Dataset Information

Relation of severe COVID-19 to polypharmacy and prescribing of psychotropic drugs: the REACT-SCOT case-control study.

ABSTRACT:

Background

The objective of this study was to investigate the relation of severe COVID-19 to prior drug prescribing.

Methods

Severe cases were defined by entry to critical care or fatal outcome. For this matched case-control study (REACT-SCOT), all 4251 cases of severe COVID-19 in Scotland since the start of the epidemic were matched for age, sex and primary care practice to 36,738 controls from the population register. Records were linked to hospital discharges since June 2015 and dispensed prescriptions issued in primary care during the last 240 days.

Results

Severe COVID-19 was strongly associated with the number of non-cardiovascular drug classes dispensed. This association was strongest in those not resident in a care home, in whom the rate ratio (95% CI) associated with dispensing of 12 or more drug classes versus none was 10.8 (8.8, 13.3), and in those without any of the conditions designated as conferring increased risk of COVID-19. Of 17 drug classes postulated at the start of the epidemic to be "medications compromising COVID", all were associated with increased risk of severe COVID-19 and these associations were present in those without any of the designated risk conditions. The fraction of cases in the population attributable to exposure to these drug classes was 38%. The largest effect was for antipsychotic agents: rate ratio 4.18 (3.42, 5.11). Other drug classes with large effects included proton pump inhibitors (rate ratio 2.20 (1.72, 2.83) for = 2 defined daily doses/day), opioids (3.66 (2.68, 5.01) for = 50 mg morphine equivalent/day) and gabapentinoids. These associations persisted after adjusting for covariates and were stronger with recent than with non-recent exposure.

Conclusions

Severe COVID-19 is associated with polypharmacy and with drugs that cause sedation, respiratory depression, or dyskinesia; have anticholinergic effects; or affect the gastrointestinal system. These associations are not easily explained by co-morbidity. Measures to reduce the burden of mortality and morbidity from COVID-19 should include reinforcing existing guidance on reducing overprescribing of these drug classes and limiting inappropriate polypharmacy.

Registration

ENCEPP number EUPAS35558.

SUBMITTER: McKeigue PM

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7897516 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundReports have suggested that the efficacy of vaccines against COVID-19 might have fallen since the delta (B.1.617.2) SARS-CoV-2 variant replaced the alpha (B.1.1.7) variant as the predominant variant. We aimed to investigate, for the two main classes of vaccine, whether efficacy against severe COVID-19 has decreased since delta became the predominant variant and whether the efficacy of two doses of vaccine against severe COVID-19 wanes with time since second dose.MethodsIn the REACT-SCOT case-control study, vaccine efficacy was estimated using a matched case-control design that includes all diagnosed cases of COVID-19 in Scotland up to Sept 8, 2021. For every incident case of COVID-19 in the Scottish population, ten controls matched for age rounded to the nearest year, sex, and primary care practice, and alive on the day of presentation of the case that they were matched to were selected using the Community Health Index database. To minimise ascertainment bias we prespecified the primary outcome measure to assess vaccine efficacy as severe COVID-19, defined as diagnosed patients with entry to critical care within 21 days of first positive test, death within 28 days of first positive test, or any death for which COVID-19 was coded as underlying cause. Although the data extracted for this study included cases presenting up to Sept 22, 2021, the analyses reported here are restricted to cases and controls presenting from Dec 1, 2020, to Sept 8, 2021, ensuring follow-up for at least 14 days after presentation date to allow classification of hospitalisation and (for most cases) severity based on entry to critical care or fatal outcome.FindingsDuring the study period, a total of 5645 severe cases of COVID-19 were recorded; these were matched to 50 096 controls. Of the severe cases, 4495 (80%) were not vaccinated, and of the controls, 36 879 (74%) were not vaccinated. Of the severe cases of COVID-19 who had been vaccinated, 389 had received an mRNA vaccine and 759 had received the ChAdOx1 vaccine. The efficacy of vaccination against severe COVID-19 decreased in May, 2021, coinciding with the replacement of the alpha SARS-CoV-2 variant by the delta variant in Scotland, but this decrease was reversed over the following month. In the most recent time window centred on July 29, 2021, the efficacy of two doses was 91% (95% CI 87-94) for the ChAdOx1 vaccine and 92% (88-95) for mRNA (Pfizer or Moderna) vaccines. The efficacy of the ChAdOx1 vaccine against severe COVID-19 declined with time since second dose to 69% (95% CI 52-80) at 20 weeks from second dose. The efficacy of mRNA vaccines declined in the first ten weeks from second dose but more slowly thereafter to 93% (88-96) at 20 weeks from second dose.InterpretationOur results are reassuring with respect to concerns that vaccine efficacy against severe COVID-19 might have fallen since the delta variant became predominant, or that efficacy of mRNA vaccines wanes within the first 5-6 months after second dose. However, the efficacy of the ChAdOx1 vaccine against severe COVID-19 wanes substantially by 20 weeks from second dose. Efficacy of mRNA vaccines after 20 weeks and against newer variants remains to be established. Our findings support the case for additional protective measures for those at risk of severe disease, including, but not limited to, booster doses, at times when transmission rates are high or expected to rise.FundingNone.

Project description:BACKGROUND:The objectives of this study were to identify risk factors for severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and to lay the basis for risk stratification based on demographic data and health records. METHODS AND FINDINGS:The design was a matched case-control study. Severe COVID-19 was defined as either a positive nucleic acid test for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in the national database followed by entry to a critical care unit or death within 28 days or a death certificate with COVID-19 as underlying cause. Up to 10 controls per case matched for sex, age, and primary care practice were selected from the national population register. For this analysis-based on ascertainment of positive test results up to 6 June 2020, entry to critical care up to 14 June 2020, and deaths registered up to 14 June 2020-there were 36,948 controls and 4,272 cases, of which 1,894 (44%) were care home residents. All diagnostic codes from the past 5 years of hospitalisation records and all drug codes from prescriptions dispensed during the past 240 days were extracted. Rate ratios for severe COVID-19 were estimated by conditional logistic regression. In a logistic regression using the age-sex distribution of the national population, the odds ratios for severe disease were 2.87 for a 10-year increase in age and 1.63 for male sex. In the case-control analysis, the strongest risk factor was residence in a care home, with rate ratio 21.4 (95% CI 19.1-23.9, p = 8 × 10-644). Univariate rate ratios for conditions listed by public health agencies as conferring high risk were 2.75 (95% CI 1.96-3.88, p = 6 × 10-9) for type 1 diabetes, 1.60 (95% CI 1.48-1.74, p = 8 × 10-30) for type 2 diabetes, 1.49 (95% CI 1.37-1.61, p = 3 × 10-21) for ischemic heart disease, 2.23 (95% CI 2.08-2.39, p = 4 × 10-109) for other heart disease, 1.96 (95% CI 1.83-2.10, p = 2 × 10-78) for chronic lower respiratory tract disease, 4.06 (95% CI 3.15-5.23, p = 3 × 10-27) for chronic kidney disease, 5.4 (95% CI 4.9-5.8, p = 1 × 10-354) for neurological disease, 3.61 (95% CI 2.60-5.00, p = 2 × 10-14) for chronic liver disease, and 2.66 (95% CI 1.86-3.79, p = 7 × 10-8) for immune deficiency or suppression. Seventy-eight percent of cases and 52% of controls had at least one listed condition (51% of cases and 11% of controls under age 40). Severe disease was associated with encashment of at least one prescription in the past 9 months and with at least one hospital admission in the past 5 years (rate ratios 3.10 [95% CI 2.59-3.71] and 2.75 [95% CI 2.53-2.99], respectively) even after adjusting for the listed conditions. In those without listed conditions, significant associations with severe disease were seen across many hospital diagnoses and drug categories. Age and sex provided 2.58 bits of information for discrimination. A model based on demographic variables, listed conditions, hospital diagnoses, and prescriptions provided an additional 1.07 bits (C-statistic 0.804). A limitation of this study is that records from primary care were not available. CONCLUSIONS:We have shown that, along with older age and male sex, severe COVID-19 is strongly associated with past medical history across all age groups. Many comorbidities beyond the risk conditions designated by public health agencies contribute to this. A risk classifier that uses all the information available in health records, rather than only a limited set of conditions, will more accurately discriminate between low-risk and high-risk individuals who may require shielding until the epidemic is over.

