↓ Skip to main content

Defining Appropriate Use of Proton-Pump Inhibitors Among Medical Inpatients

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of General Internal Medicine, November 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (97th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (97th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
10 news outlets
blogs
2 blogs
twitter
13 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
25 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
68 Mendeley
Title
Defining Appropriate Use of Proton-Pump Inhibitors Among Medical Inpatients
Published in
Journal of General Internal Medicine, November 2015
DOI 10.1007/s11606-015-3536-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Matt Pappas, Sanjay Jolly, Sandeep Vijan

Abstract

Proton-pump inhibitors (PPIs) are commonly used among medical inpatients, both for prophylaxis against upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) and continuation of outpatient use. While PPIs reduce the risk of UGIB, they also appear to increase the risk of hospital-acquired pneumonia (HAP) and Clostridium difficile infection (CDI). Depending upon the underlying risks of these conditions and the changes in those risks with PPIs, use of proton-pump inhibitors may lead to a net benefit or net harm among medical inpatients. We aimed to determine the net impact of PPIs on hospital mortality among medical inpatients. A microsimulation model, using literature-derived estimates of the risks of UGIB, HAP, and CDI among medical inpatients, along with the changes in risk associated with PPI use for each of these outcomes. The primary outcome was change in inpatient mortality. Simulated general medical inpatients outside the intensive care unit (ICU). Change in overall mortality during hospitalization. New initiation of PPI therapy led to an increase in hospital mortality in about 90 % of simulated patients. Continuation of outpatient PPI therapy on admission led to net increase in hospital mortality in 79 % of simulated patients. Results were robust to both one-way and multivariate sensitivity analyses, with net harm occurring in at least two-thirds of patients in all scenarios. For the majority of medical inpatients outside the ICU, use of PPIs likely leads to a net increase in hospital mortality. Even in patients at particularly high risk of UGIB, only those at the very lowest risk of HCAP and CDI should be considered for prophylactic PPI use. Continuation of outpatient PPIs may also increase expected hospital mortality. Apart from patients with active UGIB, use of PPIs in hospitalized patients should be discouraged.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 13 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 68 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 3%
United Kingdom 1 1%
Unknown 65 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 10 15%
Student > Postgraduate 10 15%
Student > Bachelor 8 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 9%
Student > Master 6 9%
Other 16 24%
Unknown 12 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 32 47%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 6 9%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 6%
Immunology and Microbiology 3 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 3%
Other 4 6%
Unknown 17 25%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 96. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 14 June 2017.
All research outputs
#413,987
of 24,254,113 outputs
Outputs from Journal of General Internal Medicine
#331
of 7,884 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#6,216
of 289,866 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of General Internal Medicine
#2
of 44 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,254,113 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,884 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 22.0. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 289,866 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 44 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its contemporaries.