首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>Springer Open Choice >A comparison of pharmacoepidemiological study designs in medication use and traffic safety research
【2h】

A comparison of pharmacoepidemiological study designs in medication use and traffic safety research

机译:药物流行病学研究设计在药物使用和交通安全研究中的比较

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

In order to explore how the choice of different study designs could influence the risk estimates, a case–crossover and case–time–control study were carried out and their outcomes were compared with those of a traditional case–control study design that evaluated the association between the exposure to psychotropic medications and the risk of having a motor vehicle accident (MVA). A record-linkage database availing data for 3,786 cases and 18,089 controls during the period 2000–2007 was used. The study designs (i.e., case–crossover and case–time–control) were derived from published literature, and the following psychotropic medicines were examined: antipsychotics, anxiolytics, hypnotics and sedatives, and antidepressants, stratified in the two groups selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) and other antidepressants. Moreover, in order to further investigate the effects of frequency of psychoactive medication exposure on the outcomes of the case–crossover analysis, the data were also stratified by the number of defined daily doses (DDDs) and days of medication use in the 12 months before the motor vehicle accident. Three-thousand seven-hundred fifty-two cases were included in this second part of the case–crossover analysis. The case–crossover design did not show any statistically significant association between psychotropic medication exposure and MVA risk [e.g., SSRIs—Adj. OR = 1.00 (95 % CI: 0.69–1.46); Anxiolytics—Adj. OR = 0.95 (95 % CI: 0.68–1.31)]. The case–time–control design only showed a borderline statistically significant increased traffic accident risk in SSRI users [Adj. OR = 1.16 (95 % CI: 1.01–1.34)]. With respect to the stratifications by the number of DDDs and days of medication use, the analyses showed no increased traffic accident risk associated with the exposure to the selected medication groups [e.g., SSRIs, <20 DDDs—Adj. OR = 0.65 (95 % CI: 0.11–3.87); SSRIs, 16–150 days—Adj. OR = 0.55 (95 % CI: 0.24–1.24)]. In contrast to the above-mentioned results, our recent case–control study found a statistically significant association between traffic accident risk and exposure to anxiolytics [Adj. OR = 1.54 (95 % CI: 1.11–2.15)], and SSRIs [Adj. OR = 2.03 (95 % CI: 1.31–3.14)]. Case–crossover and case–time–control analyses produced different results than those of our recent case–control study (i.e., case–crossover and case–time–control analyses did not show any statistically significant association whereas the case–control analysis showed an increased traffic accident risk in anxiolytic and SSRI users). These divergent results can probably be explained by the differences in the study designs. Given that the case–crossover design is only appropriate for short-term exposures and the case–time–control design is an elaboration of this latter, it can be concluded that, probably, these two approaches are not the most suitable ones to investigate the relation between MVA risk and psychotropic medications, which, on the contrary, are often use chronically.
机译:为了探讨不同研究设计的选择如何影响风险估计,进行了病例交叉和病例时间对照研究,并将其结果与评估关联性的传统病例对照研究设计进行了比较。服用精神药物与发生机动车事故(MVA)的风险之间的差异。使用记录链接数据库,该数据库提供了2000-2007年期间3786例病例和18089例对照的数据。研究设计(即病例交叉和病例时间控制)来自已发表的文献,并检查了以下精神药物:抗精神病药,抗焦虑药,催眠药和镇静药以及抗抑郁药,在两组中均分层为选择性5-羟色胺再摄取抑制剂。 (SSRIs)和其他抗抑郁药。此外,为了进一步调查精神药物暴露频率对病例交叉分析结果的影响,还对数据进行了定义,即在定义前12个月内每日定义的日剂量(DDD)和服药天数机动车事故。在案例交叉分析的第二部分中包括了三千七百五十二个案例。病例交叉设计未显示精神药物暴露与MVA风险之间有任何统计学上的显着相关性(例如SSRIs-Adj。或= 1.00(95%CI:0.69-1.46);抗焦虑药OR = 0.95(95%CI:0.68–1.31)]。病例-时间-控制设计仅显示出SSRI用户在统计学上明显增加了交通事故风险的临界点[调整]。 OR = 1.16(95%CI:1.01–1.34)]。对于按DDD数量和药物使用天数进行的分层,分析显示,与所选药物组的暴露相关的交通事故风险没有增加[例如SSRIs,<20 DDDs-Adj。或= 0.65(95%CI:0.11-3.87); SSRI,16-150天-可调。 OR = 0.55(95%CI:0.24–1.24)]。与上述结果相反,我们最近的病例对照研究发现,交通事故风险与抗焦虑药暴露之间存在统计学上的显着关联[Adj。 OR = 1.54(95%CI:1.11–2.15)]和SSRI [调整或= 2.03(95%CI:1.31-3.14)]。病例交叉和病例时间对照分析产生的结果与我们最近的病例对照研究的结果不同(即病例交叉和病例时间对照分析未显示任何统计学上的显着相关性,而病例对照分析显示抗焦虑和SSRI用户的交通事故风险增加)。这些不同的结果可能可以通过研究设计的差异来解释。鉴于案例交叉设计仅适用于短期暴露,而案例时间控制设计则是对后者的详细说明,因此可以得出结论,很可能这两种方法都不是最适合调查风险的方法。 MVA风险与精神药物之间的关系,相反,它们经常长期使用。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号