Victor Kaitlyn, Skelly Megan, Mulcahy Kimberly, Demler Tammie Lee, Trigoboff Eileen
VA Western New York, Healthcare System, Buffalo, New York, USA.
Buffalo Psychiatric Center, New York State Office of Mental Health.
Int Clin Psychopharmacol. 2018 Sep;33(5):274-281. doi: 10.1097/YIC.0000000000000228.
In April 2016, the US Preventive Service Task Force (USPSTF) updated the aspirin guidelines for the primary prevention of cardiovascular disease (CVD) and colorectal cancer. This review assesses the importance of appropriate use of aspirin for the primary prevention of CVD and, specifically, how individuals with psychiatric disorders may benefit from such use. This study examined how current prescribing practices of aspirin in a state psychiatric hospital align with these new guidelines and how inappropriate prescribing may jeopardize patient safety. A retrospective chart review of 93 patients was performed to evaluate whether aspirin therapy would be recommended for primary prevention of CVD based on the new USPSTF guidelines. A secondary analysis of these data was performed using the 2009 USPSTF recommendations to strengthen the assumption that practitioners were no longer using the old guidelines. Drug interactions between aspirin and concurrently prescribed pharmacotherapy were classified based on of severity, and the past events of bleeding were quantified. Based on the 2016 guidelines, 25 of the 93 patients included in this study were identified as potential candidates who would benefit from aspirin use for the primary prevention of CVD; of whom 22 (88%) were not prescribed aspirin. The remaining 68 patients did not meet the criteria for aspirin use for primary prevention, although 11 (16.2%) of these patients were taking low-dose aspirin. Based on the 2009 guidelines, 49 of the 93 patients included in our study would have been identified as potential candidates who would benefit from the use of aspirin for the primary prevention of CVD; 41 (83.7%) of whom were not prescribed aspirin. The remaining 44 patients did not meet the previous criteria for aspirin use for primary prevention, although six (13.6%) of these individuals were taking low-dose aspirin daily. The results above indicate a difference between prescribing practices of aspirin use for the primary prevention of CVD. We identified a similar rate of underuse; however, there was a slight increase in the appropriate prescribing according to the 2016 guidelines compared with the 2009 guidelines (88 vs. 83.7%, respectively). Also, there was a higher incidence of unnecessary prescribing (overutilization) of aspirin for the primary prevention of CVD in 2016 compared with 2009 despite the more restrictive criteria (and smaller candidate pool) published in these newer guidelines. There were 47 drug interactions identified when patients' aspirin and concurrent medication regimens were reviewed for our entire sample population. These interactions could potentially lead to an adverse drug reaction in the future. Our safety analysis revealed that none of the patients who were prescribed aspirin had any bleeding events while on therapy within the period of this study. Inappropriate omission of aspirin (underutilization) was more prevalent in our psychiatric institution than overutilization; however, the overall percentage of both underuse and overuse were greater when patients were evaluated according to the 2016 guidelines and then compared with the 2009 statistics. Overutilization did not pose a serious risk for those on aspirin therapy in this sample, as there were no major episodes of bleeding. However, future harm from aspirin still exists based on the significant number of major and moderate potential drug interactions with aspirin and the increased risk of decreased adherence to critical psychiatric medications due to increased pill burden and regimen complexity. Our findings demonstrate that there is an opportunity to educate prescribers on the updated 2016 USPSTF guidelines to improve preventive care and patient safety, which include harm reduction by initiating aspirin in those who are at a risk of cardiovascular events, continuing aspirin in those who are currently receiving aspirin appropriately, and discontinuing aspirin in those who are not considered to be at a high risk of CVD and who may also be at a risk of experiencing an increased risk of bleeding.
2016年4月,美国预防服务工作组(USPSTF)更新了心血管疾病(CVD)和结直肠癌一级预防的阿司匹林指南。本综述评估了合理使用阿司匹林进行CVD一级预防的重要性,特别是患有精神疾病的个体如何可能从这种使用中获益。本研究考察了一家州立精神病医院目前阿司匹林的处方实践如何符合这些新指南,以及不适当的处方如何可能危及患者安全。对93例患者进行了回顾性病历审查,以评估根据USPSTF新指南,阿司匹林治疗是否推荐用于CVD的一级预防。使用2009年USPSTF建议对这些数据进行二次分析,以强化从业者不再使用旧指南这一假设。根据严重程度对阿司匹林与同时开具的药物治疗之间的药物相互作用进行分类,并对既往出血事件进行量化。根据2016年指南,本研究纳入的93例患者中有25例被确定为可能从使用阿司匹林进行CVD一级预防中获益的潜在候选者;其中22例(88%)未开具阿司匹林。其余68例患者不符合阿司匹林用于一级预防的标准,尽管其中11例(16.2%)患者正在服用低剂量阿司匹林。根据2009年指南,我们研究纳入的93例患者中有49例被确定为可能从使用阿司匹林进行CVD一级预防中获益的潜在候选者;其中41例(83.7%)未开具阿司匹林。其余44例患者不符合之前阿司匹林用于一级预防的标准,尽管其中6例(13.6%)患者每天服用低剂量阿司匹林。上述结果表明,阿司匹林用于CVD一级预防的处方实践存在差异。我们发现未充分使用的比例相似;然而,与2009年指南相比,根据2016年指南适当处方略有增加(分别为88%和83.7%)。此外,尽管这些更新的指南中发布的标准更严格(候选人群更小),但2016年与2009年相比,阿司匹林用于CVD一级预防的不必要处方(过度使用)发生率更高。对我们的整个样本群体的患者阿司匹林和同时用药方案进行审查时,确定了47种药物相互作用。这些相互作用可能在未来导致药物不良反应。我们的安全性分析显示,在本研究期间,所有开具阿司匹林的患者在治疗期间均未发生任何出血事件。在我们的精神病机构中,阿司匹林的不适当遗漏(未充分使用)比过度使用更为普遍;然而,根据2016年指南评估患者然后与2009年统计数据进行比较时,未充分使用和过度使用的总体百分比都更高。在这个样本中,过度使用对接受阿司匹林治疗的患者没有构成严重风险,因为没有重大出血事件。然而,基于与阿司匹林大量的主要和中度潜在药物相互作用以及由于药片负担增加和用药方案复杂性导致关键精神科药物依从性降低的风险增加,阿司匹林未来仍存在危害。我们的研究结果表明,有机会就2016年USPSTF更新指南对开处方者进行教育,以改善预防性护理和患者安全,这包括在有心血管事件风险的人群中启动阿司匹林以减少危害,在目前正在适当服用阿司匹林的人群中继续使用阿司匹林,以及在不被认为有高CVD风险且可能也有出血风险增加的人群中停用阿司匹林。