Search

Background It is not clear which hypercholesterolemic patients benefit most from β-hydroxy-β-methylglutaryl coenzyme A reductase inhibitors with respect to the prevention of cardiovascular events. Early signs of atherosclerotic vascular damage may identify high-risk patients.Design We studied whether subjects with hypercholesterolemia will benefit more from starting statin treatment in the case of high albuminuria and/or high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hsCRP).Methods Included were subjects who had hypercholesterolemia at baseline, a negative cardiovascular disease history and who were not treated with statins. In total, 2011 subjects were analysed, of whom 695 started with a statin during a follow-up of 7.0 ± 1.7 years. Adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) for cardiovascular events were calculated in subjects who started versus those who did not start a statin stratified for albuminuria less than or ≥ 15 mg/day and/or hsCRP less than or ≥ 3 mg/L.Results The start of a statin was associated with a beneficial effect on cardiovascular risk in subjects with high albuminuria (HR 0.38 (0.23–0.60)), while the effect of starting a statin was non-significant in subjects with low albuminuria (HR 0.74 (0.44–1.24), Pfor interaction < 0.05). The effect of starting a statin was similar in subgroups with high and low hsCRP (Pfor interaction 0.34). When combining albuminuria and hsCRP subgroups, the start of statin treatment was associated with a lower risk of cardiovascular events dependent on albuminuria and not on the hsCRP level.Conclusions The start of statin treatment is associated with a significantly lower absolute as well as relative risk of cardiovascular events in subjects with hypercholesterolemia and elevated albuminuria, whereas these drugs had less effect in subjects with normal albuminuria.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate drug use in 2 Dutch nursing homes (254 residents) by developing and evaluating prescribing indicators based on pharmacy prescription data.METHODS: We evaluated the prescribing of benzodiazepines, nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), ulcer-healing drugs, and diuretics. Prescribing indicators were used to identify prescribing that was potentially not in line with recommendations in national and regional prescribing guidelines. We used both descriptive indicators, such as the number and percentage of users, and indicators reflecting potentially suboptimal prescribing, such as use of drugs outside the regional drug formulary, use of >1 drug from the same drug class, and prescription of drug dosages above recommended values. When potentially suboptimal prescribing was found, we verified the findings by means of an interview with 1 of the prescribers.RESULTS: The prescribing indicators we assessed were generally in agreement with national and regional guidelines. However, prescribing of NSAIDs without concomitant prescribing of gastroprotective drugs was found in a relatively high number of patients. After prescriber interview and patient chart review, it was found that some prescribing indicators, such as dosages above recommended values, were not always indicative for suboptimal prescribing.CONCLUSIONS: This pilot study showed that prescribing indicators based solely on pharmacy prescription data can be a useful tool to evaluate drug prescribing. With some of these prescribing indicators, we identified cases of potentially suboptimal prescribing. However, with other indicators such as those based on drug dosages, we could not identify suboptimal prescribing, and clinical information from the prescriber was necessary to get insight into the appropriateness of prescribing.