Search

Introduction: Hip fractures are associated with a high burden of morbidity and mortality. Globally, there is wide variation in the incidence of hip fracture in people aged 50 years and older. Longitudinal and cross-geographical comparisons of health data can provide insights on aetiology, risk factors, and healthcare practices. However, systematic reviews of studies that use different methods and study periods do not permit direct comparison across geographical regions. Thus, the objective of this study is to investigate global secular trends in hip fracture incidence, mortality and use of postfracture pharmacological treatment across Asia, Oceania, North and South America, and Western and Northern Europe using a unified methodology applied to health records., Methods and Analysis: This retrospective cohort study will use a common protocol and an analytical common data model approach to examine incidence of hip fracture across population-based databases in different geographical regions and healthcare settings. The study period will be from 2005 to 2018 subject to data availability in study sites. Patients aged 50 years and older and hospitalised due to hip fracture during the study period will be included. The primary outcome will be expressed as the annual incidence of hip fracture. Secondary outcomes will be the pharmacological treatment rate and mortality within 12 months following initial hip fracture by year. For the primary outcome, crude and standardised incidence of hip fracture will be reported. Linear regression will be used to test for time trends in the annual incidence. For secondary outcomes, the crude mortality and standardised mortality incidence will be reported., Ethics and Dissemination: Each participating site will follow the relevant local ethics and regulatory frameworks for study approval. The results of the study will be submitted for peer-reviewed scientific publications and presented at scientific conferences., Competing Interests: Competing interests: ICKW, SW, KMCV, A-MT, HTS, J-YS, DP-A, MMdA, EC-CL, KK, CD-P, MC, AHYC, and JSB had financial support from Amgen Inc. for the submitted work., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Background: The use of medications to treat attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) has increased, but the prevalence of ADHD medication use across different world regions is not known. Our objective was to determine regional and national prevalences of ADHD medication use in children and adults, with a specific focus on time trends in ADHD medication prevalence., Methods: We did a retrospective, observational study using population-based databases from 13 countries and one Special Administrative Region (SAR): four in Asia and Australia, two in North America, five in northern Europe, and three in western Europe. We used a common protocol approach to define study populations and parameters similarly across countries and the SAR. Study populations consisted of all individuals aged 3 years or older between Jan 1, 2001, and Dec 31, 2015 (dependent on data availability). We estimated annual prevalence of ADHD medication use with 95% CI during the study period, by country and region and stratified by age and sex. We reported annual absolute and relative percentage changes to describe time trends., Findings: 154·5 million individuals were included in the study. ADHD medication use prevalence in 2010 (in children aged 3-18 years) varied between 0·27% and 6·69% in the countries and SAR assessed (0·95% in Asia and Australia, 4·48% in North America, 1·95% in northern Europe, and 0·70% in western Europe). The prevalence of ADHD medication use among children increased over time in all countries and regions, and the absolute increase per year ranged from 0·02% to 0·26%. Among adults aged 19 years or older, the prevalence of any ADHD medication use in 2010 varied between 0·003% and 1·48% (0·05% in Asia and Australia, 1·42% in North America, 0·47% in northern Europe, and 0·03% in western Europe). The absolute increase in ADHD medication use prevalence per year ranged from 0·0006% to 0·12%. Methylphenidate was the most commonly used ADHD medication in most countries., Interpretation: Using a common protocol and data from 13 countries and one SAR, these results show increases over time but large variations in ADHD medication use in multiple regions. The recommendations of evidence-based guidelines need to be followed consistently in clinical practice. Further research is warranted to describe the safety and effectiveness of ADHD medication in the short and long term, and to inform evidence-based guidelines, particularly in adults., Funding: None., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Prescription sequence symmetry analysis (PSSA) is a signal detection method for adverse drug events. Its capacity to consistently detect adverse drug events across different settings has not been tested. We aimed to determine the consistency of PSSA results for detecting positive and negative control adverse drug events across different settings., Methods: Using a distributed network model, we analyzed prescription dispensing data using PSSA in Australia, Hong Kong, Japan, Korea, and Taiwan. Positive control was amiodarone and thyroxine, as a marker of amiodarone-induced hypothyroidism, a known adverse event with a clear temporal relationship to amiodarone initiation. Negative controls were amiodarone and allopurinol, as a marker of amiodarone-induced gout and thyroxine and allopurinol, as a marker of thyroxine-induced gout. Gout is not recorded as an adverse event in product information for either medicine. Adjusted sequence ratios (ASR) were calculated for each country. Pooled estimates were obtained by using the generic inverse variance method., Results: A positive association was identified between amiodarone and thyroxine in all settings with a pooled ASR 2.63 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.47-4.72). Temporal analysis showed the effect occurred within the first few weeks of treatment. No significant associations were found for the negative controls in any setting; pooled ASR were 0.76 (95%CI 0.62-0.93) and 0.98 (95%CI 0.85-1.12) for amiodarone-allopurinol and thyroxine-allopurinol, respectively., Conclusion: Despite different health settings, different populations, and different patterns of medicine utilization, PSSA gave consistent estimates across countries for a well-known positive association and two negative control adverse events., (© 2015 The Authors Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)