PMCC PMCC

Search tips
Search criteria

Advanced
Results 1-6 (6)
 

Clipboard (0)
None

Select a Filter Below

Journals
Authors
more »
Year of Publication
Document Types
1.  Cardiovascular risk factor burden, treatment, and control among adults with chronic kidney disease in the United States 
American heart journal  2013;166(1):150-156.
Background
Cardiovascular disease is a major concern in persons with chronic kidney disease (CKD). We assessed the current burden of cardiovascular risk factors and differences in risk factor treatment and control in the general U.S. adult population by CKD status.
Methods
Cross-sectional study of 10,741 adults aged 20+ years from the 2007-2010 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey. Persons were categorized into three groups: CKD Stages 3-5 (estimated glomerular filtration rate [eGFR]<60mL/min/1.73m2), CKD Stages 1-2 (urinary albumin-to-creatinine ratio≥30mg/g and eGFR≥60mL/min/1.73m2), and no CKD.
Results
The majority of adults with CKD Stages 3-5 (79.8%) and Stages 1-2 (59.1%) had ≥2 cardiovascular risk factors, substantially higher than adults without CKD (32.7%, p<0.001). Diabetes was the most strongly associated risk factor and was highly specific for CKD Stages 1-2 (prevalence ratio [PR] 2.53, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.21-2.89) and, to a lesser extent, CKD Stages 3-5 (PR 1.59, 95%CI 1.38-1.84). Most adults with diagnosed risk factors reported medication use for risk factor control, and pharmacologic treatment was more common among those with than without CKD. However, poor risk factor control was also common among persons treated for risk factors with CKD compared to those without CKD.
Conclusions
There continues to be a substantial cardiovascular risk factor burden among adults with CKD Stages 3-5 and, to a lesser extent, adults with CKD Stages 1-2, when compared to adults without CKD. Overall, optimal risk factor control is low in adults with CKD, highlighting the need for aggressive cardiovascular risk reduction in adults with CKD.
doi:10.1016/j.ahj.2013.03.016
PMCID: PMC3933201  PMID: 23816034
2.  Limitations of real-world treatment with atorvastatin monotherapy for lowering LDL-C in high-risk cardiovascular patients in the US 
Background
Guidelines endorse statin therapy for lowering low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) to recommended levels, in patients with cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk, if needed, after lifestyle changes. Atorvastatin is a common statin with greater LDL-C lowering efficacy than most other statins; its availability in generic form will likely increase its use. This study assessed attainment of guideline-recommended LDL-C levels in high-risk CVD patients treated with atorvastatin monotherapy.
Methods
Analyses of two retrospective US cohorts of patients who received a prescription for atorvastatin monotherapy between January 1, 2008 and December 31, 2010 (index date defined as first prescription date) in the GE Centricity Electronic Medical Record (EMR) (N=10,693) and Humana Medicare (N=16,798) databases. Eligible patients were ≥18 years, diagnosed with coronary heart disease or atherosclerotic vascular disease, with ≥1 LDL-C measurement between 3 months and 1 year postindex date, and continuously enrolled for 1 year prior to and following the index date.
Results
Of the eligible patients, 21.8%, 29.6%, 29.9%, and 18.7% (GE Centricity EMR) and 25.4%, 32.9%, 27.8%, and 14.0% (Humana Medicare) received 10, 20, 40, and 80 mg doses of atorvastatin, respectively. The mean ± standard deviation (SD) follow-up LDL-C levels were 2.1±0.8 mmol/L (83±30 mg/dL) and 2.3±0.8 mmol/L (88±31 mg/dL) for the GE Centricity EMR and Humana Medicare cohorts, respectively. Regardless of dose, only 28.3%–34.8% of patients had LDL-C levels <1.8 mmol/L (<70 mg/dL), and 72.0%–78.0% achieved LDL-C <2.6 mmol/L (<100 mg/dL) in both cohorts. As many as 41% and 13% of patients had LDL-C levels ≥0.5 mmol/L (≥20 mg/dL) above LDL-C 1.8 mmol/L (70 mg/dL) and 2.6 mmol/L (100 mg/dL), respectively, in both cohorts; these percentages were generally similar across atorvastatin doses.
Conclusion
In this real-world US setting, a large number of high-risk CVD patients did not attain guideline-recommended LDL-C levels with atorvastatin monotherapy. More than 65% of the patients had LDL-C levels >1.8 mmol/L (>70 mg/dL), and of these, 30%–40% had LDL-C levels ≥0.5 mmol/L (≥20 mg/dL) above this, regardless of dose. This suggests that more effective lipid-lowering strategies, such as statin uptitration, switching to a higher efficacy statin, and/or combination therapy, may be required to achieve optimal LDL-C lowering in high-risk patients.
doi:10.2147/VHRM.S54886
PMCID: PMC4008284  PMID: 24851051
statin therapy; managed-care; lipid-lowering therapy
3.  Burden of peripheral arterial disease in Europe and the United States: a patient survey 
