Initial cardiovascular treatment patterns during the first 90 days following an incident cardiovascular event

Evaluation of potentially inappropriate medications in older patients admitted to the cardiac intensive care unit according to the 2019 Beers criteria, STOPP criteria version 2 and Chinese criteria

WHAT IS KNOWN AND OBJECTIVES

Potential inappropriate medications (PIMs) can increase the risk of medication-induced harm. However, there are no studies regarding PIMs in older and critically ill patients with cardiovascular diseases in China. Therefore, studies evaluating PIMs in these patients can help in the implementation of more effective interventions to reduce the risk of drug use. Our objective was to analyse the prevalence of PIMs in elderly patients admitted to the cardiac intensive care unit (CICU) comparing the 2019 Beers criteria (Beers criteria), Screening Tool of Older People's Potentially Inappropriate Prescriptions (STOPP) criteria version 2 (STOPP criteria) and criteria of potentially inappropriate medications for older adults in China (Chinese criteria); and analyse the factors influencing the PIMs.

METHODS

This cross-sectional and retrospective study was performed with elderly patients (≥65 years) admitted to the CICU of the Beijing Tongren Hospital in China from January 2019 to June 2020. The PIMs were identified based on the Chinese, STOPP and Beers criteria at admission and discharge. The three criteria were compared using the Kappa statistic. Multiple regression analysis was used to investigate the influencing factors associated with PIMs.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

A total of 369 patients who met the inclusion/exclusion criteria were included in this study. According to the three criteria used to evaluate the PIMs, the prevalence was 78.3% and 72.6% at admission and discharge, respectively. The prevalence rate of PIMs determined by the Chinese criteria was 62.1% at admission versus 56.6% at discharge (p = 0.134); the Beers criteria was 53.9% at admission versus 46.9% at discharge (p = 0.056); by the STOPP criteria was 20.6% at admission versus 13.8% at discharge (p = 0.015). Moreover, 28.9% (STOPP criteria), 56.8% (Beers criteria) and 73.4% (Chinese criteria) of patients taking PIMs on admission still had the same problem at discharge. The most common PIMs screened by the Beers, STOPP and Chinese criteria were diuretics, benzodiazepines and clopidogrel, respectively. Besides, the three criteria showed poor agreement. Finally, the stronger predictor of PIMs was the increased number of medications (p < 0.05).

WHAT IS NEW AND CONCLUSION

The prevalence of PIMs in elderly patients admitted to the CICU was high. The Chinese, STOPP and Beers criteria are effective screening tools to detect PIMs, but the consistency between them was poor. The increased number of medications was a significant predictor of PIMs.

Statin-related adverse drug reactions in UK primary care consultations: A retrospective cohort study to evaluate the risk of cardiovascular events and all-cause mortality

AIMS

To investigate the risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD) events and all-cause mortality in patients with statin-related adverse drug reaction (ADR) consultation in primary care and examine whether different treatments following the ADR affect subsequent outcomes.

METHODS

This was a retrospective cohort study of statin users between 2004 and 2019 using IQVIA Medical Research Data (formally known as the THIN database). Patients with statin-related ADR consultation were matched by propensity score (1:1) to statin users without ADR consultation based on demographics, comorbidities and concomitant medication. Cox proportional hazard regression was used to compare the risk of subsequent CVD event and all-cause mortality, stratified by history of CVD. In the secondary analysis among patients with statin-related ADR, treatment changes within a 1-year period following the ADR were examined and the outcomes were compared between different treatment groups.

RESULTS

Among 1 564 687 statin users, 19 035 (1.22%) had a statin-related ADR consultation in primary care. The mean (standard deviation) follow-up time was 6.32 (3.74) years and 5.31 (3.83) years for CVD primary and secondary prevention cohorts, respectively. Statin-related ADR consultation was associated with subsequent CVD events in both cohorts (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] of 1.39 [95% CI 1.23, 1.57] and 1.34 [95% CI 1.25,1.42], respectively). In the secondary analysis among patients with statin-related ADR consultation, we found that (i) continued statin prescription or combination of any statin with additional lipid-lowering treatment (LLT) and (ii) other LLT only were associated with lower risks of CVD event (adjusted HR 0.71 [95% CI 0.64, 0.78] and 0.75 [95% CI 0.62, 0.92], respectively) and all-cause mortality (adjusted HR 0.46 [95% CI 0.42, 0.50] and 0.52 [95% CI, 0.43, 0.64], respectively), compared to discontinuation of all LLT.

CONCLUSION

Statin-related ADR was associated with an increased risk of subsequent CVD event, indicating that these patients should be monitored more closely. Continued lipid-lowering medication is of importance to protect against CVD events and mortality.

Socioeconomic and health factors related to polypharmacy and medication management: analysis of a Household Health Survey in North West Coast England

OBJECTIVES

To examine the socioeconomic and demographic drivers associated with polypharmacy (5-9 medicines), extreme polypharmacy (9-20 medicines) and increased medication count.

DESIGN, SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

A total of 5509 participants, from two waves of the English North West Coast, Household Health Survey were analysed OUTCOME MEASURES: Logistic regression modelling was used to find associations with polypharmacy and extreme polypharmacy. A negative binomial regression identified associations with increased medication count. Descriptive statistics explored associations with medication management.

RESULTS

Age and number of health conditions account for the greatest odds of polypharmacy. ORs (95% CI) were greatest for those aged 65+ (3.87, 2.45 to 6.13) and for those with ≥5 health conditions (10.87, 5.94 to 19.88). Smaller odds were seen, for example, in those prescribed cardiovascular medications (3.08, 2.36 to 4.03), or reporting >3 emergency attendances (1.97, 1.23 to 3.17). Extreme polypharmacy was associated with living in a deprived neighbourhood (1.54, 1.06 to 2.26). The greatest risk of increased medication count was associated with age, number of health conditions and use of primary care services. Relative risks (95% CI) were greatest for those aged 65+ (2.51, 2.23 to 2.82), those with ≥5 conditions (10.26, 8.86 to 11.88) or those reporting >18 primary care visits (2.53, 2.18 to 2.93). Smaller risks were seen in, for example, respondents with higher levels of income deprivation (1.35, 1.03 to 1.77). Polypharmic respondents were more likely to report medication management difficulties associated with taking more than one medicine at a time (p<0.001). Furthermore, individuals reporting a mental health condition, were significantly more likely to consistently report difficulties managing their medication (p<0.001).

CONCLUSION

Age and number of health conditions are most associated with polypharmacy. Thus, delaying or preventing the onset of long-term conditions may help to reduce polypharmacy. Interventions to reduce income inequalities and health inequalities generally could support a reduction in polypharmacy, however, more research is needed in this area. Furthermore, increased prevention and support, particularly with medication management, for those with mental health conditions may reduce adverse medication effects.