STUDY DESIGN: Systematic review.
SETTING & POPULATION: Adults requiring maintenance hemodialysis.
SELECTION CRITERIA: All randomized controlled trials and trial protocols reporting vascular access outcomes identified from ClinicalTrials.gov, Embase, MEDLINE, and the Cochrane Kidney and Transplant Specialized Register from January 2011 to June 2016.
INTERVENTIONS: Any hemodialysis-related intervention.
OUTCOMES: The frequency and characteristics of vascular access outcome measures were analyzed and classified.
RESULTS: From 168 relevant trials, 1,426 access-related outcome measures were extracted and classified into 23 different outcomes. The 3 most common outcomes were function (136 [81%] trials), infection (63 [38%]), and maturation (31 [18%]). Function was measured in 489 different ways, but most frequently reported as "mean access blood flow (mL/min)" (37 [27%] trials) and "number of thromboses" (30 [22%]). Infection was assessed in 136 different ways, with "number of access-related infections" being the most common measure. Maturation was assessed in 44 different ways at 15 different time points and most commonly characterized by vein diameter and blood flow. Patient-reported outcomes, including pain (19 [11%]) and quality of life (5 [3%]), were reported infrequently. Only a minority of trials used previously standardized outcome definitions.
LIMITATIONS: Restricted sampling frame for feasibility and focus on contemporary trials.
CONCLUSIONS: The reporting of access outcomes in hemodialysis trials is very heterogeneous, with limited patient-reported outcomes and infrequent use of standardized outcome measures. Efforts to standardize outcome reporting for vascular access are critical to optimizing the comparability, reliability, and value of trial evidence to improve outcomes for patients requiring hemodialysis.
METHODS: We used data from The National Medical Care Survey (NMCS), a national cross-sectional survey of patients' visits to primary care clinics in Malaysia. A weighted total of 22,832 encounters of patients aged ≥65 years were analysed. Polypharmacy was defined as concomitant use of five medications and above. Multilevel logistic regression was performed to examine the association of polypharmacy with patient, prescriber and practice characteristics.
RESULTS: A total of 20.3% of the older primary care attenders experienced polypharmacy (26.7%% in public and 11.0% in private practice). The adjusted odds ratio (OR) of polypharmacy were 6.37 times greater in public practices. Polypharmacy was associated with patients of female gender (OR 1.49), primary education level (OR 1.61) and multimorbidity (OR 14.21). The variation in rate of polypharmacy was mainly found at prescriber level.
CONCLUSION: Polypharmacy is common among older persons visiting primary care practices. Given the possible adverse outcomes, interventions to reduce the burden of polypharmacy are best to be directed at individual prescribers.
DESIGN: In-depth and focus group interviews were conducted with participants who have engaged in telemedicine. Questions included were participants' perception on the programme being used, satisfaction as well as engagement with the telemedicine programme. All interviews and focus groups were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim. Data were analysed using a thematic approach.
PARTICIPANTS AND SETTING: People with type 2 diabetes (n=48) who participated in a randomised controlled study which examined the use of telemedicine for diabetes management were recruited from 11 primary care clinics located within the Klang Valley.
RESULTS: Twelve focus groups and two in-depth interviews were conducted. Four themes emerged from the analysis: (1) generational difference; (2) independence and convenience, (3) sharing of health data and privacy and (4) concerns and challenges. The main obstacles found in patients using the telemedicine systems were related to internet connectivity and difficulties experienced with system interface. Cost was also another significant concern raised by participants. Participants in this study were primarily positive about the benefits of telemedicine, including its ability to provide real-time data and disease monitoring and the reduction in clinic visits.
CONCLUSION: Despite the potential benefits of telemedicine in the long-term care of diabetes, there are several perceived barriers that may limit the effectiveness of this technology. As such, collaboration between educators, healthcare providers, telecommunication service providers and patients are required to stimulate the adoption and the use of telemedicine.NCT0246680.
OBJECTIVE: To determine the extent of unlicensed and off-label use of medicines in hospitalised children in the intensive care units of a tertiary care teaching hospital.
METHODS: A prospective, observational exploratory study was conducted on medicines prescribed to children admitted to the 3 intensive care units of Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia Medical Centre (UKMMC).
RESULTS: A total of 194 patients were admitted to UKMMC, 168 of them received one or more drugs. Of 1,295 prescriptions, 353 (27.3 %) were unlicensed and 442 (34.1 %) were for off-label use. Forty-four percent of patients received at least one medicine for unlicensed use and 82.1 % received at least one medicine off-label. Preterm infants, children aged 28 days to 23 months, patients with hospital stays of more than 2 weeks, and those prescribed increasing numbers of medicines were more likely to receive medicines for unlicensed use. Term neonates and patients prescribed increasing numbers of medicines had increased risk of receiving medicines for off-label use.
CONCLUSION: Prescribing of medicines in an unlicensed or off-label fashion to the children in the intensive care units of UKMMC was common. Further detailed studies are necessary to ensure the delivery of safe and effective medicines to children.