Sensitivity and Specificity of Using GPT-3.5 Turbo Models for Title and Abstract Screening in Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses

BACKGROUND

Systematic reviews are performed manually despite the exponential growth of scientific literature.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the sensitivity and specificity of GPT-3.5 Turbo, from OpenAI, as a single reviewer, for title and abstract screening in systematic reviews.

DESIGN

Diagnostic test accuracy study.

SETTING

Unannotated bibliographic databases from 5 systematic reviews representing 22 665 citations.

PARTICIPANTS

None.

MEASUREMENTS

A generic prompt framework to instruct GPT to perform title and abstract screening was designed. The output of the model was compared with decisions from authors under 2 rules. The first rule balanced sensitivity and specificity, for example, to act as a second reviewer. The second rule optimized sensitivity, for example, to reduce the number of citations to be manually screened.

RESULTS

Under the balanced rule, sensitivities ranged from 81.1% to 96.5% and specificities ranged from 25.8% to 80.4%. Across all reviews, GPT identified 7 of 708 citations (1%) missed by humans that should have been included after full-text screening at the cost of 10 279 of 22 665 false-positive recommendations (45.3%) that would require reconciliation during the screening process. Under the sensitive rule, sensitivities ranged from 94.6% to 99.8% and specificities ranged from 2.2% to 46.6%. Limiting manual screening to citations not ruled out by GPT could reduce the number of citations to screen from 127 of 6334 (2%) to 1851 of 4077 (45.4%), at the cost of missing from 0 to 1 of 26 citations (3.8%) at the full-text level.

LIMITATIONS

Time needed to fine-tune prompt. Retrospective nature of the study, convenient sample of 5 systematic reviews, and GPT performance sensitive to prompt development and time.

CONCLUSION

The GPT-3.5 Turbo model may be used as a second reviewer for title and abstract screening, at the cost of additional work to reconcile added false positives. It also showed potential to reduce the number of citations before screening by humans, at the cost of missing some citations at the full-text level.

PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE

None.

Disease burden of Barrett's esophagus across the Paris metropolitan area

INTRODUCTION

The prevalence of Barrett's esophagus (BE) in France is unknown. However, the management of dysplastic BE in expert centers is recommended and reduces the risk of developing invasive adenocarcinoma. Our aim was to determine the burden of BE patients in the Paris Region.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective study using the data from electronic medical records from the data warehouse of the 39 Greater Paris public hospitals (Entrepôt de données de santé de l' Assistance Publique- Hôpitaux de Paris) for the year 2018, and used natural language processing to search for occurrences of Barrett's esophagus in endoscopy and pathology reports.

RESULTS

we observed a 2.2 % prevalence of Barrett's esophagus. Patients with Barrett's esophagus were older, more frequently males, with a hiatal hernia, proton pump inhibitor users, and less frequently infected by H. Pylori. Gastro-esophageal reflux symptoms were not more frequently encountered in Barrett's patients. Eleven percent of patients with Barrett's esophagus had dysplasia or adenocarcinoma.

DISCUSSION

Over 200 000 patients with Barrett's esophagus are expected in the Paris Region, of which 11 % harbor dysplasia or adenocarcinoma. This data should be taken into account to tailor healthcare offer in France.

Personalizing renal replacement therapy initiation in the intensive care unit: a reinforcement learning-based strategy with external validation on the AKIKI randomized controlled trials

OBJECTIVE

The timely initiation of renal replacement therapy (RRT) for acute kidney injury (AKI) requires sequential decision-making tailored to individuals' evolving characteristics. To learn and validate optimal strategies for RRT initiation, we used reinforcement learning on clinical data from routine care and randomized controlled trials.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We used the MIMIC-III database for development and AKIKI trials for validation. Participants were adult ICU patients with severe AKI receiving mechanical ventilation or catecholamine infusion. We used a doubly robust estimator to learn when to start RRT after the occurrence of severe AKI for three days in a row. We developed a "crude strategy" maximizing the population-level hospital-free days at day 60 (HFD60) and a "stringent strategy" recommending RRT when there is significant evidence of benefit for an individual. For validation, we evaluated the causal effects of implementing our learned strategies versus following current best practices on HFD60.

RESULTS

We included 3748 patients in the development set and 1068 in the validation set. Through external validation, the crude and stringent strategies yielded an average difference of 13.7 [95% CI -5.3 to 35.7] and 14.9 [95% CI -3.2 to 39.2] HFD60, respectively, compared to current best practices. The stringent strategy led to initiating RRT within 3 days in 14% of patients versus 38% under best practices.

DISCUSSION

Implementing our strategies could improve the average number of days that ICU patients spend alive and outside the hospital while sparing RRT for many.

CONCLUSION

We developed and validated a practical and interpretable dynamic decision support system for RRT initiation in the ICU.

Stigma in vitiligo: associated factors and severity strata of the Patient Unique Stigmatization Holistic tool in Dermatology (PUSH-D) score

BACKGROUND

Vitiligo is the most common cause of skin depigmentation worldwide. Patients with vitiligo may experience stigma and this needs to be addressed.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate stigma in patients with vitiligo, search for associated factors and establish severity strata for the Patient Unique Stigmatization Holistic tool in Dermatology (PUSH-D) for patients with vitiligo.

METHODS

We conducted a cross-sectional study in ComPaRe Vitiligo, an e-cohort of adult patients with vitiligo. Stigmatization was assessed using the PUSH-D, a recently validated dermatology-specific stigmatization assessment tool. We conducted univariate and multivariable linear regression to identify patient and disease factors associated with the stigmatization. We used an anchor-based approach to define severity strata for the PUSH-D.

RESULTS

In total, 318 patients participated (mean age 49.7 years; 73.9% women). Fitzpatrick skin phototype IV-VI, severe facial involvement (high Self-Assessment Vitiligo Extent Score of the face) and depression (high Patient Health Questionnaire-9 score) were positively -associated with a higher stigmatization score, although this association was weak [r = 0.24 (P < 0.001) and r = 0.30 (P < 0.001), respectively]. PUSH-D cutoff values that best discriminated patients with high and low stigma, as defined by the anchor question, were 13 and 23 (κ = 0.622, 95% confidence interval 0.53-0.71).

CONCLUSIONS

Our study is the first to use a skin-specific stigmatization tool to assess stigma in patients with vitiligo. Creating strata helps to better interpret the PUSH-D in daily practice and may facilitate its use in clinical trials.

Psychometric properties and domains covered by patient-reported outcome measures used in trials assessing interventions for chronic pain

OBJECTIVES

To identify the patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) used in clinical trials assessing interventions for chronic pain, describe their psychometric properties, and the clinical domains they cover.

STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING

We identified phase 3 or 4 interventional trials: on adult participants (aged >18 years), registered in clinicaltrials.gov between January 1, 2021 and December 31, 2022, and which provided "chronic pain" as a keyword condition. We excluded diagnostic studies and phase 1 or 2 trials. In each trial, one reviewer extracted all outcomes registered and identified those captured using PROMs. For each PROM used in more than 1% of identified trials, two reviewers assessed whether it covered the six important clinical domains from the Initiative on Methods, Measurement, and Pain Assessment in Clinical Trials (IMMPACT): pain, emotional functioning, physical functioning, participant ratings of global improvement and satisfaction with treatment, symptoms and adverse events, and participant disposition (eg, adherence to medication). Second, reviewers searched PubMed for both the initial publication and latest review reporting the psychometric properties of each PROM and assessed their content validity, structural validity, internal consistency, reliability, measurement error, hypotheses testing, criterion validity, and responsiveness using published criteria from the literature.

RESULTS

In total, 596 trials assessing 4843 outcomes were included in the study (median sample size 60, interquartile range 40-100). Trials evaluated behavioral (22%), device-based (21%), and drug-based (10%) interventions. Of 495 unique PROMs, 55 were used in more than 1% trials (16 were generic pain measures; 8 were pain measures for specific diseases; and 30 were measures of other symptoms or consequences of pain). About 50% PROMs had more than 50% of psychometric properties rated as sufficient. Scales often focused on a single clinical domain. Only 25% trials measured at least three clinical domains from IMMPACT.

CONCLUSION

Half of PROMs used in trials assessing interventions for chronic pain had sufficient psychometric properties for more than 50% of criteria assessed. Few PROMs assessed more than one important clinical domain. Only 25% of trials measured more than 3/6 clinical domains considered important by IMMPACT.

Heterogeneity of outcome measures in depression trials and the relevance of the content of outcome measures to patients: a systematic review

Research waste occurs when randomised controlled trial (RCT) outcomes are heterogeneous or overlook domains that matter to patients (eg, relating to symptoms or functions). In this systematic review, we reviewed the outcome measures used in 450 RCTs of adult unipolar and bipolar depression registered between 2018 and 2022 and identified 388 different measures. 40% of the RCTs used the same measure (Hamilton Depression Rating Scale [HAMD]). Patients and clinicians matched each item within the 25 most frequently used measures with 80 previously identified domains of depression that matter to patients. Seven (9%) domains were not covered by the 25 most frequently used outcome measures (eg, mental pain and irritability). The HAMD covered a maximum of 47 (59%) of the 80 domains that matter to patients. An interim solution to facilitate evidence synthesis before a core outcome set is developed would be to use the most common measures and choose complementary scales to optimise domain coverage. TRANSLATIONS: For the French and Dutch translations of the abstract see Supplementary Materials section.

