-
[show abstract]
[hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Despite the availability of effective treatments for the management of corticosteroid-induced osteoporosis (CIOP), the condition is undertreated. Our objective was to assess prescribers' knowledge and likely prescribing patterns concerning the diagnosis and treatment of CIOP. Another goal was to identify key barriers to the use of preventive therapy in patients using long-term corticosteroids.
We used a postal survey of general practitioners (GPs) and specialists in the Netherlands. The survey comprised of questions on: demographic data, perceived barriers to the use of preventive therapy for CIOP, and knowledge of diagnosis and treatment of CIOP. Case scenarios were questioned to assess practice patterns.
Responding prescribers correctly answered an average of 55% of knowledge questions and 69% of case scenarios. Multiple questions and cases showed that knowledge on the use of bone mineral density (BMD) determination was poor. BMD was determined in patients who, according to the national osteoporosis guideline, should be treated with bisphosphonates independent of BMD. Moreover, only 18% of doctors correctly answered that the BMD cutoff in CIOP patients is a T-score of ≤-1 or ≤-1·5. Key barriers identified were: (i) GPs, significantly more than specialists, consider prescription of preventive therapy the responsibility of another doctor; (ii) discontinuation of anti-resorptive medication due to adverse effects and (iii) the reluctance to prescribe preventive therapy in patients already prescribed multiple medications.
Doctors did not identify many barriers to the prescribing of anti-resorptive therapies. Lack of knowledge, especially concerning use of BMD-results, likely led to the under-treatment of the presented patients.
Journal of Clinical Pharmacy and Therapeutics 06/2011; 36(3):356-66. · 1.57 Impact Factor
-
[show abstract]
[hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: What is known and Objective: Despite the availability of effective treatments for the management of corticosteroid-induced osteoporosis (CIOP), the condition is undertreated. Our objective was to assess prescribers’ knowledge and likely prescribing patterns concerning the diagnosis and treatment of CIOP. Another goal was to identify key barriers to the use of preventive therapy in patients using long-term corticosteroids.Methods: We used a postal survey of general practitioners (GPs) and specialists in the Netherlands. The survey comprised of questions on: demographic data, perceived barriers to the use of preventive therapy for CIOP, and knowledge of diagnosis and treatment of CIOP. Case scenarios were questioned to assess practice patterns.Results: Responding prescribers correctly answered an average of 55% of knowledge questions and 69% of case scenarios. Multiple questions and cases showed that knowledge on the use of bone mineral density (BMD) determination was poor. BMD was determined in patients who, according to the national osteoporosis guideline, should be treated with bisphosphonates independent of BMD. Moreover, only 18% of doctors correctly answered that the BMD cutoff in CIOP patients is a T-score of ≤−1 or ≤−1·5. Key barriers identified were: (i) GPs, significantly more than specialists, consider prescription of preventive therapy the responsibility of another doctor; (ii) discontinuation of anti-resorptive medication due to adverse effects and (iii) the reluctance to prescribe preventive therapy in patients already prescribed multiple medications.What is new and Conclusion: Doctors did not identify many barriers to the prescribing of anti-resorptive therapies. Lack of knowledge, especially concerning use of BMD-results, likely led to the under-treatment of the presented patients.
Journal of Clinical Pharmacy and Therapeutics 05/2011; 36(3):356 - 366. · 1.57 Impact Factor
-
[show abstract]
[hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Antiplatelet therapy with aspirin and clopidogrel is an important component of the management of acute coronary syndrome, but it also increases the risk of bleeding. There are no formal guidelines about the use of a proton pump inhibitor (PPI) for gastroprotection in patients on clopidogrel. This study assessed how many patients in the Royal Darwin Hospital (RDH) and the Royal Hobart Hospital (RHH) prescribed clopidogrel and at risk of bleeding were co-prescribed PPIs.
We conducted a retrospective cohort study using a pharmacy database to select all patients commenced on clopidogrel in a 1-year period. We identified all patients newly prescribed clopidogrel and determined the proportion that had a risk factor for bleeding and also received a PPI. We also assessed the effect of the use of PPIs on the number of reported bleeds.
