Individualized versus Standardized Risk Assessment in Patients at High Risk for Adverse Drug Reactions (The IDrug Randomized Controlled Trial)–Never Change a Running System?

The aim of this study was to compare effects of an individualized with a standardized risk assessment for adverse drug reactions to improve drug treatment with antithrombotic drugs in older adults. A randomized controlled trial was conducted in general practitioner (GP) offices. Patients aged 60 years and older, multi-morbid, taking antithrombotic drugs and at least one additional drug continuously were randomized to individualized and standardized risk assessment groups. Patients were followed up for nine months. A composite endpoint defined as at least one bleeding, thromboembolic event or death reported via a trigger list was used. Odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated. In total, N = 340 patients were enrolled from 43 GP offices. Patients in the individualized risk assessment group met the composite endpoint more often than in the standardized group (OR 1.63 [95%CI 1.02–2.63]) with multiple adjustments. The OR was higher in patients on phenprocoumon treatment (OR 1.99 [95%CI 1.05–3.76]), and not significant on DOAC treatment (OR 1.52 [95%CI 0.63–3.69]). Pharmacogenenetic variants of CYP2C9, 2C19 and VKORC1 were not observed to be associated with the composite endpoint. The results of this study may indicate that the time point for implementing individualized risk assessments is of importance

Determinants of having no general practitioner in Germany and the influence of a migration background: results of the German health interview and examination survey for adults (DEGS1)

Background: It is aspired in the German healthcare system that general practitioners (GPs) act as initial contact for patients and guide through at all steps of medical treatment. This study aims at identifying factors associated with the odds of having no GP within the general population and especially among people with migration background. Methods: This cross-sectional analysis was based on the “German Health Interview and Examination Survey for Adults” (DEGS1) conducted by the Robert Koch Institute. Descriptive analyses as well as multiple logistic regression models were performed to analyse the impact of a migration background, age, gender, residential area, socioeconomic status (SES) and other factors on having no GP among 7755 participants. Results: 9.5% of the total study population and 14.8% of people with a migration background had no GP, especially men, adults living in big cities and without chronic diseases. The odds of not having a GP were higher for people with a two-sided migration background (aOR: 1.90, 95% CI: 1.42–2.55). Among the population with a migration background, particularly young adults, men, people living in big cities and having a private health insurance showed higher odds to have no GP. Conclusions: It is necessary to investigate the causes of the differing utilization of healthcare of people with a migration background and, if necessary, to take measures for an equal access to healthcare for all population groups. Further research needs to be done to evaluate how to get young people into contact with a GP.Peer Reviewe

Prevalence of multimorbidity in Germany: impact of age and educational level in a cross-sectional study on 19,294 adults

Abstract Background Multimorbidity is one of the most important and challenging aspects in public health. Multimorbid people are associated with more hospital admissions, a large number of drug prescriptions and higher risks of mortality. As there is evidence that multimorbidity varies with age and socioeconomic disparity, the main objective aimed at determining age-specific prevalence rates as well as exploring educational differences relating to multimorbidity in Germany. Methods This cross-sectional analysis is based on the national telephone health interview survey “German Health Update” (GEDA2012) conducted between March 2012 and March 2013 with nearly 20,000 adults. GEDA2012 provides information on 17 self-reported health conditions along with sociodemographic characteristics. Multimorbidity was defined as the occurrence of two or more chronic conditions in one individual at the same time. Descriptive statistical analysis was used to examine multimorbidity according to age and education, which was defined by the International Standard Classification of Education (ISCED 1997). Results Overall, 39.6% (95% confidence interval (CI) 38.7%–40.6%) of the 19,294 participants were multimorbid and the proportion of adults with multimorbidity increased substantially with age: nearly half (49.2%, 95% CI 46.9%–51.5%) of the adults aged 50–59 years had already two or more chronic health conditions. Prevalence rates of multimorbidity differed considerably between the levels of education. Low-level educated adults aged 40–49 years were more likely to be multimorbid with a prevalence rate of 47.4% (95% CI 44.2%–50.5%) matching those of highly educated men and women aged about ten years older. Conclusions Our findings demonstrate that both, age and education are associated with a higher risk of being multimorbid in Germany. Hence, special emphasis in the development of new approaches in national public health and prevention programs on multimorbidity should be given to low-level educated people aged <65 years