Spread of awareness of COVID-19 between December 2019 and March 2020 in France

During the early phase of outbreaks, awareness of the presence of the disease plays an important role in transmission dynamics. To investigate the processes of how people become aware of a disease, we conducted two complementary investigations. First, we surveyed 868 academic researchers in France, on the time and circumstances when they became aware of COVID-19 as an important event. We found that 25% did so before February 18th (first death in France), 50% did so before March 10th (first presidential allocution) and 75% did so before March 16th (announcement of the lockdown). Awareness came from nine categories of circumstances: (1) decisions taken by the government (elicited by 35.7% participants); (2) information from media or social media (24.7%); (3) conversation with friends (22.4%); (4) observed changes in their personal lives (14.0%); (5) decisions taken by the employer (9.2%); (6) observed changes at work (9.9%); (7) suspected case of COVID-19 in their entourage (3.1%); (8) fear for oneself or their entourage (2.8%) and (9) self-appraisal of scientific reports (2.8%). Second, we appraised three general media in France (a television news show, a radio news show, and a newspaper) and showed that COVID-19 became a preeminent topic only after March 1st 2020 when the epidemic is present on national soil. Our results show that multiple intricated factors prompt the awareness of an emerging infectious disease. Awareness is not solely driven by general media as they begin to focus on the topic late.

Impact of surgery after endoscopically resected high-risk T1 colorectal cancer: results of an emulated target trial

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

We aimed to compare the long-term outcomes of patients with high-risk T1 colorectal cancer (CRC) resected endoscopically who received either additional surgery or surveillance.

METHODS

We used data from routine care to emulate a target trial aimed at comparing 2 strategies after endoscopic resection of high-risk T1 CRC: surgery with lymph node dissection (treatment group) versus surveillance alone (control group). All patients from 14 tertiary centers who underwent an endoscopic resection for high-risk T1 CRC between March 2012 and August 2019 were included. The primary outcome was a composite outcome of cancer recurrence or death at 48 months.

RESULTS

Of 197 patients included in the analysis, 107 were categorized in the treatment group and 90 were categorized in the control group. From baseline to 48 months, 4 of 107 patients (3.7%) died in the treatment group and 6 of 90 patients (6.7%) died in the control group. Four of 107 patients (3.7%) in the treatment group experienced a cancer recurrence and 4 of 90 patients (4.4%) in the control group experienced a cancer recurrence. After balancing the baseline covariates by inverse probability of treatment weighting, we found no significant difference in the rate of death and cancer recurrence between patients in the 2 groups (weighted hazard ratio, .95; 95% confidence interval, .52-1.75).

CONCLUSIONS

Our study suggests that patients with high-risk T1 CRC initially treated with endoscopic resection may not benefit from additional surgery.

A core outcome domain set to assess cutaneous neurofibromas related to neurofibromatosis type 1 in clinical trials

BACKGROUND

Cutaneous neurofibromas (cNF) are considered one of the highest burdens of neurofibromatosis type 1 (NF1). To date, no medical treatment can cure cNF or prevent their development. In that context, there is an urgent need to prepare and standardize the methodology of future trials targeting cNF.

OBJECTIVES

The objective was to develop a core outcome domain set suitable for all clinical trials targeting NF1-associated cNF.

METHODS

The validated approach of this work consisted of a three-phase methodology: (i) generating the domains [systematic literature review (SLR) and qualitative studies]; (ii) agreeing (three-round international e-Delphi consensus process and working groups); and (iii) voting.

RESULTS

(i) The SLR and the qualitative studies (three types of focus groups and a French e-survey with 234 participants) resulted in a preliminary list of 31 candidate items and their corresponding definitions. (ii) A total of 229 individuals from 29 countries participated in the first round of the e-Delphi process: 71 patients, relatives or representatives (31.0%), 130 healthcare professionals (HCPs, 56.8%) and 28 researchers, representatives of a drug regulatory authority, industry or pharmaceutical company representatives or journal editors (12.2%). The overall participation rate was 74%. After round 2, five candidate items were excluded. Between rounds 2 and 3, international workshops were held to better understand the disagreements among stakeholders. This phase led to the identification of 19 items as outcome subdomains. (iii) The items were fused to create four outcome domains ('clinical assessment', 'daily life impact', 'patient satisfaction' and 'perception of health') and prioritized. The seven items that did not reach consensus were marked for the research agenda. The final core outcome domain set reached 100% of the votes of the steering committee members.

CONCLUSIONS

Although numerous outcomes can be explored in studies related to cNF in NF1, the present study offers four outcome domains that should be reported in all trial studies, agreed on by international patients, relatives and representatives of patients; HCPs; researchers, representatives of drug regulatory authorities or pharmaceutical companies and journal editors. The next step will include the development of a set of core outcome measurement instruments to further standardize how these outcomes should be assessed.

cNF-Skindex in Adults Living with Neurofibromatosis 1: Severity Strata in France and Validation in United States Adults

Cutaneous neurofibromas (cNF) contribute to the impairment of QOL in individuals with neurofibromatosis 1. The cNF-Skindex, validated in a French population, specifically assesses the cNF-related QOL. In this study, we first defined severity strata using an anchoring approach on the basis of patient's burden. In total, 209 patients answered the anchor question and the cNF-Skindex. We tested the agreement among the three strata, generated by all potential couples of cut-off values of the cNF-Skindex and the three strata defined in the anchor question. The cut-off values 12 and 49 provided the highest Kappa value (κ = 0.685, 95% confidence interval = 0.604-0.765). Second, we validated the score and the strata in a United States population using the answers provided by 220 French and 148 United States adults. In the multivariable linear regression analysis, the country of origin was not a factor associated with the score (P = 0.297). The number of cNF along the different severity strata was similar between the French and the United States populations. In conclusion, stratification constitutes a powerful tool to better interpret the cNF-Skindex in daily practice and in clinical trials. This study validates its use in two populations that together constitute a large cohort of patients willing to participate in clinical research.

Assessment of US Food and Drug Administration-Approved Digital Medical Devices for Just-in-Time Interventions: A Systematic Review

Importance

Just-in-time interventions (JITIs) are a type of digital therapeutic intervention that combines remote monitoring tools and algorithms to personalize the delivery of specific interventions at the right time. The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regulatory approval documents are often the only available source of information on the effectiveness of therapeutic interventions based on these devices.

Objective

To systematically review the publicly available information from the FDA on all recently approved medical devices used in JITIs to (1) assess how they operate to deliver JITIs and (2) appraise the evidence supporting their performance and clinical effectiveness.

Evidence Review

Two reviewers systematically searched the Premarket Notifications (510(k)), Premarket Approvals, De Novo, and Humanitarian Device Exemption databases from January 2019 to December 2021 for all entries associated with devices that monitored patients' data over time to personalize the delivery of interventions to treat, prevent, or mitigate health conditions or events. They assessed whether the product summaries (1) enabled an understanding of how the device operated to deliver a JITI (eg, the nature, type, and frequency of the monitoring, the nature of the decision algorithm, and the nature and intended receiver of the intervention); (2) informed about the performance and effectiveness of the JITI; and (3) included information on data security and ownership.

Findings

In total, 38 devices were included in this review. These were mainly intended for cardiac conditions (12 [31.6%]), diabetes (10 [26.3%]), and neurological diseases (4 [10.5%]). Monitoring devices ranged from wearable (18 of 28 [64.4%]; eg, smartwatches) to implanted sensors (6 of 28 [21.4%]; eg, inserted electrocardiographic sensors). Only 10 of 38 product summaries (26.3%) allowed a full understanding of how the device operated to deliver a JITI. Similarly, only 12 of 28 (42.9%), 12 of 36 (33.3%), and 5 of 38 (13.2%) reported the assessment of the performance of the monitoring device, assessment of the decision algorithm, and results of clinical studies assessing the effectiveness of the JITI, respectively. Finally, 14 of 36 product summaries (38.9%) included some information on data security, but none included information on data ownership.

Conclusion and Relevance

The results of this systematic review suggest that the information publicly available in the FDA databases on the performance and effectiveness of digital medical devices used in JITIs is heterogeneous.

Facial involvement is reflective of patients' global perception of vitiligo extent

BACKGROUND

The involvement of visible areas in vitiligo has been found to be correlated with increased psychiatric morbidity. Although multiple tools have been developed to assess vitiligo, no cutoff for improvement or worsening of vitiligo from a patient's perspective has been established.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) of the Self-Assessment Vitiligo Extent Score (SA-VES) in patients with vitiligo and to evaluate, from the patient's perspective, the importance of the change in the involvement of visible areas (face and hands) in patients' overall perception of disease worsening or improving.

METHODS

This was a cross-sectional study in the context of the ComPaRe e-cohort. Adult patients with vitiligo were invited to answer online questionnaires. They completed the SA-VES twice, 1 year apart. In addition, patients answered a 5-point Likert anchor question aimed at assessing their perception of the evolution of the extent of their vitiligo. The MCID was calculated using distribution- and anchor-based approaches. Using ordinal logistic regression, the change of vitiliginous lesions on the face or hands was compared to the overall extent of vitiligo (patches on all body areas).

RESULTS

In total, 244 patients with vitiligo were included in the analyses; 20 (8%) were found to have an improvement in their vitiligo. The MCID in worsened patients was equal to a 1.3% body surface area [95% confidence interval (CI) 1.01-1.43] increase in the SA-VES. For participants with improved vitiligo, the MCID was equal to a decrease in total SA-VES of 1.3% (95% CI 0.867-1.697). Patients' perceptions of change in their vitiligo was increased sevenfold when it affected the face vs. the rest of the body.