Background
The aim of the current study was to quantify the burden of peripheral arterial disease (PAD) with respect to health-related quality of life, work productivity and activity impairment, and healthcare resource utilization.
Methods
Data were obtained from the 2010 EU National Health and Wellness Survey (NHWS), which included participants from France, Germany, Italy, Spain, and the UK (5EU, N = 57,805) as well as the 2010 US NHWS (N = 75,000). The NHWS is an annual, cross-sectional, self-administered Internet survey which employs a stratified random sampling frame to match the age and gender characteristics of the NHWS sample with known population statistics. Participants who self-reported a diagnosis of PAD were compared with participants who did not self-report a diagnosis of PAD on health-related quality of life (mental and physical component summary scores and health utilities from the Short Form-12v2), work productivity and activity impairment (Work Productivity and Activity Impairment questionnaire), and healthcare resource use in terms of the number of physician visits, emergency room visits, and hospitalizations in the past six months through regression modeling adjusting for demographics and health characteristics.
Results
A total of 743 (1.29%) and 777 (1.04%) participants self-reported a diagnosis of PAD in the 5EU and US, respectively. After adjusting for demographics and health characteristics, patients with PAD reported worse health-related quality of life, as measured by health utilities (5EU: 0.66 vs. 0.70; US: 0.66 vs. 0.72; all p < .05), greater overall work impairment percentage (5EU: 38.27% vs. 27.48%; US: 23.89% vs. 14.26%) and greater healthcare resource use compared to participants without PAD (all p < .05).
Conclusions
These results suggest a significant burden for patients with PAD in both the 5 EU countries and the US with respect to both quality of life and economic outcomes. Improved management of these patients may have profound effects from both patient and societal perspectives.
doi:10.1186/1477-7525-11-175
PMCID: PMC3854518  PMID: 24148832
Peripheral arterial disease; Health-related quality of life; Work productivity and activity impairment; Healthcare resource use
4.  Physician Reasons for Nonpharmacologic Treatment of Hyperglycemia in Older Patients Newly Diagnosed with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus 
Diabetes Therapy  2012;3(1):5.
Introduction
To identify reasons why primary care physicians (PCPs) do not treat older patients newly diagnosed with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) with antihyperglycemic agents following diagnosis.
Methods
US PCPs were surveyed via the internet regarding their reasons for not treating patients aged >65 years diagnosed with T2DM and had not yet initiated antihyperglycemic therapy for ≥6 months after diagnosis. PCPs were requested to provide relevant clinical information for untreated older patients and select applicable reasons for not initiating treatment from a list of 35 possibilities, grouped into five categories.
Results
A total of 508 PCPs completed the online survey and provided complete clinical data for 770 patients. The reasons provided by the first-ranked physician for not initiating antihyperglycemic therapy were related to diet and exercise (57.5%); mild hyperglycemia (23.8%); patient’s concerns (13.4%); concerns about antihyperglycemic agents (3.0%); and comorbidities and polypharmacy (2.3%). The “diet and exercise” category was the most common first-ranked non-treatment reason, regardless of recent hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) stratum. Reasons within the “patient’s concerns,” “concerns related to antihyperglycemic agents,” and “comorbidities and polypharmacy” categories tended to be selected more often as first-ranked reasons by physicians for patients with higher HbA1c values. Of the 158 patients whose physicians planned to initiate antihyperglycemic therapy within the next month, 54.4% already had a most recent HbA1c value above their physician-stated threshold for treatment initiation.
Conclusion
In the PCPs studied, there was a tendency to select appropriate reasons for non-treatment with antihyperglycemic agents given their patients’ glycemic status. However, there was inertia related to the initiation of pharmacological therapy in some older patients with newly diagnosed T2DM. Important factors included physicians’ perceptions of “mild” hyperglycemia and the HbA1c threshold for using antihyperglycemic agents.
doi:10.1007/s13300-012-0005-8
PMCID: PMC3508110  PMID: 22700283
Antihyperglycemic agents; Clinical inertia; Elderly; Non-treatment; Type 2 diabetes mellitus
5.  Reasons given by general practitioners for non-treatment decisions in younger and older patients with newly diagnosed type 2 diabetes mellitus in the United Kingdom: a survey study 
