4.4 Article

Use of administrative health databases to estimate incidence and prevalence of acromegaly in Piedmont Region, Italy

Journal

JOURNAL OF ENDOCRINOLOGICAL INVESTIGATION
Volume 42, Issue 4, Pages 397-402

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s40618-018-0928-7

Keywords

Acromegaly; Algorithm; Incidence; Prevalence; Administrative health databases

Funding

  1. PRIN (Progetti di ricerca di Rilevante Interesse Nazionale) [2015ZHKFTA_001]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

PurposeRecent studies from national registries have described changing patterns in epidemiology of acromegaly. Our retrospective study used administrative databases to estimate prevalence and incidence of acromegaly in the Piedmont Region, Italy.MethodsThis study was conducted in Piedmont between 2012 and 2016 on administrative health databases for inpatients and outpatients of any age. Enrollees were included if claims suggestive of acromegaly were identified in at least two of the following databases: Drug Claims Registry, Hospital Information System, Co-payment Exemption Registry and Outpatient Specialist Service Information System.Results369 individuals (M=146, F=223) met our criteria. Overall incidence was 5.3 per million person years (95% CI 4.2-6.7), and prevalence was 83 cases per million inhabitants (95% CI 75-92). Mean age was 50.9years. Both incidence and prevalence were slightly higher among women (rate ratio 1.08, prevalence ratio 1.43). Age-specific incidence was similar between sexes up to 39years and diverged thereafter, with an increasing trend recorded among men. Prevalence was higher in women aged 40-79years, and increased continuously up to 79years in both sexes.ConclusionsThis is the first population-based study conducted in Italy to estimate incidence and prevalence of acromegaly and results show a higher prevalence than previously reported. Although our algorithm requires proper validation, it constitutes a promising tool to describe the epidemiology of acromegaly.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available