The final study cohort consisted of 385 patients who had been newly prescribed clopidogrel. Of all patients discharged on clopidogrel, 95.6% (368/385) had >or=1 risk factor for bleeding. One hundred and twenty-eight of these patients [128/368, (34.8%)] were discharged on a PPI. Patients on dual antiplatelet therapy with an additional risk factor for bleeding and not discharged on a PPI were more likely to develop a major bleed than patients on dual antiplatelet therapy without a risk factor for bleeding not discharged on a PPI (11.1% vs. 1.8%; P < 0.01). Patients on dual antiplatelet therapy with an additional risk factor for bleeding not discharged on a PPI had a higher probability (borderline significance) of major bleeding, compared with patients on dual antiplatelet therapy with an additional risk factor for bleeding discharged on a PPI [PPI: 1/60, (1.7%) vs. no PPI: 6/54, (11.1%); P = 0.05].
Our results indicate that PPIs may only lower the probability of major bleeding in patients treated with dual antiplatelet therapy, who possess additional risk factor(s) for bleeding.
Journal of Clinical Pharmacy and Therapeutics 04/2010; 35(2):213-7. · 1.57 Impact Factor
-
[show abstract]
[hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Corticosteroid-induced osteoporosis (CIOP) is currently undertreated. Systematic review of the literature revealed that the percentage of patients treated adequately is dependent on study quality. Therefore, it remains unknown whether adherence to the guidelines is really so poor. Five major quality criteria provide the standard for future studies on this scope.
It has recently been stated that the degree of prophylaxis of corticosteroid-induced osteoporosis (CIOP) is low and effort should be put into determining reasons for non-prescribing of preventive agents. The aim of this study was to identify: how many studies adequately audit the prevalent guideline; the longitudinal trends in prevention of CIOP; which patient groups appear to be most undertreated; and which intervention strategies are effective.
We performed a comprehensive search of MEDLINE and systematically recorded the outcomes and quality of published studies, using five major criteria.
Twenty-four studies were included in the analysis. The quality of the included studies was poor (31%) or moderate (37%). There was a longitudinal increase in quality of the studies and percentage of prevention. Multivariable linear regression showed that the quality of the study was the only independent predictor of the prevention rate reported in the study.
The results show undertreatment of CIOP might be due to insufficient quality of the studies rather than poor practice or failure to recognise the right patients. Future interventions should comply with five major quality criteria, and a multifaceted approach is required in order to make an impact on the underprescribing of CIOP prophylaxis.
Osteoporosis International 10/2008; 19(10):1379-94. · 4.58 Impact Factor
-
[show abstract]
[hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: We investigated prevention trends and predictors for osteoporosis prevention in long term corticosteroid users. The use of bisphosphonates increased from 2001 to 2005. Longer duration of corticosteroid use and DMARD use were predictors for receiving prevention. Females appear reasonably well treated; however, men require more attention.
Previous studies have shown that long-term corticosteroid users are undertreated for osteoporosis prevention. Our aim was to identify prevention trends in long-term corticosteroid users from 2001-2005 in The Netherlands and to identify predictors for bisphosphonate prophylaxis.
Pharmacy dispensing data were used from 9 community pharmacies. All oral corticosteroid doses were converted to "prednisolone equivalents". We then identified long-term (> or =90 days) corticosteroid episodes, which required bisphosphonate prophylaxis as per 2002 Dutch guidelines; Multivariate logistic regression was used to identify predictors for receiving prevention.
We identified 615 different corticosteroid patients requiring prophylaxis. From 2001-2005 the use of bisphosphonates increased from 38% to 54% (p = 0.001). In 2005 females were prescribed more bisphosphonates than males (61% vs. 39%; p = 0.002), or any treatment (72% vs. 45%; p < 0.001). Multivariate analysis showed that longer duration of corticosteroid use and disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drug (DMARD) use were independent predictors of bisphosphonate use. Use of respiratory medication was a negative predictor of bisphosphonate use.
There has been a significant increase in osteoporosis prophylaxis in a population at high risk for osteoporosis/fractures. In particular, females appear reasonably well treated; however, men are still not receiving prevention to the same degree as women.
Osteoporosis International 10/2007; 18(10):1429-33. · 4.58 Impact Factor
-
Osteoporosis International 02/2006; 17(4):634-5; author reply 636. · 4.58 Impact Factor
-
Journal of Clinical Pharmacy and Therapeutics 11/2005; 30(5):417-21. · 1.57 Impact Factor
-
[show abstract]
[hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: To evaluate a pharmacist-conducted educational and monitoring programme, designed to promote dietary and lifestyle modification and compliance with lipid-lowering drug therapy, for patients with dyslipidaemia.
