Limited effect of patient and disease characteristics on compliance with hospital antimicrobial guidelines

Objective: Physicians frequently deviate from guidelines that promote prudent use of antimicrobials. We explored to what extent patient and disease characteristics were associated with compliance with guideline recommendations for three common infections. Methods: In a 1-year prospective observational study, 1,125 antimicrobial prescriptions were analysed for compliance with university hospital guidelines. Results: Compliance varied significantly between and within the groups of infections studied. Compliance was much higher for lower respiratory tract infections (LRTIs; 79%) than for sepsis (53%) and urinary tract infections (UTIs; 40%). Only predisposing illnesses and active malignancies were associated with more compliant prescribing, whereas alcohol/ intravenous drug abuse and serum creatinine levels > 130 mu mol/l were associated with less compliant prescribing. Availability of culture results had no impact on compliance with guidelines for sepsis but was associated with more compliance in UTIs and less in LRTIs. Narrowing initial broad-spectrum antimicrobial therapy to cultured pathogens was seldom practised. Most noncompliant prescribing concerned a too broad spectrum of activity when compared with guideline-recommended therapy. Conclusion: Patient characteristics had only a limited impact on compliant prescribing for a variety of reasons. Physicians seemed to practise defensive prescribing behaviour, favouring treatment success in current patients over loss of effectiveness due to resistance in future patients

Interest in a Mobile App for Two-Way Risk Communication: A Survey Study Among European Healthcare Professionals and Patients

INTRODUCTION: Previously, an app has been developed for healthcare professionals (HCPs) and patients to report adverse drug reactions (ADRs) to national medicines agencies and to receive drug safety information. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to assess (1) European HCPs' and patients' interest in an app for this two-way risk communication; (2) their preferences and perceptions towards specific app characteristics; and (3) which HCPs and patients are particularly interested in the app. In addition, these aspects were studied specifically for the countries where such an app was already available, i.e. Croatia, The Netherlands, and The UK. METHODS: European HCPs and patients were asked to complete a web-based survey developed in the context of the Web-Recognizing Adverse Drug Reactions (Web-RADR) project. Data on app interest and preferences and perceptions towards app characteristics were analysed descriptively. Logistic regression analyses were conducted to assess the association of HCP characteristics and patient characteristics on the level of interest in the app (i.e. very interested vs. not/somewhat interested). RESULTS: In total, 399 HCPs and 656 patients completed the survey. About half of the patients (48%; ranging from 38% from The Netherlands to 54% from The UK), and 61% of the HCPs (ranging from 42% from The Netherlands to 54% from The UK) were very interested in the app. A faster means of reporting ADRs and easier access to the reporting form were the main perceived benefits. HCPs and patients who already use a health app were particularly interested in the app (HCPs: odds ratio [OR] 3.52; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.96-6.30, patients: OR 1.64; 95% CI 1.19-2.27). CONCLUSIONS: An app is positively perceived by HCPs and patients for reporting ADRs quickly and for receiving drug safety information from national medicines agencies. In particular, HCPs and patients who already use other health apps were interested in the app

Patient Registries: An Underused Resource for Medicines Evaluation: Operational proposals for increasing the use of patient registries in regulatory assessments

IntroductionPatient registries, 'organised systems that use observational methods to collect uniform data on a population defined by a particular disease, condition, or exposure, and that is followed over time', are potentially valuable sources of data for supporting regulatory decision-making, especially for products to treat rare diseases. Nevertheless, patient registries are greatly underused in regulatory assessments. Reasons include heterogeneity in registry design and in the data collected, even across registries for the same disease, as well as unreliable data quality and data sharing impediments. The Patient Registries Initiative was established by the European Medicines Agency in 2015 to support registries in collecting data suitable to contribute to regulatory assessments, especially post-authorisation safety and effectiveness studies.MethodsWe conducted a qualitative synthesis of the published observations and recommendations from an initiative-led multi-stakeholder consultation and four disease-specific patient registry workshops. We identified the primary factors facilitating the use of registry data in regulatory assessments. We generated proposals on operational measures needed from stakeholders including registry holders, patients, healthcare professionals, regulators, marketing authorisation applicants and holders, and health technology assessment bodies for implementing these.ResultsTen factors were identified as facilitating registry use for supporting regulatory assessments of medicinal products. Proposals on operational measures needed for implementation were categorised according to three themes: (1) nature of the data collected and registry quality assurance processes; (2) registry governance, informed consent, data protection and sharing; and (3) stakeholder communication and planning of benefit-risk assessments.ConclusionsThese are the first explicit proposals, from a regulatory perspective, on operational methods for increasing the use of patient registries in medicines regulation. They apply to registry holders, patients, regulators, marketing authorisation holders/applicants and healthcare stakeholders broadly, and their implementation would greatly facilitate the use of these valuable data sources in regulatory decision-making

Glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists use and associations with outcomes in heart failure and type 2 diabetes. Data from the Swedish Heart Failure and Swedish National Diabetes Registries.

AIMS: To assess use and associations with outcomes of glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RA) in a real-world population with heart failure (HF) and type 2 diabetes (T2DM). METHODS AND RESULTS: The Swedish HF Registry was linked with the National Diabetes Registry and other national registries. Independent predictors of GLP-1 RA use were assessed by multivariable logistic regressions, and associations with outcomes by Cox regressions in a 1:1 propensity score-matched cohort. Of 8188 patients enrolled in 2017-2021, 9% received a GLP-1 RA. Independent predictors of GLP-1 RA use were age<75, worse glycaemic control, impaired renal function, obesity and reduced ejection fraction (EF). GLP-1 RA use was not significantly associated with a composite of HF hospitalization (HHF) or cardiovascular (CV) death regardless of EF, but was associated with lower risk of major adverse CV events (CV death, non-fatal stroke/transient ischemic attack or myocardial infarction), CV and all-cause death. In patients with body mass index≥30 kg/m2, GLP-1 RA use was also associated with lower risk of HHF/CV death and HHF alone. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with HF and T2DM, GLP-1 RA use was independently associated with more severe T2DM, reduced EF and obesity, and was not associated with a higher risk of HHF/CV death but with longer survival and less major CV adverse events. An association with lower HHF/CV death and HHF was observed in obese patients. Our findings provide new insights into GLP-1 RA use and its safety in HF and T2DM

Randomised primary health center based interventions to improve the diagnosis and treatment of undifferentiated fever and dengue in Vietnam

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Fever is a common reason for attending primary health facilities in Vietnam. Response of health care providers to patients with fever commonly consists of making a presumptive diagnosis and proposing corresponding treatment. In Vietnam, where malaria was brought under control, viral infections, notably dengue, are the main causes of undifferentiated fever but they are often misdiagnosed and inappropriately treated with antibiotics.</p> <p>This study investigate if educating primary health center (PHC) staff or introducing rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs) improve diagnostic resolution and accuracy for acute undifferentiated fever (AUF) and reduce prescription of antibiotics and costs for patients.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>In a PHC randomized intervention study in southern Vietnam, the presumptive diagnoses for AUF patients were recorded and confirmed by serology on paired (acute and convalescence) sera. After one year, PHCs were randomized to four intervention arms: training on infectious diseases (A), the provision of RDTs (B), the combination (AB) and control (C). The intervention lasted from 2002 until 2006.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>The frequency of the non-etiologic diagnosis "undifferentiated fever" decreased in group AB, and - with some delay- also in group B. The diagnosis "dengue" increased in group AB, but only temporarily, although dengue was the most common cause of fever. A correct diagnosis for dengue initially increased in groups AB and B but only for AB this was sustained. Antibiotics prescriptions increased in group C. During intervention it initially declined in AB with a tendency to increase afterwards; in B it gradually declined. There was a substantial increase of patients' costs in B.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>The introduction of RDTs for infectious diseases such as dengue, through free market principles, does improve the quality of the diagnosis and decreases the prescription of antibiotics at the PHC level. However, the effect is more sustainable in combination with training; without it RDTs lead to an excess of costs.</p

Dissemination of Direct Healthcare Professional Communications on Medication Errors for Medicinal Products in the EU: An Explorative Study on Relevant Factors

