Dataset Information

Health system costs of potentially inappropriate prescribing in Ontario, Canada: a protocol for a population-based cohort study.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

Adverse drug events (ADEs) are common in older persons and contribute significantly to emergency department visits, hospitalisations and mortality. ADEs are often due to potentially inappropriate prescriptions (PIP) or potentially inappropriate omissions (PIO), and are avoidable if inappropriate prescriptions or omissions are identified and prevented. Identifying PIP/PIO at the population level through the application of PIP/PIO assessment tools to health administrative data can provide a unique opportunity to assess the economic burden of PIP/PIO on the healthcare system beyond medication costs which is yet to be done. The objective of this study is to assess the economic burden associated with PIP/PIO and to estimate the incremental costs associated with distinct PIP/PIO in the province of Ontario.

Methods and analysis

We will conduct a retrospective cohort study using Ontario's health administrative databases. Eligible patients aged 66 years and older who were prescribed at least one medication between 1 April 2003 and 31 March 2014 (approximately 2.4 million patients) will be included. Population attributable fraction methodology will be used to assess the overall burden of PIP in Ontario, while regression analyses will be used to estimate the incremental costs of having specific PIP criteria and aid in prioritising targets for intervention.

Ethics and dissemination

This study was approved by the Institutional Review Board at Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Canada. Dissemination will occur via publication, presentation at national and international conferences, and knowledge exchange with various stakeholders.

SUBMITTER: Black CD

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6020945 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to determine the health system costs from hospitalizations, emergency department (ED) visits, and medications due to potentially inappropriate prescribing (PIP) in Ontario, Canada, at the population-level.MethodsA retrospective cohort of individuals ≥ 66 years of age and prescribed at least one medication from April 2002 to March 2015 was identified using linked population-level health administrative databases from Ontario, Canada. Patients were identified as having PIP or no PIP by applying a subset of the Screening Tool of Older Persons' Potentially Inappropriate Prescribing/Screening Tool to Alert Doctors to Right Treatment (STOPP/START) criteria. The number of days spent in hospital, new medications prescribed, and ED visits in the 90 days following PIP or patient index date were captured, as well as the total costs from each of these health services. Count regression models were used to generate incidence rate ratios (IRRs) for each outcome given the presence of PIP versus no PIP and combined with the prevalence of PIP to generate population attributable fractions (PAFs). The PAF was then multiplied by the cost for each health service to obtain the costs attributable to PIP in the whole cohort, and by age and sex.ResultsPIP was associated with an increased rate of hospitalization (IRR 2.77, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.72-2.82), ED visits (IRR 1.87, 95% CI 1.82-1.92), and newly prescribed medications (IRR 1.13, 95% CI 1.13-1.14), resulting in PAFs of 55.7, 37.9, and 5.0% for each outcome, respectively. PIP was associated with 38.8% of the total spent on these healthcare services ($1.22 billion) in the 90 days after PIP. Costs attributable to PIP decreased with age despite increasing prevalence.ConclusionsPIP in older adults is a significant source of health system costs from healthcare service use beyond medication costs, with a significant portion of hospitalizations and ED visit costs attributable to PIP. Future work should focus on identifying strategies and priorities for intervention.

Project description:Using a matched cohort design, the 1-year excess cost of incident fragility fractures at any site was $26,341 per patient, with 43% of total excess costs attributed to hospitalization. The high economic burden of fractures in Ontario underscores the urgency of closing the secondary fracture prevention gap.IntroductionThis retrospective real-world observational study was conducted to document the incremental costs associated with fragility fractures in Ontario, Canada.MethodsPatients aged >65 years with an index fragility fracture occurring between January 2011 and March 2015 were identified from administrative databases and matched 1:1 to a cohort of similar patients without a fracture. Healthcare resource utilization data were extracted from healthcare records and associated costs were calculated on a per-patient level and for the province of Ontario. Costs were presented as 2017 Canadian dollars.ResultsThe eligible cohort included 115,776 patients with a fragility fracture. Of these, 101,773 patients were successfully matched 1:1 to a non-fracture cohort. Overall, hip fractures (n = 31,613) were the most common, whereas femur fractures (n = 3002) were the least common type. Hospitalization and continuing care/home care/long-term care accounted for more than 60% of 1-year direct costs, whereas 5% was attributed to medication costs. First-year costs per patient in the fracture cohort were approximately threefold higher versus the non-fracture cohort (mean $37,362 versus $11,020, respectively). The incremental first-year direct healthcare costs of fragility fractures for the province of Ontario were calculated at $724 million per year.ConclusionsFragility fractures were associated with a threefold increase in overall mean healthcare costs per patient compared to patients without fractures. With an aging population, there is an urgent need for improved prevention strategies for patients at high-risk of fracture to decrease the economic burden of fragility fractures on the Canadian healthcare system.

