Association of clinical and social factors with risk of fracture in children with atopic dermatitis

First-Generation Antihistamines and Seizures in Young Children

Importance

The widespread use of antihistamines in children for treatment of common cold symptoms and their central nervous system effects, like drowsiness, underscore the importance of being aware of the associated risks.

Objective

To assess associations between prescriptions of first-generation antihistamines and seizures in children using a comprehensive and nationwide dataset.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This cohort study used a self-controlled case-crossover design. Data were obtained from the National Health Insurance Service database in Korea. Children born between January 1, 2002, and December 31, 2005, who visited the emergency department for seizure events (International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems, Tenth Revision, codes R56.8, G40, and G41) during the follow-up period were included. Follow-up was completed on December 31, 2019, and data were analyzed from June 3, 2023, to January 30, 2024.

Exposure

First-generation antihistamine prescription.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Primary outcome consisted of an index seizure event. Odds ratios (ORs) for seizure events were estimated using a conditional logistic regression model, comparing first-generation antihistamine prescription 1 to 15 days before seizure (hazard period) against control period 1 (31-45 days before the event) and control period 2 (61-75 days before the event) using the same period windows. Stratified analyses were conducted to examine the association with individual participant characteristics.

Results

Of 11 729 children who had a seizure event, 3178 (1776 [55.9%] boys) were identified as having been prescribed antihistamines during the hazard or the control period, but not both. Seizure events were predominantly observed in children aged 6 to 24 months (985 [31.0%]) and 25 months to 6 years (1445 [45.5%]). During the hazard period, 1476 first-generation antihistamine prescriptions were recorded, in contrast to 1239 and 1278 prescriptions during control periods 1 and 2, respectively. After multiple confounder adjustments, first-generation antihistamine prescription was associated with an increased seizure event risk during the hazard period (adjusted OR [AOR], 1.22 [95% CI, 1.13-1.31]). Stratified subgroup analyses showed consistent results, particularly in children aged 6 to 24 months who were prescribed first-generation antihistamines having a higher risk (AOR, 1.49 [95% CI, 1.31-1.70]) than children aged 25 months to 6 years (AOR, 1.11 [95% CI, 1.00-1.24]; P = .04 for interaction). Furthermore, sensitivity analyses, including adjustment for exposure window periods, evaluation of new first-generation antihistamine prescriptions, comparison of control points from the same period 1 year prior, and exclusion of individuals using combination drugs, confirmed a similarly high risk.

Conclusions and Relevance

In this cohort study, prescriptions for first-generation antihistamines were associated with a 22.0% higher seizure risk in children, especially in those aged 6 to 24 months. These findings emphasize the need for careful and judicious prescription of first-generation antihistamines in young children and underline the need for further research to elucidate associations between antihistamine prescriptions and seizure risk.

Adjusting for Confounders in Outcome Studies Using the Korea National Health Insurance Claim Database: A Review of Methods and Applications

OBJECTIVES

Adjusting for potential confounders is crucial for producing valuable evidence in outcome studies. Although numerous studies have been published using the Korea National Health Insurance Claim Database, no study has critically reviewed the methods used to adjust for confounders. This study aimed to review these studies and suggest methods and applications to adjust for confounders.

METHODS

We conducted a literature search of electronic databases, including PubMed and Embase, from January 1, 2021 to December 31, 2022. In total, 278 studies were retrieved. Eligibility criteria were published in English and outcome studies. A literature search and article screening were independently performed by 2 authors and finally, 173 of 278 studies were included.

RESULTS

Thirty-nine studies used matching at the study design stage, and 171 adjusted for confounders using regression analysis or propensity scores at the analysis stage. Of these, 125 conducted regression analyses based on the study questions. Propensity score matching was the most common method involving propensity scores. A total of 171 studies included age and/or sex as confounders. Comorbidities and healthcare utilization, including medications and procedures, were used as confounders in 146 and 82 studies, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

This is the first review to address the methods and applications used to adjust for confounders in recently published studies. Our results indicate that all studies adjusted for confounders with appropriate study designs and statistical methodologies; however, a thorough understanding and careful application of confounding variables are required to avoid erroneous results.