Dataset Information

Multi-drug therapy in chronic condition multimorbidity: a systematic review.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Older populations often suffer from multimorbidity and guidelines for each condition are often associated with recommended drug therapy management. Yet, how different and specific multimorbidity is associated with number and type of multi-drug therapies in general populations is unknown.

Aim

The aim of this systematic review was to synthesize the current evidence on patterns of multi-drug prescribing in family practice.

Methods

A systematic review on six common chronic conditions: diabetes mellitus, cardiovascular disease, cerebrovascular disease, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), osteoarthritis and depression was conducted, with a focus on studies which looked at any potential combination of two or more multimorbidity. Studies were identified from searches of MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsychINFO, the Allied and Complementary Medicine Database (AMED) and the Health Management Information Consortium (HMIC) databases from 1960 to 2013.

Results

A total of eleven articles were selected based on study criteria. Our review identified very few specific studies which had explicitly investigated the association between multimorbidity and multi-drug therapy. Relevant chronic conditions literature showed nine observational studies and two reviews of comorbid depression drug treatment. Most (seven) of the articles had focused on the chronic condition and comorbid depression and whether antidepressant management had been optimal or not, while four studies focused on other multimorbidities mainly heart failure, COPD and diabetes.

Conclusions

Very few studies have investigated associations between specific multimorbidity and multi-drug therapy, and most currently focus on chronic disease comorbid depression outcomes. Further research needs to identify this area as key priority for older populations who are prescribed high levels of multiple drug therapy.

SUBMITTER: Doos L

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5942538 | biostudies-literature | 2014 Dec

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Multi-drug therapy in chronic condition multimorbidity: a systematic review.

Doos Lucy L Roberts Eyitope O EO Corp Nadia N Kadam Umesh T UT

Family practice 20140905 6

<h4>Background</h4>Older populations often suffer from multimorbidity and guidelines for each condition are often associated with recommended drug therapy management. Yet, how different and specific multimorbidity is associated with number and type of multi-drug therapies in general populations is unknown.<h4>Aim</h4>The aim of this systematic review was to synthesize the current evidence on patterns of multi-drug prescribing in family practice.<h4>Methods</h4>A systematic review on six common c ...[more]

PMID: 25192902

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundIt is challenging to use shared decision-making with patients who have a chronic health condition or, especially, multimorbidity. A patient-goal-oriented approach can thus be beneficial. This study aims to identify and evaluate studies on the effects of interventions that support collaborative goal setting or health priority setting compared to usual care for elderly people with a chronic health condition or multimorbidity.MethodsThis systematic review was based on EPOC, PRISMA and MOOSE guidelines. Pubmed, PsychInfo, CINAHL, Web of Science, Embase and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched systematically. The following eligibility criteria were applied: 1. Randomised (cluster) controlled trials, non-randomised controlled trials, controlled before-after studies, interrupted time series or repeated measures study design; 2. Single intervention directed specifically at collaborative goal setting or health priority setting or a multifactorial intervention including these elements; 3. Study population of patients with multimorbidity or at least one chronic disease (mean age ± standard deviation (SD) incl. age 65). 4. Studies reporting on outcome measures reducible to outcomes for collaborative goal setting or health priority setting.ResultsA narrative analysis was performed. Eight articles describing five unique interventions, including four cluster randomised controlled trials and one randomised controlled trial, were identified. Four intervention studies, representing 904, 183, 387 and 1921 patients respectively, were multifactorial and showed statistically significant effects on the application of goal setting (Patient Assessment of Chronic Illness Care (PACIC) goal setting subscale), the number of advance directives or the inclusion of goals in care plans. Explicit attention for goal setting or priority setting by a professional was a common element in these multifactorial interventions. One study, which implemented a single-factor intervention on 322 patients, did not have significant effects on doctor-patient agreement. All the studies had methodological concerns in varying degrees.ConclusionsCollaborative goal setting and/or priority setting can probably best be integrated in complex care interventions. Further research should determine the mix of essential elements in a multifactorial intervention to provide recommendations for daily practice. In addition, the necessity of methodological innovation and the application of mixed evaluation models must be highlighted to deal with the complexity of goal setting and/or priority setting intervention studies.

