Found 8319 matches for
PPI Co-ordinator, Lynne Maddocks, introduces our PPI case studies – real world examples from real world researchers who have used PPI and (sometimes to their surprise!) found it beneficial to their work.
BACKGROUND: Pharmacological treatments for tobacco dependence, such as nicotine replacement therapy (NRT), have been shown to be safe and effective interventions for smoking cessation. Higher levels of adherence to these medications increase the likelihood of sustained smoking cessation, but many smokers use them at a lower dose and for less time than is optimal. It is important to determine the effectiveness of interventions designed specifically to increase medication adherence. Such interventions may address motivation to use medication, such as influencing beliefs about the value of taking medications, or provide support to overcome problems with maintaining adherence. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness of interventions aiming to increase adherence to medications for smoking cessation on medication adherence and smoking abstinence compared with a control group typically receiving standard care. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group Specialized Register, and clinical trial registries (ClinicalTrials.gov and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform) to the 3 September 2018. We also conducted forward and backward citation searches. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised, cluster-randomised or quasi-randomised studies in which adults using active pharmacological treatment for smoking cessation were allocated to an intervention arm where there was a principal focus on increasing adherence to medications for tobacco dependence, or a control arm providing standard care. Dependent on setting, standard care may have comprised minimal support or varying degrees of behavioural support. Included studies used a measure that allowed assessment of the degree of medication adherence. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently screened studies for eligibility, extracted data for included studies and assessed risk of bias. For continuous outcome measures, we calculated effect sizes as standardised mean differences (SMDs). For dichotomous outcome measures, we calculated effect sizes as risk ratios (RRs). In meta-analyses for adherence outcomes, we combined dichotomous and continuous data using the generic inverse variance method and reported pooled effect sizes as SMDs; for abstinence outcomes, we reported and pooled dichotomous outcomes. We obtained pooled effect sizes with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) using random-effects models. We conducted subgroup analyses to assess whether the primary focus of the adherence treatment ('practicalities' versus 'perceptions' versus both), the delivery approach (participant versus clinician-centred) or the medication type were associated with effectiveness. MAIN RESULTS: We identified two new studies, giving a total of 10 studies, involving 3655 participants. The medication adherence interventions studied were all provided in addition to standard behavioural support.They typically provided further information on the rationale for, and emphasised the importance of, adherence to medication or supported the development of strategies to overcome problems with maintaining adherence (or both). Seven studies targeted adherence to NRT, two to bupropion and one to varenicline. Most studies were judged to be at high or unclear risk of bias, with four of these studies judged at high risk of attrition or detection bias. Only one study was judged to be at low risk of bias.Meta-analysis of all 10 included studies (12 comparisons) provided moderate-certainty evidence that adherence interventions led to small improvements in adherence (i.e. the mean amount of medication consumed; SMD 0.10, 95% CI 0.03 to 0.18; I² = 6%; n = 3655), limited by risk of bias. Subgroup analyses for the primary outcome identified no significant subgroup effects, with effect sizes for subgroups imprecisely estimated. However, there was a very weak indication that interventions focused on the 'practicalities' of adhering to treatment (i.e. capabilities, resources, levels of support or skills) may be effective (SMD 0.21, 95% CI 0.03 to 0.38; I² = 39%; n = 1752), whereas interventions focused on treatment 'perceptions' (i.e. beliefs, cognitions, concerns and preferences; SMD 0.10, 95% CI -0.03 to 0.24; I² = 0%; n = 839) or on both (SMD 0.04, 95% CI -0.08 to 0.16; I² = 0%; n = 1064), may not be effective. Participant-centred interventions may be effective (SMD 0.12, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.23; I² = 20%; n = 2791), whereas those that are clinician-centred may not (SMD 0.09, 95% CI -0.05 to 0.23; I² = 0%; n = 864).Five studies assessed short-term smoking abstinence (five comparisons), while an overlapping set of five studies (seven comparisons) assessed long-term smoking abstinence of six months or more. Meta-analyses resulted in low-certainty evidence that adherence interventions may slightly increase short-term smoking cessation rates (RR 1.08, 95% CI 0.96 to 1.21; I² = 0%; n = 1795) and long-term smoking cessation rates (RR 1.16, 95% CI 0.96 to 1.40; I² = 48%; n = 3593). In both cases, the evidence was limited by risk of bias and imprecision, with CIs encompassing minimal harm as well as moderate benefit, and a high likelihood that further evidence will change the estimate of the effect. There was no evidence that interventions to increase adherence to medication led to any adverse events. Studies did not report on factors plausibly associated with increases in adherence, such as self-efficacy, understanding of and attitudes toward treatment, and motivation and intentions to quit. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: In people who are stopping smoking and receiving behavioural support, there is moderate-certainty evidence that enhanced behavioural support focusing on adherence to smoking cessation medications can modestly improve adherence. There is only low-certainty evidence that this may slightly improve the likelihood of cessation in the shorter or longer-term. Interventions to increase adherence can aim to address the practicalities of taking medication, change perceptions about medication, such as reasons to take it or concerns about doing so, or both. However, there is currently insufficient evidence to confirm which approach is more effective. There is no evidence on whether such interventions are effective for people who are stopping smoking without standard behavioural support.
