Error in Dates of Data Analysis in the Methods: the Research Letter Titled
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Letters Author Affiliations: Renal Hypertension Center, Division of Nephrology, Table 2. Change in Daytime Systolic Blood Pressure University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada (Ruzicka, Bugeja, Edwards, Mean (SD), mm Hg McCormick, Hiremath); Division of Cardiology, University of Ottawa Heart Institute, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada (Leenen); Ottawa Hospital Research With Daytime ABPM Mean Value Institute, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada (Ruzicka, Ramsay, Hiremath); Kidney SBP SBP Research Center, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada (Ruzicka, Time Point Overall <135 mm Hg ≥135 mm Hg Bugeja, Edwards, McCormick, Hiremath). Immediately after DOT −9.7 (17.3) −26.1 (19.9) −2.9 (10.4) (n = 48) Accepted for Publication: March 29, 2019. 1 mo After DOT −11.0 (15.8) −21.9 (14.0) −6.3 (14.2) Corresponding Author: Marcel Ruzicka, MD, PhD, FRCPC, Renal Hypertension (n = 46) Center, Division of Nephrology, University of Ottawa, 1967 Riverside, Rm 5-21, Ottawa, Ontario K1H 7W9, Canada ([email protected]). Abbreviations: ABPM, ambulatory blood pressure monitoring; DOT, directly Published Online: June 17, 2019. doi:10.1001/jamainternmed.2019.1455 observed therapy; SBP, systolic blood pressure. Author Contributions: Drs Ruzicka and Hiremath had full access to all of the data in the study and take responsibility for the integrity of the data and the accuracy of the data analysis. Results | A total of 60 consecutive patients (32 men [67%]; mean Concept and design: Ruzicka, Ramsay, McCormick, Hiremath. [SD] age, 62.1 [13.1] years) were enrolled in the study, and af- Acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data: All authors. Drafting of the manuscript: Ruzicka, Leenen, Ramsay, Hiremath. ter exclusion of those who withdrew consent (n = 4), did not Critical revision of the manuscript for important intellectual content: Ruzicka, attend DOT (n = 4), or missed subsequent ABPM (n = 4), 48 par- Ramsay, Bugeja, Edwards, McCormick, Hiremath. ticipants completed this study for the primary outcome and Statistical analysis: Ruzicka, Ramsay, Hiremath. 46 for the secondary outcome. Baseline characteristics are re- Obtained funding: Ruzicka, Ramsay, Hiremath. Administrative, technical, or material support: Ruzicka, Leenen, Ramsay, ported in Table 1. After DOT, daytime systolic BP remained 135 McCormick, Hiremath. mm Hg or greater in 34 of 48 patients (71%) who experienced Supervision: Ruzicka, Ramsay, Bugeja, Edwards, McCormick, Hiremath. a mean (SD) decrease in systolic BP of 3 (10) mm Hg. In con- Conflict of Interest Disclosures: Dr Ruzicka reported receiving grants from trast, in 14 participants (29%), treatment-resistant hyperten- Physicians Services Incorporated and The Ottawa Hospital Academic Medical Organization–Innovation Fund Provincial Oversight Committee during the sion resolved and systolic BP decreased by 26 (20) mm Hg conduct of the study. Dr Hiremath reported receiving grants from the Canadian (Table 2). This proportion was similar at 1 month in 14 of 46 Institutes of Health Research, Physicians Services Incorporated, and The Ottawa patients (30%) who no longer had treatment-resistant hyper- Hospital Academic Medical Organization outside the submitted work. No other tension. disclosures were reported. Funding/Support: This study was funded by a peer-reviewed grant (Dr Ruzicka) provided by The Ottawa Hospital Academic Medical Organization and Discussion | The results suggest that nonadherence to BP- the Innovation Fund Provincial Oversight Committee (Ontario, Canada). lowering drug regimens is high among referred patients with Role of the Funder/Sponsor: The funding sources had no role in the design and apparent treatment-resistant hypertension, even among those conduct of the study; collection, management, analysis, and interpretation of the data; preparation, review, or approval of the manuscript; and decision to who said they were adherent on questioning before DOT, had submit the manuscript for publication. pristine pharmacy filling records, and had accurate pill counts. Additional Contributions: Peter Magner, MD, FRCPC, provided critical review Moreover, this apparent nonadherence occurred despite more of the concept and results of this study (not compensated); Valerie Cronin, RN, than 50% of these patients already having had an adverse vas- was the research coordinator for the study (compensated); and the Hypertension Clinic study staff conducted the direct observed therapy cular event related to uncontrolled hypertension. However, we procedures (compensated). cannot exclude the possibility that the process of being in the 1. Burnier M, Wuerzner G, Struijker-Boudier H, Urquhart J. Measuring, study or receiving treatment from a nurse in a clinic was as- analyzing, and managing drug adherence in resistant hypertension. Hypertension. sociated with lower BP for some patients. Of interest, most of 2013;62(2):218-225. doi:10.1161/HYPERTENSIONAHA.113.00687 those with markedly improved BP after DOT had a sustained 2. Fadl Elmula FE, Hoffmann P, Larstorp AC, et al. Adjusted drug treatment is superior to renal sympathetic denervation in patients with true improvement in BP control seen at 1 month. Limitations of the treatment-resistant hypertension. Hypertension. 