Time filter

Source Type

Baltimore Highlands, MD, United States

Kornfield R.,University of Illinois at Chicago | Watson S.,University of Chicago | Higashi A.S.,Franklin University | Conti R.M.,University of Chicago | And 5 more authors.
Psychiatric Services | Year: 2013

Objective: This study assessed the effect of public health advisories issued between 2005 and 2007 by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) on treatments of attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and physician prescribing practices. Methods: Data obtained from the IMS Health National Disease and Therapeutic Index, a nationally representative audit of ambulatory physicians, were used to examine trends in office visits by children and adolescents (under age 18) during which ADHD was treated with Adderall, other psychostimulants, or atomoxetine. Segmented time series regressions were conducted to determine changes in use associated with three advisories issued between 2005 and 2007. Results: In 2004, before the first FDA advisory, Adderall accounted for 36%of ADHD pharmacotherapy treatment visits. Other stimulants accounted for 46%, and atomoxetine accounted for 19%. Overall pharmacotherapy treatment rates were stable over the study period, but by 2008 the treatment visits accounted for by Adderall (that is, market share) declined to 24%, and the market share for atomoxetine declined to 8%. The market share for substitute therapies-clonidine, guanfacine, and bupropion-was stable over this period, ranging from 5% to 7%. Despite the declines in the use of Adderall and atomoxetine over the study period, results from the regression models suggest that the advisories did not have a statistically significant effect on ADHD medication prescribing. Conclusions: FDA advisories regarding potential cardiovascular and other risks of ADHD medications had little discernible incremental effect on the use of these medicines in this nationally representative ambulatory audit. Copyright © American Psychiatric Association. Source

Qato D.M.,University of Illinois at Chicago | Wilder J.,University of Illinois at Chicago | Schumm L.P.,University of Chicago | Gillet V.,University of Chicago | Alexander G.C.,Center for Drug Safety and Effectiveness
JAMA Internal Medicine | Year: 2016

IMPORTANCE: Prescription and over-the-counter medicines and dietary supplements are commonly used, alone and together, among older adults. However, the effect of recent regulatory and market forces on these patterns is not known. OBJECTIVES: To characterize changes in the prevalence of medication use, including concurrent use of prescription and over-the-counter medications and dietary supplements, and to quantify the frequency and types of potential major drug-drug interactions. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Descriptive analyses of a longitudinal, nationally representative sample of community-dwelling older adults 62 to 85 years old. In-home interviews with direct medication inspection were conducted in 2005-2006 and again in 2010-2011. The dates of the analysis were March to November 2015.We defined medication use as the use of at least 1 prescription or over-the-counter medication or dietary supplement at least daily or weekly and defined concurrent use as the regular use of at least 2 medications.We used Micromedex to identify potential major drug-drug interactions. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Population estimates of the prevalence of medication use (in aggregate and by therapeutic class), concurrent use, and major drug-drug interactions. RESULTS: The study cohort comprised 2351 participants in 2005-2006 and 2206 in 2010-2011. Their mean age was 70.9 years in 2005-2006 and 71.4 years in 2010-2011. Fifty-three percent of participants were female in 2005-2006, and 51.6%were female in 2010-2011. The use of at least 1 prescription medication slightly increased from 84.1%in 2005-2006 to 87.7%in 2010-2011 (P = .003). Concurrent use of at least 5 prescription medications increased from 30.6%to 35.8% (P = .02). While the use of over-the-counter medications declined from 44.4%to 37.9%, the use of dietary supplements increased from 51.8%to 63.7%(P < .001 for both). There were clinically significant increases in the use of statins (33.8% to 46.2%), antiplatelets (32.8%to 43.0%), and omega-3 fish oils (4.7%to 18.6%) (P < .05 for all). In 2010-2011, approximately 15.1%of older adults were at risk for a potential major drug-drug interaction compared with an estimated 8.4%in 2005-2006 (P < .001). Most of these interacting regimens involved medications and dietary supplements increasingly used in 2010-2011. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In this study, the use of prescription medications and dietary supplements, and concurrent use of interacting medications, has increased since 2005, with 15%of older adults potentially at risk for a major drug-drug interaction. Improving safety with the use of multiple medications has the potential to reduce preventable adverse drug events associated with medications commonly used among older adults. Copyright 2016 American Medical Association. All rights reserved. Source

Chang H.-Y.,Center for Drug Safety and Effectiveness | Hsieh C.-F.,National Yang Ming University | Singh S.,Center for Drug Safety and Effectiveness | Singh S.,Johns Hopkins Hospital | And 3 more authors.
Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety | Year: 2015

