Perhevapaat 2013 -väestökyselyn toteutus : Tiedonkeruu, aineiston edustavuus ja perustietoja vastaajista

Perhevapaat 2013 -väestökysely on Kelan tutkimusosaston ja Terveyden ja hyvinvoinnin laitoksen (THL) Politiikan seuranta- ja vaikuttavuusyksikön yhteydessä toteuttama laaja väestökysely. Kyselyn kohderyhmänä olivat vuonna 2011 lapsen saaneet äidit ja isät. Kysely oli kolmas osa vastaavien kyselyiden sarjaa, joista aiemmat on toteutettu vuosina 2001 ja 2006. Tämänkertainen kysely toteutettiin ensimmäistä kertaa täysin sähköisesti kun taas aiemmat ovat olleet perinteisiä paperikyselyitä. Kyselyn perusjoukon muodostivat vuonna 2011 lapsen saaneet äidit ja isät, jotka olivat käyttäneet vanhempainpäivärahoja eli äitiys-, isyys- tai vanhempainrahaa kyseisestä lapsesta, joille löytyi Kelaan ilmoitettu sähköpostiosoite ja jotka asuivat kyselyhetkellä Suomessa. Sähköpostiosoite löytyi kaikkiaan 75,7 prosentille etuuksia käyttäneistä äideistä ja 68,3 prosentille etuuksia käyttäneistä isistä. Otannan yhteydessä äidit jaettiin kolmeen ryhmään, perusotoksen äiteihin, monikkoäiteihin ja 18–22-vuotiaisiin nuoriin äiteihin. Perusotoksen äidit muodostavat aineiston perustan ja tästä ryhmästä tehtyyn otokseen kuului kaikkiaan 6 914 äitiä. Perusotoksen äitien lisäksi erillisaineistoja varten kyselyyn otettiin mukaan kaikki monikkoäidit ja nuorten äitien ryhmää kasvatettiin täydennysotoksilla. Kyselyyn tuli mukaan kaikkiaan 8 297 äitiä. Isien puolella isäotoksen koko oli 6 781 isää. Otos toteutettiin jakamalla isät ensin kahteen ryhmään käytettyjen perhevapaapäivien mukaan ja ottamalla näistä ositteista omat otoksensa. Äitien perusotoksessa kyselyn vastausaste oli 44,1, monikkoäideillä 38,4 ja nuorilla äideillä 34,6 prosenttia. Isien vastausaste oli 32,3 prosenttia. Äitiaineistojen edustavuus on hyvä ja sitä tullaan käyttämään varsinaisissa analyyseissä sellaisenaan, kun taas isäkyselyssä enemmän vanhempainpäivärahoja käyttäneet isät olivat aktiivisempia vastaamaan kuin vähän vanhempainpäivärahoja käyttäneet. Isäaineistossa ryhmien suhteelliset osuudet painotettiin vastaamaan perusjoukkoa. Kyselyllä saadaan paljon tietoa suomalaisista pienten lasten perheistä. Voimme kuvailla perheitä, saada tietoa syistä, miksi perheet tekivät erilaisia lapsenhoitovalintoja ja saada tietoa perheiden mielipiteistä liittyen perhevapaajärjestelmään. Esimerkiksi perusäitien kyselyssä ja isäkyselyssä saadut vastaukset olivat hyvin samankaltaisia, kun tarkasteltiin vastaajien käsitystä perheen toimeentulosta, omista tai puolison tuloista sekä perhevapaiden käytöstä. Runsaat 40 prosenttia sekä äideistä että isistä oli puolestaan sitä mieltä, että tuolloinen mahdollisuus myöhentää isäkuukautta vaikutti ainakin jonkin verran siihen, että isät käyttivät oikeuttaan. Sen sijaan isät olivat äitejä hieman useammin valmiita kehittämään perhevapaajärjestelmää. Mielipiteet, jotka koskivat päivähoito-oikeuksien rajaamista, jakautuivat työttömyystaustan mukaan. Vastaajat, joiden perheessä oli työttömyyttä, suhtautuivat muita kielteisemmin päivähoito-oikeuksien rajoittamiseen. Mielipiteisiin eri aiheista vaikuttaa niin vastaajien ja heidän perheidensä tilanne kuin heidän kokemuksensa näistä järjestelmistä. Lapsiperheet ovat erilaisia ja niiden joukossa on useita erilaisia ryhmiä. Kyselyaineistoja analysoitaessa on tärkeää huomioida nämä tekijät.2., korjattu painos (16.3.2017

