Women's perspectives regarding osteoporosis, fracture risk, and pharmacologic treatment: a cross-sectional study.

We assessed women's perspectives regarding early preventative therapy for osteoporosis. More than a third of early menopausal women were concerned about bone loss and future fractures, and approximately half were willing to take an intravenous or oral bisphosphonate around the time of menopause to preserve bone health. PURPOSE: Bisphosphonate medications can prevent the substantial bone loss that occurs during early menopause, but little is known about whether women would accept bisphosphonate treatment at this time in their life, when imminent fracture risk is low. We assessed women's perspectives regarding bone loss, fracture risk, and preventative pharmacotherapy in early menopause. METHODS: In this cross-sectional study, Canadian women aged ≥ 45 years were recruited via Facebook advertisement to complete an electronic survey. Primary outcome was the proportion of early menopausal respondents (≤ 5 years since final menstrual period) who were worried about bone loss and fractures. Secondary outcomes were the proportion of early menopausal women willing to accept pharmacologic intervention aimed at preventing either bone loss or future fractures. We compared responses between early menopausal women and older women (> 5 years since final menstrual period). RESULTS: 2033 women responded to the Facebook advertisement, 1195 eligible women (aged: 45 to 89 years) started the survey, and 966 completed it. Among early menopausal respondents (N = 98), 38 (42%) were worried about future fractures and 9 of 25 (36%) who had a prior bone mineral density scan were worried about their results. A total of 42 (47%) were willing to start medication to prevent fractures, and 48 (54%) would start medication to prevent bone loss. Responses were comparable between early menopausal women and older women. CONCLUSION: Menopausal women are concerned about bone loss and fractures. Many women would consider early menopausal pharmacotherapy, with the goals of preserving bone health and lowering their risk of fractures.

Development of a case definition for hearing loss in community-based older adults: a cross-sectional validation study.

BACKGROUND: Research based in primary care suggests that hearing loss may be underreported as well as inconsistently recorded in patient histories. In this study, we aimed to develop and validate a case definition for hearing loss among older adults in primary care, using electronic medical records. METHODS: We used data from adult patients aged 55 years and older from 13 practices in the Southern Alberta Primary Care Research Network database, part of the Canadian Primary Care Sentinel Surveillance Network (CPCSSN), from Dec. 1, 2014, to Dec. 31, 2016. We developed a hearing loss case definition that was translated into an electronic algorithm. A record review was undertaken as the reference standard, followed by application of the algorithm to the sample. Validation metrics included sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value and negative predictive value, as well as prevalence. We assessed risk factors using the Fisher exact test and odds ratios. RESULTS: The sample included 1000 patients; 496 (49.6%) were female and the mean age was 67.5 (standard deviation 9.6) years. Sensitivity of the case definition algorithm was determined to be 87.3% (95% confidence interval [CI] 76.5%-94.4%) with specificity valued at 94.8% (95% CI 93.1%-96.1%). Positive and negative predictive values were 52.9% (95% CI 42.8%-62.8%) and 99.1% (95% CI 98.2%-99.6%), respectively. The prevalence of hearing loss within the sample was 6.3% (95% CI 4.9%-7.9%). Older age was a significant risk factor for hearing loss (t = 4.98, 95% CI 3.76-8.65). Men had greater odds of hearing loss than women (odds ratio 1.65, 95% CI 0.98-2.79). INTERPRETATION: The validated case definition for hearing loss in community-based older adults had high sensitivity and specificity. It may be applied to surveillance and future epidemiologic research within the CPCSSN database.

Pelvic floor disorders in women who consult primary care clinics: development and validation of case definitions using primary care electronic medical records.