Introduction: When serious medication errors (ME) are identified, communication to the field may be necessary. In the EU, communication of serious safety issues, such as medication errors associated with adverse drug reactions, is done through direct healthcare professional communications (DHPCs). We aimed to identify how often DHPCs about medication errors are distributed, and we explored factors associated with these ME DHPCs. Methods: We performed a descriptive study of all centrally authorised products (CAPs) approved before 1 May 2019 in the EU. All DHPCs issued between 1 January 2001 and 1 May 2019 were reviewed for ME content. Characteristics of CAPs were collected from the website of the European Medicines Agency. A Kaplan–Meier survival analysis was performed to estimate the 5- and 10-year probability of the occurrence of a first ME DHPC. A logistic regression was performed to explore risk factors for ME DHPCs. Results: A total of 678 CAPs were included, of which 35 required an ME DHPC during the study period. The 5-year probability for a CAP to have a first ME DHPC was 2.5% (95% CI 1.1–3.9) and the 10-year probability was 4.4% (95% CI 2.2–6.5). Among products with an ME DHPC, the 5-year probability of a second ME DHPC was 21.3% (95% CI 0.2–38.0). The risk of ME DHPCs was increased for products with multiple pharmaceutical formulations, enteral liquid or parenteral injection preparations, and products classified as nervous system agents or antineoplastic and immunomodulating agents. Conclusions: The absolute number of ME DHPCs for CAPs is low and does not give rise to immediate concern. We identified potential risk factors for ME DHPCs that should be taken into account during approval procedures or line extensions

The Additional Value of an E-Mail to Inform Healthcare Professionals of a Drug Safety Issue: A Randomized Controlled Trial in the Netherlands

Background The usefulness and the impact of Direct Healthcare Professional Communications (DHPCs, or 'Dear Doctor letters') in changing the clinical behaviour of physicians have been debated. Changes in the current risk communication methods should preferably be based on the preferences of the healthcare professionals, to optimize the uptake of the message. Objective The aim of this study was to assess whether safety issues are communicated more effectively with an additional e-mail sent by the Dutch Medicines Evaluation Board (MEB) than with the DHPC only. Methods A randomized controlled trial was conducted amongst ophthalmologists and hospital pharmacists in the Netherlands, who were the target group of a DHPC that was issued for pegaptanib, a drug that is administered intra-ocularly in patients with macular degeneration. The intervention group (N = 110) received the pegaptanib DHPC, as well as the MEB e-mail. The control group (N = 105) received the traditional paper-based DHPC only. Two weeks later, the study population received an invitation t Results Forty respondents (18.6 %) completed the questionnaire. Eighty-one percent of the respondents in the intervention group (N = 21) and 47 % of the control group (N = 19) correctly indicated that a serious increase in intra-ocular pressure could be caused by pegaptanib injections (Fishers' exact test, p = 0.046). Nine respondents in the intervention group versus none of the control group respondents indicated that they had taken action in response to the pegaptanib safety issue (Fishers' ex Conclusion The results of this study indicate that an additional e-mail might strengthen the uptake of the safety information provided to healthcare professionals, who prefer to receive an e-mail from the MEB as a source of such information, as well as the DHPC. This study may serve as a starting point for new strategies to improve risk communication regarding safety issues associated with drugs and its impact on prescribing

Impact of Safety-Related Regulatory Action on Drug Use in Ambulatory Care in the Netherlands

The effect of Direct Healthcare Professional Communications (DHPCs) informing health-care providers of serious drug safety issues has been questioned. The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of DHPCs on drug use. Nationwide dispensing data for the period 2000-2008 for new users of 46 drugs with one or more DHPCs were assessed. Impact on short-term volume of use was evaluated with regression models, and the presence of long-term changes in use was evaluated with interrupted time series analyses incorporating preexisting trends. The short-term prescription level was lower post-DHPC in 28 (48.3%) of 58 cases. Twenty (34.5%) DHPCs resulted in long-term changes in use. A long-term mean reduction in use was observed in 26.7% of cases (95% confidence interval, -15.2 to -38.2%). Long-term changes in use were not significantly related to preexisting trends in use. Although short- and long-term decreases in use were observed after only half and a third of DHPCs, respectively, the decrease was substantial