A60 PATIENT KNOWLEDGE-GAPS IN HEPATOTOXIC EFFECTS OF ACETAMINOPHEN FORMULATIONS
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Acetaminophen (APAP) is an immensely popular analgesic agent that is sold in Canada without prescription. The incidence of APAP toxicity leading to acute liver failure has increased over the past two decades. Recent data from a US cohort study demonstrates that up to 46% of acute liver failure cases are due to APAP. Published data suggest that accidental hepatotoxicity related to therapeutic misuse of APAP is a relatively common occurrence, especially when APAP is combined with alcohol. It is unclear if patients are aware of differences in dosage formats of APAP and increased potential for hepatotoxicity when APAP is combined with alcohol. The aim of this study was to assess patient understanding of APAP, dosage formats, combination with alcohol, and potential for toxicity. A survey was given to consecutive patients aged ≥ 18 attending a general gastroenterology clinic in Vancouver, BC. Data collection for this study began in September 2018 and is ongoing. Fisher’s exact test was used to compare categorical variables. P-values were calculated as 2-tailed and a value of ≤ 0.05 was interpreted as significant. This preliminary analysis included 95 respondents, some did not answer all questions. The majority of respondents were female (n=52/94, 54.7%). A majority identified as having university-level education (n=63/94, 67.0%) and Caucasian ethnicity (n=69/94, 73.4%). A minority reported using “regular-strength (RS)” APAP (325mg PO) more than one day per week (n=23/94, 24.5%). A similar number of respondents reported used “extra-strength (ES)” APAP (650mg PO) more than one day per week (n=21/93, 22.6%). Respondents more commonly reported using both RS and ES APAP together over a given stretch of time (n=14/92, 15.2%), than RS APAP alone (n=8/92, 8.7%) or ES APAP alone (n=6/92, 6.5%) (p<0.01). Most recognized that APAP toxicity is harmful to the liver (n=76/91, 83.5%). A majority (n=50/86, 58.1%) misunderstood the distinction between RS and ES APAP – believing that the ES formula included the addition of a separate analgesic agent (n=36/86, 41.9%) or was a different drug altogether than RS APAP (n=14/86, 16.3 %). A minority identified that APAP in combination with alcohol leads to increased toxicity (n=42/89, 47.2%). Patients seen in an outpatient GI clinic have a general understanding that APAP may lead to liver toxicity. Concerningly, however, those who frequently use APAP products seem to use both regular and extra-strength formulations together. Additionally, there is a low-level of understanding regarding the differences in these formulations. Data collection is ongoing, and we will seek to stratify those patients at risk for misunderstanding APAP dosage formats. None
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».