Vaccination Rates in Patients With Medical Indications for the Pneumococcal Polysaccharide Vaccine in a Family Medicine Clinic

2017 ◽  
Vol 32 (2) ◽  
pp. 154-157 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anthony Trovato ◽  
Karen Gunning ◽  
Karly Pippitt
Keyword(s):  
High Risk ◽  
Family Medicine ◽  
Pneumococcal Vaccination ◽  
Low Risk ◽  
Vaccination Rates ◽  
Medical Indication ◽  
High Risk Patients ◽  
Patients With Diabetes ◽  
Risk Patients ◽  
Patient Refusal

Background: Pneumococcal vaccination rates among high-risk patients (eg, diabetes, asthma, smoking) seen in 2 family medicine clinics are unknown. Objectives: To assess differences in pneumococcal polysaccharide vaccination rates and reasons for nonvaccination among patients with diabetes and asthma and patients who smoke. Methods: A chart review at 2 family medicine residency training clinics showed 425 patients with a medical indication for PPSV23 were seen between April 1, 2015, and April 30, 2015. One reviewer searched the electronic health records to assess reasons for nonvaccination. Results: Rates of nonvaccination were 29.8% in patients with diabetes, 58.7% in patients with asthma, and 62.5% in patients who smoke cigarettes. Patients were classified into 3 groups based on the reasons for nonvaccination: documented patient refusal, not being addressed by a provider, and being documented as low risk despite the presence of a medical indication. Conclusion: The 3 reasons for nonvaccination were vaccination not being addressed, misclassification of high-risk patients as low-risk patients for infection, and documented patient refusal. Providers overlooked vaccination more often in patients with asthma and cigarette use than in patients with diabetes. Patients seeing pharmacists were most likely to be vaccinated, whereas patients seeing physician assistants were least likely to be vaccinated. Pharmacists see patients to provide medication management and preventive care, whereas other providers treat more urgent conditions. Because indications are often overlooked and not addressed, pharmacists can play a larger role in identifying and vaccinating high-risk patients.

scholarly journals Accuracy of upper endoscopies with random biopsies to identify patients with gastric premalignant lesions who can safely be exempt from surveillance

2021 ◽  
Vol 24 (3) ◽  
pp. 680-690
Author(s):  
Michiel C. Mommersteeg ◽  
Stella A. V. Nieuwenburg ◽  
Wouter J. den Hollander ◽  
Lisanne Holster ◽  
Caroline M. den Hoed ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Gastric Cancer ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Low Risk ◽  
Premalignant Lesions ◽  
High Risk Patients ◽  
European Guidelines ◽  
Progression Of Disease ◽  
Risk Patients ◽  
Progression Risk

Abstract Introduction Guidelines recommend endoscopy with biopsies to stratify patients with gastric premalignant lesions (GPL) to high and low progression risk. High-risk patients are recommended to undergo surveillance. We aimed to assess the accuracy of guideline recommendations to identify low-risk patients, who can safely be discharged from surveillance. Methods This study includes patients with GPL. Patients underwent at least two endoscopies with an interval of 1–6 years. Patients were defined ‘low risk’ if they fulfilled requirements for discharge, and ‘high risk’ if they fulfilled requirements for surveillance, according to European guidelines (MAPS-2012, updated MAPS-2019, BSG). Patients defined ‘low risk’ with progression of disease during follow-up (FU) were considered ‘misclassified’ as low risk. Results 334 patients (median age 60 years IQR11; 48.7% male) were included and followed for a median of 48 months. At baseline, 181/334 (54%) patients were defined low risk. Of these, 32.6% were ‘misclassified’, showing progression of disease during FU. If MAPS-2019 were followed, 169/334 (51%) patients were defined low risk, of which 32.5% were ‘misclassified’. If BSG were followed, 174/334 (51%) patients were defined low risk, of which 32.2% were ‘misclassified’. Seven patients developed gastric cancer (GC) or dysplasia, four patients were ‘misclassified’ based on MAPS-2012 and three on MAPS-2019 and BSG. By performing one additional endoscopy 72.9% (95% CI 62.4–83.3) of high-risk patients and all patients who developed GC or dysplasia were identified. Conclusion One-third of patients that would have been discharged from GC surveillance, appeared to be ‘misclassified’ as low risk. One additional endoscopy will reduce this risk by 70%.

scholarly journals A Novel Epigenetic Machine Learning Model to Define Risk of Progression for Hepatocellular Carcinoma Patients

2021 ◽  
Vol 22 (3) ◽  
pp. 1075
Author(s):  
Luca Bedon ◽  
Michele Dal Bo ◽  
Monica Mossenta ◽  
Davide Busato ◽  
Giuseppe Toffoli ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Machine Learning ◽  
Hepatocellular Carcinoma ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Low Risk ◽  
Functional Enrichment ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
High Risk Patients ◽  
Risk Of Progression ◽  
Risk Patients

Although extensive advancements have been made in treatment against hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), the prognosis of HCC patients remains unsatisfied. It is now clearly established that extensive epigenetic changes act as a driver in human tumors. This study exploits HCC epigenetic deregulation to define a novel prognostic model for monitoring the progression of HCC. We analyzed the genome-wide DNA methylation profile of 374 primary tumor specimens using the Illumina 450 K array data from The Cancer Genome Atlas. We initially used a novel combination of Machine Learning algorithms (Recursive Features Selection, Boruta) to capture early tumor progression features. The subsets of probes obtained were used to train and validate Random Forest models to predict a Progression Free Survival greater or less than 6 months. The model based on 34 epigenetic probes showed the best performance, scoring 0.80 accuracy and 0.51 Matthews Correlation Coefficient on testset. Then, we generated and validated a progression signature based on 4 methylation probes capable of stratifying HCC patients at high and low risk of progression. Survival analysis showed that high risk patients are characterized by a poorer progression free survival compared to low risk patients. Moreover, decision curve analysis confirmed the strength of this predictive tool over conventional clinical parameters. Functional enrichment analysis highlighted that high risk patients differentiated themselves by the upregulation of proliferative pathways. Ultimately, we propose the oncogenic MCM2 gene as a methylation-driven gene of which the representative epigenetic markers could serve both as predictive and prognostic markers. Briefly, our work provides several potential HCC progression epigenetic biomarkers as well as a new signature that may enhance patients surveillance and advances in personalized treatment.

Association of infrapopliteal medial arterial calcification with lower-limb amputations in high-risk patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis

2020 ◽  
pp. 1358863X2097973
Author(s):  
Fabrizio Losurdo ◽  
Roberto Ferraresi ◽  
Alessandro Ucci ◽  
Anna Zanetti ◽  
Giacomo Clerici ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factor ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Lower Limb ◽  
Fixed Effects ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Arterial Calcification ◽  
High Risk Patients ◽  
Patients With Diabetes ◽  
Risk Patients ◽  
Medial Arterial Calcification

Medial arterial calcification (MAC) is a known risk factor for cardiovascular morbidity. The association between vascular calcifications and poor outcome in several vascular districts suggest that infrapopliteal MAC could be a risk factor for lower-limb amputation (LLA). This study’s objective is to review the available literature focusing on the association between infrapopliteal MAC and LLA in high-risk patients. The PubMed and Embase databases were systematically searched. We selected original studies reporting the association between infrapopliteal MAC and LLAs in patients with diabetes and/or peripheral artery disease (PAD). Estimates were pooled using either a fixed-effects or a random-effects model meta-analysis. Heterogeneity was evaluated using the Q and I2 statistics. Publication bias was investigated with a funnel plot and Egger test. The trim-and-fill method was designed to estimate the possibly missing studies. Influence analysis was conducted to search studies influencing the final result. Test of moderators was used to compare estimates in good versus non-good-quality studies. Fifteen articles satisfied the selection criteria ( n = 6489; median follow-up: 36 months). MAC was significantly associated with LLAs (pooled adjusted risk ratio (RR): 2.27; 95% CI: 1.89–2.74; I2 = 25.3%, Q-test: p = 0.17). This association was kept in the subgroup of patients with diabetes (RR: 2.37; 95% CI: 1.76–3.20) and patients with PAD (RR: 2.48; 95% CI: 1.72–3.58). The association was maintained if considering as outcome only major amputations (RR: 2.11; 95% CI: 1.46–3.06). Our results show that infrapopliteal MAC is associated with LLAs, thus suggesting MAC as a possible new marker of the at-risk limb.