Project description:BackgroundThe co-design of health care enables patient-centredness by partnering patients, clinicians and other stakeholders together to create services.MethodsWe conducted a systematic review of co-designed health interventions for people living with multimorbidity and assessed (a) their effectiveness in improving health outcomes, (b) the co-design approaches used and (c) barriers and facilitators to the co-design process with people living with multimorbidity. We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, Scopus and PsycINFO between 2000 and March 2022. Included experimental studies were quality assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool (ROB-2 and ROBINS-I).ResultsWe screened 14,376 reports, with 13 reports meeting the eligibility criteria. Two reported health and well-being outcomes: one randomised clinical trial (n = 134) and one controlled cohort (n = 1933). Outcome measures included quality of life, self-efficacy, well-being, anxiety, depression, functional status, healthcare utilisation and mortality. Outcomes favouring the co-design interventions compared to control were minimal, with only 4 of 17 outcomes considered beneficial. Co-design approaches included needs assessment/ideation (12 of 13), prototype (11 of 13), pilot testing (5 of 13) (i.e. focus on usability) and health and well-being evaluations (2 of 13). Common challenges to the co-design process include poor stakeholder interest, passive participation, power imbalances and a lack of representativeness in the design group. Enablers include flexibility in approach, smaller group work, advocating for stakeholders' views and commitment to the process or decisions made.ConclusionsIn this systematic review of co-design health interventions, we found that few projects assessed health and well-being outcomes, and the observed health and well-being benefits were minimal. The intensity and variability in the co-design approaches were substantial, and challenges were evident. Co-design aided the design of novel services and interventions for those with multimorbidity, improving their relevance, usability and acceptability. However, the clinical benefits of co-designed interventions for those with multimorbidity are unclear.

Project description:Objectives: We aim to compare the effectiveness of different drug treatments in improving recurrence in patients with chronic subdural hematoma (CSDH). Methods: Eligible randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and prospective trials were searched in PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Embase, from database inception to December 2021. After the available studies following inclusion and exclusion criteria were screened, the main outcome measures were strictly extracted. Taking the random-effects model, dichotomous data were determined and extracted by odds ratio (OR) with 95% credible interval (CrI), and a surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) was generated to calculate the ranking probability of comparative effectiveness among each drug intervention. Moreover, we used the node-splitting model to evaluate inconsistency between direct and indirect comparisons of our network meta-analysis (NMA). Funnel plots were used to evaluate publication bias. Results: From the 318 articles found during initial citation screening, 11 RCTs and 3 prospective trials (n = 3,456 participants) were ultimately included in our study. Our NMA results illustrated that atorvastatin + dexamethasone (ATO+DXM) (OR = 0.06, 95% CrI 0.01, 0.89) was the most effective intervention to improve recurrence in patients with CSDH (SUCRA = 89.40%, 95% CrI 0.29, 1.00). Four drug interventions [ATO+DXM (OR = 0.06, 95% CrI 0.01, 0.89), DXM (OR = 0.18, 95% CrI 0.07, 0.41), tranexamic acid (TXA) (OR = 0.26, 95% CrI 0.07, 0.41), and ATO (OR = 0.41, 95% CrI 0.12, 0.90)] achieved statistical significance in improving recurrence in CSDH patients compared with the placebo (PLB) or standard neurosurgical treatment (SNT) group. Conclusion: Our NMA showed that ATO+DXM, DXM, ATO, and TXA had definite efficacy in improving recurrence in CSDH patients. Among them, ATO+DXM is the best intervention for improving recurrence in patients with CSDH in this particular population. Multicenter rigorous designed prospective randomized trials are still needed to evaluate the role of various drug interventions in improving neurological function or outcome. Systematic Review Registration: (https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=299491), identifier (CRD 42022299491).

Project description:BackgroundThere have been growing recommendations to include education in multi-disciplinary interventions targeting chronic pain management. However, effects of this strategy on short- and long-term self-management of chronic pain, remain largely unexplored.Objectives1. To provide an updated overview of studies that report on the impact of patient education in multi-disciplinary interventions, on self-management of chronic pain; 2. To explore associations between education and chronic pain self-management techniques; and 3. To identify the format and duration of suitable chronic pain interventions targeted at patient self-management.MethodsDesign: Narrative systematic literature review of randomised or controlled study designs. Data Sources: PubMed, CINAHL, EMBASE, PsycINFO. Participants: Adult patients with chronic pain of any aetiology participating in multi-disciplinary programs that included education. Main outcome measures: Assessments of level of pain, function, quality of life, self-efficacy, self-management, and any other relevant assessments. Study Appraisal and Synthesis Methods: PRISMA guidelines, Cochrane Risk of Bias tool, and TIDieR model.ResultsDatabase searching identified 485 potential papers. After removal of duplicates, and irrelevant articles by title and abstract, 120 full-text articles were reviewed and 27 studies were included in this systematic review. Studies were predominantly from the United States (n = 8; 29.6%). Over one hundred outcome measures were identified across all studies, with significant variation also observed in terms of how chronic pain duration was defined, and how education was delivered to participants. Overall, positive benefits of education were reported.ConclusionsEducation, as part of multi-disciplinary programs, is likely to improve self-management and self-efficacy in people with chronic pain of any aetiology. Heterogeneity in terms of: chronic pain duration; educational resources; healthcare professionals; and outcome measures, were identified as limitations. Further research, in the form of Randomised Controlled Trials addressing these limitations, is recommended.