Return to the workforce following first hospitalization for heart failure: a Danish nationwide cohort study

Background: Return to work is important financially, as a marker of functional status and for self-esteem in patients developing chronic illness. We examined return to work after first heart failure (HF) hospitalization. Methods: By individual-level linkage of nationwide Danish registries, we identified 21455 patients of working age (18-60 years) with a first HF hospitalization in the period of 1997-2012. Of these 11880 (55%) were in the workforce prior to HF hospitalization and comprised the study population. We applied logistic regression to estimate odds ratios (OR) for associations between age, sex, length of hospital stay, level of education, income, comorbidity and return to work. Results: One year after first HF hospitalization, 8040 (67.7%) returned to the workforce, 2981 (25.1%) did not, 805 (6.7%) died and 54 (0.5%) emigrated. Predictors of return to work included younger age (18-30 vs. 51-60 years, OR 3.12; 95% CI 2.42-4.03), male sex (OR 1.22 [1.18-1.34]) and level of education (long-higher vs. basic school OR 2.06 [1.63-2.60]). Conversely, hospital stay >7 days (OR 0.56 [0.51-0.62]) and comorbidity including history of stroke (OR 0.55 [0.45-0.69]), chronic kidney disease (OR 0.46 [0.36-0.59]), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (OR 0.62 [0.52-0.75]), diabetes (OR 0.76 [0.68-0.85]) and cancer (OR 0.49 [0.40-0.61]) were all significantly associated with lower chance of return to work. Conclusions: Patients in the workforce prior to HF hospitalization had low mortality but high risk of detachment from the workforce one year later. Young age, male sex, and higher level of education were predictors of return to work

Impact of proton pump inhibitor treatment on gastrointestinal bleeding associated with non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug use among post-myocardial infarction patients taking antithrombotics: nationwide study

Study question What is the effect of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) on the risk of gastrointestinal bleeding in post-myocardial infarction patients taking antithrombotics and treated with non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs)? Methods This was a nationwide cohort study based on linked administrative registry data from all hospitals in Denmark between 1997 and 2011. The study included patients aged 30 years and over admitted with a first myocardial infarction who survived at least 30 days after discharge. The association between PPIs and risk of gastrointestinal bleeding according to NSAID plus antithrombotic therapy was estimated using adjusted time dependent Cox regression models. Study answer and limitations The use of PPIs was independently associated with decreased risk of gastrointestinal bleeding in post-myocardial infarction patients taking antithrombotics and treated with NSAIDs. Of 82 955 post-myocardial infarction patients (mean age 67.4 years, 64% (n=53 070) men), all of whom were taking single or dual antithrombotic therapy, 42.5% (n=35 233) filled at least one prescription for NSAIDs and 45.5% (n=37 771) received PPIs. Over a mean follow-up of 5.1 years, 3229 gastrointestinal bleeds occurred. The crude incidence rates of bleeding (events/100 person years) on NSAID plus antithrombotic therapy were 1.8 for patients taking PPIs and 2.1 for those not taking PPIs. The adjusted risk of bleeding was lower with PPI use (hazard ratio 0.72, 95% confidence interval 0.54 to 0.95) regardless of antithrombotic treatment regimen, type of NSAID, and type of PPI used. The main limitation of the study is its observational non-randomised design. The results suggest that PPI treatment probably has a beneficial effect regardless of underlying gastrointestinal risk and that when NSAIDs cannot be avoided in post-myocardial infarction patients, physicians might prescribe a PPI as well. The study does not clarify whether PPIs might be safely omitted in specific subgroups of patients with a low risk of gastrointestinal bleeding. What this study adds In post-myocardial infarction patients, bleeding complications have been associated with both antithrombotic and NSAID treatment. Concurrent use of PPIs was independently associated with a decreased risk of gastrointestinal bleeding in post-myocardial infarction patients taking antithrombotics and NSAID, regardless of antithrombotic treatment regimen, type of NSAID, and type of PPI used. Funding, competing interests, data sharing AMSO has received a grant from the Danish Council of Independent Research (grant 12-132760). GHG is supported by an unrestricted research scholarship from the Novo Nordisk Foundation