Background
Older patients with newly diagnosed type 2 diabetes mellitus are less likely to receive antihyperglycaemic therapy compared to their younger counterparts. The purpose of this study was to assess the reasons of general practitioners (GPs) for not treating younger and older patients with newly diagnosed type 2 diabetes mellitus with antihyperglycaemic agents.
Methods
In a survey conducted between November 2009 and January 2010, 358 GPs from the United Kingdom selected reasons for not initiating antihyperglycaemic therapy in younger (< 65 years) and older (≥65 years) patients with newly diagnosed type 2 diabetes mellitus and untreated with any antihyperglycaemic agent for at least six months following diagnosis. Thirty-six potential reasons were classified into four major categories: Mild hyperglycaemia, Factors related to antihyperglycaemic agents, Comorbidities and polypharmacy, and Patient-related reasons. Reasons for non-treatment were compared between younger (n = 1, 023) and older (n = 1, 005) patients.
Results
Non-treatment reasons related to Mild hyperglycaemia were selected more often by GPs for both younger (88%) and older (86%) patients than those in other categories. For older patients, Factors related to antihyperglycaemic agents (46% vs. 38%) and Comorbidities and polypharmacy (33% vs. 19%), both including safety-related issues, were selected significantly (p < 0.001) more often by GPs. No between-group difference was observed for the Patient-related reasons category. The GP-reported HbA1c threshold for initiating antihyperglycaemic therapy was significantly (p < 0.001) lower for younger patients (mean ± standard deviation: 7.3% ± 0.7) compared to older patients (7.5% ± 0.9).
Conclusions
GPs selected reasons related to Mild hyperglycaemia for non-treatment of their untreated patients with newly diagnosed type 2 diabetes mellitus, despite nearly one-third of these patients having their most recent HbA1c value ≥7%. The findings further suggest that safety-related issues may influence the non-treatment of older patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus.
doi:10.1186/1472-6823-11-17
PMCID: PMC3219572  PMID: 22035104
6.  Assessment of severity and frequency of self-reported hypoglycemia on quality of life in patients with type 2 diabetes treated with oral antihyperglycemic agents: A survey study 
BMC Research Notes  2011;4:251.
Background
Some oral antihyperglycemic agents may increase risk of hypoglycemia and thereby reduce patient quality of life. Our objective was to assess the impact of the severity and frequency of self-reported hypoglycemia on health-related quality of life (HRQoL) among patients with type 2 diabetes treated with oral antihyperglycemic agents.
Findings
A follow-up survey was conducted in participants with self-reported type 2 diabetes treated with oral antihyperglycemic agents from the US National Health and Wellness Survey 2007. Data were collected on the severity and frequency of hypoglycemic episodes in the 6 months prior to the survey, with severity defined as mild (no interruption of activities), moderate (some interruption of activities), severe (needed assistance of others), or very severe (needed medical attention). HRQoL was assessed using the EuroQol-5D Questionnaire (EQ-5D) US weighted summary score (utility) and Worry subscale of the Hypoglycemia Fear Survey (HFS). Of the participants who completed the survey (N = 1,984), mean age was 58 years, 57% were male, 72% reported an HbA1c <7.0%, and 50% reported treatment with a sulfonylurea-containing regimen. Hypoglycemic episodes were reported by 63% of patients (46% mild, 37% moderate, 13% severe and 4% very severe). For patients reporting hypoglycemia, mean utility score was significantly lower (0.78 versus 0.86, p < 0.0001) and mean HFS score was significantly higher (17.5 versus 6.2, p < 0.0001) compared to patients not reporting hypoglycemia. Differences in mean scores between those with and without hypoglycemia increased with the level of severity (mild, moderate, severe, very severe) for utility (0.03, 0.09, 0.18, 0.23) and HFS (6.1, 13.9, 20.1, 25.6), respectively. After adjusting for age, gender, weight gain, HbA1c, microvascular complications, and selected cardiovascular conditions, the utility decrement was 0.045 (by level of severity: 0.009, 0.055, 0.131, 0.208), and the HFS increase was 9.6 (by severity: 5.3, 12.4, 17.6, 23.2). HRQoL further decreased with greater frequency of hypoglycemic episodes.
Conclusions
Self-reported hypoglycemia is independently associated with lower HRQoL, and the magnitude of this reduction increases with both severity and frequency of episodes in patients with type 2 diabetes treated with oral antihyperglycemic agents.
doi:10.1186/1756-0500-4-251
PMCID: PMC3148563  PMID: 21777428

Results 1-6 (6)