Rockwell Michelle S, Oyese Emma G, Singh Eshika, Vinson Matthew, Yim Isaiah, Turner Jamie K, Epling John W
Department of Family & Community Medicine, Virginia Tech Carilion School of Medicine, Roanoke, VA.
Virginia Tech Carilion School of Medicine, Roanoke, VA.
medRxiv. 2023 Jul 30:2023.07.29.23293362. doi: 10.1101/2023.07.29.23293362.
Potentially harmful nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) utilization persists at undesirable rates throughout the world. The purpose of this paper is to review the literature on interventions to de-implement potentially harmful NSAIDs in healthcare settings and to suggest directions for future research.
Scoping review.
PubMed, CINAHL, Embase, Cochrane Central, and Google Scholar (2000-2022).
Studies reporting on the effectiveness of interventions to systematically reduce potentially harmful NSAID utilization in healthcare settings.
Using Covidence systematic review software, we extracted study and intervention characteristics, including the effectiveness of interventions in reducing NSAID utilization.
From 7,818 articles initially identified, 68 were included in the review. Most studies took place in European countries (45.6%) or the U.S. (35.3%), with randomized controlled trial as the most common design (55.9%). The majority of studies (76.2%) reported a reduction in the utilization of potentially harmful NSAIDs. Interventions were largely clinician-facing (76.2%) and delivered in primary care (60.2%). Academic detailing, clinical decision support or electronic medical record interventions, performance reports, and pharmacist review were frequent approaches employed. NSAID use was most commonly classified as potentially harmful based on patients' age (55.8%) or history of gastrointestinal disorders (47.1%) or kidney disease (38.2%). Only 7.4% of interventions focused on over-the-counter NSAIDs in addition to prescription. Few studies (5.9%) evaluated pain or quality of life following NSAIDs discontinuation.
Many varied interventions are effective in de-implementing potentially harmful NSAIDs in healthcare settings. Efforts to adapt, scale, and disseminate these interventions are needed. In addition, future interventions should address over-the-counter NSAIDs, which are broadly available and widely used. Evaluating unintended consequences of interventions, including patient-focused outcomes, is another important priority.
在全球范围内,潜在有害的非甾体抗炎药(NSAIDs)的使用比例一直居高不下,令人担忧。本文旨在回顾关于在医疗机构中减少潜在有害NSAIDs使用的干预措施的文献,并为未来研究提出方向。
范围综述。
PubMed、CINAHL、Embase、Cochrane Central和谷歌学术(2000 - 2022年)。
报告在医疗机构中系统减少潜在有害NSAIDs使用的干预措施有效性的研究。
使用Covidence系统综述软件,我们提取了研究和干预特征,包括干预措施在减少NSAIDs使用方面的有效性。
从最初识别的7818篇文章中,68篇被纳入综述。大多数研究发生在欧洲国家(45.6%)或美国(35.3%),最常见的设计是随机对照试验(55.9%)。大多数研究(76.2%)报告潜在有害NSAIDs的使用有所减少。干预措施主要面向临床医生(76.2%),并在初级保健中实施(60.2%)。学术详述、临床决策支持或电子病历干预、绩效报告以及药剂师审查是常用的方法。基于患者年龄(55.8%)、胃肠道疾病史(47.1%)或肾脏疾病史(38.2%),NSAIDs的使用最常被归类为潜在有害。除了处方NSAIDs外,只有7.4%的干预措施关注非处方NSAIDs。很少有研究(5.9%)评估停用NSAIDs后的疼痛或生活质量。
许多不同的干预措施在医疗机构中减少潜在有害NSAIDs的使用方面是有效的。需要努力对这些干预措施进行调整、扩大规模并加以传播。此外,未来的干预措施应针对广泛可得且广泛使用的非处方NSAIDs。评估干预措施的意外后果,包括以患者为中心的结果,是另一个重要的优先事项。