Univ. Lille, CHU Lille, ULR 2694 - METRICS: Évaluation des Technologies de Santé et des Pratiques Médicales, Lille, France.
CHU Lille, Institut de Pharmacie, Lille, France.
PLoS One. 2022 Sep 12;17(9):e0274256. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0274256. eCollection 2022.
Potentially inappropriate prescriptions (PIPs) of antidiabetic drugs (ADs) (PIPADs) to patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) have been reported in some studies. The detection of PIPs in electronic databases requires the development of explicit definitions. This approach is widely used in geriatrics but has not been extended to PIPADs in diabetes mellitus. The objective of the present literature review was to identify all explicit definitions of PIPADs in patients with T2DM.
We performed a systematic review of the literature listed on Medline (via PubMed), Scopus, Web of Science, and, Embase between 2010 and 2021. The query included a combination of three concepts ("T2DM" AND "PIPs" AND "ADs") and featured a total of 86 keywords. Two independent reviewers selected publications, extracted explicit definitions of PIPADs, and then classified the definitions by therapeutic class and organ class.
Of the 4,093 screened publications, 39 were included. In all, 171 mentions of PIPADs (corresponding to 56 unique explicit definitions) were identified. More than 50% of the definitions were related to either metformin (34%) or sulfonylureas (29%). More than 75% of the definitions were related to either abnormal renal function (56%) or age (22%). In addition, 20% (n = 35) mentions stated that biguanides were inappropriate in patients with renal dysfunction and 17.5% (n = 30) stated that sulfonylureas were inappropriate above a certain age. The definitions of PIPADs were heterogeneous and had various degrees of precision.
Our results showed that researchers focused primarily on the at-risk situations related to biguanide prescriptions in patients with renal dysfunction and the prescription of sulfonylureas to older people. Our systematic review of the literature revealed a lack of consensus on explicit definitions of PIPADs, which were heterogeneous and limited (in most cases) to a small number of drugs and clinical situations.
一些研究报告显示,在 2 型糖尿病(T2DM)患者中,存在抗糖尿病药物(ADs)的潜在不适当处方(PIPs)(PIPADs)。在电子数据库中检测 PIPs 需要制定明确的定义。这种方法在老年病学中被广泛应用,但尚未扩展到糖尿病中的 PIPADs。本文献综述的目的是确定 T2DM 患者中 PIPADs 的所有明确定义。
我们对 2010 年至 2021 年期间在 Medline(通过 PubMed)、Scopus、Web of Science 和 Embase 上列出的文献进行了系统回顾。查询包括三个概念的组合(“T2DM”和“PIPs”和“ADs”),共有 86 个关键词。两名独立的审查员选择出版物,提取 PIPADs 的明确定义,然后按治疗类别和器官类别对定义进行分类。
在筛选出的 4093 篇出版物中,有 39 篇被纳入。总共确定了 171 个 PIPADs 的提及(对应 56 个独特的明确定义)。超过 50%的定义与二甲双胍(34%)或磺酰脲类药物(29%)有关。超过 75%的定义与肾功能异常(56%)或年龄(22%)有关。此外,20%(n=35)的提及表明,在肾功能障碍患者中,双胍类药物不适当,17.5%(n=30)的提及表明,在一定年龄以上,磺酰脲类药物不适当。PIPADs 的定义具有异质性,并且具有不同程度的精度。
我们的结果表明,研究人员主要关注肾功能障碍患者中与双胍类药物处方相关的高危情况,以及磺酰脲类药物在老年人中的处方。我们对文献的系统回顾显示,PIPADs 的明确定义缺乏共识,这些定义具有异质性且有限(在大多数情况下),仅限于少数几种药物和临床情况。