CONCLUSIONS

Changes in the facial SA-VES were highly correlated with patients' impressions of the extent of vitiligo.

A methodological framework allows the identification of personomic markers to consider when designing personalized interventions

OBJECTIVES

To develop a methodological framework to identify and prioritize personomic markers (e.g., psychosocial situation, beliefs…) to consider for personalizing interventions and to test in smoking cessation interventions.

STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING

(1) We identified potential personomic markers considered in protocols of personalized interventions, in reviews of predictors of smoking cessation, and in interviews with general practitioners. (2) Physicians, and patient smokers or former smokers selected the markers they considered most relevant during online paired comparison experiments. Data were analyzed with Bradley Terry Luce models.

RESULTS

Thirty-six personomic markers were identified from research evidence. They were evaluated by 795 physicians (median age: 34, IQR [30-38]; 95% general practitioners) and 793 patients (median age: 54, IQR [42-64], 71.4% former smokers) during 11,963 paired comparisons. Physicians identified patients' motivation for quitting (e.g., Prochaska stages), patients' preferences, and patients' fears and beliefs (e.g., concerns about weight gain) as the most relevant elements to personalize smoking cessation. Patients considered their motivation for quitting, smoking behavior (e.g., smoking at home/at work), and tobacco dependence (e.g., Fagerström Test) as the most relevant elements to consider.

CONCLUSION

We provide a methodological framework to prioritize which personomic markers should be considered when developing smoking cessation interventions.

Trajectories of the evolution of post COVID-19 condition, up to two years after symptoms onset

BACKGROUND

We aimed to identify trajectories of the evolution of post COVID-19 condition, up to two years after symptom onset.

METHODS

The ComPaRe long COVID e-cohort is a prospective cohort of patients with symptoms lasting at least two months after SARS-CoV2 infection. We used trajectory modelling to identify different trajectories in the evolution of post COVID-19 condition, based on symptoms collected every 60 days using the long COVID Symptom Tool.

FINDINGS

A total of 2,197 patients were enrolled in the cohort between December 2020 and July 2022 when the Omicron variant was not dominant. Three trajectories of the evolution of post COVID-19 condition were identified: "high persistent symptoms" (4%), "rapidly decreasing symptoms" (5%), and "slowly decreasing symptoms" (91%). Participants with high persistent symptoms were older and more likely to report a history of systemic diseases. They often reported tachycardia, bradycardia, palpitations, and arrhythmia. Participants with rapidly decreasing symptoms were younger and more likely to report a confirmed infection. They often reported diarrhoea and back pain. Participants with slowly decreasing symptoms were more likely to have functional diseases.

INTERPRETATION

Most of patients with post COVID-19 condition improve slowly over time, while 5% have rapid improvement in the two years after symptom onset and 4% have a persistent condition.

FUNDING

The authors received no specific funding for this study.

A systematic scoping review of just-in-time, adaptive interventions finds limited automation and incomplete reporting

OBJECTIVES

To describe the degree of automation in just-in-time, adaptive interventions (JITAIs) assessed in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in any medical specialty, and to assess the completeness of intervention reporting.

STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING

Systematic scoping review-we searched PubMed, PsycINFO, and Web of Science, from 1 January 2019 to 2 March 2021, for reports of RCTs assessing JITAIs. We assessed whether study reports included the minimum information required to replicate the interventions based on JITAI frameworks. We described JITAIs according to their automation level using an established framework (partially, highly, or fully automated), and care workload distribution (requiring work from patients, health care professionals [HCPs], both, or neither).

RESULTS

We included 88 JITAIs (62%, n = 55 supported chronic illness management and 12%, n = 11 supported health behavior change). Overall, 77% (n = 68) of JITAIs were missing some information required to replicate the intervention (e.g., n = 38, 43% inadequately reported the algorithm used to select intervention components). Only fifteen (17%) JITAIs were fully automated and did not require additional work from HCPs nor patients. Of the remaining JITAIs, 36% required work from both patients and HCPs, and 47% required work from either patients or HCPs.

CONCLUSION

Most JITAIs are not fully automated and require work from the HCPs and patients.

Patients' Perspectives on How to Improve Endometriosis Care: A Large Qualitative Study Within the ComPaRe-Endometriosis e-Cohort

Background: Endometriosis is a chronic gynecological condition that affects about 10% of women of reproductive age. Despite its prevalence, diagnosis is often delayed, misdiagnosis is common, and treatment options are poor. This study aimed at capturing ideas to improve endometriosis care from the patients' perspectives. Materials and Methods: We analyzed cross-sectional data from 1,000 adult patients in ComPaRe-Endometriosis (a French prospective e-cohort focused on endometriosis) who answered to the open-ended question: "If you had a magic wand, what would you change about your health care?". The free-text responses were analyzed by qualitative thematic analysis using an inductive approach. Results: Patients had a mean age of 34.1 years (standard deviation = 8.1); 56% and 42% had stage IV disease or deep endometriosis, respectively. They elicited 2,487 ideas to improve the management of endometriosis, which were categorized into 61 areas of improvement, further grouped into 14 themes. The top five areas of improvement were mentioned by >10% of the patients and were to (1) train caregivers to develop their knowledge on the disease, (2) provide better management of daily pain and pain attacks, (3) take patient-reported symptoms seriously, (4) standardize diagnostic processes to improve early detection, and (5) have caregivers listen more to the patients. Conclusions: We identified 61 areas for improvement in endometriosis care. These results reflect patients' expectations in terms of management of their disease and will be useful to design a better global care for endometriosis from the patients' perspectives.

Efficacy of first dose of covid-19 vaccine versus no vaccination on symptoms of with long covid: target trial emulation based on ComPaRe e-cohort

Objective

To evaluate the effect of covid-19 vaccination on the severity of symptoms in patients with long covid.

Design

Target trial emulation based on ComPaRe e-cohort.

Data source

ComPaRe long covid cohort, a nationwide e-cohort (ie, a cohort where recruitment and follow-up are performed online) of patients with long covid, in France.

Methods

Adult patients (aged ≥18 years) enrolled in the ComPaRe cohort before 1 May 2021 were included in the study if they reported a confirmed or suspected SARS-CoV-2 infection, symptoms persistent for >3 weeks after onset, and at least one symptom attributable to long covid at baseline. Patients who received a first covid-19 vaccine injection were matched with an unvaccinated control group in a 1:1 ratio according to their propensity scores. Number of long covid symptoms, rate of complete remission of long covid, and proportion of patients reporting an unacceptable symptom state at 120 days were recorded.

Results

910 patients were included in the analyses (455 in the vaccinated group and 455 in the control group). By 120 days, vaccination had reduced the number of long covid symptoms (mean 13.0 (standard deviation 9.4) in the vaccinated group v 14.8 (9.8) in the control group; mean difference -1.8, 95% confidence interval -3.0 to -0.5) and doubled the rate of patients in remission (16.6% v 7.5%, hazard ratio 1.93, 95% confidence interval 1.18 to 3.14). Vaccination reduced the effect of long covid on patients' lives (mean score on the impact tool 24.3 (standard deviation 16.7) v 27.6 (16.7); mean difference -3.3, 95% confidence interval -5.7 to -1.0) and the proportion of patients with an unacceptable symptom state (38.9% v 46.4%, risk difference -7.4%, 95% confidence interval -14.5% to -0.3%). In the vaccinated group, two (0.4%) patients reported serious adverse events requiring admission to hospital.

Conclusion

In this study, covid-19 vaccination reduced the severity of symptoms and the effect of long covid on patients' social, professional, and family lives at 120 days in those with persistent symptoms of infection.

Important adverse events to be evaluated in antidepressant trials and meta-analyses in depression: a large international preference study including patients and healthcare professionals

BACKGROUND

Non-serious adverse events (NSAEs) should be captured and reported because they can have a significant negative impact on patients and treatment adherence. However, the reporting of NSAEs in randomised controlled trials (RCTs) is limited.

OBJECTIVE

To identify the most important NSAEs of antidepressants for patients and clinicians, to be evaluated in RCTs and meta-analyses.

METHODS

We conducted online international surveys in English, German and French, including (1) adults prescribed an antidepressant for a depressive episode and (2) healthcare professionals (HCPs) prescribing antidepressants. Participants ranked the 30 most frequent NSAEs reported in the scientific literature. We fitted logit models for sets of ranked items and calculated for each AE the probability to be ranked higher than the least important AE. We also identified additional patient-important AEs not included in the ranking task via open-ended questions.

FINDINGS

We included 1631 patients from 44 different countries (1290 (79.1%) women, mean age 39.4 (SD 13), 289 (37.1%) with severe depression (PHQ-9 score ≥20)) and 281 HCPs (224 (79.7%) psychiatrists). The most important NSAEs for patients were insomnia (95.9%, 95% CI 95.2% to 96.5%), anxiety (95.2%, 95% CI 94.3% to 95.9%) and fatigue (94.6%, 95% CI 93.6% to 95.4%). The most important NSAEs for HCPs were sexual dysfunction (99.2%, 95% CI 98.5% to 99.6%), weight gain (98.9%, 95% CI 97.7% to 99.4%) and erectile problems (98.8%, 95% CI 97.7% to 99.4%). Participants reported 66 additional NSAEs, including emotional numbing (8.6%), trouble with concentration (7.6%) and irritability (6%).

CONCLUSIONS

These most important NSAEs should be systematically reported in antidepressant trials.

CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS

The most important NSAEs should contribute to the core outcome set for harms in depression.

Completeness and Mismatch of Patient-Important Outcomes After Trauma

To assess the completeness of the collection of patient-important outcomes and the mismatch between outcomes measured in research and patients' important issues after trauma.

Summary Background Data

To date, severe trauma has mainly been assessed using in-hospital mortality. Yet, with 80 to 90% survivors discharged from hospital, it is critical to assess the collection of patient important long-term outcomes of trauma.

Methods

Mixed methods study combining a systematic review of outcomes and their comparison with domains elicited by patients during a qualitative study. We searched Medline, EMBASE and clinicaltrials.gov from January 1, 2014 to September 30, 2019 and extracted all outcomes from reports including severe trauma. We compared these outcomes with 97 domains that matter to trauma survivors identified in a previous qualitative study. We defined as patient-important outcome as the 10 most frequently elicited domains in the qualitative study. We assessed the number of domains captured in each report to illustrate the completeness of the collection of patient-important outcomes. We also assessed the mismatch between outcomes collected and what matters to patients.

Findings

Among the 116 reports included in the systematic review, we identified 403 outcomes collected with 154 unique measurements tools. Beside mortality, measurement tools most frequently used were the Glasgow Outcome Scale (31.0%, n=36), questions on patients' return to work (20,7%, n=24) and the EQ-5D (19.0%, n=22). The comparison between the outcomes identified in the systematic review and the domains from the qualitative study found that 10.3% (n=12) reports did not collect any patient-important domains and one collected all 10 patient-important domains. By examining each of the 10 patient-important domains, none was collected in more than 72% of reports and only five were among the ten most frequently measured domains in studies.

Conclusion

The completeness of the collection of the long-term patient-important outcomes after trauma can be improved. There was a mismatch between the domains used in the literature and those considered important by patients during a qualitative study.

Quality of life in neurofibromatosis 1: development and validation of a tool dedicated to cutaneous neurofibromas in adults

BACKGROUND

Cutaneous neurofibromas (cNF), present in 95% of individuals with neurofibromatosis 1 (NF1), are considered as one of the greatest medical burden because of physical disfigurement. No specific score evaluates their impact on quality of life (QoL).

OBJECTIVE

To develop a specific score assessing cNF-related QoL.

METHODS

Through a multidisciplinary workshop including 10 patients, 3 expert-in-NF1 physicians, 3 health care workers (nurses and psychologist) and 1 methodologist, the French version of the Skindex-16 was modified by adding 3 items. The new cNF-Skindex was validated among patients with NF1 recruited in the ComPaRe online cohort, in France (N=284). Construct validity was assessed by comparing it with the EQ-5D-5L, its visual analog scale and the MYMOP2 and by assessing its association with patients' characteristics. Reliability was assessed by a test-retest. An English version of the tool was developed using a back forward translation.

RESULTS

A total of 228 individuals with NF1, with cNF answered the 19-item questionnaire. These items fitted into 3 domains: emotions, symptoms, functioning. One was dropped during analysis because >90% responders were not concerned. The cNF-Skindex significantly correlated with the EQ-5D-5L (N=193) and MYMOP2 (N=210) indicating good external validity: rs 0.38 (p<0.001), and 0.58 (p<0.001) respectively. Having >50 cNF was the only independent variable associated with the total score cNF-Skindex (β=15.88, 95%CI 6.96 - 24.81, p=0.001), and with the 3 sub-scores: "functioning" (β=2.65, 95%CI 0.71 - 4.59, p=0.008), "emotions" (β=17.03, 95%CI 4.11 - 29.96, p=0.010) and "symptoms" (β=3.90, 95%CI 1.95 - 5.85, p<0.001). Test-retest reliability (N=133) found an ICC at 0.96 demonstrating good reproducibility.

CONCLUSION

The cNF-Skindex demonstrated excellent psychometric properties. The global and sub-scores were increased with higher number of cNF arguing for its use in further trials aiming to reduce their number or prevent their development. Cross-cultural validation and evaluation of its responsiveness are the next steps.

Important Issues to Severe Trauma Survivors: A Qualitative Study

OBJECTIVE

Identify issues that are important to severe trauma survivors up to 3 years after the trauma.

BACKGROUND

Severe trauma is the first cause of disability-adjusted life years worldwide, yet most attention has focused on acute care and the impact on long-term health is poorly evaluated.

METHOD

We conducted a large-scale qualitative study based on semi-structured phone interviews. Qualitative research methods involve the systematic collection, organization, and interpretation of conversations or textual data with patients to explore the meaning of a phenomenon experienced by individuals themselves. We randomly selected severe trauma survivors (abbreviated injury score ≥3 in at least 1 body region) who were receiving care in 6 urban academic level-I trauma centers in France between March 2015 and March 2018. We conducted double independent thematic analysis. Issues reported by patients were grouped into overarching domains by a panel of 5 experts in trauma care. Point of data saturation was estimated with a mathematical model.

RESULTS

We included 340 participants from 3 months to 3 years after the trauma [median age: 41 years (Q1-Q3 24-54), median injury severity score: 17 (Q1-Q3 11-22)]. We identified 97 common issues that we grouped into 5 overarching domains: body and neurological issues (29 issues elicited by 277 participants), biographical disruption (23 issues, 210 participants), psychological and personality issues (21 issues, 147 participants), burden of treatment (14 issues, 145 participants), and altered relationships (10 issues, 87 participants). Time elapsed because the trauma, injury location, or in-hospital trauma severity did not affect the distribution of these domains across participants' answers.

CONCLUSIONS

This qualitative study explored trauma survivors' experiences of the long-term effect of their injury and allowed for identifying a set of issues that they consider important, including dimensions that seem overlooked in trauma research. Our findings confirm that trauma is a chronic medical condition that demands new approaches to post-discharge and long-term care.

Methods to Generate Innovative Research Ideas and Improve Patient and Public Involvement in Modern Epidemiological Research: Review, Patient Viewpoint, and Guidelines for Implementation of a Digital Cohort Study

Background

Patient and public involvement (PPI) in research aims to increase the quality and relevance of research by incorporating the perspective of those ultimately affected by the research. Despite these potential benefits, PPI is rarely included in epidemiology protocols.

Objective

The aim of this study is to provide an overview of methods used for PPI and offer practical recommendations for its efficient implementation in epidemiological research.

Methods

We conducted a review on PPI methods. We mirrored it with a patient advocate’s viewpoint about PPI. We then identified key steps to optimize PPI in epidemiological research based on our review and the viewpoint of the patient advocate, taking into account the identification of barriers to, and facilitators of, PPI. From these, we provided practical recommendations to launch a patient-centered cohort study. We used the implementation of a new digital cohort study as an exemplary use case.

Results

We analyzed data from 97 studies, of which 58 (60%) were performed in the United Kingdom. The most common methods were workshops (47/97, 48%); surveys (33/97, 34%); meetings, events, or conferences (28/97, 29%); focus groups (25/97, 26%); interviews (23/97, 24%); consensus techniques (8/97, 8%); James Lind Alliance consensus technique (7/97, 7%); social media analysis (6/97, 6%); and experience-based co-design (3/97, 3%). The viewpoint of a patient advocate showed a strong interest in participating in research. The most usual PPI modalities were research ideas (60/97, 62%), co-design (42/97, 43%), defining priorities (31/97, 32%), and participation in data analysis (25/97, 26%). We identified 9 general recommendations and 32 key PPI-related steps that can serve as guidelines to increase the relevance of epidemiological studies.

Conclusions

PPI is a project within a project that contributes to improving knowledge and increasing the relevance of research. PPI methods are mainly used for idea generation. On the basis of our review and case study, we recommend that PPI be included at an early stage and throughout the research cycle and that methods be combined for generation of new ideas. For e-cohorts, the use of digital tools is essential to scale up PPI. We encourage investigators to rely on our practical recommendations to extend PPI in future epidemiological studies.

Preferences for Alternative Care Modalities Among French Adults With Chronic Illness

IMPORTANCE

The COVID-19 pandemic led to the implementation of alternative care modalities (eg, teleconsultations and task shifting) that will continue to be implemented in parallel to traditional care after the pandemic. An ideal balance between alternative and traditional care modalities is unknown.

OBJECTIVES

To quantify the ideal postpandemic balance between alternative and traditional care modalities among patients with chronic illness and to qualify the circumstances in which patients consider it appropriate to replace traditional care with alternative care.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This survey study invited 5999 adults with chronic illness in ComPaRe, a French nationwide e-cohort of adults with chronic conditions who volunteer their time to participate in research projects, to participate in this study, which was performed from January 27 to February 23, 2021.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Participants rated the ideal proportion at which they would use 3 alternative care modalities instead of the traditional care equivalent on a 0% to 100% scale (with 0% indicating using alternative care modalities for none of one's future care and 100% indicating using alternative care modalities for all of one's future care) of their overall future care: (1) teleconsultations, (2) online symptom-checkers to react to new symptoms, and (3) remote monitoring to adapt treatment outside consultations. The median ideal proportion of alternative care use was calculated. Perceived appropriate circumstances in which each alternative modality could replace traditional care were collected with open-ended questions. Analyses were performed on a weighted data set representative of patients with chronic illness in France.