Statin treatment and risk of recurrent venous thromboembolism: a nationwide cohort study

Statins may decrease the risk of primary venous thromboembolism (VTE), that is, deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary embolism (PE) but the effect of statins in preventing recurrent VTE is less clear. The aim of this study was therefore to investigate the association between statin therapy and risk of recurrent VTE. A prospective cohort study. All hospitals in Denmark. All patients with a hospital diagnosis of VTE in Denmark during 1997-2009 associated with a warfarin or heparin prescription were identified. Adjusted HR of recurrent hospitalised VTE (ie, fatal or non-fatal DVT or PE) associated with use of statins. 44 330 patients with VTE were included in the study. Of these 3914 were receiving statin therapy at baseline. Patients receiving statins were older (68±11 compared to 62±18 years), had more comorbidity and used more medications. The incidence rate for recurrent VTE was 24.4 (95% CI 22.8 to 26.2) per 1000 person-years among statin users and 48.5 (95% CI 47.4 to 49.7) per 1000 person-years among non-statin users. Statin use was associated with a significantly lower risk of a recurrent VTE, adjusted HR 0.74 (95% CI 0.68 to 0.80), compared with no statin use. The association between statin use and risk of recurrent VTE was significantly affected by age. Among younger individuals (≤80 years), statin use was associated with lower risk of recurrent VTE, HR 0.70 (95% CI 0.65 to 0.76) whereas in older individuals (>80 years) statin use was significantly associated with higher risk of recurrent VTE, HR 1.28 (95% CI 1.02 to 1.60), p for interaction= <0.0001. Statin use was associated with a decreased risk of recurrent VT

The challenge of return to work in workers with cancer : employer priorities despite variation in social policies related to work and health

This study explored employer's perspectives on (1) their experience of good practice related to workers diagnosed with cancer and their return to work (RTW), and (2) their perceived needs necessary to achieve good practice as reported by employers from nine separate countries. Twenty-five semi-structured interviews were held in eight European countries and Israel with two to three employers typically including HR managers or line managers from both profit and non-profit organisations of different sizes and sectors. Interviews were recorded and transcribed verbatim. A grounded theory/thematic analysis approach was completed. Employers' experience with RTW assistance for workers with cancer appears to be a dynamic process. Results indicate that good practice includes six phases: (1) reacting to disclosure, (2) collecting information, (3) decision-making related to initial actions, (4) remaining in touch, (5) decision-making on RTW, and (6) follow-up. The exact details of the process are shaped by country, employer type, and worker characteristics; however, there was consistency related to the need for (1) structured procedures, (2) collaboration, (3) communication skills training, (4) information on cancer, and (5) financial resources for realizing RTW support measures. Notwithstanding variations at country, employer, and worker levels, the employers from all nine countries reported that good practice regarding RTW assistance in workers with a history of cancer consists of the six phases above. Employers indicate that they would benefit from shared collaboration and resources that support good practice for this human resource matter. Further research and development based on the six phases of employer support as a framework for a tool or strategy to support workers with a history of cancer across countries and organisations is warranted

Influence of heart rate, blood pressure, and beta-blocker dose on outcome and the differences in outcome between carvedilol and metoprolol tartrate in patients with chronic heart failure: results from the COMET trial.

