Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug use does not appear to be associated with increased cardiovascular mortality in patients with inflammatory polyarthritis: results from a primary care based inception cohort of patients.

OBJECTIVES: There is controversy about the effects of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) on cardiovascular disease (CVD) mortality. The aim of this study was to explore associations between NSAID use and mortality in patients with inflammatory polyarthritis (IP). SUBJECTS AND METHODS: A total of 923 patients with new onset (IP), recruited to the UK Norfolk Arthritis Register (NOAR) between 1990-1994, were followed up to the end of 2004. Current medication was recorded annually for the first 6 years and then every 2-3 years. Rheumatoid factor (RF) and C-reactive protein (CRP) were measured. Logistic regression was used to calculate all cause and CVD mortality odds ratios (OR) for NSAID use at baseline and during follow-up, adjusting for gender and time-varying covariates: RF, CRP, joint counts, smoking, steroid use, DMARD use and other medication use. RESULTS: By 2004 there were 203 deaths, 85 due to CVD. At baseline, NSAIDs were used by 66% of patients. In final multivariate models, baseline NSAID use was inversely associated with all cause mortality (adjusted OR 0.62, 95% CI 0.45 to 0.84) and CVD mortality (adjusted OR 0.54, 95% CI 0.34 to 0.86). Interval NSAID use had weaker mortality associations: all cause mortality (adjusted OR 0.72, 95% CI 0.52 to 1.00), CVD mortality (adjusted hazard ratio (HR) 0.66, 95% CI 0.40 to 1.08). CONCLUSION: No excess CVD or all cause mortality was observed in NSAID users in this cohort of patients with IP. This is at variance with the literature relating to NSAID use in the general population. It is unclear whether this represents unmeasured confounders influencing a doctor's decision to avoid NSAIDs in the treatment of IP.

Interventions to improve adherence and persistence with osteoporosis medications: a systematic literature review.

SUMMARY: Adherence and persistence with osteoporosis medications are poor. We conducted a systematic literature review of interventions to improve adherence and persistence with osteoporosis medications. Seven studies met eligibility requirements and were included in the review. Few interventions were efficacious, and no clear trends regarding successful intervention techniques were identified. However, periodic follow-up interaction between patients and health professionals appeared to be beneficial. INTRODUCTION: Adherence and persistence with pharmacologic therapy for osteoporosis are suboptimal. Our goal was to examine the design and efficacy of published interventions to improve adherence and persistence. METHODS: We searched medical literature databases for English-language papers published between January 1990 and July 2008. We selected papers that described interventions and provided results for control and intervention subjects. We assessed the design and methods of each study, including randomization, blinding, and reporting of drop-outs. We summarized the results and calculated effect sizes for each trial. RESULTS: Seven studies met eligibility requirements and were included in the review. Five of the seven studies provided adherence data. Of those five studies, three showed a statistically significant (p < or = 0.05) improvement in adherence by the intervention group, with effect sizes from 0.17 to 0.58. Five of the seven studies provided persistence data. Of those five, one reported statistically significant improvement in persistence by the intervention group, with an effect size of 0.36. CONCLUSIONS: Few interventions were efficacious, and no clear trends regarding successful intervention techniques were identified in this small sample of studies. However, periodic follow-up interaction between patients and health professionals appeared to be beneficial.