Marin Judith G, Beresford Laura, Lo Clifford, Pai Alexander, Espino-Hernandez Gabriela, Beaulieu Monica
St. Paul's Hospital, Providence Health Care, Vancouver, BC, Canada.
UBC Faculty of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Vancouver, Canada.
Can J Kidney Health Dis. 2020 May 1;7:2054358120912652. doi: 10.1177/2054358120912652. eCollection 2020.
Patients treated with maintenance dialysis are at high risk of polypharmacy given their many comorbidities as well as complications from their disease state and treatment. The prescribing patterns and burden of polypharmacy in patients treated with maintenance dialysis, and specifically the difference between hemodialysis (HD) and peritoneal dialysis (PD) prescribing, are not well characterized.
The objectives of this study were to review the prescribing patterns for patients treated with maintenance dialysis, to compare prescribing pattern between HD and PD, and to identify opportunities for deprescription.
This is a retrospective cohort study.
This study was conducted in all dialysis centers in British Columbia, Canada.
Patients who were receiving chronic dialysis (>120 days on the same dialysis modality) between June 3 and October 1, 2015, and registered in the British Columbia (BC) Renal Patient Records and Outcomes Management Information System.
Patient demographics as well as both prescription and non-prescription medications were collected. Comparison of discrete and continuous variables was made by chi-square analysis and independent test, respectively. All statistical tests were 2-sided, and a value of <.05 was considered statistically significant.
Medications were classified by indication: (1) management of renal complications, (2) cardiovascular (CV) medications, (3) diabetes medications, or (4) management of symptoms, and then classified as to whether they were a "potentially inappropriate medication" (PIM) or not. Ethics approval was granted from the University of British Columbia Research and Ethics Board.
In total, 3017 patients met inclusion criteria (2243 HD, 774 PD). The mean age was 66.2 ± 14.8 years. The HD group had more patients over 80 years old (22.1% vs 12.5%) and more patients with diabetes and CV disease. The mean number (standard deviation [SD]) of discrete prescribed medications was 17.71 (5.72) overall with more medications in the HD group versus the PD group. The mean number of medications increased with dialysis vintage in both groups. HD patients were on more medications for renal complications and management of symptoms than PD patients. Of the total number of medications prescribed, 5.02 (2.78) were classified as a PIM, with the number of PIMs higher in HD vs PD patients: 5.37 (2.83) versus 4.02 (2.37).
In BC, some of the medications are prescribed through standardized protocols and may not be comparable with other Canadian provinces. We report here prescribing patterns, not utilization patterns, as we are not able to ascertain actual consumption of prescribed medication.
This study reviews and characterizes both the prescription and non-prescription medication prescribed to HD patients and PD patients in BC. Pill burden in both groups is high, as is the prescription of PIMs. Patients receiving maintenance HD receive more overall medications and more PIMs. These results highlight areas of opportunities for future systematic and patient-informed deprescription initiatives in both patient groups.
接受维持性透析治疗的患者由于存在多种合并症以及疾病状态和治疗引发的并发症,面临着多重用药的高风险。维持性透析患者的用药模式和多重用药负担,尤其是血液透析(HD)和腹膜透析(PD)用药之间的差异,目前尚未得到充分描述。
本研究的目的是回顾维持性透析患者的用药模式,比较HD和PD之间的用药模式,并确定减少用药的机会。
这是一项回顾性队列研究。
本研究在加拿大不列颠哥伦比亚省的所有透析中心进行。
2015年6月3日至10月1日期间接受慢性透析(同一透析方式超过120天)并注册于不列颠哥伦比亚省(BC)肾脏患者记录与结局管理信息系统的患者。
收集患者人口统计学数据以及处方药和非处方药信息。分别采用卡方分析和独立t检验对离散变量和连续变量进行比较。所有统计检验均为双侧检验,P值<.05被认为具有统计学意义。
药物按适应证分类:(1)肾脏并发症管理,(2)心血管(CV)药物,(3)糖尿病药物,或(4)症状管理,然后再分类为是否为“潜在不适当药物”(PIM)。获得了英属哥伦比亚大学研究与伦理委员会的伦理批准。
共有3017例患者符合纳入标准(2243例HD,774例PD)。平均年龄为66.2±14.8岁。HD组80岁以上患者更多(22.1%对12.5%),糖尿病和CV疾病患者也更多。总体离散处方药的平均数量(标准差[SD])为17.71(5.7 < 原文此处似乎不完整),HD组的药物数量多于PD组。两组患者的用药数量均随透析时间增加。HD患者用于肾脏并发症管理和症状管理的药物比PD患者更多。在所有处方药物中,5.02(2.78)种被分类为PIM,HD患者的PIM数量高于PD患者:5.37(2.83)对4.02(2.37)。
在BC省,一些药物是通过标准化方案开具的,可能与加拿大其他省份不可比。我们在此报告的是用药模式,而非使用模式,因为我们无法确定处方药的实际消耗量。
本研究回顾并描述了BC省HD患者和PD患者的处方药和非处方药情况。两组的用药负担都很高,PIM的处方情况也是如此。接受维持性HD的患者总体用药更多,PIM也更多。这些结果突出了未来针对这两组患者开展系统性且基于患者信息的减少用药举措的机会领域。