AIMS: We studied the influence of heart rate (HR), systolic blood pressure (SBP), and beta-blocker dose on outcome in the 2599 out of 3029 patients in Carvedilol Or Metoprolol European Trial (COMET) who were alive and on study drug at 4 months after randomization (time of first visit on maintenance therapy). METHODS AND RESULTS: By multivariable analysis, baseline HR, baseline SBP, and their change after 4 months were not independently related to subsequent outcome. In a multivariable analysis including clinical variables, HR above and SBP below the median value achieved at 4 months predicted subsequent increased mortality [relative risk (RR) for HR>68 b.p.m. 1.333; 95% confidence intervals (CI) 1.152-1.542; P120 mmHg 0.78; 95% CI 0.671-0.907; P<0.0013]. Achieving target beta-blocker dose was associated with a better outcome (RR 0.779; 95% CI 0.662-0.916; P<0.0025). The superiority of carvedilol as compared to metoprolol tartrate was maintained in a multivariable model (RR 0.767; 95% CI 0.663-0.887; P=0.0004) and there was no interaction with HR, SBP, or beta-blocker dose. CONCLUSION: Beta-blocker dose, HR, and SBP achieved during beta-blocker therapy have independent prognostic value in heart failure. None of these factors influenced the beneficial effects of carvedilol when compared with metoprolol tartrate at the pre-defined target doses used in COMET

Should beta-blocker therapy be reduced or withdrawn after an episode of decompensated heart failure? Results from COMET.

BACKGROUND: It is unclear whether beta-blocker therapy should be reduced or withdrawn in patients who develop acute decompensated heart failure (HF). We studied the relationship between changes in beta-blocker dose and outcome in patients surviving a HF hospitalisation in COMET. METHODS: Patients hospitalised for HF were subdivided on the basis of the beta-blocker dose administered at the visit following hospitalisation, compared to that administered before. RESULTS: In COMET, 752/3029 patients (25%, 361 carvedilol and 391 metoprolol) had a non-fatal HF hospitalisation while on study treatment. Of these, 61 patients (8%) had beta-blocker treatment withdrawn, 162 (22%) had a dose reduction and 529 (70%) were maintained on the same dose. One-and two-year cumulative mortality rates were 28.7% and 44.6% for patients withdrawn from study medication, 37.4% and 51.4% for those with a reduced dosage (n.s.) and 19.1% and 32.5% for those maintained on the same dose (HR,1.59; 95%CI, 1.28-1.98; p<0.001, compared to the others). The result remained significant in a multivariable model: (HR, 1.30; 95%CI, 1.02-1.66; p=0.0318). No interaction with the beneficial effects of carvedilol, compared to metoprolol, on outcome was observed (p=0.8436). CONCLUSIONS: HF hospitalisations are associated with a high subsequent mortality. The risk of death is higher in patients who discontinue beta-blocker therapy or have their dose reduced. The increase in mortality is only partially explained by the worse prognostic profile of these patients

Comparison of carvedilol and metoprolol on clinical outcomes in patients with chronic heart failure in the Carvedilol Or Metoprolol European Trial (COMET): randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND: Beta blockers reduce mortality in patients who have chronic heart failure, systolic dysfunction, and are on background treatment with diuretics and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors. We aimed to compare the effects of carvedilol and metoprolol on clinical outcome. METHODS: In a multicentre, double-blind, and randomised parallel group trial, we assigned 1511 patients with chronic heart failure to treatment with carvedilol (target dose 25 mg twice daily) and 1518 to metoprolol (metoprolol tartrate, target dose 50 mg twice daily). Patients were required to have chronic heart failure (NYHA II-IV), previous admission for a cardiovascular reason, an ejection fraction of less than 0.35, and to have been treated optimally with diuretics and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors unless not tolerated. The primary endpoints were all-cause mortality and the composite endpoint of all-cause mortality or all-cause admission. Analysis was done by intention to treat. FINDINGS: The mean study duration was 58 months (SD 6). The mean ejection fraction was 0.26 (0.07) and the mean age 62 years (11). The all-cause mortality was 34% (512 of 1511) for carvedilol and 40% (600 of 1518) for metoprolol (hazard ratio 0.83 [95% CI 0.74-0.93], p=0.0017). The reduction of all-cause mortality was consistent across predefined subgroups. The composite endpoint of mortality or all-cause admission occurred in 1116 (74%) of 1511 on carvedilol and in 1160 (76%) of 1518 on metoprolol (0.94 [0.86-1.02], p=0.122). Incidence of side-effects and drug withdrawals did not differ by much between the two study groups. INTERPRETATION: Our results suggest that carvedilol extends survival compared with metoprolo