Sleep-Wake Disturbance Related to Ocular Disease: A Systematic Review of Phase-Shifting Pharmaceutical Therapies.
Purpose: Light input, via the eyes, is essential for regulating circadian rhythms. Eye diseases can cause disruption of vital biological rhythms. Of totally blind people, 87% report sleep problems. There are no UK guidelines for visual disturbance-related circadian rhythm disruption. Our objective was to systematically review the literature to determine the effectiveness of pharmacological agents on the sleep quality of patients with sleep disturbance related to ocular disease. Methods: We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, and CINAHL alongside protocol registries and citation searches. We assessed the risk of bias using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Assessment Tool and assessed the strength of overall evidence using GRADE criteria. Results: Four studies (n=116) met the inclusion criteria. Low-quality evidence showed that melatonin can cause entrainment (1 study), increases in total sleep time (all 3 studies), and reduction in sleep latency (1 study). Low-to-moderate quality evidence showed tasimelteon causes a significant improvement in entrainment, midpoint of sleep timing, lower-quartile of night-time sleep, and upper-quartile of daytime sleep. Conclusions: Results should be treated with caution as the melatonin studies had risks of bias due to inadequate reporting of randomization and masking procedures. The tasimelteon trial had a risk of reporting bias due to changing the outcomes after enrolling participants. Despite the paucity of trials, melatonin and tasimelteon may cause entrainment and improve subjective sleep measures with limited side effects. Translational Relevance: Given the relative cost melatonin may be a viable choice for treatment of circadian rhythm sleep disorders in the blind and warrants further research.
Is the association between blood pressure and mortality in older adults different with frailty? A systematic review and meta-analysis.
OBJECTIVE: to investigate whether the association between blood pressure and clinical outcomes is different in older adults with and without frailty, using observational studies. METHODS: MEDLINE, EMBASE and CINAHL were searched from 1st January 2000 to 13th June 2018. PROSPERO CRD42017081635. We included all observational studies reporting clinical outcomes in older adults with an average age over 65 years living in the community with and without treatment that measured blood pressure and frailty using validated methods. Two independent reviewers evaluated study quality and risk of bias using the ROBANS tool. We used generic inverse variance modelling to pool risks of all-cause mortality adjusted for age and sex. RESULTS: nine observational studies involving 21,906 older adults were included, comparing all-cause mortality over a mean of six years. Fixed effects meta-analysis of six studies demonstrated that in people with frailty, there was no mortality difference associated with systolic blood pressure <140 mm Hg compared to systolic blood pressure >140 mm Hg (HR 1.02, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.16). In the absence of frailty, systolic blood pressure <140 mm Hg was associated with lower risk of death compared to systolic blood pressure >140 mm Hg (HR 0.86, 95% CI 0.77 to 0.96). CONCLUSIONS: evidence from observational studies demonstrates no mortality difference for older people with frailty whose systolic blood pressure is <140 mm Hg, compared to those with a systolic blood pressure >140 mm Hg. Current evidence fails to capture the complexities of blood pressure measurement, and the association with non-fatal outcomes.
