Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 3 de 3
Filter
1.
Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases ; 82(Suppl 1):374-375, 2023.
Article in English | ProQuest Central | ID: covidwho-20241840

ABSTRACT

BackgroundAlthough studies have quantified adherence to medications among patients with rheumatic diseases (RD) during the COVID-19, lack of direct pre-pandemic comparison precludes understanding of impact of the pandemic.ObjectivesOur objective was to evaluate the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on adherence to disease modifying drugs (DMARDs) including conventional synthetic (csDMARDs) and targeted synthetic (tsDMARDs).MethodsWe linked population-based health data on all physician visits, hospital admissions, and all dispensed medications, regardless of payer in British Columbia from 01/01/1996 to 3/31/2021. We identified prescriptions for csDMARDs (including methotrexate, hydroxychloroquine) and tsDMARDs, namely anti-TNFs (including infliximab, etanercept, adalimumab) and rituximab using drug identification numbers among indicated individuals with RD. We defined March 11, 2020, as the ‘index date' which corresponded to the date that mitigation measures for the COVID-19 pandemic were first introduced. We assessed adherence as proportion days covered (PDC), calculated monthly in the 12 months before and 12 months after the index date. We used interrupted time-series models, namely segmented regression to estimate changes and trends in adherence before and after the index date.ResultsOur analysis showed that the mean PDCs for all included DMARDs stayed relatively steady in the 12 months before and after mitigation measures were introduced (see Table 1). Adherence was highest among anti-TNFs, methotrexate, and azathioprine. Anti-TNFs were on a downward trajectory 12 months prior to the index date. Interrupted time-series modeling demonstrated statistically significant differences in the trends in PDCs post- vs. pre-mitigation measures for all anti-TNFS (slope [∂]: 1.38, standard error [SE]: 0.23), infliximab (∂: 1.35, SE: 0.23), adalimumab (∂: 0.82, SE: 0.25), and etanercept (∂: 1.07, SE: 0.25) (see Figure 1a). Conversely, the csDMARDs were on a flatter trajectory, and methotrexate (∂: -0.53, SE: 0.16), leflunomide (∂: 0.43, SE: 0.08), mycophenolate (∂: -1.26, SE: 0.48), cyclophosphamide (∂: 0.29, SE: 0.05), minocycline (∂: 0.04, SE: 0.02), chloroquine (∂: 0.02, SE: 0.00) showed statistically significant changes in estimated PDC trajectory after mitigation measures were introduced (see Figure 1b).ConclusionThis population-based study demonstrates that messaging and pandemic mitigation measures did not affect adherence to DMARDs.Table 1.Mean PDC 1 year before and after mitigation measures for the COVID-19 pandemic were introduced.MedicationMean PDC (%) 12 months before index dateMean PDC (%) 12 months after index datecsDMARDsmethotrexate28.926.8azathioprine21.819.5sulfasalazine16.214.9leflunomide14.313.0cyclosporine13.711.5hydroxychloroquine10.59.6mycophenolate4.52.9antimalarials4.43.9penicillamine3.53.4cyclophosphamide1.50.7chlorambucil1.20.4minocycline1.10.9gold0.50.2chloroquine0.10.0tsDMARDsanti-TNFs52.149.2infliximab41.838.3adalimumab40.336.8etanercept31.828.9rituximab3.42.9REFERENCES:NIL.Acknowledgements:NIL.Disclosure of InterestsNone Declared.

2.
J Stud Alcohol Drugs ; 83(4): 480-485, 2022 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1940326

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: Studies report mixed findings on the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on college student alcohol consumption. However, the impact of pandemic restrictions on students referred to an intervention following a campus alcohol violation has not yet been studied. The current study examined alcohol use behaviors and perceived drinking norms among mandated student cohorts enrolled in the pre-COVID-19 era (fall 2019) and COVID-19 era (fall 2020). METHOD: Participants (N = 228) completed measures focused on alcohol use and associated behaviors. Analytic models controlled for participant age and entailed negative binomial regressions for count outcomes and analyses of covariance for normally distributed continuous outcomes. RESULTS: COVID-era cohort students reported fewer drinks, pregaming occasions (i.e., drinking before a social occasion such as a sports event), and drinks while pregaming. Frequency of heavy episodic drinking (HED) remained consistent between groups; however, the peak number of drinks during HED was significantly lower in the COVID-era group, as were Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test scores and alcohol-related consequences. Perceived peer norms for frequency and quantity were significantly higher in the COVID-era group. Regression confirmed a significant impact of norms on both frequency and quantity of alcohol use in both cohorts. CONCLUSIONS: Mandated college students during the COVID-19 pandemic consumed less alcohol, engaged in less pregaming, consumed fewer drinks while pregaming, and reported fewer negative alcohol consequences than a cohort from the previous year. In this campus case study of residential students who violate campus alcohol policy, COVID restrictions were associated with reduced overall quantity and risky practices.


Subject(s)
Alcohol Drinking in College , Alcoholism , COVID-19 , Alcohol Drinking/epidemiology , COVID-19/epidemiology , Ethanol , Humans , Pandemics , Students , Universities
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL