OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the utilization of coxibs and traditional nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (tNSAIDs) indicated for postoperative orthopaedic pain control using defined daily dose (DDD) and ratio of use density to use rate (UD/UR).
METHOD: A retrospective drug utilization review (DUR) of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) at an inpatient department of a private teaching hospital in Seremban, Malaysia was conducted. Patients' demographic characteristics, medications prescribed, clinical lab results, visual analogue scale (VAS) pain scores and length of hospital stay were documented. Orthopaedic surgeries, namely arthroscopy, reconstructive, and fracture fixation, were included. Stratified random sampling was used to select patients. Data were collected through patients' medical records. The DDD per 100 admissions and the indicator UD/UR were calculated with the World Health Organization's DDD as a benchmark. The inclusion criteria were patients undergoing orthopaedic surgery prescribed with coxibs (celecoxib capsules, etoricoxib tablets, parecoxib injections) and tNSAIDs (dexketoprofen injections, diclofenac sodium tablets). Data were analysed descriptively. This research was approved by the academic institution and the hospital research ethics committee.
RESULT: A total of 195 records of patients who received NSAIDs were randomly selected among 1169 cases. In term of the types of orthopaedic surgery, the ratio of included records for arthroscopy:fracture fixation:reconstructive surgery was 55.4:35.9:8.7. Most of the inpatients had low rates of common comorbidities such as cardiovascular disease as supported by their baseline parameters. The majority were not prescribed with other concomitant prescriptions that could cause drug interaction (74.9%), or gastroprotective agents (77.4%). Overall, DDDs per 100 admissions for all NSAIDs were less than 100, except for parecoxib injections (389.23). The UD/UR for all NSAIDs were less than 100, except for etoricoxib tablets (105.75) and parecoxib injections (108.00).
DISCUSSION: As per guidelines, the majority (96.9%) received other analgesics to ensure a multimodal approach was carried out to control pain. From the UD/UR results, the arthroscopy surgery was probably the most appropriate in terms of NSAID utilization.
CONCLUSION: The prescribing pattern of NSAIDs except parecoxib was appropriate based on adverse effect and concurrent medication profile. The findings of this DUR provide insight for a low-risk patient population at a private specialized teaching hospital on the recommended use of NSAIDs for postoperative orthopaedic pain control.
Methods: A multi-center cross sectional study was conducted for a month in out-patient wards of hospitals in Khobar, Dammam, Makkah, and Madinah, Saudi Arabia. Patients were randomly selected from a registered patient pools at hospitals and the item-subject ratio was kept at 1:20. The tool was assessed for factorial, construct, convergent, known group and predictive validities as well as, reliability and internal consistency of scale were also evaluated. Sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy were also evaluated. Data were analyzed using SPSS v24 and MedCalc v19.2. The study was approved by concerned ethics committees (IRB-129-25/6/1439) and (IRB-2019-05-002).
Results: A total of 282 responses were received. The values for normed fit index (NFI), comparative fit index (CFI), Tucker Lewis index (TLI) and incremental fit index (IFI) were 0.960, 0.979, 0.954 and 0.980. All values were >0.95. The value for root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) was 0.059, i.e., <0.06. Hence, factorial validity was established. The average factor loading of the scale was 0.725, i.e., >0.7, that established convergent validity. Known group validity was established by obtaining significant p-value <0.05, for the associations based on hypotheses. Cronbach's α was 0.865, i.e., >0.7. Predictive validity was established by evaluating odds ratios (OR) of demographic factors with adherence score using logistic regression. Sensitivity was 78.16%, specificity was 76.85% and, accuracy of the tool was 77.66%, i.e., >70%.
Conclusion: The Arabic version of GMAS achieved all required statistical parameters and was validated in Saudi patients with chronic diseases.
METHODS: Newly diagnosed IBD cases between 2011 and 2013 from 13 countries or regions in Asia-Pacific were included. Incidence was calculated with 95% confidence interval (CI) and pooled using random-effects model. Meta-regression analysis was used to assess incidence rates and their association with population density, latitude, and longitude.
RESULTS: We identified 1175 ulcerative colitis (UC), 656 Crohn's disease (CD), and 37 IBD undetermined (IBD-U). Mean annual IBD incidence per 100 000 was 1.50 (95% CI: 1.43-1.57). India (9.31; 95% CI: 8.38-10.31) and China (3.64; 95% CI, 2.97-4.42) had the highest IBD incidence in Asia. Incidence of overall IBD (incidence rate ratio [IRR]: 2.19; 95% CI: 1.01-4.76]) and CD (IRR: 3.28; 95% CI: 1.83-9.12) was higher across 19 areas of Asia with a higher population density. In China, incidence of IBD (IRR: 2.37; 95% CI: 1.10-5.16) and UC (IRR: 2.63; 95% CI: 1.2-5.8) was positively associated with gross domestic product. A south-to-north disease gradient (IRR: 0.94; 95% CI: 0.91-0.98) was observed for IBD incidence and a west-to-east gradient (IRR: 1.14; 95% CI: 1.05-1.24) was observed for CD incidence in China. This study received IRB approval.
CONCLUSIONS: Regions in Asia with a high population density had a higher CD and UC incidence. Coastal areas within China had higher IBD incidence. With increasing urbanization and a shift from rural areas to cities, disease incidence may continue to climb in Asia.