BACKGROUND: To date, there has been no validated method to identify cases of pelvic floor disorders in primary care electronic medical record (EMR) data. We aimed to develop and validate symptom-based case definitions for urinary incontinence, fecal incontinence and pelvic organ prolapse in women, for use in primary care epidemiologic or clinical research. METHODS: Our retrospective study used EMR data from the Southern Alberta Primary Care Research Network (SAPCReN) and the Canadian Primary Care Sentinel Surveillance Network (CPCSSN) in southern Alberta. Trained researchers remotely reviewed a random sample of EMR charts of women aged 18 years or older from 6 rural and urban clinics to validate case definitions for urinary incontinence, fecal incontinence and pelvic organ prolapse. We calculated sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV), and estimated SAPCReN prevalence as appropriate. RESULTS: Charts of 900 women were included. Sensitivity was 81.9% (95% confidence interval [CI] 75.1-87.2) for urinary incontinence, 61.2% (95% CI 46.2-74.5) for fecal incontinence, and 51.8% (95% CI 40.6-62.8) for pelvic organ prolapse. Corresponding specificity values were 71.9% (95% CI 68.4-75.1), 99.2% (95% CI 98.2-99.6) and 98.8% (95% CI 97.7-99.4), PPVs 40.6% (95% CI 35.4-46.0), 81.1% (95% CI 64.3-91.4) and 81.1% (95% CI 67.6-90.1), and NPVs 94.4% (95% CI 92.1-96.1), 97.8% (95% CI 96.5-98.6) and 95.3% (95% CI 93.6-96.6). The SAPCReN-observed prevalence for urinary incontinence was 29.7% (95% CI 29.3-30.0), but the adjusted prevalence was 2.97%. INTERPRETATION: The case definition for urinary incontinence met our standard for validity (sensitivity and specificity > 70%), and the case definitions for fecal incontinence and pelvic organ prolapse had PPVs greater than 80%. The urinary incontinence definition may be used in epidemiologic research, and those for fecal incontinence and pelvic organ prolapse may be used in quality-improvement studies or creation of disease registries. Our symptom-based case definitions could also be adapted for research in other EMR settings.

Validation of a case definition for speech and language disorders: In community-dwelling older adults in Alberta.

OBJECTIVE: To validate a case definition for speech and language disorders in community-dwelling older adults and to determine the prevalence of speech and language disorders in a primary care population. DESIGN: This is a combined case definition validation and cross-sectional prevalence study. Chart review was considered the reference standard and was used to estimate prevalence. This study used de-identified electronic medical record data from participating SAPCReN-CPCSSN (Southern Alberta Primary Care Research Network-Canadian Primary Care Sentinel Surveillance Network) primary care clinics. SETTING: Southern Alberta. PARTICIPANTS: Men and women aged 55 years and older who had visited a SAPCReN-CPCSSN physician or nurse practitioner at least once in the 2 years before the beginning of the study. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Validation analysis included estimation of sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value. Prevalence was the other main outcome measure. RESULTS: The prevalence of speech and language disorders within the sample of 1384 patients was 1.2%. The case definition had a favourable specificity (99.9%, 95% CI 99.6% to 100.0%), positive predictive value (75.6%, 95% CI 25.4% to 96.6%), and negative predictive value (99.0%, 95% CI 98.8% to 99.2%). Sensitivity was not sufficient for validity (18.8%, 95% CI 4.05% to 45.6%). CONCLUSION: The case definition did not meet an acceptable standard for validity and thus cannot be used for future epidemiologic research. However, owing to the case definition's high positive predictive value, it might be useful for clinical purposes and for cohort studies. Finally, while the case definition did not prove valid, this study has provided a conservative estimate of prevalence (1.2%) given the case definition's high specificity.

Antidepressant and antipsychotic prescribing in primary care for people with dementia.

OBJECTIVE: To use data from the Canadian Primary Care Sentinel Surveillance Network (CPCSSN) to evaluate the prevalence of antidepressant and antipsychotic prescriptions among patients with no previous depression or psychosis diagnoses, and to identify the factors associated with the use of these drugs in this population. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study using data derived from CPCSSN. SETTING: Primary care practices associated with CPCSSN. PARTICIPANTS: Patients who were born before 1949; who were associated with a CPCSSN primary care practitioner between October 1, 2007, and September 30, 2013; and whose electronic medical records contained data from at least 6 months before and 12 months after the date of dementia diagnosis. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Prescription for an antidepressant or antipsychotic medication in the absence of a depression or psychosis diagnosis. Multivariable models were fitted to determine estimated odds ratios (ORs) and were adjusted for age and sex. RESULTS: Of the 3252 patients without a depression diagnosis, 8.5% received a new prescription for an antidepressant in the 12 months following their diagnosis of dementia. Prescribing was reduced in association with older age (OR of 0.86 per 5-year age increase, P=.001) and male sex (OR=0.77, P=.056), and prescribing increased in association with prescription of cholinesterase inhibitor medications (OR=1.57, P=.003). Of the 4262 patients without a diagnosis of psychosis, 6.1% received a new prescription for an antipsychotic in the 12 months following their diagnosis of dementia. Higher rates of antipsychotic prescriptions were reported in men (OR=1.31, P=.046), those receiving a prescription for steroids (OR=1.90, P=.037), and those diagnosed with Parkinson disease (OR 1.58, P=.051). CONCLUSION: A substantial number of patients with dementia are being prescribed antidepressant or antipsychotic medications by their primary care practitioners without evidence of depression or psychosis in their electronic medical records.