Improving harm reduction with a naloxone intervention in primary care to prescribe and educate a support person

2021 ◽  
Vol 17 (2) ◽  
pp. 109-113
Author(s):  
Julienne K. Kirk, PharmD, CDE, BCPS ◽  
Matthew Q. Tran, PharmD ◽  
Samantha Pelc, PharmD ◽  
Katherine G. Moore, PharmD, BCPS, BCACP
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Family Medicine ◽  
Quality Improvement Intervention ◽  
Opioid Overdose ◽  
Naloxone Administration ◽  
Support Person ◽  
High Risk Patients ◽  
Increased Risk ◽  
Risk Patients

Objective: To determine whether a pharmacist-led intervention would increase the number of naloxone prescriptions and naloxone administration education in a primary care family medicine setting.Design: Prospective quality improvement intervention in an academic family medicine clinic.Methods: We surveyed providers about naloxone knowledge, prescribing habits, and prescribing barriers. We identified patients on chronic opioid therapy, through electronic health records for the year 2019. Overdose risk categories based upon morphine milligram equivalent doses and concomitant benzodiazepine use were used to determine patients who met criteria for naloxone. Pharmacists phoned qualified patients to discuss overdose risk and naloxone benefits. Patients who accepted naloxone prescriptions used their local pharmacy through a department-approved standing order set.Results: From the survey results, there were 47 of 54 provider responses, and the majority noted that they do not routinely prescribe naloxone in high-risk patients. The predominant barriers were lack of time during visit and naloxone administration education. The population of patients from chart review included 93 high-risk patients with a mean age of 58 years. During the time of intervention, 71 patients remained eligible for naloxone coprescribing. Of the patients contacted, 29 (40 percent) accepted the intervention prescription, and subsequently, 22 picked up their prescription from the pharmacy. Sixteen received counseling with a support person. Twelve patients had naloxone already at home, and two received counseling with a support person.Conclusion: The naloxone prescribing intervention is achievable. The results of this intervention support identifying patients at increased risk of opioid overdose and offer education of a support person for naloxone in a large academic family medicine clinic.

scholarly journals Does socioeconomic status make a difference? A register-based study on the extent to which cardiovascular screening in patients with inflammatory arthritis leads to recommended follow-up in general practice

RMD Open ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 6 (2) ◽  
pp. e000940
Author(s):  
Anette Hvenegaard Kjeldgaard ◽  
Kim Hørslev-Petersen ◽  
Sonja Wehberg ◽  
Jens Soendergaard ◽  
Jette Primdahl
Keyword(s):  
Blood Pressure ◽  
Socioeconomic Status ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Secondary Care ◽  
Inflammatory Arthritis ◽  
Low Risk ◽  
Risk Screening ◽  
High Risk Patients ◽  
Eular Recommendations ◽  
Risk Patients