RESULTS

Of the 5999 invited individuals, 1529 (mean [SD] age, 50.3 [14.7] years; 1072 [70.1%] female) agreed to participate (participation rate, 25.5%). Participants would choose teleconsultations for 50.0% of their future consultations (IQR, 11.0%-52.0%), online symptom-checkers over contacting their physician for 22.0% of new symptoms (IQR, 2.0%-50.0%), and remote monitoring instead of consultations for 52.3% of their treatment adaptations (IQR, 25.4%-85.4%). Participants reported 67 circumstances for which replacing traditional with alternative care modalities was considered appropriate, including 31 care activities (eg, prescription renewal and addressing acute or minor complaints), 25 patient characteristics (eg, stable chronic condition and established patient-physician relationship), and 11 required characteristics of the alternative care modalities (eg, quality assurance).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Results of this survey study suggest that after the pandemic, patients would choose alternative over traditional care for 22% to 52% of the time across different care needs. Participants proposed 67 criteria to guide clinicians in replacing traditional care with alternative care. These findings provide a guide for redesigning care in collaboration with patients after the pandemic.

P–327 Patients’ perspectives on how to improve the management of endometriosis in France: The ComPaRe-Endometriosis cohort

Study question

How should endometriosis management be improved from the patient’s point of view?

Summary answer

One thousand endometriosis patients proposed 2,587 ideas to improve the management of endometriosis that reflect three main themes: diagnosis, care, and information on the disease.

What is known already

Endometriosis is a gynecologic condition affecting 10% of reproductive-age women. The disease causes severe pelvic pain and has a dramatic impact on women’s quality of life. A mean delay of 7 years was described between onset of symptoms and diagnosis. There is an urgent need to reduce this delay and to rethink endometriosis care in order to adopt a more comprehensive and patient-centered approach, as women are often dissatisfied with the care they receive.

Study design, size, duration

This study was carried out in a random sample of endometriosis patients participating in ComPaRe (Community of Patients for Research), a prospective e-cohort of adult chronic disease patients who will be followed-up for 10 years. Participants complete monthly online questionnaires about their life with their disease(s). Recruitment began in January 2017 and is still ongoing, with currently 44,000 participants, including 10,000 endometriosis patients in the ComPaRe-Endometriosis sub-cohort.

Participants/materials, setting, methods

We selected a random sample of 1,000 participants in ComPaRe-Endometriosis, forming 3 equal groups of age (&lt;25, 25–45, &gt;45 years old) and education (&lt;12, 12–14, &gt;14 years). We conducted a qualitative study to gather their ideas for improving the management of their disease. Participants were asked: “If you had a magic wand, what would you change in your health care?”. One interviewer and two patients independently extracted ideas from the open-ended responses using thematic analysis.

Main results and the role of chance

Patients proposed a total of 2,587 ideas to improve the management of endometriosis, which we classified in three main themes: diagnosis, care, and information on the disease. To improve diagnosis, women proposed 724 ideas classified into 11 areas of improvement, including training of health professionals, taking symptoms seriously, improving the diagnosis process, and recognition of the disease by clinicians. To improve care, patients gave 1,677 ideas classified into 71 areas of improvement. For example, they asked for a better pain management, more listening from caregivers, the reimbursement of care or medical treatments, help in accessing clinicians that are expert in endometriosis, and reduced waiting times for medical appointments and exams. Finally, to improve information on the disease, participants suggested 186 ideas classified into 5 areas of improvement, covering more explanation about the disease, public recognition of endometriosis and general awareness, and more research and more explanation of research results.

Limitations, reasons for caution

The results were reviewed by three people in order to reduce the margin of interpretation in the analysis of this open-ended question, but some subjectivity remains. Generalizability may be difficult because the results are linked to the specificities of the French model of care.

Wider implications of the findings: Through the many ideas proposed by patients, we identified a total of 87 areas for improvement in endometriosis diagnosis, care, and information. These results reflect patients’ expectations in terms of management of their disease and will be useful to design a better global care for endometriosis from the patients’ perspective.

Trial registration number

Not applicable

Impact of an interactive web tool on patients' intention to receive COVID-19 vaccination: a before-and-after impact study among patients with chronic conditions in France

Objectives

In France, about 30% of the population refuses COVID-19 vaccination outright, and 9 to 40% are hesitant. We developed and evaluated an interactive web tool providing transparent and reliable information on the benefits and risks of COVID-19 vaccination.

Methods

The most recent scientific data at the time of the study were implemented into an interactive web tool offering individualized information on the risks of COVID-19 infection-related events versus vaccination-related serious adverse events. The tool was evaluated during a before-and-after impact study nested in ComPaRe, a French e-cohort of adult patients with chronic conditions. Primary outcome was the proportion of patients intending to receive vaccination after using the tool, among those not intending to receive it at baseline.

Results

Between January 8 and 14, 2021, we enrolled 3152 patients in the study [mean age 55.2 (SD: 16.9), 52.9% women and 63% with ≥ 2 chronic conditions]. Before consulting the tool, 961 (30.5%) refused to be vaccinated until further data on efficacy/safety was obtained and 239 (7.5%) outright refused vaccination. Among these 1200 patients, 96 (8.0%, number needed to treat: 12.5) changed their mind after consulting the tool and would subsequently accept vaccination.

Conclusions

Our interactive web tool represents a scalable method to help increase the intent to receive COVID-19 vaccination among patients with chronic conditions and address vaccine hesitancy. Since April 2021, our tool has been embedded on the official webpage of the French Government for COVID-19 information.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12911-021-01594-8.

Belief and adherence to COVID 19-lockdown restrictions in patients with asthma versus other chronic diseases: results from a cross-sectional survey nested in the ComPaRe e-cohort, in France

BACKGROUND

Asthma patients are under-represented among patients with COVID-19. Their behavior during lockdown and associated restrictions is unknown, as well as whether it was influenced by coexistent cardiovascular conditions.

METHODS

We conducted a cross-sectional survey in May 2020, in France, nested in ComPaRe, an e-cohort of adults with chronic diseases. A self-administered questionnaire was mailed to 10,859 people; 3701 fully completed questionnaires. The prevalence of self-reported asthma was 7%. Patients were classified in 4 categories: asthma with (n = 106) or without (n = 149) cardiovascular disease and other diseases with (n = 1186) or without (n = 2260) cardiovascular disease.

RESULT

Adherence to movement restrictions during the lockdown was very strong: 89% of participants reported a frequency of outings of "less than once per week" and "once or twice per week" for errands and no family-related outings during the lockdown. This proportion and frequency of outings were similar whatever the chronic disease (p = 0.122). Most patients (96%) reported a high feeling of security during the lockdown, but 95% felt anxious or depressed, with no difference by disease. As compared with patients with controlled asthma, those with uncontrolled asthma more frequently reported complaints related to deteriorated medical follow-up, waived care, anxiety or depression.

CONCLUSIONS

Behaviors during the lockdown in France among the asthma population did not differ from patients with other chronic diseases in this cohort, which strengthens hypotheses for specific disease-related susceptibility to explain the low representation of asthmatics among COVID-19 cases. Special attention should be paid to the subgroup of patients with uncontrolled asthma during lockdowns.

An International, Mixed-Methods Study of the Perceived Intrusiveness of Remote Digital Diabetes Monitoring

OBJECTIVE

To assess the relationship between remote digital monitoring (RDM) modalities for diabetes and intrusiveness in patients' lives.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Online vignette-based survey (February 1 through July 1, 2019). Adults with diabetes (type 1, 2, or subtypes such as latent autoimmune diabetes of adulthood) assessed three randomly selected vignettes among 36 that combined different modalities for monitoring tools (three options: glucose- and physical activity [PA]-monitoring only, or glucose- and PA-monitoring with occasional or regular food monitoring), duration/feedback loops (six options: monitoring for a week before all vs before specific consultations with feedback given in consultation, vs monitoring permanently, with real-time feedback by one's physician vs by anoter caregiver, vs monitoring permanently, with real-time, artificial intelligence-generated treatment feedback vs treatment and lifestyle feedback), and data handling (two options: by the public vs private sector). We compared intrusiveness (assessed on a 5-point scale) across vignettes and used linear mixed models to identify intrusiveness determinants. We collected qualitative data to identify aspects that drove participants' perception of intrusiveness.

RESULTS

Overall, 1010 participants from 30 countries provided 2860 vignette-assessments (52% were type 1 diabetes). The monitoring modalities associated with increased intrusiveness were food monitoring compared with glucose- and PA-monitoring alone (β=0.34; 95% CI, 0.26 to 0.42; P<.001) and permanent monitoring with real-time physician-generated feedback compared with monitoring for a week with feedback in consultation (β=0.25; 95% CI, 0.16 to 0.34, P<.001). Public-sector data handling was associated with decreased intrusiveness as compared with private-sector (β=-0.15; 95% CI, -0.22 to -0.09; P<.001). Four drivers of intrusiveness emerged from the qualitative analysis: practical/psychosocial burden (eg, RDM attracting attention in public), control, data safety/misuse, and dehumanization of care.

CONCLUSION

RDM is intrusive when it includes food monitoring, real-time human feedback, and private-sector data handling.

Development and validation of the long covid symptom and impact tools, a set of patient-reported instruments constructed from patients' lived experience

Objectives

To develop and validate patient-reported instruments, based on patients' lived experiences, for monitoring the symptoms and impact of long covid.

Design

The long covid Symptom and Impact Tools (ST and IT) were constructed from the answers to a survey with open-ended questions to 492 patients with long COVID. Validation of the tools involved adult patients with suspected or confirmed COVID-19 and symptoms extending over three weeks after onset. Construct validity was assessed by examining the relations of the ST and IT scores with health related quality of life (EQ-5D-5L), function (PCFS, post-COVID functional scale), and perceived health (MYMOP2). Reliability was determined by a test-retest. The "patient acceptable symptomatic state" (PASS) was determined by the percentile method.

