Medicine (RMH) - Research Publications
Permanent URI for this collection
Search Results
1 - 2 of 2
-
ItemPoor adherence and persistence to sodium glucose co-transporter 2 inhibitors in real-world settings: Evidence from a systematic review and meta-analysis(WILEY, 2021-01)AIMS: Despite increasing prescription of sodium glucose co-transporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors, there is limited insight of the patterns of use among patients with diabetes prescribed these drugs. This study aimed to summarize available real-world data on the adherence and persistence to SGLT2 inhibitors. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A systematic review for observational studies reporting the adherence and persistence to SGLT2 inhibitors was performed in Medline, Embase, and Web of Science from their inception to October 2019. Data were analysed via random-effects meta-analysis. RESULTS: A total of 22 studies (31 cohorts) comprising 123 854 individuals prescribed SGLT2 inhibitors from eight countries were included. The pooled mean proportions of days covered [PDC] at six months and one year were 0.77 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.72-0.82) and 0.72 (95% CI 0.66-0.77), respectively. The pooled proportions adherent (PDC ≥0.80) at six months and one year were 59.5% (95% CI 52.9-65.9) and 49.0% (95% CI 42.3-55.8), respectively. The pooled proportions of people persistent at six months, one year, and two years were 80.1% (95% CI 75.8-84.0), 61.8% (95% CI 57.8-65.7), and 45.9% (95% CI 35.5-56.5), respectively. When persistence was defined as the absence of ≥90-days gap, the equivalent pooled proportions persistent were 81.5% (95% CI 73.1-88.6), 58.9% (95% CI 53.1-64.6), and 34.7% (95% CI 33.6-35.8). Adherence and persistence appeared to vary across different SGLT2 inhibitors. CONCLUSIONS: Real-world adherence and persistence to SGLT2 inhibitors is poor. Hence, targets for improving treatment adherence and persistence need to be identified and appropriate interventions implemented.
-
ItemFrailty Confers High Mortality Risk across Different Populations: Evidence from an Overview of Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses(MDPI, 2020-03)We performed an overview of systematic reviews and meta-analyses to summarize available data regarding the association between frailty and all-cause mortality. Medline, Embase, CINAHL, Web of Science, PsycINFO, and AMED (Allied and Complementary Medicine) databases were searched until February 2020 for meta-analyses examining the association between frailty and all-cause mortality. The AMSTAR2 checklist was used to evaluate methodological quality. Frailty exposure and the risk of all-cause mortality (hazard ratio [HR] or relative risk [RR]) were displayed in forest plots. We included 25 meta-analyses that pooled data from between 3 and 20 studies. The number of participants included in these meta-analyses ranged between <2000 and >500,000. Overall, 56%, 32%, and 12% of studies were rated as of moderate, low, and critically low quality, respectively. Frailty was associated with increased risk of all-cause mortality in 24/24 studies where the HR/RRs ranged from 1.35 [95% confidence interval (CI) 1.05-1.74] (patients with diabetes) to 7.95 [95% CI 4.88-12.96] (hospitalized patients). The median HR/RR across different meta-analyses was 1.98 (interquartile range 1.65-2.67). Pre-frailty was associated with a significantly increased risk of all-cause mortality in 7/7 studies with the HR/RR ranging from 1.09 to 3.65 (median 1.51, IQR 1.38-1.73). These data suggest that interventions to prevent frailty and pre-frailty are needed.