External validation of the Vulnerable Elder\u27s Survey for predicting mortality and emergency admission in older community-dwelling people: a prospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Prospective external validation of the Vulnerable Elder\u27s Survey (VES-13) in primary care remains limited. The aim of this study is to externally validate the VES-13 in predicting mortality and emergency admission in older community-dwelling adults. METHODS: Design: Prospective cohort study with 2 years follow-up (2010-2012). SETTING: 15 General Practices (GPs) in the Republic of Ireland. PARTICIPANTS: n = 862, aged ≥70 years, community-dwellers Exposure: VES-13 calculated at baseline, where a score of ≥3 denoted high risk. OUTCOMES: i) Mortality; ii) ≥1 Emergency admission and ≥1 ambulatory care sensitive (ACS) admission over 2 years. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Descriptive statistics, model discrimination (c-statistic) and sensitivity/specificity. RESULTS: Of 862 study participants, a total of 246 (38%) were classified as vulnerable at baseline. Fifty-three (6%) died during follow-up and 246 (29%) had an emergency admission. At the VES-13 cut-point of ≥3 denoting high-risk model discrimination was poor for mortality (c-statistic: 0.61 (95% CI 0.54, 0.67), ≥1 emergency admission (c-statistic: 0.59 (95% CI 0.56, 0.63) and ≥1 ACS emergency admission (c-statistic: 0.63 (95% CI 0.60, 0.67). CONCLUSIONS: In this study the VES-13 demonstrated relatively limited predictive accuracy in predicting mortality and emergency admission. External validation studies examining the tool in different health settings and healthier populations are needed and represent an interesting area for future research

Impact of Potentially Inappropriate Prescribing on Adverse Drug Events, Health Related Quality of Life and Emergency Hospital Attendance in Older People Attending General Practice: A Prospective Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Potentially inappropriate prescribing (PIP) describes medications where risk generally outweighs benefit for older people. Cross-sectional studies suggest an association between PIP and poorer health outcomes but there is a paucity of prospective cohort studies. This study investigates the longitudinal association of PIP with adverse drug events (ADEs), health related quality of life, and accident \u26 emergency visits. METHODS: Study design: Two-year (2010-2012) prospective cohort study (n = 904, ≥70 years, community-dwelling) with linked pharmacy dispensing data. EXPOSURE: Baseline PIP: Screening Tool for Older Persons potentially Inappropriate Prescriptions (STOPP) and Beers 2012 applied 12 months prior. STUDY OUTCOMES: ADEs (patient interview), health related quality of life (EQ-5D-3L: patient questionnaire), and accident \u26 emergency visits (general practice medical record review). STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Descriptive statistics: Poisson (incidence rate ratio [95% confidence interval [CI]], linear regression models [regression coefficient [95% CI]], and logistic [odds ratio [OR] [95% CI]). RESULTS: Of 791 participants eligible for follow-up, 673 (85%) returned a questionnaire and 605 (77%) also completed an ADE interview. Baseline STOPP PIP prevalence was 40% and 445 (74%) patients reported ≥1 ADE at follow-up. In multivariable analysis, ≥2 STOPP PIP was associated with ADEs (adjusted incidence rate ratio: 1.29 [95% CI 1.03, 1.85; p = .03]; poorer health related quality of life [adjusted regression coefficient: -0.11 [95% CI -0.16, -0.06; p \u3c .001]]; and, ≥1 accident \u26 emergency visit [adjusted OR: 1.85 [95% CI 1.06, 3.24; p = .03]]). Baseline Beers 2012 prevalence was 26% and there was no association with adverse health outcomes in multivariable analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Older community-dwelling people, prescribed ≥2 STOPP PIP are more likely to report ADEs, poorer health related quality of life and attend the accident \u26 emergency department over 2-year follow-up