Results

Validation involved 1022 participants (55% with confirmed COVID-19, 79% female, and 12.5% hospitalized for COVID-19). The long COVID ST and IT scores were strongly correlated with the EQ-5D-5L (r_s = -0.45 and r_s = -0.59 respectively), the PCFS (r_s = -0.39 and r_s = -0.55), and the MYMOP2 (r_s = -0.40 and r_s = -0.59). Reproducibility was excellent with an interclass correlation coefficient of 0.83 (95% confidence interval 0.80 to 0.86) for the ST score and 0.84 (0.80 to 0.87) for the IT score. In total, 793 (77.5%) patients reported an unacceptable symptomatic state, thereby setting the PASS for the long covid IT score at 30 (28 to 33).

Conclusions

The long covid ST and IT tools, constructed from patients’ lived experiences, provide the first validated and reliable instruments for monitoring the symptoms and impact of long covid.

Fourteen-day survival among older adults with severe infection with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 treated with corticosteroid: a cohort study

Objective

To assess the effectiveness of corticosteroids among older adults with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pneumonia requiring oxygen.

Methods

We used routine care data from 36 hospitals in France and Luxembourg to assess the effectiveness of corticosteroids with at least 0.4 mg/kg/day equivalent prednisone (treatment group) versus standard of care (control group). Participants were adults aged 80 years or older with PCR-confirmed severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection or CT scan images typical of COVID-19 pneumonia, requiring oxygen ≥3 L/min, and with an inflammatory syndrome (C-reactive protein ≥40 mg/L). The primary outcome was overall survival at day 14. In our main analysis, characteristics of patients at baseline (i.e. time when patients met all inclusion criteria) were balanced by using propensity-score inverse probability of treatment weighting.

Results

Among the 267 patients included in the analysis, 98 were assigned to the treatment group. Their median age was 86 years (interquartile range 83–90 years) and 95% had a SARS-CoV-2 PCR-confirmed diagnosis. In total, 43/98 (43.9%) patients in the treatment group and 84/166 (50.6%) in the control group died before day 14 (weighted hazard ratio 0.67, 95% CI 0.46–0.99). The treatment and control groups did not differ significantly for the proportion of patients discharged to home/rehabilitation at day 14 (weighted relative risk 1.12, 95% CI 0.68–1.82). Twenty-two (16.7%) patients receiving corticosteroids developed adverse events, but only 11 (6.4%) from the control group.

Conclusions

Corticosteroids were associated with a significant increase in the overall survival at day 14 of patients aged 80 years and older hospitalized for severe COVID-19.

Corticosteroids in patients hospitalized for COVID-19 pneumonia who require oxygen: observational comparative study using routine care data

OBJECTIVE

To assess the effectiveness of corticosteroids on outcomes of patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pneumonia requiring oxygen without mechanical ventilation.

METHODS

We used routine care data from 51 hospitals in France and Luxembourg to assess the effectiveness of corticosteroids at 0.8 mg/kg/day eq. prednisone (CTC group) versus standard of care (no-CTC group) among adults 18-80 years old with confirmed COVID-19 pneumonia requiring oxygen without mechanical ventilation. The primary outcome was intubation or death by day 28. In our main analysis, characteristics of patients at baseline (i.e. time when patients met all inclusion criteria) were balanced by using propensity-score inverse probability of treatment weighting.

RESULTS

Among the 891 patients included in the analysis, 203 were assigned to the CTC group. Use of corticosteroids was not significantly associated with risk of intubation or death by day 28 (weighted hazard ratio (wHR) 0.92, 95%CI 0.61-1.39) nor cumulative death rate (wHR 1.03, 95%CI 0.54-1.98). However, use of corticosteroids was associated with reduced risk of intubation or death by day 28 in the prespecified subgroups of patients requiring oxygen ≥3 L/min (wHR 0.50, 95%CI 0.30-0.85) or C-reactive protein level ≥100 mg/L (wHR 0.44, 95%CI 0.23-0.85). The number of hyperglycaemia events was higher for patients with corticosteroids than for those without, but the number of infections was similar.

CONCLUSIONS

We found no association between the use of corticosteroids and intubation or death in the broad population of patients 18-80 years old, with COVID-19, hospitalized in settings non intensive care units. However, the treatment was associated with a reduced risk of intubation or death for patients with ≥3 L/min oxygen or C-reactive protein level ≥100 mg/L at baseline. Further research is needed to confirm the right timing for corticosteroids in patients with COVID-19 requiring oxygen only.

Baseline Characteristics of a National French E-Cohort of Hidradenitis Suppurativa in ComPaRe and Comparison with Other Large Hidradenitis Suppurativa Cohorts

BACKGROUND

Hidradenitis suppurativa (HS) is a chronic inflammatory skin condition substantially impacting patients' quality of life; the pathogenesis remains unclear, and treatment is complex and not yet standardized. Observational data are increasingly being used to evaluate therapeutics in "real-life" interventions, and the development of e-cohorts is offering new tools for epidemiological studies at the population level.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to describe the clinical characteristics and treatment history of HS participants in the Community of Patients for Research (ComPaRe) cohort and to compare these to other cohorts.

METHODS

We performed a cross-sectional study of the baseline data of HS participants in ComPaRe, an e-cohort of patients with chronic diseases. Data were collected using patient-reported questionnaires about clinical-dem-ographic aspects, quality of life, and treatment history.

RESULTS

A total of 396 participants (339 females, 57 males) were included (mean age 38 years); 83 (21%) had a family history of HS, 227 (57.3%) were current smokers, and 241 (60.9%) were overweight or obese. Most of the participants declared a Hurley stage II (n = 263, 66.4%) or III (n = 76, 20.3%). The breast was more frequently affected in women than men (37.5 vs. 5.3%, p < 0.0001), whereas the dorsal region was more frequently affected in men (39.5 vs. 10.9%, p < 0.0001). Increased disease stage was associated with obesity (25.9 vs. 33.8 vs. 51.3%, p = 0.02) and some HS localizations (genital [p < 0.005], pubis [p < 0.007], gluteal fold [p = 0.02], and groin [p < 0.0001]). The most frequently prescribed treatments were oral antibiotics (n = 362, 91.4%), especially amoxicillin-clavulanic acid and cyclins. Less than 10% of participants received biologics. Most of these results were consistent with previously published cohorts.

CONCLUSION

Recruitment of participants by such a web platform can be a faster way to get relevant scientific data for a wide variety of patients that could be used for epidemiological studies and to evaluate therapeutics in "real-life" interventions.

A classification of methods used to personalize participative interventions revealed inadequate reporting in trial protocols

OBJECTIVES

The objective of the study was to develop a classification of methods used to personalize participative interventions in randomized controlled trials (RCTs).

STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING

We conducted a systematic review including protocols of RCTs assessing participative interventions in PubMed and ClinicalTrials.gov between June 2018 and May 2019. Data extraction was performed by two independent reviewers. We developed a precise classification of methods used to personalize interventions. Then, protocols were reviewed to determine whether personalization was sufficiently described to enable replication.

RESULTS

We included 109 protocols. The classification used four components and 13 subcomponents accounting for decision points (when interventions were personalized), tailoring variables (on what interventions were personalized), decision rules (how and by whom interventions were personalized), and nature of the subsequent tailoring (what was personalized in the interventions). In 95% of protocols, at least one component or subcomponent of our classification was not adequately reported to enable the replication of the intervention. Components the least well described were tailoring variables (72% of protocols insufficiently described) and the nature of the subsequent tailoring (46% of protocols).

CONCLUSION

This study provides the first detailed classification of methods used to personalize interventions. This is required to transparently implement personalization and improve reporting in RCTs.

Use of wearable biometric monitoring devices to measure outcomes in randomized clinical trials: a methodological systematic review

BACKGROUND

Wearable biometric monitoring devices (BMDs) have the potential to transform the conduct of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) by shifting the collection of outcome data from single measurements at predefined time points to dense continuous measurements.

METHODS

Methodological systematic review to understand how recent RCTs used BMDs to measure outcomes and to describe the reporting of these RCTs. Electronic search was performed in the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, PubMed, and EMBASE and completed a page-by-page hand search in five leading medical journals between January 1, 2018, and December 31, 2018. Three reviewers independently extracted all primary and secondary outcomes collected using BMDs, and assessed (1) the definitions used to summarize BMD outcome data; (2) whether the validity, reliability, and responsiveness of sensors was reported; (3) the discrepancy with outcomes prespecified in public clinical trial registries; and (4) the methods used to manage missing and incomplete BMD outcome data.

RESULTS

Of the 4562 records screened, 75 RCTs were eligible. Among them, 24% tested a pharmacological intervention and 57% used an inertial measurement sensor to measure physical activity. Included trials involved 464 outcomes (average of 6 [SD = 8] outcomes per trial). In total, 35 trials used a BMD to measure a primary outcome. Several issues affected the value and transparency of trials using BMDs to measure outcomes. First, the definition of outcomes used in the trials was highly heterogeneous (e.g., 21 diabetes trials had 266 outcomes and 153 had different unique definitions to measure diabetes control), which limited the combination and comparison of results. Second, information on the validity, reliability, and responsiveness of sensors used was lacking in 74% of trials. Third, half (53%) of the outcomes measured with BMDs had not been prespecified, with a high risk of outcome reporting bias. Finally, reporting on the management of incomplete outcome data (e.g., due to suboptimal compliance with the BMD) was absent in 68% of RCTs.