Using out-of-office blood pressure measurements in established cardiovascular risk scores: a secondary analysis of data from two blood pressure monitoring studies.
Background: Blood pressure (BP) measurement is increasingly carried out through home or ambulatory monitoring, yet existing cardiovascular risk scores were developed for use with measurements obtained in clinic. Aim: To describe differences in cardiovascular risk estimates obtained using ambulatory or home BP measurements instead of clinic readings. Design and setting: Secondary analysis of data from adults aged 30-84 without prior history of cardiovascular disease (CVD) in two BP monitoring studies (BP-Eth and HOMERUS). Method: The primary comparison was Framingham risk calculated using BP measured as in the Framingham study or daytime ambulatory BP measurements. The QRISK2 and SCORE risk equations were also studied. Statistical and clinical significance were determined using the Wilcoxon signed-rank test and scatter plots respectively. Results: In 442 BP-Eth patients (mean age = 58 years, 50% female) the median absolute difference in 10-year Framingham cardiovascular risk calculated using BP measured as in the Framingham study or daytime ambulatory BP measurements was 1.84% (interquartile range 0.65 to 3.63, p=0.67). Only 31/ 442 (7.0%) of patients were reclassified across the 10% risk treatment threshold. In 165 HOMERUS patients (mean age = 56 years, 46% female) the median difference in 10-year risk was 2.76% (IQR 1.19 to 6.39, p<0.001) and only 8/165 (4.8%) of patient were reclassified. Conclusion: Estimates of cardiovascular risk are similar when calculated using BP measurements obtained as in the risk score derivation study or through ambulatory monitoring. Further research is required to determine if differences in estimated risk would meaningfully influence risk score accuracy.
The comorbidity burden of type 2 diabetes mellitus: patterns, clusters and predictions from a large English primary care cohort.
BACKGROUND: The presence of additional chronic conditions has a significant impact on the treatment and management of type 2 diabetes (T2DM). Little is known about the patterns of comorbidities in this population. The aims of this study are to quantify comorbidity patterns in people with T2DM, to estimate the prevalence of six chronic conditions in 2027 and to identify clusters of similar conditions. METHODS: We used the Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD) linked with the Index of Multiple Deprivation (IMD) data to identify patients diagnosed with T2DM between 2007 and 2017. 102,394 people met the study inclusion criteria. We calculated the crude and age-standardised prevalence of 18 chronic conditions present at and after the T2DM diagnosis. We analysed longitudinally the 6 most common conditions and forecasted their prevalence in 2027 using linear regression. We used agglomerative hierarchical clustering to identify comorbidity clusters. These analyses were repeated on subgroups stratified by gender and deprivation. RESULTS: More people living in the most deprived areas had ≥ 1 comorbidities present at the time of diagnosis (72% of females; 64% of males) compared to the most affluent areas (67% of females; 59% of males). Depression prevalence increased in all strata and was more common in the most deprived areas. Depression was predicted to affect 33% of females and 15% of males diagnosed with T2DM in 2027. Moderate clustering tendencies were observed, with concordant conditions grouped together and some variations between groups of different demographics. CONCLUSIONS: Comorbidities are common in this population, and high between-patient variability in comorbidity patterns emphasises the need for patient-centred healthcare. Mental health is a growing concern, and there is a need for interventions that target both physical and mental health in this population.
Effect of increasing the price of sugar-sweetened beverages on alcoholic beverage purchases: an economic analysis of sales data.