Comparison of count-based multimorbidity measures in predicting emergency admission and functional decline in older community-dwelling adults: a prospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVES: Multimorbidity, defined as the presence of 2 or more chronic medical conditions in an individual, is associated with poorer health outcomes. Several multimorbidity measures exist, and the challenge is to decide which to use preferentially in predicting health outcomes. The study objective was to compare the performance of 5 count-based multimorbidity measures in predicting emergency hospital admission and functional decline in older community-dwelling adults attending primary care. SETTING: 15 general practices (GPs) in Ireland. PARTICIPANTS: n=862, ≥70 years, community-dwellers followed-up for 2 years (2010-2012). Exposure at baseline: Five multimorbidity measures (disease counts, selected conditions counts, Charlson comorbidity index, RxRisk-V, medication counts) calculated using GP medical record and linked national pharmacy claims data. PRIMARY OUTCOMES: (1) Emergency admission and ambulatory care sensitive (ACS) admission (GP medical record) and (2) functional decline (postal questionnaire). STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Descriptive statistics and measure discrimination (c-statistic, 95% CIs), adjusted for confounders. RESULTS: Median age was 77 years and 53% were women. Prevalent rates ranged from 37% to 91% depending on which measure was used to define multimorbidity. All measures demonstrated poor discrimination for the outcome of emergency admission (c-statistic range: 0.62, 0.65), ACS admission (c-statistic range: 0.63, 0.68) and functional decline (c-statistic range: 0.55, 0.61). Medication-based measures were equivalent to diagnosis-based measures. CONCLUSIONS: The choice of measure may have a significant impact on prevalent rates. Five multimorbidity measures demonstrated poor discrimination in predicting emergency admission and functional decline, with medication-based measures equivalent to diagnosis-based measures. Consideration of multimorbidity in isolation is insufficient for predicting these outcomes in community settings

Risk prediction models to predict emergency hospital admission in community-dwelling adults: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Risk prediction models have been developed to identify those at increased risk for emergency admissions, which could facilitate targeted interventions in primary care to prevent these events. OBJECTIVE: Systematic review of validated risk prediction models for predicting emergency hospital admissions in community-dwelling adults. METHODS: A systematic literature review and narrative analysis was conducted. Inclusion criteria were as follows; POPULATION: community-dwelling adults (aged 18 years and above); Risk: risk prediction models, not contingent on an index hospital admission, with a derivation and ≥1 validation cohort; PRIMARY OUTCOME: emergency hospital admission (defined as unplanned overnight stay in hospital); STUDY DESIGN: retrospective or prospective cohort studies. RESULTS: Of 18,983 records reviewed, 27 unique risk prediction models met the inclusion criteria. Eleven were developed in the United States, 11 in the United Kingdom, 3 in Italy, 1 in Spain, and 1 in Canada. Nine models were derived using self-report data, and the remainder (n=18) used routine administrative or clinical record data. Total study sample sizes ranged from 96 to 4.7 million participants. Predictor variables most frequently included in models were: (1) named medical diagnoses (n=23); (2) age (n=23); (3) prior emergency admission (n=22); and (4) sex (n=18). Eleven models included nonmedical factors, such as functional status and social supports. Regarding predictive accuracy, models developed using administrative or clinical record data tended to perform better than those developed using self-report data (c statistics 0.63-0.83 vs. 0.61-0.74, respectively). Six models reported c statistics of \u3e0.8, indicating good performance. All 6 included variables for prior health care utilization, multimorbidity or polypharmacy, and named medical diagnoses or prescribed medications. Three predicted admissions regarded as being ambulatory care sensitive. CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that risk models developed using administrative or clinical record data tend to perform better. In applying a risk prediction model to a new population, careful consideration needs to be given to the purpose of its use and local factors

PIPc study: development of indicators of potentially inappropriate prescribing in children (PIPc) in primary care using a modified Delphi technique

OBJECTIVE: There is limited evidence regarding the quality of prescribing for children in primary care. Several prescribing criteria (indicators) have been developed to assess the appropriateness of prescribing in older and middle-aged adults but few are relevant to children. The objective of this study was to develop a set of prescribing indicators that can be applied to prescribing or dispensing data sets to determine the prevalence of potentially inappropriate prescribing in children (PIPc) in primary care settings. DESIGN: Two-round modified Delphi consensus method. SETTING: Irish and UK general practice. PARTICIPANTS: A project steering group consisting of academic and clinical general practitioners (GPs) and pharmacists was formed to develop a list of indicators from literature review and clinical expertise. 15 experts consisting of GPs, pharmacists and paediatricians from the Republic of Ireland and the UK formed the Delphi panel. RESULTS: 47 indicators were reviewed by the project steering group and 16 were presented to the Delphi panel. In the first round of this exercise, consensus was achieved on nine of these indicators. Of the remaining seven indicators, two were removed following review of expert panel comments and discussion of the project steering group. The second round of the Delphi process focused on the remaining five indicators, which were amended based on first round feedback. Three indicators were accepted following the second round of the Delphi process and the remaining two indicators were removed. The final list consisted of 12 indicators categorised by respiratory system (n=6), gastrointestinal system (n=2), neurological system (n=2) and dermatological system (n=2). CONCLUSIONS: The PIPc indicators are a set of prescribing criteria developed for use in children in primary care in the absence of clinical information. The utility of these criteria will be tested in further studies using prescribing databases