Aims: To examine the relationship between different anti-diabetic therapies (dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4), metformin and sulfonylureas) and risk of acute pancreatitis among type 2 diabetic patients in Taiwan, and explore each drug's dose-response relationship. Materials and Methods: We derived a nationwide retrospective cohort of patients with type 2 diabetes in Taiwan. The inclusion criteria are adult diabetic patients with continuous baseline enrollment, new users of the studied drugs, and without missing demographics. There were 4113/101498/44772 DPP-4/Metformin/Sulfonylurea users. Adjusted hazards ratios for pancreatitis associated with DPP-4, derived from Cox proportional hazard models with propensity score weighting, were estimated; dose-response analyses were also conducted. Results: Dipeptidyl peptidase-4 was statistically significantly associated with a decreased risk of acute pancreatitis compared with sulfonylureas (adjusted HR: 0.36, 95%CI [0.17, 0.75]) but not metformin (adjusted HR: 0.67, 95%CI [0.32, 1.41]); metformin was statistically significantly associated with a lower risk of pancreatitis than sulfonylurea (adjusted HR: 0. 53; 95%CI [0.37, 0.76]). In addition, low-dose metformin was statistically significantly associated with a lower risk of pancreatitis compared with high-dose metformin (HR: 0.65; 95%CI [0.44, 0.97]). Conclusions: Our findings suggest that sulfonylureas may potentially be associated with an increased risk of pancreatitis compared with DPP-4 or metformin. Studies with longer follow up, larger sample sizes, and more precise capture of confounders may be needed to determine the risk of pancreatitis associated with incretin based therapies. © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Source

Hwang C.S.,Center for Drug Safety and Effectiveness | Turner L.W.,Center for Drug Safety and Effectiveness | Kruszewski S.P.,Center for Drug Safety and Effectiveness | Kolodny A.,Brandeis University | And 3 more authors.
Clinical Journal of Pain | Year: 2016

Objectives: Physicians are a key stakeholder in the epidemic of prescription opioid abuse. Therefore, we assessed their knowledge of opioid abuse and diversion, as well as their support for clinical and regulatory interventions to reduce opioid-related morbidity and mortality. Materials and Methods: We conducted a nationally representative postal mail survey of 1000 practicing internists, family physicians, and general practitioners in the United States between February and May 2014. Results: The adjusted response rate was 58%, and all physicians (100%) believed that prescription drug abuse was a problem in their communities. However, only two-thirds (66%) correctly reported that the most common route of abuse was swallowing pills whole, and nearly one-half (46%) erroneously reported that abuse-deterrent formulations were less addictive than their counterparts. In addition, a notable minority of physicians (25%) reported being "not at all" or "only slightly concerned" about the potential for opioid diversion from the licit to the illicit market when this practice is common at all levels of the pharmaceutical supply chain. Most physicians supported clinical and regulatory interventions to reduce prescription opioid abuse, including the use of patient contracts (98%), urine drug testing (90%), requiring prescribers to check a centralized database before prescribing opioids (88%), and instituting greater restrictions on the marketing and promotion of opioids (77% to 82%). Despite this, only one-third of physicians (33%) believed that interventions to reduce prescription opioid abuse had a moderate or large effect on preventing patients' clinically appropriate access to pain treatment. Discussion: Although physicians are unaware of some facets of prescription opioid-related morbidity, most support a variety of clinical and regulatory interventions to improve the risk-benefit balance of these therapies. © 2015 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved. Source

Chang H.-Y.,Center for Drug Safety and Effectiveness | Zhou M.,Center for Drug Safety and Effectiveness | Tang W.,George Washington University | Alexander G.C.,Center for Drug Safety and Effectiveness | And 3 more authors.
BMJ (Online) | Year: 2015

Objectives: To determine the real world safety of dabigatran or rivaroxaban compared with warfarin in terms of gastrointestinal bleeding. Design: Retrospective cohort study. Setting: Large administrative database of commercially insured people in United States from 1 October 2010 through 31 March 2012. Participants: Enrollees with a prescription of warfarin, dabigatran, or rivaroxaban between 1 October 2010 and 31 March 2012, who were aged 18 years or older, had continuous enrollment and no oral anticoagulant use during the six months before the entry date, with known age and sex, and with no gastrointestinal bleeding for at least six months before the cohort entry date. The final study sample of 46 163 patients included 4907 using dabigatran, 1649 using rivaroxaban, and 39 607 using warfarin. Main outcome measure: Time to gastrointestinal bleeding. Hazard ratios were derived from Cox proportional hazard models with propensity score weighting and robust estimates of errors. Results: Dabigatran users tended to be older (dabigatran v rivaroxaban v warfarin: 62.0 v 57.6 v 57.4 years) and more likely to be male (69% v 49% v 53%). The rate of gastrointestinal bleeding was highest among dabigatran users and lowest among rivaroxaban users (dabigatran v rivaroxaban v warfarin: 9.01 v 3.41 v 7.02 cases per 100 person years). After adjustment for potentially confounding covariates, there was no evidence of a statistically significant difference in the risk of gastrointestinal bleeding between dabigatran and warfarin users (adjusted hazard ratio 1.21, 95% confidence interval 0.96 to 1.53) or between rivaroxaban and warfarin users (0.98, 0.36 to 2.69). Conclusions: Although rates of gastrointestinal bleeding seem to be similar in this commercially insured sample of adults in the United States, we cannot rule out as much as a 50% increase in the risk of gastrointestinal bleeding with dabigatran compared with warfarin or a more than twofold higher risk of bleeding with rivaroxaban compared with warfarin. © BMJ Publishing Group Ltd 2015. Source

Discover hidden collaborations