2014;63(5):991-999. doi:10. study include that the patients were highly selected and likely 1161/HYPERTENSIONAHA.114.03246 do not represent most patients with hypertension in the com- 3. Ruzicka M, Hiremath S. Can drugs work in patients who do not take them? munity. The use of DOT as described here was strictly dichoto- the problem of non-adherence in resistant hypertension. Curr Hypertens Rep. mous (adherence vs nonadherence) and thus does not allow 2015;17(9):579. doi:10.1007/s11906-015-0579-4 4. Ruzicka M, McCormick B, Leenen FH, Froeschl M, Hiremath S. Adherence to for precise assessment of the degree of nonadherence (eg, par- blood pressure-lowering drugs and resistant hypertension: should trial of direct tial vs complete), as may be the case with therapeutic drug observation therapy be part of preassessment for renal denervation? Can J Cardiol. monitoring.5,6 Overall, the findings suggest that rigorous meth- 2013;29(12):1741.e1-1741.e3. doi:10.1016/j.cjca.2013.07.678 ods of adherence assessment and intervention such as DOT 5. Brinker S, Pandey A, Ayers C, et al. Therapeutic drug monitoring facilitates should be considered for patients with apparent treatment- blood pressure control in resistant hypertension. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2014;63(8): 834-835. doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2013.10.067 resistant hypertension. 6. Eskås PA, Heimark S, Eek Mariampillai J, Larstorp AC, Fadl Elmula FE, Høieggen A. Adherence to medication and drug monitoring in apparent Marcel Ruzicka, MD, PhD, FRCPC treatment-resistant hypertension. Blood Press. 2016;25(4):199-205. doi:10. Frans H. H. Leenen, MD, PhD, FRCPC 3109/08037051.2015.1121706 Tim Ramsay, PhD Ann Bugeja, MD, FRCPC Prevalence of Inappropriateness of Parenteral Cedric Edwards, MD, FRCPC Vitamin B12 Administration in Ontario, Canada Brendan McCormick, MD, FRCPC Randomized clinical trials demonstrate that treating vitamin Swapnil Hiremath, MD, MPH B12 (cobalamin, or hereinafter B12) deficiency with oral supple- 1434 JAMA Internal Medicine October 2019 Volume 179, Number 10 (Reprinted) jamainternalmedicine.com © 2019 American Medical Association. All rights reserved. Downloaded From: https://jamanetwork.com/ on 09/27/2021 Letters mentation substantially increases serum B levels compared 12 Table. Characteristics of Patients Who Received an Intramuscular with intramuscular injections, with no difference in hemato- a Vitamin B12 Prescription logic or neuropsychiatric outcomes.1 Despite this, some pri- Patients, No. (%) mary care physicians still inappropriately administer B12 in- Characteristics (n = 146 850) jections to elderly patients.2 To our knowledge, there is no Age, y published literature characterizing prescribing patterns of in- Mean (SD) 76.5 (8.1) Median (IQR) [range] 76 (14.0) tramuscular B12 using laboratory data to document patient se- [65-110] rum levels. In this study, we assessed the prevalence of inap- Age categorized, y propriate B supplementation using population-based 12 65-69 36 866 (25.1) databases and estimated the associated cost. 70-74 28 196 (19.2) 75-79 28 014 (19.1) Methods | We performed a population-based, retrospective co- 80-84 26 055 (17.7) hort study using health system administrative databases within 85-89 18 384 (12.5) ICES, formerly the Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences, in ≥ 90 9335 (6.4) Ontario, Canada. Data sets were linked using unique, encoded Sex identifiers and analyzed at ICES. All persons 65 years or older Male 60 037 (40.9) who received at least 1 intramuscular B12 prescription from Janu- Female 86 813 (59.1) ary 1, 2011, to September 30, 2015 (data on B12 levels were not Location of residence available until January 1, 2010), were included. Data were ana- Rural 12 692 (8.6) lyzed from July 26, 2018, to November 22, 2018. The primary Urban 124 359 (84.7) Neighborhood income quintile outcome was the proportion of inappropriate B12 supplemen- Q1 (lowest) 32 905 (22.4) tation, defined as persons with either a normal serum B12 level Q2 32 230 (22.0) (≥ 221 pmol/L), or without a documented B12 level in the 12 Q3 29 828 (20.3) months prior to their first intramuscular B12 prescription. Vita- Q4 27 679 (18.9) min B12 supplementation was considered appropriate when per- Q5 (highest) 23 573 (16.1) sons had at least 1 documented level of marginal B12 deficiency Comorbidities (≤ 221 pmol/L) in the year prior to receiving their first B injec- 12 Crohn disease, ulcerative colitis, and malabsorption 9309 (6.3) tion. Annual cost of inappropriate, once-monthly injections was Pernicious anemia 40 908 (27.9) estimated in Canadian dollars using the amount paid for a phy- ADG comorbidity classification scheme sician visit ($33.70), intramuscular injection ($3.89), and pre- Low scores (0-5) 24 135 (16.4) scription cost ($6.74). Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre’s re- Moderate scores (6-9) 51 920 (35.4) search ethics board approved this study and waived patient High scores (≥ 10) 70 795 (48.2) written informed consent for deidentified data.