The acidity of atmospheric particles and clouds

Acidity, defined as pH, is a central component of aqueous chemistry. In the atmosphere, the acidity of condensed phases (aerosol particles, cloud water, and fog droplets) governs the phase partitioning of semivolatile gases such as HNO3, NH3, HCl, and organic acids and bases as well as chemical reaction rates. It has implications for the atmospheric lifetime of pollutants, deposition, and human health. Despite its fundamental role in atmospheric processes, only recently has this field seen a growth in the number of studies on particle acidity. Even with this growth, many fine-particle pH estimates must be based on thermodynamic model calculations since no operational techniques exist for direct measurements. Current information indicates acidic fine particles are ubiquitous, but observationally constrained pH estimates are limited in spatial and temporal coverage. Clouds and fogs are also generally acidic, but to a lesser degree than particles, and have a range of pH that is quite sensitive to anthropogenic emissions of sulfur and nitrogen oxides, as well as ambient ammonia. Historical measurements indicate that cloud and fog droplet pH has changed in recent decades in response to controls on anthropogenic emissions, while the limited trend data for aerosol particles indicate acidity may be relatively constant due to the semivolatile nature of the key acids and bases and buffering in particles. This paper reviews and synthesizes the current state of knowledge on the acidity of atmospheric condensed phases, specifically particles and cloud droplets. It includes recommendations for estimating acidity and pH, standard nomenclature, a synthesis of current pH estimates based on observations, and new model calculations on the local and global scale. © 2020 Author(s)

Antimicrobial management and appropriateness of treatment of urinary tract infection in general practice in Ireland

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Urinary tract infections (UTIs) are the second most common bacterial infections in general practice and a frequent indication for prescription of antimicrobials. Increasing concern about the association between the use of antimicrobials and acquired antimicrobial resistance has highlighted the need for rational pharmacotherapy of common infections in general practice.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Management of urinary tract infections in general practice was studied prospectively over 8 weeks. Patients presenting with suspected UTI submitted a urine sample and were enrolled with an opt-out methodology. Data were collected on demographic variables, previous antimicrobial use and urine samples. Appropriateness of different treatment scenarios was assessed by comparing treatment with the laboratory report of the urine sample.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>A total of 22 practices participated in the study and included 866 patients. Bacteriuria was established for 21% of the patients, pyuria without bacteriuria for 9% and 70% showed no laboratory evidence of UTI. An antimicrobial agent was prescribed to 56% (481) of the patients, of whom 33% had an isolate, 11% with pyuria only and 56% without laboratory evidence of UTI. When taking all patients into account, 14% patients had an isolate identified and were prescribed an antimicrobial to which the isolate was susceptible. The agents most commonly prescribed for UTI were co-amoxyclav (33%), trimethoprim (26%) and fluoroquinolones (17%). Variation between practices in antimicrobial prescribing as well as in their preference for certain antimicrobials, was observed. Treatment as prescribed by the GP was interpreted as appropriate for 55% of the patients. Three different treatment scenarios were simulated, i.e. if all patients who received an antimicrobial were treated with nitrofurantoin, trimethoprim or ciprofloxacin only. Treatment as prescribed by the GP was no more effective than treatment with nitrofurantoin for all patients given an antimicrobial or treatment with ciprofloxacin in all patients. Prescribing cost was lower for nitrofurantoin. Empirical treatment of all patients with trimethoprim only was less effective due to the higher resistance levels.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>There appears to be considerable scope to reduce the frequency and increase the quality of antimicrobial prescribing for patients with suspected UTI.</p