Validity of health insurance data to identify people with epilepsy

BACKGROUND: Large administrative databases may prove useful to assess epilepsy-related comorbidity and mortality. Despite their increased use, their validity as data source in epilepsy is yet under-ascertained. METHODS: Achmea is a large Dutch health insurance company covering about 25% of the population. We performed a retrospective cohort study using data from the Achmea Health Insurance Database (AHID) over the period 2006-2009. To assess the validity of epilepsy codes in the AHID, we randomly invited 1000 individuals (age 18-75 years insured by Achmea), attending an epilepsy centre or a district hospital during 2006-2009, to participate. Informed consent was provided and 293 were eligible for inclusion. We compared the diagnostic codes for epilepsy in AHID with the diagnosis in their case-notes (reference standard). As additional measure of validity, we compared prevalence of epilepsy codes in AHID (based on anonymized data of all 26.297 subjects with this code in AHID) with epilepsy prevalence rates in the general Dutch population to estimate an age-specific standardized prevalence ratio. RESULTS: We identified 293 participants with an epilepsy code in AHID. The majority (278) of them had a definite or possible diagnosis of epilepsy in the case-notes; i.e. a positive predictive value of 0.95 (95% CI 0.92-0.97). The overall prevalence of epilepsy codes in the AHID was slightly higher than the putative prevalence in the general Dutch population (7.4/1.000 vs. 6.8/1.000) with a Standardized Prevalence Ratio of 1.08 (95% CI: 1.08-1.09). CONCLUSIONS: Our findings demonstrate the validity of AHID data for a diagnosis of epilepsy and confirm previous work on using administrative data for epilepsy research

Visual hypersensitivity in patients treated with anti-calcitonin gene–related peptide (receptor) monoclonal antibodies

Objective: To evaluate the effect of treatment with anti-calcitonin gene–related peptide (CGRP; receptor) antibodies on visual hypersensitivity in patients with migraine. Background: Increased visual sensitivity can be present both during and outside migraine attacks. CGRP has been demonstrated to play a key role in light-aversive behavior. Methods: In this prospective follow-up study, patients treated for migraine with erenumab (n = 105) or fremanezumab (n = 100) in the Leiden Headache Center were invited to complete a questionnaire on visual sensitivity (the Leiden Visual Sensitivity Scale [L-VISS]), pertaining to both their ictal and interictal state, before starting treatment (T0) and 3 months after treatment initiation (T1). Using a daily e-diary, treatment effectiveness was assessed in weeks 9–12 compared to a 4-week pre-treatment baseline period. L-VISS scores were compared between T0 and T1. Subsequently, the association between the reduction in L-VISS scores and the reduction in monthly migraine days (MMD) was investigated. Results: At 3 months, the visual hypersensitivity decreased, with a decrease in mean ± standard deviation (SD) ictal L-VISS (from 20.1 ± 7.7 to 19.2 ± 8.1, p = 0.042) and a decrease in mean ± SD interictal L-VISS (from 11.8 ± 6.6 to 11.1 ± 7.0, p = 0.050). We found a positive association between the reduction in MMD and the decrease in interictal L-VISS (β = 0.2, p = 0.010) and the reduction in ictal L-VISS (β = 0.3, p = 0.001). Conclusion: A decrease in visual hypersensitivity in patients with migraine after treatment with anti-CGRP (receptor) antibodies is positively associated with clinical response on migraine.</p

Patients’ use of information about medicine side effects in relation to experiences of suspected adverse drug reactions

Background Adverse drug reactions (ADRs) are common, and information about medicines is increasingly widely available to the public. However, relatively little work has explored how people use medicines information to help them assess symptoms that may be suspected ADRs. Objective Our objective was to determine how patients use patient information leaflets (PILs) or other medicines information sources and whether information use differs depending on experiences of suspected ADRs. Method This was a cross-sectional survey conducted in six National Health Service (NHS) hospitals in North West England involving medical in-patients taking at least two regular medicines prior to admission. The survey was administered via a questionnaire and covered use of the PIL and other medicines information sources, perceived knowledge about medicines risks/ADRs, experiences of suspected ADRs, plus demographic information. Results Of the 1,218 respondents to the survey, 18.8 % never read the PIL, whilst 6.5 % only do so if something unexpected happens. Educational level was related to perceived knowledge about medicines risks, but not to reading the PIL or seeking further information about medicines risks. Over half the respondents (56.0 %) never sought more information about possible side effects of medicines. A total of 57.2 % claimed they had experienced a suspected ADR. Of these 85.9 % were either very sure or fairly sure this was a reaction to a medicine. Over half of those experiencing a suspected ADR (53.8 %) had read the PIL, of whom 36.2 % did so before the suspected ADR occurred, the remainder afterwards. Reading the PIL helped 84.8 % of these respondents to decide they had experienced an ADR. Educational level, general knowledge of medicines risks and number of regular medicines used all increased the likelihood of experiencing an ADR. Conclusion More patients should be encouraged to read the PIL supplied with medicines. The results support the view that most patients feel knowledgeable about medicines risks and suspected ADRs and value information about side effects, but that reading about side effects in PILs or other medicines information sources does not lead to experiences of suspected ADRs

The effect of perceived forgetfulness on quality of life in older adults: a qualitative review

Background Approximately 50% of older individuals perceive themselves as being forgetful. Objective The objective of this review is to get an overview of previous research on the relation between perceived forgetfulness (in the absence of objective memory deficit) and quality of life in older individuals. Findings in previous research might be a starting point for further research and possible future interventions. Methods Scientific papers that investigated the relation between subjective memory complaints and quality of life were searched. Two independent raters scored the articles on their methodology. The methodological quality was taken into account when conclusions were drawn. Results The literature search resulted in 682 articles, of which five studies met the inclusion criteria. Although the five studies differed in their methodology, the findings of the methodologically adequate studies show a relation between memory complaints and a diminished quality of life in the elderly. Conclusions The negative impact that subjective memory complaints can have on quality of life makes it important to acknowledge forgetfulness as a serious issue in the life of older individuals. However, more research is needed to explore the relationship between subjective memory complaints and quality of life, also with regard to the influence of depression and objective memory performance

Are Migraineurs at Increased Risk of Adverse Drug Responses?: A Meta-Analytic Comparison of Topiramate-Related Adverse Drug Reactions in Epilepsy and Migraine

To compare adverse drug reactions (ADRs) to topiramate in patients with migraine and patients with epilepsy, we systematically reviewed all published randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compare topiramate monotherapy in epilepsy and migraine. We included four epilepsy RCTs (N = 1,179 patients; vs. active comparators) and six migraine RCTs (N = 1,723 patients; vs. placebo). Behavioral ADRs and headache were found only in the case of epilepsy, whereas cognitive complaints and alteration of taste were found only in the case of migraine. The risk ratios (RRs) for paresthesia in migraine vs. epilepsy trials were 2.5 (99% confidence interval (CI): 1.66-3.77) for 50 mg, 2.7 (99% CI: 1.80-3.97) for 100 mg, and 3.0 (99% CI: 1.95-4.56) for 200 mg. For ADR-related dropouts, the RR was 2.5 (95% CI: 2.03-2.98) for 50 mg but no different for the other doses. We conclude that when treated with the same doses of topiramate, migraineurs show different ADRs than patients with epilepsy and are more likely to drop out because of ADRs