BACKGROUND: Taxing soft-drinks may reduce their purchase, but assessing the impact on health demands wider consideration on alternative beverage choices. Effects on alcoholic drinks are of particular concern, as many contain similar or greater amounts of sugar than soft-drinks and have additional health harms. Changes in consumption of alcoholic drinks may reinforce or negate the intended effect of price changes for soft-drinks. METHODS: A partial demand model, adapted from the Almost Ideal Demand System, was applied to Kantar Worldpanel data from 31 919 households from January 2012 to December 2013, covering drink purchases for home consumption, providing ~6 million purchases aggregated into 11 groups, including three levels of soft-drink, three of other non-alcoholic drinks and five of alcoholic drinks. RESULTS: An increase in the price of high-sugar drinks leads to an increase in the purchase of lager, an increase in the price of medium-sugar drinks reduces purchases of alcoholic drinks, while an increase in the price of diet/low-sugar drinks increases purchases of beer, cider and wines. Overall, the effects of price rises are greatest in the low-income group. CONCLUSION: Increasing the price of soft-drinks may change purchase patterns for alcohol. Increasing the price of medium-sugar drinks has the potential to have a multiplier-effect beneficial to health through reducing alcohol purchases, with the converse for increases in the price of diet-drinks. Although the reasons for such associations cannot be explained from this analysis, requiring further study, the design of fiscal interventions should now consider these wider potential outcomes.
Plasma oxylipins respond in a linear dose-response manner with increased intake of EPA and DHA: results from a randomized controlled trial in healthy humans.
BACKGROUND: The health effects of long-chain omega-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids (n-3 PUFAs) are partly mediated by their oxidized metabolites, i.e., eicosanoids and other oxylipins. Some intervention studies have demonstrated that eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA) and docosahexaenoic acid (DHA) increase systemic concentrations of n-3 PUFA-derived oxylipins and moderately decrease arachidonic acid-derived oxylipins. There is no information on the dose-response of oxylipin concentrations after n-3 PUFA intake. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to quantify oxylipins in human plasma samples from an intervention study in which participants were randomly assigned to different daily intakes of EPA and DHA for 12 mo. METHODS: Healthy adult men and women with low habitual fish consumption (n = 121) were randomly assigned to receive capsules providing doses of n-3 PUFAs reflecting 3 patterns of consumption of oily fish [1, 2, or 4 portions/wk with 3.27 g EPA + DHA (1:1.2, wt:wt) per portion] or placebo. Oxylipins were quantified in plasma after 3 and 12 mo. Relative and absolute changes of individual oxylipins were calculated and concentrations were correlated with the dose and the content of EPA and DHA in blood lipid pools. RESULTS: Seventy-three oxylipins, mostly hydroxy-, dihydroxy-, and epoxy-PUFAs, were quantified in the plasma samples. After 3 and 12 mo a linear increase with dose was observed for all EPA- and DHA-derived oxylipins. Cytochrome-P450-derived anti-inflammatory and cardioprotective epoxy-PUFAs increased linearly with n-3 PUFA dose and showed low interindividual variance (r2 > 0.95). Similarly, 5, 12-, and 15-lipoxygenase-derived hydroxy-PUFAs as well as those formed autoxidatively increased linearly. These include the precursors of so-called specialized pro-resolving lipid mediators (SPMs), e.g., 17-hydroxy-DHA and 18-hydroxy-EPA. CONCLUSIONS: Plasma concentrations of biologically active oxylipins derived from n-3 PUFAs, including epoxy-PUFAs and SPM-precursors, increase linearly with elevated intake of EPA and DHA. Interindividual differences in resulting plasma concentrations are low. This trial was registered at controlled-trials.com as ISRCTN48398526.
INTRODUCTION: Numerous important cardiology clinical trials have been published or presented at major international meetings during 2017. This paper aims to summarize these trials and place them in clinical context. METHODS: The authors reviewed clinical trials presented at major cardiology conferences during 2017 including the American College of Cardiology, European Association for Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions, European Society of Cardiology, European Association for the Study of Diabetes, Transcatheter Cardiovascular Therapeutics, and the American Heart Association. Selection criteria were trials with a broad relevance to the cardiology community and those with potential to change current practice. RESULTS: A total of 75 key cardiology clinical trials were identified for inclusion. New interventional and structural cardiology data include left main bifurcation treatment strategy, multivessel disease management in cardiogenic shock, drug-eluting balloons for in-stent restenosis, instantaneous wave-free physiological assessment, new-generation stents (COMBO, Orsiro), transcatheter aortic valve implantation, and closure devices. New preventative cardiology data include trials of liraglutide, empagliflozin, PCSK9 inhibitors (evolocumab and bococizumab), inclisiran, and anacetrapib. Antiplatelet data include the role of uninterrupted aspirin therapy during non-cardiac surgery and dual antiplatelet therapy following coronary artery bypass grafting. New data are also included from fields of heart failure (levosimendan, spironolactone), atrial fibrillation (apixaban in DC cardioversion), cardiac devices (closed loop stimulation pacing for neuromediated syncope), and electrophysiology (catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation). CONCLUSION: This paper presents a summary of key clinical cardiology trials during the past year and should be of practical value to both clinicians and cardiology researchers.
