OBJECTIVES The aim of this study was to evaluate the real-world incidence of endophthalmitis after intravitreal anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) injections using data from the Observational Medical Outcomes Partnership (OMOP) Common Data Model (CDM). METHODS Patients with endophthalmitis that developed within 6 weeks after intravitreal anti-VEGF injections were identified in 3 large OMOP CDM databases. RESULTS We identified 23,490 patients who received 128,123 intravitreal anti-VEGF injections. The incidence rates of endophthalmitis were 15.75 per 10,000 patients and 2.97 per 10,000 injections. The incidence rates of endophthalmitis for bevacizumab, ranibizumab, and aflibercept (per 10,000 injections) were 3.64, 1.39, and 0.76, respectively. The annual incidence has remained below 5.00 per 10,000 injections since 2011 despite the increasing number of intravitreal anti-VEGF injections. Bevacizumab presented a higher incidence rate for endophthalmitis than ranibizumab and aflibercept (incidence rate ratio, 3.17; p=0.021). CONCLUSIONS The incidence of endophthalmitis after intravitreal anti-VEGF injections has stabilized since 2011 despite the explosive increase in anti-VEGF injections. The off-label use of bevacizumab accounted for its disproportionately high incidence of endophthalmitis. The OMOP CDM, which includes off-label uses, laboratory data, and a scalable standardized database, could provide a novel strategy to reveal real-world evidence, especially in ophthalmology.
Despite many studies, optimal treatment sequences or intervals are still questionable in retinal vein occlusion (RVO) macular edema. The aim of this study was to examine the real-world treatment patterns of RVO macular edema. A retrospective analysis of the Observational Medical Outcomes Partnership Common Data Model, a distributed research network, of four large tertiary referral centers (n = 9,202,032) identified 3286 eligible. We visualized treatment pathways (prescription volume and treatment sequence) with sunburst and Sankey diagrams. We calculated the average number of intravitreal injections per patient in the first and second years to evaluate the treatment intensities. Bevacizumab was the most popular first-line drug (80.9%), followed by triamcinolone (15.1%) and dexamethasone (2.28%). Triamcinolone was the most popular drug (8.88%), followed by dexamethasone (6.08%) in patients who began treatment with anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) agents. The average number of all intravitreal injections per person decreased in the second year compared with the first year. The average number of injections per person in the first year increased throughout the study. Bevacizumab was the most popular first-line drug and steroids were considered the most common as second-line drugs in patients first treated with anti-VEGF agents. Intensive treatment patterns may cause an increase in intravitreal injections.
BackgroundAlthough scoring and machine learning methods have been developed to predict patient deterioration, bedside assessment by nurses should not be overlooked. This study aimed to evaluate the performance of subjective bedside assessment of the patient by the rapid response team (RRT) nurses in predicting short-term patient deterioration.MethodsPatients noticed by RRT nurses based on the vital sign instability, abnormal laboratory results, and direct contact via phone between November 1, 2016, and December 12, 2017, were included. Five RRT nurses visited the patients according to their shifts and assessed the possibility of patient deterioration. Patient acuity rating (PAR), a scale of 1–7, was used as the tool of bedside assessment. Other scores, including the modified early warning score, VitalPAC early warning score, standardised early warning score, and cardiac arrest risk triage, were calculated afterwards. The performance of these scores in predicting mortality and/or intensive care unit admission within 1 day was compared by calculating the area under the receiver operating curve.ResultsA total of 1,426 patients were included in the study, of which 258 (18.1%) died or were admitted to the intensive care unit within 1 day. The area under the receiver operating curve of PAR was 0.87 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.84–0.89), which was higher than those of modified early warning score (0.66, 95% CI 0.62–0.70), VitalPAC early warning score (0.69, 95% CI 0.66–0.73), standardised early warning score (0.67, 95% CI 0.63–0.70) and cardiac arrest risk triage (0.63, 95% CI 0.59–0.66) (P<0.001).ConclusionsPAR assessed by RRT nurses can be a useful tool for assessing short-term patient prognosis in the RRT setting.
Congenital and infantile (CI) cataract is one of the most important and preventable cause of blindness in children but the incidence has not been studied in Korea. We collected data from the national claims database of the National Health Insurance Service of Korea from 2002 through 2019. We identified children who underwent cataract surgery within the age of 5 years, and cumulative incidence rates were calculated for each of the three age criteria. 989 patients out of 4,221,459 births underwent surgery with CI cataract during the period. The cumulative incidence rates per 10,000 births were 1.60 (0–1 years), 2.38 (0–3 years), and 2.95 (0–5 years), respectively. The incidence peaked in the 2007 birth cohort, which coincides with the start of the national screening program for infants/children. Primary intraocular lens implantation was performed in 439 patients (44%). Strabismus and glaucoma were diagnosed in 825 (83%) and 692 (70%) within 8 years of cataract surgery. The incidence rates of CI cataract in Korea appear to be comparable to previous studies in other regions. The early screening program for infants may reduce delayed diagnosis and increase the proportion of patients undergoing surgery at a critical time for visual development.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.