Search

Background: Adverse drug reaction reports used in pharmacosurveillance often lack complete information on treatment indication that is important for benefit-risk analyses and clinical and regulatory decision making. A systematic documentation of treatment indication using electronic prescribing applications provides an opportunity to develop new pharmacosurveillance tools that will allow evaluation of drugs by weighing benefits and risks for specific indications, and evaluate off-label prescribing. In addition, interfacing indications with reminders and clinical guidelines can enhance clinical decision making. We investigated the validity of treatment indications documented using an electronic prescribing system at the time of prescribing.Objectives: To determine the sensitivity and positive predictive value (PPV) of an electronic prescribing system in documenting treatment indications at the time of drug prescribing, and to investigate the use of treatment indication data to evaluate off-label prescribing in primary-care practice.Study Design and Setting: We prospectively assessed the validity of documenting treatment indication using an electronic prescribing system by comparing it with treatment indications documented by physician-facilitated medical chart review ('gold standard'). Sensitivity and PPV were evaluated in 338 patients of 22 community-based primary-care physicians in Quebec, Canada, in 2006.Results: The sensitivity of the electronic prescribing system in documenting treatment indication was 98.5% (95% CI 96.5, 99.5) and the PPV of the system in accurately identifying the treatment indication was 97.0% (95% CI 94.2, 98.6). The treatment indication data collected using this system allowed assessment of off-label prescribing.Conclusions: The electronic prescribing system offers a valid method for documenting treatment indication at the time of prescribing. Our results provide strong evidence to support incorporating mandatory recording of treatment indication in integrated electronic prescribing systems to provide a critical piece of information for the evaluation of safety and effectiveness of drugs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the efficacy of a task-oriented walking intervention in improving balance self-efficacy in persons with stroke and to determine whether effects were task-specific, influenced by baseline level of self-efficacy and associated with changes in walking and balance capacity. DESIGN: Secondary analysis of a two-center, observer-blinded, randomized, controlled trial. SETTING: General community. PARTICIPANTS: Ninety-one individuals with a residual walking deficit within 1 year of a first or recurrent stroke. INTERVENTION: Task-oriented interventions targeting walking or upper extremity (UE) function were provided three times a week for 6 weeks. MEASUREMENTS: Activities-specific Balance Confidence Scale, Six-Minute Walk Test, 5-m walk, Berg Balance Scale, and Timed 'Up and Go' administered at baseline and postintervention. RESULTS: The walking intervention was associated with a significantly greater average proportional change in balance self-efficacy than the UE intervention. Treatment effects were largest in persons with low self-efficacy at baseline and for activities relating to tasks practiced. In the walking group, change in balance self-efficacy correlated with change in functional walking capacity (correlation coefficient=0.45, 95% confidence interval=0.16-0.68). Results of multivariable modeling suggested effect modification by the baseline level of depressive symptoms and a prognostic influence of age, sex, comorbidity, time poststroke, and functional mobility on change in self-efficacy. CONCLUSION: Task-oriented walking retraining enhances balance self-efficacy in community-dwelling individuals with chronic stroke. Benefits may be partially the result of improvement in walking capacity. The influence of baseline level of self-efficacy, depressive symptoms, and prognostic variables on treatment effects are of clinical importance and must be verified in future studies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BACKGROUND: As the definitional formula for population attributable fraction is not usually directly usable in applications, separate estimation formulas are required. However, most epidemiology textbooks limit their coverage to Levin's formula, based on the (dichotomous) distribution of the exposure of interest in the population. Few present or explain Miettinen's formula, based on the distribution of the exposure in the cases; and even fewer present the corresponding formulas for situations with more than two levels of exposure. Thus, many health researchers and public health practitioners are unaware of, or are not confident in their use of, these formulas, particularly when they involve several exposure levels, or confounding factors. METHODS/RESULTS: A heuristic approach, coupled with pictorial representations, is offered to help understand and interconnect the structures behind the Levin and Miettinen formulas. The pictorial representation shows how to deal correctly with several exposure levels, and why a commonly used approach is incorrect. Correct and incorrect approaches are also presented for situations where estimates must be aggregated over strata of a confounding factor. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]