In order to influence every day clinical practice professional organisations issue management guidelines. Cross-sectional surveys are used to evaluate the implementation of such guidelines. The present survey investigated screening for glucose perturbations in people with coronary artery disease and compared patients with known and newly detected type 2 diabetes with those without diabetes in terms of their life-style and pharmacological risk factor management in relation to contemporary European guidelines. A total of 6187 patients (18–80 years) with coronary artery disease and known glycaemic status based on a self reported history of diabetes (previously known diabetes) or the results of an oral glucose tolerance test and HbA1c (no diabetes or newly diagnosed diabetes) were investigated in EUROASPIRE IV including patients in 24 European countries 2012–2013. The patients were interviewed and investigated in order to enable a comparison between their actual risk factor control with that recommended in current European management guidelines and the outcome in previously conducted surveys. A total of 2846 (46 %) patients had no diabetes, 1158 (19 %) newly diagnosed diabetes and 2183 (35 %) previously known diabetes. The combined use of all four cardioprotective drugs in these groups was 53, 55 and 60 %, respectively. A blood pressure target of <140/90 mmHg was achieved in 68, 61, 54 % and a LDL-cholesterol target of <1.8 mmol/L in 16, 18 and 28 %. Patients with newly diagnosed and previously known diabetes reached an HbA1c 9.0 % (>75 mmol/mol). Of the patients with diabetes 69 % reported on low physical activity. The proportion of patients participating in cardiac rehabilitation programmes was low (≈40 %) and only 27 % of those with diabetes had attended diabetes schools. Compared with data from previous surveys the use of cardioprotective drugs had increased and more patients were achieving the risk factor treatment targets. Despite advances in patient management there is further potential to improve both the detection and management of patients with diabetes and coronary artery disease.

Subscription and open access journals from SAGE Publishing, the world's leading independent academic publisher.

Introduction: European Union intends to enable cross-border health services through a program referred to as “MyHealth@EU”. The first main service is the dispensation of medicine by interlinking national electronic prescription systems. The second one is the Patient Summary, which enables providing the basic set of patients’ medical data. Methods: The contemporary technical documentation of the project was studied and selected published Key Performance Indicators of the project were analyzed. Where necessary, data were acquired directly from the European Commission. Results: Data from the start of the project (fourth quarter of 2019) until the second quarter of 2022 were analyzed. During this time both the overall number of EU countries with operational cross-border healthcare and their particular abilities in both services have risen. At present, there are eleven countries with capabilities in at least one of the services, of which nine have reported transactions. More countries are in the test phase now and will join the operational phase of the project shortly. Discussion and Conclusion: Nevertheless, the program is still used mostly for testing purposes. It seems that only electronic prescription and dispensation are commonly and widely used so far and only Estonian and Finnish patients usually get their medication dispensed abroad. The rest of the operational countries is still at present missing country pairs with a strong cross-border use case.

This study presents a systematic review conducted according to the PRISMA 2020 guidelines, evaluating pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic (PK-PD) models for target-controlled infusion (TCI) of propofol. A structured search was performed across PubMed, Summon, Google Scholar, Web of Science, and Scopus, identifying 427 sources, of which 17 met the inclusion criteria. The analysis revealed that nine studies compared existing models, six focused on the development of new PK-PD models, and two explored broader implications of TCI in anesthesia. Comparative studies indicate that while the Eleveld model generally offers superior predictive accuracy, it does not consistently outperform the Marsh and Schnider models across all populations. The Schnider model demonstrated better bias control in elderly patients, while the Eleveld model improved drug clearance estimation in obese patients. However, inconsistencies remain in predicting brain concentrations of propofol. Newly proposed models introduce adaptive dosing strategies, incorporating allometric scaling, lean body weight, and machine learning techniques, yet require further external validation. The results highlight ongoing challenges in achieving universal applicability of TCI models, underscoring the need for future research in refining precision dosing and personalized anesthesia management.