ObjectiveTo investigate to what extent patients with inflammatory arthritis (IA) follow recommendations given in a secondary care nurse-led cardiovascular (CV) risk screening consultation to consult their general practitioner (GP) to reduce their CV risk and whether their socioeconomic status (SES) affects adherence.MethodsAdults with IA who had participated in a secondary care screening consultation from July 2012 to July 2015, based on the EULAR recommendations, were identified. Patients were considered to have high CV risk if they had risk Systematic COronary Risk Evaluation (SCORE) ≥5%, according to the European SCORE model or systolic blood pressure ≥145 mmHg, total cholesterol ≥8 mmol/L, LDL cholesterol ≥5 mmol/L, HbA1c ≥42 mmol/mol or fasting glucose ≥6 mmol/L. The primary outcome was a consultation with their GP and at least one action focusing on CV risk factors within 6 weeks after the screening consultation.ResultsThe study comprised 1265 patients, aged 18–85 years. Of these, 336/447 (75%) of the high-risk patients and 580/819 (71%) of the low-risk patients had a GP consultation. 127/336 (38%) of high-risk patients and 160/580 (28%) of low-risk patients received relevant actions related to their CV risk, for example, blood pressure home measurement or prescription for statins, antihypertensives or antidiabetics. Education ≥10 years increased the odds for non-adherence (OR 0.58, 95% CI 0.0.37 to 0.92, p=0.02).Conclusions75% of the high-risk patients consulted their GP after the secondary care CV risk screening, and 38% of these received an action relevant for their CV risk. Higher education decreased adherence.

scholarly journals Changes in patient activation following cardiac rehabilitation using the Active+me digital healthcare platform during the COVID-19 pandemic: a cohort evaluation

2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Gabbi Frith ◽  
Kathryn Carver ◽  
Sarah Curry ◽  
Alan Darby ◽  
Anna Sydes ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Blood Pressure ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Cardiac Rehabilitation ◽  
Group Analysis ◽  
Patient Activation ◽  
Low Risk ◽  
Smart Device ◽  
Face To Face ◽  
High Risk Patients ◽  
Risk Patients

Abstract Background Restrictions on face-to-face contact, due to COVID-19, led to a rapid adoption of technology to remotely deliver cardiac rehabilitation (CR). Some technologies, including Active+me, were used without knowing their benefits. We assessed changes in patient activation measure (PAM) in patients participating in routine CR, using Active+me. We also investigated changes in PAM among low, moderate, and high risk patients, changes in cardiovascular risk factors, and explored patient and healthcare professional experiences of using Active+me. Methods Patients received standard CR education and an exercise prescription. Active+me was used to monitor patient health, progress towards goals, and provide additional lifestyle support. Patients accessed Active+me through a smart-device application which synchronised to telemetry enabled scales, blood pressure monitors, pulse oximeter, and activity trackers. Changes in PAM score following CR were calculated. Sub-group analysis was conducted on patients at high, moderate, and low risk of exercise induced cardiovascular events. Qualitative interviews explored the acceptability of Active+me. Results Forty-six patients were recruited (Age: 60.4 ± 10.9 years; BMI: 27.9 ± 5.0 kg.m2; 78.3% male). PAM scores increased from 65.5 (range: 51.0 to 100.0) to 70.2 (range: 40.7 to 100.0; P = 0.039). PAM scores of high risk patients increased from 61.9 (range: 53.0 to 91.0) to 75.0 (range: 58.1 to 100.0; P = 0.044). The PAM scores of moderate and low risk patients did not change. Resting systolic blood pressure decreased from 125 mmHg (95% CI: 120 to 130 mmHg) to 119 mmHg (95% CI: 115 to 122 mmHg; P = 0.023) and waist circumference measurements decreased from 92.8 cm (95% CI: 82.6 to 102.9 cm) to 85.3 cm (95% CI 79.1 to 96.2 cm; P = 0.026). Self-reported physical activity levels increased from 1557.5 MET-minutes (range: 245.0 to 5355.0 MET-minutes) to 3363.2 MET-minutes (range: 105.0 to 12,360.0 MET-minutes; P < 0.001). Active+me was acceptable to patients and healthcare professionals. Conclusion Participation in standard CR, with Active+me, is associated with increased patient skill, knowledge, and confidence to manage their condition. Active+me may be an appropriate platform to support CR delivery when patients cannot be seen face-to-face. Trial registration As this was not a clinical trial, the study was not registered in a trial registry.