Team-based comanagement of diabetes in rural primary care.

OBJECTIVE: To explore clinical indicators among patients with diabetes in southern Alberta and assess changes over time, and to compare patients with diabetes attending a reference clinic (RC), which had adapted its service model to address the specific needs of the patient population, with patients with diabetes attending comparison clinics (CCs) in the same region. DESIGN: Analysis of longitudinal data from the Canadian Primary Care Sentinel Surveillance Network (CPCSSN). SETTING: Rural southern Alberta. PARTICIPANTS: A community-based family medicine clinic and the 6 other CPCSSN clinics in the same region at the time of the study. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: A range of data elements from patients with diabetes within the RC, as well as from patients with diabetes from the CCs, were analyzed by CPCSSN to compare rates of comorbidity and mean body mass index, hemoglobin A1c levels, and blood pressure, as well as service use and measurement frequency. Rate of change per year was modeled longitudinally for each of the outcomes. RESULTS: The RC had higher proportions of patients with comorbid conditions and a consistently higher mean body mass index. Mean HbA1c levels varied minimally between the RC and CCs, with both sets worsening slightly. However, the rate of worsening among patients with diabetes in the RC was found to be significantly greater (P < .05) than for those in the CCs. Blood pressure also varied minimally between the RC and the CCs, with both sets improving; however, the RC had a significantly greater (P < .001) rate of improvement than the CCs did. Finally, a greater proportion of patients in the RC had complete data for these 3 outcome measures, and RC patients made a greater number of clinic visits compared with the CC patients (P < .001). CONCLUSION: This study describes a team-based comanagement organizational model and might provide useful commentary about organizational effectiveness in primary care. Although improvement in health outcomes cannot be directly attributed to any specific change in clinic organization, some statistically and likely clinically significant benefit was found associated with the service model of the RC in a relatively medically and socially challenged patient population and in a conservative evaluative design.

Manual review of electronic medical records as a reference standard for case definition development: a validation study.

BACKGROUND: The Canadian Primary Care Sentinel Surveillance Network (CPCSSN) previously carried out a validation study of case definitions for 8 chronic diseases (diabetes mellitus, hypertension, osteoarthritis, depression, dementia, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, parkinsonism and epilepsy) using direct review of "raw" electronic medical record data. Although effective, this method is time-consuming and can present methodological and organizational challenges. We aimed to determine whether the processed and standardized data contained with the CPCSSN database might function as a reference standard for case definition validation. METHODS: Using a traditional validation study design, we compared the case identification results of the chart reviews for the 8 chronic diseases with the results of a manual review of the CPCSSN processed data for the same conditions in the same patient sample. Patients were randomly sampled from the June 30, 2012 CPCSSN database, with oversampling of patients with rare conditions. RESULTS: We analyzed data for 1906 patients. Manual review of the CPCSSN records for case ascertainment yielded sensitivity ranging from 77.5% (95% confidence interval [CI] 73.3%-81.6%) for depression to 97.2% (95% CI 95.4%-99.0%) for diabetes. Specificity was high for all definitions (range 93.1% [95% CI 91.4%-94.7%] to 99.4% [95% CI 99.0%-99.8%]). Positive predictive values and negative predictive values also showed high accuracy of the manual CPCSSN record review relative to review of the raw chart data. INTERPRETATION: The use of CPCSSN records as the reference standard to validate case definitions substantially reduces the burden on sentinel physicians and clinic managers as well as on researchers while offering a reference standard that is a reasonable substitution for chart review.