 95% CI 0.12 - 0.94, p = 0.039). No class effect was observed for SSRIs overall, nor was any other effect found for the remaining SSRIs. The results of this large-scale, real-world data study indicate that, citalopram, could be a candidate drug for being repurposed as preventive treatment aimed at reducing COVID-19 patients' risk of progressing to severe stages of the disease.

Wood dust exposure and small cell lung cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Occupational exposure role on small cell lung cancer (SCLC) onset has been little studied. Wood dust has been recognized as a human carcinogen, and many occupations have high wood-dust exposure. The aim of this study was therefore to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of the scientific literature to summarize and analyse the risks of wood dust-related occupations on development of SCLC, taking tobacco use into account. METHODS: We conducted a literature search of PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science and Cochrane using a predefined strategy and including case-control and cohort studies assessing occupational exposure to wood dust or wood dust-related occupations. To perform the meta-analysis, the odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) of each of the studies were extracted. A random-effects model was fitted using the DerSimonian Laird method. Sensitivity and subgroup analyses were performed. Quality was assessed using the Office and Health Assessment and Translation (OHAT) for human and animal studies instrument. RESULTS: Eleven studies with a total of 2,368 SCLC cases and 357,179 controls were included. Overall, exposure to wood dust significantly increases risk of SCLC (RR = 1.41, 95% CI 1.11-1.80), with low heterogeneity between studies (I2 = 40%). The association was maintained in studies conducted on males (RR = 1.41, 95% CI 1.12-1.78) but not in those conducted on females/both sexes (RR = 1.37, 95% CI 0.35-3.44). Sensitivity analysis showed that none of the studies significantly modified the results. CONCLUSIONS: Our results support that exposure to wood-dust can increase the risk of SCLC. Although the level of evidence is low, there are strong arguments to recommend the implementation of effective control measures to reduce exposure in occupational settings, as a means of preventing SCLC. IMPACT STATEMENT: The results of this study support that exposure to wood-dust can increase the risk of developing small cell lung cancer. Determining the impact of occupational exposure on workers is essential to improve their individual protection and prevention. There is a strong case for recommending the implementation of control measures to reduce occupational exposure to wood dust, specifically for highly exposed occupations such as carpenters and sawmills, in order to prevent small cell lung cancer.

Magnitude and determinants of inappropriate prescribing of antibiotics in dentistry: a nation-wide study.

BACKGROUND: Dentist play an important role in misuse of antibiotics. Identification of the dental activities linked to the misuse of antibiotics is important for improving dentists' prescribing quality. The aim of the study was to quantify the magnitude of inappropriate antibiotic prescribing by dentists in Spain and identify the characteristics, knowledge and attitudes that influence prescribing quality. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional, questionnaire-based study on dentists in Spain, assessing prescribing quality (dependent variable) on the basis of their responses about the prescription of antibiotics in 14 clinical situations. As the independent variables, we assessed professional characteristics and attitudes (lack of knowledge, fear, complacency, scheduling problems, and economic benefit) measured on a Likert scale. Odds Ratios (OR) (95%CI) were calculated using logistic regression. RESULTS: A total of 878 participants were included in the analysis. Half of all dentists displayed inappropriate antibiotic prescribing habits in more than 28.6% (10/14) of the clinical situations posed (interquartile range 57-79%). Prescribing quality increased when resistance was perceived as a public health problem (OR 0.88, 95% CI: 0.79-0.97), and decreased in response to fear (OR 1.12, 95% CI:1.07-1.18) or the pursuit of economic benefit (OR 1.07, 95% CI 1.01-1.14). Having over 30 years' experience (OR 4.58, 95% CI:1.80-12.48) and/or practising in the field of prosthodontics as opposed to endodontics (OR 2.65, 95% CI:1.26-5.71) were associated with worse prescribing quality. CONCLUSIONS: Antibiotics are the most commonly prescribed drugs in dentistry, and in many cases this prescription is inappropriate. Our findings shows that modifiable factors influence prescribing quality among dentists in Spain. These may be use for designing educational and training programmes for dentists.

Knowledge, Attitudes and Practice Regarding Antibiotic Prescription by Medical Interns: A Qualitative Study in Spain.

Antibiotic resistance is an issue of growing importance in the public health sphere. Medical interns are of great relevance when it comes to the source of this problem. This study therefore sought to ascertain which factors influence the management of antibiotic therapy by this population, in order to pinpoint the possible causes of misprescribing habits. We conducted a qualitative study based on focus group techniques, with groups consisting of medical interns from the Santiago de Compostela Clinical University Teaching Hospital. Our study identified factors which the participants considered to be determinants of antibiotic use and their relationship with the appearance of resistance. The single most repeated factor was the influence of the attending physician's judgement; other factors included a high healthcare burden or prescribing inertia. This stage is an opportunity to correct misprescribing habits, by implementing educational interventions aimed at modifying the identified factors.

Knowledge, Perceptions, and Perspectives of Medical Students Regarding the Use of Antibiotics and Antibiotic Resistance: A Qualitative Research in Galicia, Spain.

Antibiotic resistance is a significant public health concern, with numerous studies linking antibiotic consumption to the development of resistance. As medical students will play a pivotal role in prescribing antibiotics, this research aimed to identify their perceptions of current use and factors that could influence future inappropriate use of antibiotics. The study employed a qualitative research approach using Focus Group discussions (FGs) consisting of students from the final theoretical course of the Medicine degree. The FGs were conducted based on a pre-script developed from factors contributing to antibiotic misuse identified in previous studies. All sessions were recorded and transcribed for analysis by two independent researchers, with all participants signing informed consent. Seven focus groups were conducted, with a total of 35 participants. The study identified factors that could influence the future prescription of antibiotics, including the low applicability of knowledge, insecurity, clinical inertia, difficulties in the doctor-patient relationship, unawareness of available updates on the topic, and inability to assess their validity. The students did not perceive antibiotic resistance as a current problem. However, the study found several modifiable factors in medical students that could explain the misuse of antibiotics, and developing specific strategies could help improve their use.

Potentially Inappropriate Medication at Admission and at Discharge: A Geriatric Study in an Internal Medicine Service in Portugal.

Aging is associated with an increase in the prevalence of chronic diseases and polypharmacy, and with the prescription of potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs). This study aimed to analyze the variation in PIMs from hospital admission to discharge. A retrospective cohort study was conducted on inpatients of an internal medicine service. According to the Beers criteria, 80.7% of the patients had been prescribed at least one PIM at admission and 87.2% at discharge; metoclopramide was the most-prescribed PIM from admission to discharge, and acetylsalicylic acid was the most-deprescribed one. According to the STOPP criteria, 49.4% of patients had been prescribed at least one PIM at admission and 62.2% at discharge; quetiapine was the most-prescribed PIM from admission to discharge, and captopril was the most-deprescribed one. According to the EU(7)-PIM list, 51.3% of patients had been prescribed at least one PIM at admission and 70.3% at discharge, and bisacodyl was the most-prescribed PIM from admission to discharge and propranolol the most-deprescribed one. It was found that the number of PIMs at discharge was higher than at admission, suggesting the need to develop a guide with adapted criteria to be applied in an internal medicine service.

Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on the Prescribing of Antiasthmatic Treatments in Portugal: A Nationwide Study.

PURPOSE: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has had a profound impact on everyday life, the environment, and health care services. A shift from in-person medical appointments to telemedicine was a main adjustment. Such changes can have repercussions on the control and management of chronic respiratory diseases, such as asthma. The available data suggest that there was an overall decrease in asthma-related morbidities during the first year of the pandemic. Therefore, the goal of this study was to quantify the effects of the pandemic on the prescribing of antiasthmatic treatments in outpatient care (public and private health care). METHODS: This before-after study used a time series approach based on data from monthly prescriptions of antiasthmatic drugs (anti-inflammatory drugs and bronchodilators) dated between April 2018 and March 2021. An interrupted time series (ITS) design was used for assessing changes in antiasthmatic prescribing patterns in the short and long terms after COVID-19 was recognized as a pandemic. The results are complemented with seasonal autoregressive integrated moving average (sARIMA) models. FINDINGS: The ITS analysis showed a non-significant increase in antiasthmatic prescribing in the short term. In the long term, after the pandemic was declared, a statistically significant decrease was observed in the prescribing of antiasthmatics (in anti-inflammatory drugs and, more pronounced, in bronchodilators). In the sARIMA model, the mean monthly volume of antiasthmatic prescriptions was 18.1% lower than predicted. The numbers of months outside of the 95% CIs were different between anti-inflammatory drugs (1 month) and bronchodilators (7 months). IMPLICATIONS: The prescribing of antiasthmatic drugs in the long term was significantly decreased with the COVID-19 pandemic, with a greater effect in the case of bronchodilators.