Cardiovascular risk assessment in diabetes and pre-diabetes

ESC CardioMed ◽  
2018 ◽  
pp. 923-924
Author(s):  
Nikolaus Marx
Keyword(s):  
Risk Assessment ◽  
Cardiovascular Risk ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Target Organ Damage ◽  
Risk Scores ◽  
High Risk Patients ◽  
Patients With Diabetes ◽  
Risk Patients ◽  
Artery Disease ◽  
Very High

Patients with diabetes exhibit an increased propensity to develop cardiovascular disease with an increased mortality. Early risk assessment, especially for coronary artery disease, is important to initiate therapeutic strategies to reduce cardiovascular risk. This chapter reviews the current literature on risk scores in patients with type 1 and type 2 diabetes and summarizes the role of risk assessment based on biomarkers and different imaging strategies. Current guidelines recommend that patients with diabetes are characterized as high-risk or very high-risk patients. In the presence of target organ damage or other risk factors such as smoking, marked hypercholesterolaemia, or hypertension, patients with diabetes are classified as very high-risk patients while most other people with diabetes are categorized as high-risk patients.

P3609Temporal trends of the management and outcomes of patients after myocardial infarction according to the risk for recurrent cardiovascular events

2019 ◽  
Vol 40 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
T Grinberg ◽  
T Bental ◽  
Y Hammer ◽  
A R Assali ◽  
H Vaknin-Assa ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Myocardial Infarction ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Cardiovascular Events ◽  
Risk Group ◽  
Temporal Trends ◽  
High Risk Group ◽  
Low Risk ◽  
Intermediate Risk ◽  
High Risk Patients ◽  
Risk Patients

Abstract Background Following Myocardial Infarction (MI), patients are at increased risk for recurrent cardiovascular events, particularly during the immediate period. Yet some patients are at higher risk than others, owing to their clinical characteristics and comorbidities, these high-risk patients are less often treated with guideline-recommended therapies. Aim To examine temporal trends in treatment and outcomes of patients with MI according to the TIMI risk score for secondary prevention (TRS2°P), a recently validated risk stratification tool. Methods A retrospective cohort study of patients with an acute MI, who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention and were discharged alive between 2004–2016. Temporal trends were examined in the early (2004–2010) and late (2011–2016) time-periods. Patients were stratified by the TRS2°P to a low (≤1), intermediate (2) or high-risk group (≥3). Clinical outcomes included 30-day MACE (death, MI, target vessel revascularization, coronary artery bypass grafting, unstable angina or stroke) and 1-year mortality. Results Among 4921 patients, 31% were low-risk, 27% intermediate-risk and 42% high-risk. Compared to low and intermediate-risk patients, high-risk patients were older, more commonly female, and had more comorbidities such as hypertension, diabetes, peripheral vascular disease, and chronic kidney disease. They presented more often with non ST elevation MI and 3-vessel disease. High-risk patients were less likely to receive drug eluting stents and potent anti-platelet drugs, among other guideline-recommended therapies. Evidently, they experienced higher 30-day MACE (8.1% vs. 3.9% and 2.1% in intermediate and low-risk, respectively, P<0.001) and 1-year mortality (10.4% vs. 3.9% and 1.1% in intermediate and low-risk, respectively, P<0.001). During time, comparing the early to the late-period, the use of potent antiplatelets and statins increased among the entire cohort (P<0.001). However, only the high-risk group demonstrated a significantly lower 30-day MACE (P=0.001). During time, there were no differences in 1-year mortality rate among all risk categories. Temporal trends in 30-day MACE by TRS2°P Conclusion Despite a better application of guideline-recommended therapies, high-risk patients after MI are still relatively undertreated. Nevertheless, they demonstrated the most notable improvement in outcomes over time.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document