CONCLUSIONS

Use of BMDs to measure outcomes is becoming the norm rather than the exception in many fields. Yet, trialists need to account for several methodological issues when specifying and conducting RCTs using these novel tools.

Identification of Patient Perceptions That Can Affect the Uptake of Interventions Using Biometric Monitoring Devices: Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials

Background

Biometric monitoring devices (BMDs) are wearable or environmental trackers and devices with embedded sensors that can remotely collect high-frequency objective data on patients’ physiological, biological, behavioral, and environmental contexts (for example, fitness trackers with accelerometer). The real-world effectiveness of interventions using biometric monitoring devices depends on patients’ perceptions of these interventions.

Objective

We aimed to systematically review whether and how recent randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating interventions using BMDs assessed patients’ perceptions toward the intervention.

Methods

We systematically searched PubMed (MEDLINE) from January 1, 2017, to December 31, 2018, for RCTs evaluating interventions using BMDs. Two independent investigators extracted the following information: (1) whether the RCT collected information on patient perceptions toward the intervention using BMDs and (2) if so, what precisely was collected, based on items from questionnaires used and/or themes and subthemes identified from qualitative assessments. The two investigators then synthesized their findings in a schema of patient perceptions of interventions using BMDs.

Results

A total of 58 RCTs including 10,071 participants were included in the review (the median number of randomized participants was 60, IQR 37-133). BMDs used in interventions were accelerometers/pedometers (n=35, 60%), electrochemical biosensors (eg, continuous glucose monitoring; n=18, 31%), or ecological momentary assessment devices (eg, carbon monoxide monitors for smoking cessation; n=5, 9%). Overall, 26 (45%) trials collected information on patient perceptions toward the intervention using BMDs and allowed the identification of 76 unique aspects of patient perceptions that could affect the uptake of these interventions (eg, relevance of the information provided, alarm burden, privacy and data handling, impact on health outcomes, independence, interference with daily life). Patient perceptions were unevenly collected in trials. For example, only 5% (n=3) of trials assessed how patients felt about privacy and data handling aspects of the intervention using BMDs.

Conclusions

Our review showed that less than half of RCTs evaluating interventions using BMDs assessed patients’ perceptions toward interventions using BMDs. Trials that did assess perceptions often only assessed a fraction of them. This limits the extrapolation of the results of these RCTs to the real world. We thus provide a comprehensive schema of aspects of patient perceptions that may affect the uptake of interventions using BMDs and which should be considered in future trials.

Trial Registration

PROSPERO CRD42018115522; https://tinyurl.com/y5h8fjgx

What makes digital health intrusive? Qualitative findings from an international study on diabetes

Background

Remote digital monitoring (RDM, i.e., using digital devices to monitor patients' health and behavior) is a novel care model that can improve health outcomes for people with chronic conditions. However, it could be intrusive to patients' lives. We sought to understand which aspects of RDM make it intrusive to patients and why.

Methods

We performed content analysis of qualitative data collected by using open-ended questions in an international, online survey with a convenience sample of adults with type 1 or 2 diabetes (February-July 2019). Participants were first shown scenarios describing possible RDM features (i.e. different RDM tools [for glucose or food monitoring], feedback loops [receiving feedback in consultation, or remotely by a physician, or by artificial intelligence], and data handling options [by the public or private sector]).

Results

We analyzed data from 709 participants from 24 countries (38% men, median age 38, 54% type 1). Participants found RDM burdensome (n = 468). Burden arose from RDM features that caused disruption in daily life (e.g., alerts), features that may invite undesirable attention in public (e.g., visible wearable sensors may invite questions about one's health), or from having to adapt one's life to fit in RDM (e.g., adapt one's mealtime routine around food monitoring). Participants wanted control, particularly over sharing food-monitoring data with health care professionals in real-time to receive feedback (n = 440). They felt RDM could expose a delicate topic to 'surveillance' by authority figures (i.e., their data may 'reveal' poor dietary habits, leading to criticism by physicians). Intrusion could take the form of RDM eroding the patient-physician relationship (n = 34), or fear of data misuse (n = 206), which was associated with private-sector financial interests.

Conclusions

Our findings offer directions for minimally intrusive RDM design and show that digital health may cause concerns about stigma and treatment burden.

Key messages

Remote digital monitoring is intrusive when it increases treatment burden and limits patients’ control over their own health. “Minimally intrusive” digital health design could increase patient acceptability and, ultimately, foster scalability.

Priorities to improve the care for chronic conditions and multimorbidity: a survey of patients and stakeholders nested within the ComPaRe e-cohort

Objective

To set priorities to improve consultations, care structures and the healthcare system from the perspective of patients with chronic conditions, care professionals, hospital administrators and health policy makers.

Methods

Adult patients with chronic conditions recruited from the ComPaRe e-cohort in France ranked their 15 most important areas of improvement among 147 previously defined by patients. Priorities at a population level were obtained by using logit models for sets of ranked items in a data set calibrated to represent the French population of patients with chronic conditions. Care professionals, hospital managers and health policy makers rated the complexity involved in improving the areas identified. We calculated the number of patients who considered as a priority at least one of the areas considered easy to implement.

Results

Between September 2018 and May 2019, 3002 patients (84% women, 47% with multimorbidity) and 149 professionals (including 50 care professionals, 79 hospital directors, 11 health policy decision makers) were recruited. Patients’ top priorities were (1) Transforming care to be holistic and personalised, at a consultation level; (2) Smoothing patients' journey in the care system, increasing their knowledge of their own health and improving care coordination, at a care structure level (3) Training clinicians in better interpersonal skills and knowledge of specific conditions/treatments, reducing stigma and making care more affordable, at a healthcare system level. In total, 48%, 71% and 57% patients ranked in their top priorities one area considered easy to improve by professionals at consultation, care structure and health system levels, respectively.

Conclusion

This is the first comprehensive map of patients’ priorities to improve the management of chronic conditions. Implementing simple actions could benefit a large number of patients.

COVID-19-related perceptions, context and attitudes of adults with chronic conditions: Results from a cross-sectional survey nested in the ComPaRe e-cohort

Background

To avoid a surge of demand on the healthcare system due to the COVID-19 pandemic, we must reduce transmission to individuals with chronic conditions who are at risk of severe illness with COVID-19. We aimed at understanding the perceptions, context and attitudes of individuals with chronic conditions during the COVID-19 pandemic to clarify their potential risk of infection.

Methods

A cross-sectional survey was nested in ComPaRe, an e-cohort of adults with chronic conditions, in France. It assessed participants’ perception of their risk of severe illness with COVID-19; their context (i.e., work, household, contacts with external people); and their attitudes in situations involving frequent or occasional contacts with symptomatic or asymptomatic people. Data were collected from March 23 to April 2, 2020, during the lockdown in France. Analyses were weighted to represent the demographic characteristics of French patients with chronic conditions. The subgroup of participants at high risk according to the recommendations of the French High Council for Public Health was examined.

Results

Among the 7169 recruited participants, 63% patients felt at risk because of severe illness. About one quarter (23.7%) were at risk of infection because they worked outside home, had a household member working outside home or had regular visits from external contacts. Less than 20% participants refused contact with symptomatic people and <20% used masks when in contact with asymptomatic people. Among patients considered at high risk according to the recommendations of the French High Council for Public Health, 20% did not feel at risk, which led to incautious attitudes.

Conclusion

Individuals with chronic conditions have distorted perceptions of their risk of severe illness with COVID-19. In addition, they are exposed to COVID-19 due to their context or attitudes.

Clinical efficacy of hydroxychloroquine in patients with covid-19 pneumonia who require oxygen: observational comparative study using routine care data

OBJECTIVE

To assess the effectiveness of hydroxychloroquine in patients admitted to hospital with coronavirus disease 2019 (covid-19) pneumonia who require oxygen.

DESIGN

Comparative observational study using data collected from routine care.

SETTING

Four French tertiary care centres providing care to patients with covid-19 pneumonia between 12 March and 31 March 2020.

PARTICIPANTS

181 patients aged 18-80 years with documented severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pneumonia who required oxygen but not intensive care.

INTERVENTIONS

Hydroxychloroquine at a dose of 600 mg/day within 48 hours of admission to hospital (treatment group) versus standard care without hydroxychloroquine (control group).

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcome was survival without transfer to the intensive care unit at day 21. Secondary outcomes were overall survival, survival without acute respiratory distress syndrome, weaning from oxygen, and discharge from hospital to home or rehabilitation (all at day 21). Analyses were adjusted for confounding factors by inverse probability of treatment weighting.

RESULTS

In the main analysis, 84 patients who received hydroxychloroquine within 48 hours of admission to hospital (treatment group) were compared with 89 patients who did not receive hydroxychloroquine (control group). Eight additional patients received hydroxychloroquine more than 48 hours after admission. In the weighted analyses, the survival rate without transfer to the intensive care unit at day 21 was 76% in the treatment group and 75% in the control group (weighted hazard ratio 0.9, 95% confidence interval 0.4 to 2.1). Overall survival at day 21 was 89% in the treatment group and 91% in the control group (1.2, 0.4 to 3.3). Survival without acute respiratory distress syndrome at day 21 was 69% in the treatment group compared with 74% in the control group (1.3, 0.7 to 2.6). At day 21, 82% of patients in the treatment group had been weaned from oxygen compared with 76% in the control group (weighted risk ratio 1.1, 95% confidence interval 0.9 to 1.3). Eight patients in the treatment group (10%) experienced electrocardiographic modifications that required discontinuation of treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

Hydroxychloroquine has received worldwide attention as a potential treatment for covid-19 because of positive results from small studies. However, the results of this study do not support its use in patients admitted to hospital with covid-19 who require oxygen.