INTRODUCTION: The findings of many new cardiology clinical trials over the last year have been published or presented at major international meetings. This paper aims to describe and place in context a summary of the key clinical trials in cardiology presented between January and December 2016. METHODS: The authors reviewed clinical trials presented at major cardiology conferences during 2016 including the American College of Cardiology (ACC), European Association for Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions (EuroPCR), European Society of Cardiology (ESC), European Association for the Study of Diabetes (EASD), Transcatheter Cardiovascular Therapeutics (TCT), and the American Heart Association (AHA). Selection criteria were trials with a broad relevance to the cardiology community and those with potential to change current practice. RESULTS: A total of 57 key cardiology clinical trials were identified for inclusion. Here we describe and place in clinical context the key findings of new data relating to interventional and structural cardiology including delayed stenting following primary angioplasty, contrast-induced nephropathy, management of jailed wires, optimal duration of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT), stenting vs bypass for left main disease, new generation stents (BioFreedom, Orsiro, Absorb), transcatheter aortic valve implantation (Edwards Sapien XT, transcatheter embolic protection), and closure devices (Watchman, Amplatzer). New preventative cardiology data include trials of bariatric surgery, empagliflozin, liraglutide, semaglutide, PCSK9 inhibitors (evolocumab and alirocumab), and inclisiran. Antiplatelet therapy trials include platelet function monitoring and ticagrelor vs clopidogrel for peripheral vascular disease. New data are also presented in fields of heart failure (sacubitril/valsartan, aliskiren, spironolactone), atrial fibrillation (rivaroxaban in patients undergoing coronary intervention, edoxaban in DC cardioversion), cardiac devices (implantable cardioverter defibrillator in non-ischemic cardiomyopathy), and electrophysiology (cryoballoon vs radiofrequency ablation). CONCLUSION: This paper presents a summary of key clinical cardiology trials during the past year and should be of practical value to both clinicians and cardiology researchers.
Using out-of-office blood pressure measurements in established cardiovascular risk scores: a secondary analysis of data from two blood pressure monitoring studies.
BACKGROUND: Blood pressure (BP) measurement is increasingly carried out through home or ambulatory monitoring, yet existing cardiovascular risk scores were developed for use with measurements obtained in clinics. AIM: To describe differences in cardiovascular risk estimates obtained using ambulatory or home BP measurements instead of clinic readings. DESIGN AND SETTING: Secondary analysis of data from adults aged 25-84 years in the UK and the Netherlands without prior history of cardiovascular disease (CVD) in two BP monitoring studies: the Blood Pressure in different Ethnic groups (BP-Eth) study and the Home versus Office blood pressure MEasurements: Reduction of Unnecessary treatment Study (HOMERUS). METHOD: The primary comparison was Framingham risk calculated using BP measured as in the Framingham study or daytime ambulatory BP measurements. Statistical significance was determined using non-parametric tests. RESULTS: In 442 BP-Eth patients (mean age = 58 years, 50% female [n = 222]) the median absolute difference in 10-year Framingham cardiovascular risk calculated using BP measured as in the Framingham study or daytime ambulatory BP measurements was 1.84% (interquartile range [IQR] 0.65-3.63, P = 0.67). In 165 HOMERUS patients (mean age = 56 years, 46% female) the median absolute difference in 10-year risk for daytime ambulatory BP was 2.76% (IQR 1.19-6.39, P<0.001) and only 8 out of 165 (4.8%) of patients were reclassified. CONCLUSION: Estimates of cardiovascular risk are similar when calculated using BP measurements obtained as in the risk score derivation study or through ambulatory monitoring. Further research is required to determine if differences in estimated risk would meaningfully influence risk score accuracy.