Project description:Objective: Little research has evaluated trends in psychotropic prescribing and polypharmacy in primary care patients, especially those with dementia. We sought to examine this in Australia from 2011 to 2020 using the primary care dataset, MedicineInsight. Methods: Ten consecutive serial cross-sectional analyses were performed to evaluate the proportion of patients aged 65 years or more, with a recorded diagnosis of dementia, who were prescribed psychotropic medications within the first six months of each year from 2011 to 2020. This proportion was compared with propensity score-matched control patients without dementia. Results: Before matching, 24,701 patients (59.2% females) with, and 72,105 patients (59.2% females) without, a recorded diagnosis of dementia were included. In 2011, 42% (95% confidence interval [CI] 40.5–43.5%) of patients in the dementia group had at least one recorded prescription of a psychotropic medication, which declined to 34.2% (95% CI 33.3–35.1%; p for trend < 0.001) by 2020. However, it remained unchanged for matched controls (36% [95% CI 34.6–37.5%] in 2011 and 36.7% [95% CI 35.7–37.6%] in 2020). The greatest decline in the dementia groups by medication class was for antipsychotics (from 15.9% [95% CI 14.8–17.0%] to 8.8% [95% CI 8.2–9.4%]; p for trend < 0.001). During this period, the prevalence of psychotropic polypharmacy (use of two or more individual psychotropics) also decreased from 21.7% (95% CI 20.5–22.9%) to 18.1% (95% CI 17.4–18.9%) in the dementia groups, and slightly increased from 15.2% (95% CI 14.1–16.3%) to 16.6% (95% CI 15.9–17.3%) in the matched controls. Conclusions: The decline in psychotropic prescribing, particularly antipsychotics, in Australian primary care patients with dementia is encouraging. However, psychotropic polypharmacy still occurred in almost one in five patients with dementia at the end of the study period. Programs focused on encouraging further reductions in the use of multiple psychotropic drugs in patients with dementia are recommended, particularly in rural and remote regions.

Project description:High but variable rates of psychotropic polypharmacy (PP) in youth with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) have been reported in previous studies. The effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on prescribing patterns has not been well described. This study aims to examine the factors associated with psychotropic prescribing patterns, including rates of PP and multiclass polypharmacy (MPP) in youth with ASD during the COVID-19 pandemic. We examined the prescription records and clinical characteristics of youth aged between 3-21 years with a clinical diagnosis of ASD who were followed at an urban tertiary autism center psychiatry clinic between 1 January 2019, and 31 December 2020. For study purposes, we treated 2019 as the pre-pandemic year and 2020 as the pandemic year and compared the clinical characteristics of the "total clinic cohort (n = 898)" across two years. We examined the clinical characteristics of patients seen in both years ("paired-sample," n = 473) and those seen only in 219 ("not-paired sample," n = 378) to identify factors associated with the likelihood of patients' return to clinic in 2020. As the total clinic cohort was a naturalistic sample containing duplicate patients, we created a separate data set by randomly assigning duplicate patients to one of the years ("random unique sample," n = 898) and examined the clinical characteristics across two years. We defined PP and MPP broadly as the use of ≥2 unique medications (PP) and ≥2 unique medication classes (MPP) within a calendar year in this study. In the total clinic cohort, increased rates of PP (71.6% to 75.6%), MPP (61.9% to 67.8%, p = 0.027), and antidepressant prescriptions (56.9% to 62.9%, p = 0.028) were noted, although only the latter two were nominally significant. The paired-sample had a higher proportion of teens (31.0% vs. 39.7%, p < 0.001 and persons who self-identified as non-Hispanic (77.8% vs. 85.4%, p = 0.016)), higher rates of anxiety (78.9% vs. 48.7%, p < 0.001), ADHD (71.0% vs. 44.4%, p < 0.001), depression (23.9% vs. 13.0%, p < 0.001) and disruptive behavior (63.3% vs. 33.3%, p < 0.001) diagnoses, higher rates of antidepressants (63.4% vs. 48.7%, p < 0.001), ADHD medications (72.5% vs. 59.8%, p < 0.001), and antipsychotics (36.8% vs. 26.2%, p < 0.001) prescribed, and higher rates of PP (81.6% vs. 59.0%, p < 0.001) and MPP (71.0% vs. 50.5%, p < 0.001) than the not-paired sample. In the random unique sample, the patient group assigned to 2020 had higher rates of anxiety (75.0% vs. 60.2%, p < 0.001), ADHD (69.9% vs. 54.6%, p < 0.001), and disruptive behavior (57.9% vs. 45.4%, p < 0.001) diagnoses but the PP and MPP rates did not differ across years. Overall, we found high rates of PP and MPP, likely due to the broader definition of PP and MPP used in this study than those in other studies as well as the study site being a tertiary clinic. While our study suggests a possible impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on comorbidity rates and prescribing patterns, a replication study is needed to confirm how pandemic-related factors impact prescribing patterns and polypharmacy rates in youth with ASD.