Plasma electron source for generating a ribbon beam in the forevacuum pressure range

We describe a plasma-cathode electron beam source based on a hollow cathode glow discharge and operating in the forevacuum pressure range that produces a steady-state ribbon beam. The electron beam is generated in the pressure range of 10-30 Pa. A multi-aperture electron extraction and beam formation system is used to provide beam stability and enhanced uniformity of beam current density, allowing the use of this kind of device for beam-plasma surface modification over relatively large areas.

Crafting Care That Fits: Workload and Capacity Assessments Complementing Decision Aids in Implementing Shared Decision Making

About 42% of adults have one or more chronic conditions and 23% have multiple chronic conditions. The coordination and integration of services for the management of patients living with multimorbidity is important for care to be efficient, safe, and less burdensome. Minimally disruptive medicine may optimize this coordination and integration. It is a patient-centered approach to care that focuses on achieving patient goals for life and health by seeking care strategies that fit a patient’s context and are minimally disruptive and maximally supportive. The cumulative complexity model practically orients minimally disruptive medicine–based care. In this model, the patient workload-capacity imbalance is the central mechanism driving patient complexity. These elements should be accounted for when making decisions for patients with chronic conditions. Therefore, in addition to decision aids, which may guide shared decision making, we propose to discuss and clarify a potential workload-capacity imbalance.

Is My Patient Overwhelmed?: Determining Thresholds for Acceptable Burden of Treatment Using Data From the ComPaRe e-Cohort

OBJECTIVE

To estimate the highest burden of treatment beyond which patients with chronic conditions consider their current investments of time and effort in health care unsustainable.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We used data collected between January 1, 2017 and October 1, 2018 in the Community of Patients for Research (ComPaRe), an ongoing e-cohort of adult patients with chronic conditions in France. We matched participants' answers to the Treatment Burden Questionnaire (TBQ) and to a Yes/No anchor question: "Think about all the things you do to care for yourself. Do you think you could continue investing the same amount of time, energy, and money in your health care lifelong?" We defined the Patient Acceptable Symptom State (PASS) for the burden of treatment as the TBQ score below which 75% of patients reported an acceptable burden state.

RESULTS

We analyzed data for 2413 patients (1781 [73.8%] women, 1248 [51.7%] multimorbid, median age: 48 (interquartile range, 36-59] years) enrolled in ComPaRe. Of these, 38% (917 of 2413) reported that they would be unable to continue the same investment of energy, time, and money in health care lifelong. The PASS for the burden of treatment was at 39% of the maximal score (ie, TBQ score = 59/150; 95% CI, 52-64) Using these results, clinicians can detect patients at risk for becoming overwhelmed by their medical care by identifying patients with TBQ scores of 59 or higher.

CONCLUSION

About 40% of patients with chronic conditions report being unable to sustain current investments of energy, time, and money in health care lifelong. The PASS for treatment burden provides a practical yardstick to help clinicians and researchers interpret scores for burden of treatment.

Correlates of body mass index among primary school children in Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam

OBJECTIVES

To document the prevalence of overweight and obesity and examine associated risk factors.

STUDY DESIGN

A cross-sectional survey was conducted in 16 primary public schools in eight districts of Ho Chi Minh City in 2016. A multistage clustering sampling method was used to collect a sample of 1806 pupils attending the first, second, and third grades (7-9 years).

METHODS

Age- and sex-adjusted body mass index (BMI) status was defined using International Obesity Taskforce cut-offs. Ordered probit regression models were used to assess the association between child BMI and its socio-economic and demographic risk factors. The model was estimated separately for boys and girls to assess the extent to which the socio-economic gradients in BMI vary by gender.

RESULTS

The prevalence of obesity among boys was twice the rate for girls (24.7 vs 12.3%). The prevalence of overweight and obesity were also higher among pupils attending schools located in urban districts than in semi-rural districts. Gender, household wealth, the frequency of having breakfast at home, parental body weight, and school location were strong predictors of child BMI status. The protective effect of having breakfast more frequently at home against the risk of overweight/obesity was more pronounced in girls than in boys. Father's body weight and child BMI were more strongly associated with boys from poorer households than boys from wealthier households, while the differences were not significant for girls.

CONCLUSIONS

The high prevalence of childhood overweight and obesity indicates an urgent need for more gender-specific, effective intervention, and prevention programs.

A Methodologic Systematic Review of Mobile Health Behavior Change Randomized Trials

CONTEXT

Mobile health helps providers offer accessible, affordable, tailored behavior change interventions. However, research assessing mobile health interventions may feature methodologic shortcomings and poor reporting. This review aims to summarize the characteristics, methods, and intervention reporting of RCTs evaluating mobile health behavior change interventions.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

This was a methodologic systematic review of RCTs assessing mobile health behavior change interventions published in PubMed from January 1, 2014 to January 1, 2018, in journals with the upper half of Impact Factors (Clarivate Analytics). Three reviewers independently extracted sample characteristics. Primary outcomes were classified as patient-important or not using definitions from the literature. Any non-patient-important outcomes were then reclassified by a panel of 3 patients. Intervention reporting was assessed by the mobile health Evidence Reporting and Assessment checklist. Data were analyzed in December 2018.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

Most of the 231 included RCTs assessed text messaging (51%) or smartphone app (28%) interventions aiming to change nutrition and physical activity (36%) or treatment adherence (25%). Only 8% of RCTs had a patient-important primary outcome, follow-up of ≥6 months, and intent-to-treat analysis. Most primary outcomes were behavioral measures (60%). Follow-up was <3 months in 29% of RCTs. Regarding reporting, 12 of the 16 checklist items were reported in less than half of RCTs (e.g., usability/content testing, 32%; data security, 13%).

CONCLUSIONS

Reports of RCTs assessing mobile health behavior change interventions lack information that would be useful for providers, including reporting of long-term intervention impact on patient-important primary outcomes and information needed for intervention replicability.

Potential of Stratified Medicine for High Blood Pressure Management: A Modeling Study Using NHANES Survey Data

The 2017 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association hypertension guidelines lowered the thresholds for defining and treating hypertension. However, the SPRINT trial showed substantial heterogeneity in benefits and harms of intensive antihypertensive treatment depending on patients' characteristics. We aimed at illustrating the potential gains of personalizing intensive antihypertensive treatment. Using the US National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey 2011 to 2014 (n=2067), and prediction models derived from the SPRINT trial, we computed expected benefits and harms of intensive antihypertensive treatment for individuals aged 50 or more. We compared 2 interventions: (1) intensive antihypertensive treatment for all individuals meeting the 2017 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association thresholds and (2) a stratified medicine strategy excluding from intensive treatment individuals with predicted unfavorable benefit-risk. Outcome measures were model-predicted 5-year risk of cardiovascular events or death (myocardial infarction, acute coronary, stroke, acute decompensated heart failure, and cardiovascular-related death), and severe adverse events (hypotension, syncope, electrolyte abnormalities, bradycardia, and acute kidney injury). Per 2017 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association guidelines, 40.1 million (39.2%) US individuals aged 50 or more should initiate or intensify antihypertensive treatment, thereby preventing cardiovascular events for 795 000 individuals and inducing severe adverse events for 848 000 over 5 years. A stratified treatment strategy could decrease the number of individuals treated by 21.2 million (52.9%) and reduce the number of individuals with severe adverse events by 38.3%, with 11.7% fewer individuals with cardiovascular events prevented. Personalizing antihypertensive treatment according to predicted benefits and harms could spare treatment for more than half individuals while reducing harms 3× more than benefits.

Use of non-HIV medication among people living with HIV and receiving antiretroviral treatment in Côte d'Ivoire, West Africa: A cross-sectional study

Background

In Côte d’Ivoire, people living with HIV (PLHIV) have free access to antiretroviral therapy (ART) and cotrimoxazole. Yet, they may use other medications to treat non-HIV diseases. Scarce data are available regarding the use of non-HIV medications in Africa. This study describes the use of non-HIV medications and identifies the factors associated with their use by PLHIV on ART in Côte d’Ivoire.

Methods

A cross-sectional study was conducted in six HIV clinics in 2016. HIV-1-infected adults receiving ART for at least one year were eligible. A standardized questionnaire was used to collect demographics, HIV characteristics and medication use data. Associated factors were identified using a multivariate adjusted Poisson regression.

Results

A total of 1,458 participants (74% women) were enrolled. The median age was 44 years, and the median duration of ART was 81 months. A total of 696 (48%) participants reported having used at least one non-HIV medication. Among the 1,519 non-HIV medications used, 550 (36%) had not been prescribed and 397 (26%) were from the nervous system class. Individuals who were more likely to report the use of at least one non-HIV medication included those who had been treated in an Abidjan HIV clinic, had a high school education level, had a monthly income between 152 and 304 euros, had a poor perceived health status, had WHO advanced clinical stage, had used traditional medicine products and had not used cotrimoxazole.

Conclusion

Almost half PLHIV on ART reported using non-HIV medication. Further research is needed to assess whether the use of non-HIV medication is appropriate given about a third of those medications are not being prescribed.