Polypharmacy among patients with diabetes: a cross-sectional retrospective study in a tertiary hospital in Saudi Arabia

Abstract Patients with diabetes are at high risk for polypharmacy (ie, use of multiple medications) for treatment of diabetes, associated comorbidities and other coexisting conditions. This study aims to estimate the prevalence of polypharmacy and factors associated with polypharmacy among adult patients with diabetes.Methods A cross-sectional retrospective observational study of adults with diabetes, who visited the outpatient clinic of a tertiary teaching hospital in Saudi Arabia, was conducted. Data were extracted from the Electronic Health Record database for a period of 12 months (January– December 2016). Polypharmacy was defined as the cumulative use of five or more medications. Polypharmacy among adults with diabetes was measured by calculating the average number of medications prescribed per patient. A multivariable logistic regression model was used to examine the factors associated with polypharmacy. Results A total of 8932 adults with diabetes were included in this study. Of these, nearly 78% had polypharmacy which was more likely among women as compared with men and more likely among older adults (age ≥60 years) as compared with the adults. Also, polypharmacy was two times as likely among patients with coexisting cardiovascular conditions (adjusted OR (AOR)=2.89; 95% CI 2.54 to 3.29), respiratory disease (AOR=2.42; 95% CI 1.92 to 3.03) and mental health conditions (AOR=2.19; 95% CI 1.74 to 2.76), and three times as likely among patients with coexisting musculoskeletal disease (AOR=3.16; 95% CI 2.31 to 4.30) as compared with those without these coexisting chronic conditions categories. Conclusions Polypharmacy is common among patients with diabetes, with an even higher rate in older adults patients. Healthcare providers can help in detecting polypharmacy and in providing recommendations for simplifying medication regimens and minimising medications to enhance the outcome of diabetes care

Ketamine-based sedation use in mechanically ventilated critically ill patients with COVID-19: A multicenter cohort study

Backgrounds: Ketamine possesses analgesia, anti-inflammation, anticonvulsant, and neuroprotection properties. However, the evidence that supports its use in mechanically ventilated critically ill patients with COVID-19 is insufficient. The study's goal was to assess ketamine's effectiveness and safety in critically ill, mechanically ventilated (MV) patients with COVID-19. Methods: Adult critically ill patients with COVID-19 were included in a multicenter retrospective-prospective cohort study. Patients admitted between March 1, 2020, and July 31, 2021, to five ICUs in Saudi Arabia were included. Eligible patients who required MV within 24 hours of ICU admission were divided into two sub-cohort groups based on their use of ketamine (Control vs. Ketamine). The primary outcome was the length of stay (LOS) in the hospital. P/F ratio differences, lactic acid normalization, MV duration, and mortality were considered secondary outcomes. Propensity score (PS) matching was used (1:2 ratio) based on the selected criteria. Results: In total, 1,130 patients met the eligibility criteria. Among these, 1036 patients (91.7 %) were in the control group, whereas 94 patients (8.3 %) received ketamine. The total number of patients after PS matching, was 264 patients, including 88 patients (33.3 %) who received ketamine. The ketamine group's LOS was significantly lower (beta coefficient (95 % CI): −0.26 (−0.45, −0.07), P = 0.008). Furthermore, the PaO2/FiO2 ratio significantly improved 24 hours after the start of ketamine treatment compared to the pre-treatment period (6 hours) (124.9 (92.1, 184.5) vs. 106 (73.1, 129.3; P = 0.002). Additionally, the ketamine group had a substantially shorter mean time for lactic acid normalization (beta coefficient (95 % CI): −1.55 (−2.42, −0.69), P 0.01). However, there were no significant differences in the duration of MV or mortality. Conclusions: Ketamine-based sedation was associated with lower hospital LOS and faster lactic acid normalization but no mortality benefits in critically ill patients with COVID-19. Thus, larger prospective studies are recommended to assess the safety and effectiveness of ketamine as a sedative in critically ill adult patients

Potentially Inappropriate Medications Use among Older Adults with Dyslipidaemia

Background: Since older patients with dyslipidemia frequently receive many prescriptions, medication errors are typical and expected in this population. This risk has increased by using potentially inappropriate medications. The 2019 Beers criteria were used in this study to investigate potentially inappropriate medication use among older individuals with dyslipidemia. Methods: A cross-sectional retrospective analysis used data from electronic medical records from an ambulatory-care environment. Patients with dyslipidemia who were older adults (>65 years old) were included. To describe and find potential determinants of potentially inappropriate medication usage, descriptive statistics and logistic regression were employed. Results: This study included 2209 older adults (age ≥ 65) with dyslipidemia. The mean age was 72.1 ± 6.0 years, and the majority of the study sample had hypertension (83.7%) and diabetes (61.7%), and around 80.0% were using polypharmacy. The prevalence of potentially inappropriate medications to be avoided among older adults with dyslipidemia was 48.6%. A high risk of potentially inappropriate medication usage was found in older patients with dyslipidemia who had polypharmacy and comorbid diabetes, ischemic heart disease, and anxiety. Conclusions: This study showed that the number of medications prescribed and the presence of concurrent chronic health conditions are important indicators of the risk of potentially inappropriate medications in ambulatory older patients with dyslipidemia

Covid-19 Vaccine Surveillance in Saudi Arabia: Opportunities for Real-time Assessment

After months of confronting COVID-19 pandemic, several countries, including Saudi Arabia, have recently approved newly developed vaccines to prevent COVID-19 infection. With the new technology utilized to develop some vaccines, questions arise about their long-term safety. To provide rapid response to emerging safety issues, robust surveillance programs that provide near real-time analysis of vaccines effects are required. Saudi Arabia has a well-established passive pharmacovigilance system that monitors drugs and vaccines safety. However, recent development in health digitalization in Saudi Arabia may provide a unique opportunity to harvest existing resources to generate high-quality evidence. This commentary provides an overview of the available systems that can be utilized to monitor the COVID-19 vaccines’ safety and discusses opportunities for data integration to improve data quality and generate real-world evidence on COVID-19 vaccine safety

The Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Diabetes Self-Management in Saudi Arabia

The COVID-19 pandemic disrupted healthcare worldwide, potentially impacting disease management. The objective of this study was to assess the self-management behaviors of Saudi patients with diabetes during and after the COVID pandemic period using the Arabic version of the Diabetes Self-Management Questionnaire (DSMQ). A cross-sectional study was conducted in patients aged ≥18 years diagnosed with type 2 diabetes mellitus who had at least one ambulatory clinic visit in each of the specified time frames (Pre-COVID-19: 1 January 2019–21 March 2020; COVID-19 Time frame: 22 March 2020 to 30 April 2021) utilizing the DSMQ questionnaire, with an additional three questions specifically related to their diabetes care during the COVID pandemic. A total of 341 patients participated in the study. The study results revealed that the surveyed patients showed moderately high self-care activities post-COVID-19. Total DSMQ scores were significantly higher in patients aged >60 years versus younger groups (p < 0.05). Scores were significantly lower in patients diagnosed for 1–5 years versus longer durations (p < 0.05). Patients on insulin had higher glucose management sub-scores than oral medication users (p < 0.05). Overall, DSMQ scores were higher than the pre-pandemic Saudi population and Turkish post-pandemic findings. DSMQ results suggest that, while COVID-19 negatively impacted some self-management domains, the Saudi patients surveyed in this study upheld relatively good diabetes control during the pandemic. Further research is warranted on specific barriers to optimize diabetes care during public health crises