Project description:BackgroundRemote measurement technologies (RMT) such as mobile health devices and apps are increasingly used by those living with chronic neurological and mental health conditions. RMT enables real-world data collection and regular feedback, providing users with insights about their own conditions. Data visualizations are an integral part of RMT, although little is known about visualization design preferences from the perspectives of those living with chronic conditions.ObjectiveThe aim of this review was to explore the experiences and preferences of individuals with chronic neurological and mental health conditions on data visualizations derived from RMT to manage health.MethodsIn this systematic review, we searched peer-reviewed literature and conference proceedings (PubMed, IEEE Xplore, EMBASE, Web of Science, Association for Computing Machinery Computer-Human Interface proceedings, and the Cochrane Library) for original papers published between January 2007 and September 2021 that reported perspectives on data visualization of people living with chronic neurological and mental health conditions. Two reviewers independently screened each abstract and full-text article, with disagreements resolved through discussion. Studies were critically appraised, and extracted data underwent thematic synthesis.ResultsWe identified 35 eligible publications from 31 studies representing 12 conditions. Coded data coalesced into 3 themes: desire for data visualization, impact of visualizations on condition management, and visualization design considerations. Data visualizations were viewed as an integral part of users' experiences with RMT, impacting satisfaction and engagement. However, user preferences were diverse and often conflicting both between and within conditions.ConclusionsWhen used effectively, data visualizations are valuable, engaging components of RMT. They can provide structure and insight, allowing individuals to manage their own health more effectively. However, visualizations are not "one-size-fits-all," and it is important to engage with potential users during visualization design to understand when, how, and with whom the visualizations will be used to manage health.

Project description:ObjectiveTo systematically review the literature exploring the associations between multimorbidity (the presence of two or more long-term conditions (LTCs)) and adverse clinical outcomes in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD).DesignSystematic review and meta-analysis.Data sourcesMEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, Cochrane Library and SCOPUS (1946-2019). The main search terms were 'Chronic Kidney Failure' and 'Multimorbid*'.Eligibility criteriaObservational studies of adults over the age of 18 with CKD stages 3-5, that is, estimated glomerular filtration rate less than 60 mL/min/1.73 m2. The exposure was multimorbidity quantified by measures and the outcomes were all-cause mortality, renal progression, hospitalisation and cardiovascular events. We did not consider CKD as a comorbid LTC.Data extraction and synthesisNewcastle-Ottawa Scale for quality appraisal and risk of bias assessment and fixed effects meta-analysis for data synthesis.ResultsOf 1852 papers identified, 26 met the inclusion criteria. 21 papers involved patients with advanced CKD and no studies were from low or middle-income countries. All-cause mortality was an outcome in all studies. Patients with multimorbidity were at higher risk of mortality compared with patients without multimorbidity (total risk ratio 2.28 (95% CI 1.81 to 2.88)). The risk of mortality was higher with increasing multimorbidity (total HR 1.31 (95% CI 1.27 to 1.36)) and both concordant and discordant LTCs were associated with heightened risk. Multimorbidity was associated with renal progression in four studies, hospitalisation in five studies and cardiovascular events in two studies.LimitationsMeta-analysis could only include 10 of 26 papers as the methodologies of studies were heterogeneous.ConclusionsThere are associations between multimorbidity and adverse clinical outcomes in patients with CKD. However, most data relate to mortality risk in patients with advanced CKD. There is limited evidence regarding patients with mild to moderate CKD, outcomes such as cardiovascular events, types of LTCs and regarding patients from low or middle-income countries.Prospero registration numberCRD42019147424.

Dataset Information

Multi-drug therapy in chronic condition multimorbidity: a systematic review.

Background

Aim

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Multi-drug therapy in chronic condition multimorbidity: a systematic review.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets