Kathrin Jobski, Michaela Ritschel, Katja Pöggel-Krämer, Daniela Anheier, Burkhard Haastert, Veronika Gontscharuk, Werner Arend, Marion Baltes, Astrid Stephan, Gabriele Meyer, Birgit Klüppelholz, Joachim Windolf, Simon Thelen, Carina Jaekel, Silke Andrich, Andrea Icks, Falk Hoffmann
{"title":"髋部骨折后的止痛药和疼痛强度--基于 ProFem 队列研究的分析。","authors":"Kathrin Jobski, Michaela Ritschel, Katja Pöggel-Krämer, Daniela Anheier, Burkhard Haastert, Veronika Gontscharuk, Werner Arend, Marion Baltes, Astrid Stephan, Gabriele Meyer, Birgit Klüppelholz, Joachim Windolf, Simon Thelen, Carina Jaekel, Silke Andrich, Andrea Icks, Falk Hoffmann","doi":"10.1002/pds.5865","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Pain is a common symptom following proximal femoral fractures (PFF), however, information on its treatment in terms of agents and type of use (scheduled vs. pro re nata [PRN]) is scarce. The main objective of this study was to examine pain medication regimens according to pain intensity following PFF. Furthermore, we explored the utilization of medication plans.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The \"ProFem\"-study on healthcare provision, functional ability, and quality of life after PFF is a German population-based prospective cohort study based on statutory health insurance data and individually linked survey data from different time points including information on the currently used medication. This present analysis refers to the participants' baseline interviews (about 3 months following PFF) conducted from 2018 to 2019 in the participants' private surroundings.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The study population comprised 444 participants (mean age: 81.2 years, 71.0% female). Half of them reported high intensity pain, and the mean value for the EuroQol visual analogue scale was 50.8. Most commonly used analgesics were metamizole and tilidine/naloxone. Among participants with high intensity pain, 21.9% received only PRN pain medication and 17.2% no pain medication at all. Overall, 61.5% of participants presented any (printed) medication plan and only 25.2% a \"federal standardized medication plan\" (BMP).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>As a substantial number of patients reports high intensity pain about 3 months following a PFF, the large proportion of those receiving no or only PRN pain medication raises questions regarding the appropriateness of the therapy. The overall low utilization of the BMP indicates potential for improvement.</p>","PeriodicalId":19782,"journal":{"name":"Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety","volume":"33 8","pages":"e5865"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Pain Medication and Pain Intensity Following Hip Fractures-Analyses Based on the ProFem Cohort Study.\",\"authors\":\"Kathrin Jobski, Michaela Ritschel, Katja Pöggel-Krämer, Daniela Anheier, Burkhard Haastert, Veronika Gontscharuk, Werner Arend, Marion Baltes, Astrid Stephan, Gabriele Meyer, Birgit Klüppelholz, Joachim Windolf, Simon Thelen, Carina Jaekel, Silke Andrich, Andrea Icks, Falk Hoffmann\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/pds.5865\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Pain is a common symptom following proximal femoral fractures (PFF), however, information on its treatment in terms of agents and type of use (scheduled vs. pro re nata [PRN]) is scarce. The main objective of this study was to examine pain medication regimens according to pain intensity following PFF. Furthermore, we explored the utilization of medication plans.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The \\\"ProFem\\\"-study on healthcare provision, functional ability, and quality of life after PFF is a German population-based prospective cohort study based on statutory health insurance data and individually linked survey data from different time points including information on the currently used medication. This present analysis refers to the participants' baseline interviews (about 3 months following PFF) conducted from 2018 to 2019 in the participants' private surroundings.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The study population comprised 444 participants (mean age: 81.2 years, 71.0% female). Half of them reported high intensity pain, and the mean value for the EuroQol visual analogue scale was 50.8. Most commonly used analgesics were metamizole and tilidine/naloxone. Among participants with high intensity pain, 21.9% received only PRN pain medication and 17.2% no pain medication at all. Overall, 61.5% of participants presented any (printed) medication plan and only 25.2% a \\\"federal standardized medication plan\\\" (BMP).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>As a substantial number of patients reports high intensity pain about 3 months following a PFF, the large proportion of those receiving no or only PRN pain medication raises questions regarding the appropriateness of the therapy. The overall low utilization of the BMP indicates potential for improvement.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":19782,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety\",\"volume\":\"33 8\",\"pages\":\"e5865\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1002/pds.5865\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/pds.5865","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Pain Medication and Pain Intensity Following Hip Fractures-Analyses Based on the ProFem Cohort Study.
Purpose: Pain is a common symptom following proximal femoral fractures (PFF), however, information on its treatment in terms of agents and type of use (scheduled vs. pro re nata [PRN]) is scarce. The main objective of this study was to examine pain medication regimens according to pain intensity following PFF. Furthermore, we explored the utilization of medication plans.
Methods: The "ProFem"-study on healthcare provision, functional ability, and quality of life after PFF is a German population-based prospective cohort study based on statutory health insurance data and individually linked survey data from different time points including information on the currently used medication. This present analysis refers to the participants' baseline interviews (about 3 months following PFF) conducted from 2018 to 2019 in the participants' private surroundings.
Results: The study population comprised 444 participants (mean age: 81.2 years, 71.0% female). Half of them reported high intensity pain, and the mean value for the EuroQol visual analogue scale was 50.8. Most commonly used analgesics were metamizole and tilidine/naloxone. Among participants with high intensity pain, 21.9% received only PRN pain medication and 17.2% no pain medication at all. Overall, 61.5% of participants presented any (printed) medication plan and only 25.2% a "federal standardized medication plan" (BMP).
Conclusion: As a substantial number of patients reports high intensity pain about 3 months following a PFF, the large proportion of those receiving no or only PRN pain medication raises questions regarding the appropriateness of the therapy. The overall low utilization of the BMP indicates potential for improvement.
期刊介绍：
The aim of Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety is to provide an international forum for the communication and evaluation of data, methods and opinion in the discipline of pharmacoepidemiology. The Journal publishes peer-reviewed reports of original research, invited reviews and a variety of guest editorials and commentaries embracing scientific, medical, statistical, legal and economic aspects of pharmacoepidemiology and post-marketing surveillance of drug safety. Appropriate material in these categories may also be considered for publication as a Brief Report.
Particular areas of interest include:
design, analysis, results, and interpretation of studies looking at the benefit or safety of specific pharmaceuticals, biologics, or medical devices, including studies in pharmacovigilance, postmarketing surveillance, pharmacoeconomics, patient safety, molecular pharmacoepidemiology, or any other study within the broad field of pharmacoepidemiology;
comparative effectiveness research relating to pharmaceuticals, biologics, and medical devices. Comparative effectiveness research is the generation and synthesis of evidence that compares the benefits and harms of alternative methods to prevent, diagnose, treat, and monitor a clinical condition, as these methods are truly used in the real world;
methodologic contributions of relevance to pharmacoepidemiology, whether original contributions, reviews of existing methods, or tutorials for how to apply the methods of pharmacoepidemiology;
assessments of harm versus benefit in drug therapy;
patterns of drug utilization;
relationships between pharmacoepidemiology and the formulation and interpretation of regulatory guidelines;
evaluations of risk management plans and programmes relating to pharmaceuticals, biologics and medical devices.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