Project description:ObjectiveSmoking is the main modifiable cancer risk factor. The objective of this study was to examine the impact of smoking on health system costs among newly diagnosed adult patients with cancer. Specifically, costs of patients with cancer who were current smokers were compared with those of non-smokers from a publicly funded health system perspective.MethodsThis population-based cohort study of patients with cancer used administrative databases to identify smokers and non-smokers (1 April 2014-31 March 2016) and their healthcare costs in the 12-24 months following a cancer diagnosis. The health services included were hospitalisations, emergency room visits, drugs, home care services and physician services (from the time of diagnosis onwards). The difference in cost (ie, incremental cost) between patients with cancer who were smokers and those who were non-smokers was estimated using a generalised linear model (with log link and gamma distribution), and adjusted for age, sex, neighbourhood income, rurality, cancer site, cancer stage, geographical region and comorbidities.ResultsThis study identified 3606 smokers and 14 911 non-smokers. Smokers were significantly younger (61 vs 65 years), more likely to be male (53%), lived in poorer neighbourhoods, had more advanced cancer stage,and were more likely to die within 1 year of diagnosis, compared with non-smokers. The regression model revealed that, on average, smokers had significantly higher monthly healthcare costs ($5091) than non-smokers ($4847), p<0.05.ConclusionsSmoking status has a significant impact on healthcare costs among patients with cancer. On average, smokers incurred higher healthcare costs than non-smokers. These findings provide a further rationale for efforts to introduce evidence-based smoking cessation programmes as a standard of care for patients with cancer as they have the potential not only to improve patients' outcomes but also to reduce the economic burden of smoking on the healthcare system.

Project description:INTRODUCTION:Multimorbidity is a major challenge for current healthcare systems and professionals. From the different approaches that have been proposed to analyse this issue, the hypothesis of the existence of association patterns of different chronic conditions is gaining visibility. In addition, multimorbidity can be associated to polypharmacy, which can lead to a higher risk of potentially inappropriate prescribing (PIP) and consequently to adverse drug reactions (ADRs). The general objective of this novel study is to identify the association between PIP, multimorbidity patterns, polypharmacy and the presence of ADRs in older patients admitted for exacerbation of chronic diseases. METHODS AND ANALYSIS:The MoPIM (morbidity, potentially inappropriate medication) study is a multicentre prospective cohort study of an estimated sample of 800 older (?65 years) patients admitted to five general hospitals in Spain due to an exacerbation of a chronic disease. Patients referred to home hospitalisation, admitted due to an acute process or with a fatal outcome expected at the time of admission are excluded. Sociodemographic data, chronic morbidities and geriatric syndromes, number of chronic prescribed medications, PIP at admission to hospital and on discharge, according to the newest screening tool of older screening tool of older person's potentially inappropriate prescriptions/screening tool to alert doctors to right treatment criteria, and ADRs during hospitalisation are being collected. Multimorbidity patterns will be identified using cluster analyses techniques, and the frequency of polypharmacy, PIP and ADRs will be calculated. Finally, the possible relationship between those indicators will be identified through bivariate and multivariate analyses. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION:The project has been approved by the clinical research ethics committees of each centre: Comité Ético de investigación Clínica del Parc Taulí, Comitè Ètic d'Investigació Clínica Osona per a la Recerca i Educació Sanitàries (FORES), Comité de Ètica de la Investigación con Medicamentos (CEIm)-Parc de Salut MAR, Comité Ético de Investigación Clínica de Euskadi, Comité de Ética de Investigación del Hospital Universitario de Canarias. The results will be actively and mainly disseminated through publication in peer-reviewed journals and communications in scientific conferences. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER:NCT02830425.

Project description:BackgroundCOVID-19 imposed substantial health and economic burdens. Comprehensive population-based estimates of health care costs for COVID-19 are essential for planning and policy evaluation. We estimated publicly funded health care costs in 2 Canadian provinces during the pandemic's first wave.MethodsIn this historical cohort study, we linked patients with their first positive SARS-CoV-2 test result by June 30, 2020, in 2 Canadian provinces (British Columbia and Ontario) to health care administrative databases and matched to negative or untested controls. We stratified patients by highest level of initial care: community, long-term care, hospital (without admission to the intensive care unit [ICU]) and ICU. Mean publicly funded health care costs for patients and controls, mean net (attributable to COVID-19) costs and total costs were estimated from 30 days before to 120 days after the index date, or to July 31, 2020, in 30-day periods for patients still being followed by the start of each period.ResultsWe identified 2465 matched people with a positive test result for SARS-CoV-2 in BC and 28 893 in Ontario. Mean age was 53.4 (standard deviation [SD] 21.8) years (BC) and 53.7 (SD 22.7) years (Ontario); 55.7% (BC) and 56.1% (Ontario) were female. Net costs in the first 30 days after the index date were $22 010 (95% confidence interval [CI] 19 512 to 24 509) and $15 750 (95% CI 15 354 to 16 147) for patients admitted to hospital, and $65 828 (95% CI 58 535 to 73 122) and $56 088 (95% CI 53 721 to 58 455) for ICU patients in BC and Ontario, respectively. In the community and long-term care settings, net costs were near 0. Total costs for all people, from 30 days before to 30 days after the index date, were $22 128 330 (BC) and $175 778 210 (Ontario).InterpretationDuring the first wave, we found that mean costs attributable to COVID-19 were highest for patients with ICU admission and higher in BC than Ontario. Reducing the number of people who acquire COVID-19 and severity of illness are required to mitigate the economic impact of COVID-19.