This was a prospective, randomized, controlled study. The participants were 94 adults, with 81 completing the study (intervention group: 39; control group: 42), with a cardiovascular-related diagnosis and discharged from hospital, between April and October 2001, on lipid-lowering drug therapy. Patients in the intervention group were visited at home monthly by a pharmacist, who educated the patients on the goals of lipid-lowering treatment and the importance of lifestyle issues in dyslipidaemia and compliance with therapy, assessed patients for drug-related problems, and measured total blood cholesterol levels using point-of-care testing. Patients in the control group received standard medical care. The main outcome measure was total blood cholesterol levels after 6 months, and an evaluation of patient and general practitioner satisfaction with the programme.
There was no significant difference in baseline total blood cholesterol levels between the two groups. The reduction over the course of the study in cholesterol levels within the intervention group was statistically significant (4.9 +/- 0.7 to 4.4 +/- 0.6, P<0.005), whereas there was no change within the control group (P=0.26). At follow-up, 44% of the intervention group patients and 24% of the control group patients had cholesterol levels below 4.0 mmol/L (P=0.06). The reduction in total cholesterol in the intervention group should translate to an expected 21% reduction in cardiovascular mortality risk and a 16% reduction in total mortality risk--more than twice the risk reduction achieved in the control group. In addition, the programme was very well received by the patients and their general practitioners, by satisfaction questionnaire.
A pharmacist-conducted educational and monitoring intervention improved the outcomes of lipid-lowering drug therapy.
Journal of Clinical Pharmacy and Therapeutics 02/2004; 29(1):23-30. · 1.57 Impact Factor
-
[show abstract]
[hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: There have been concerns raised about the potential adverse effects of proton pump inhibitors, especially with long-term use. In particular, their potent action can suppress the features and delay the diagnosis of gastric cancer, while prolonged exposure may hasten the development of gastric carcinoids.
To examine the use of proton pump inhibitors in patients at the major teaching hospital in Tasmania, Australia, principally to determine the appropriateness of the therapy according to published guidelines.
A retrospective review of the medical records of all patients prescribed any of the proton pump inhibitors at the hospital over a 7-month period, was performed. An extensive range of demographic and clinical variables was recorded for each patient. The patients were also asked a series of questions during their hospitalization to extract some of the relevant information - in particular, if and when they had undergone endoscopy.
The 200 patients (52% males) had a mean age of 69 +/- 16.4 years. The most common indications for using proton pump inhibitors were acute gastrointestinal bleeding (20.9%), severe refractory ulcerating oesophagitis (17.3%), mild/moderate oesophageal reflux (17.3%) and refractory peptic ulcer (11.7%). A large number of patients were using a proton pump inhibitor for 'other' indications (39.6%). The prescribing of proton pump inhibitors satisfied the approved indications, as outlined in the Australian Schedule of Pharmaceutical Benefits, in only 37.1% of cases. Endoscopy had been performed in 54.1% of patients prior to commencing therapy with a proton pump inhibitor and within the next 7 days in another 12.8% of patients. Only 59% of patients had previously been treated with an H2-receptor antagonist before commencing therapy with a proton pump inhibitor. Even worse, only 58.5% of patients had used an H2-receptor antagonist before a proton pump inhibitor for mild/moderate oesophagitis. The median duration of proton pump inhibitor therapy for patients admitted to the hospital and already receiving one of the drugs was 450 days. Over half of the patients were being concurrently treated with other drugs which are known to cause or exacerbate gastro-oesophageal disease, and 18% were smokers.
Whereas the proton pump inhibitors are undoubtedly effective agents, studies of their prescribing in practice consistently suggest over-use prior to endoscopy, use in patients who do not fit the approved criteria, and prescribing for indications in which 'less powerful' agents should have been sufficiently effective for the patient's symptoms. This poses economic and safety concerns, particularly in light of the suggestion that these drugs could delay the diagnosis of gastric cancer.
Journal of Clinical Pharmacy and Therapeutics 11/2000; 25(5):333-40. · 1.57 Impact Factor
-
[show abstract]
[hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Objective: To review the pharmacology, pharmacokinetics, safety, and efficacy of a gel containing estradiol that is applied to the skin. Design: MEDLINE and EMBASE searches were conducted from 1966 to March 2005. Additional references were identified from bibliographies from selected studies in addition to approved product information. Results: Estradiol gel is indicated for the relief of moderate to severe vasomotor symptoms in menopausal women, and moderate to severe symptoms of vulvar and vaginal atrophy. Women who are intolerant of the oral route, have had previous hypersensitivity skin reactions, or have had difficulties with adhesive patches are ideal candidates for estradiol gel. Conclusions: Estradiol gel can effectively reduce menopause symptoms with minimal side effects. Long-term safety data of estradiol gel are required
