Dataset Information

Polypharmacy prevalence in older adults seen in United States physician offices from 2009 to 2016.

ABSTRACT:

Background/objectives

With an aging population suffering from increased prevalence of chronic conditions in the United States (U.S.), a large portion of these patients are on multiple medications. High-risk medications can increase the risk for drug-drug interactions and medication nonadherence. This study aims to describe the prevalence of polypharmacy and high-risk medication prescribing in U.S. physician offices.

Methods

This was a cross-sectional study of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey from 2009 to 2016. All patients over 65 years old were included. Polypharmacy was categorized as no polypharmacy (< 2 medications), minor polypharmacy (2-3 medications), moderate polypharmacy (4-5 medications), and major polypharmacy (>5 medications). Medications were further categorized into high-risk medication categories (anticholinergics, cardiovascular agents, central nervous system (CNS) medications, pain medications, and other). Comparisons between the degrees of polypharmacy were performed utilizing chi-square or Wilcoxon rank-sum tests with JMP Pro 14® (SAS Institute, Cary, NC).

Results

Over 2 billion patient visits were included. Overall, Polypharmacy was common (65.1%): minor polypharmacy (16.2%), moderate polypharmacy (12.1%), and major polypharmacy (36.8%). Patients with major polypharmacy were older compared to those with moderate or minor polypharmacy (75 vs. 73 years, respectively) and were most frequently prescribed pain medications (477.3 per 1,000 total visits). NSAIDs were the most frequently prescribed, with 232.4 per 1,000 total visits resulting in one high-risk NSAID prescription, while 21.9 per 1,000 total visits resulted in two or more high-risk NSAIDs.

Conclusion

Most patients over 65 years experienced some degree of polypharmacy, with many experiencing major polypharmacy. This indicates an increased need for expanded pharmacist roles through medication therapy management and safety monitoring in this patient population.

SUBMITTER: Young EH

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8330900 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Importance:Little is known to date about national trends in the prescribing of skeletal muscle relaxants (SMRs), the use of which is associated with important safety concerns, especially in older adults and in those who use concomitant opioids. Objective:To measure national trends in SMR prescribing over a 12-year period. Design, Setting, and Participants:This cross-sectional study used data from the National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey from January 2005 to December 2016. Data were analyzed from August 21, 2018, to July 18, 2019. The study included patients with ambulatory care visits who had encounters with non-federally funded, office-based physicians in the United States. Exposures:SMR use, categorized as newly prescribed or continued therapy at the office visit. Main Outcomes and Measures:Ambulatory care visits-overall and stratified by calendar year, geographic region, and patient age, sex, and race-in which an SMR was newly prescribed or continued were quantified. Among office visits in which an SMR was newly prescribed, diagnoses were assessed. Concomitant medications were quantified for all office visits, stratified by new or continued therapy. Survey visit weights were used to estimate nationally representative measures, and age-standardized rates were generated by geographic region using US Census data. Results:This study included a total of 314 970 308 office visits (mean [SD] age, 53.5 [15.2] years; 194 621 102 [61.8%] men and 120 349 206 [38.2%] women). In 2016, there were 30?730?262 (95% CI, 30?626?464-30?834?060) US ambulatory care visits in which an SMR was either newly prescribed or continued as ongoing therapy. Patients in these visits were most frequently female (58.2% [95% CI, 57.9%-58.6%]), white (53.7% [95% CI, 53.4%-54.0%]), and aged 45 to 64 years (48.5% [95% CI, 48.2%-48.9%]). During the study period, office visits with a prescribed SMR nearly doubled from 15.5 million (95% CI, 15.4-15.6 million) in 2005 to 30.7 million (95% CI, 30.6-30.8 million) in 2016. Although visits for new SMR prescriptions remained stable, office visits with continued SMR drug therapy tripled from 8.5 million (95% CI, 8.4-8.5 million) visits in 2005 to 24.7 million (95% CI, 24.6-24.8 million) visits in 2016. Older adults accounted for 22.2% (95% CI, 21.8%-22.6%) of visits with an SMR prescription. Concomitant use of an opioid was recorded in 67.2% (95% CI, 62.0%-72.5%) of all visits with a continuing SMR prescription. Conclusions and Relevance:This study found that SMR use increased rapidly between 2005 and 2016, which is a concern given the prominent adverse effects and limited long-term efficacy data associated with their use. These findings suggest that approaches are needed to limit the long-term use of SMRs, especially in older adults, similar to approaches to limit long-term use of opioids and benzodiazepines.

Project description:BackgroundInfants younger than 6 months are at increased risk of complications and mortality from pertussis infection. In October 2012, the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices revised its recommendation to include a Tdap dose during each pregnancy, ideally between 27 and 36 weeks gestation.ObjectiveAssess trends in Tdap vaccination coverage among privately insured pregnant women from 2009 to 2016 including timing of Tdap vaccination (before, during, or after pregnancy), trimester of vaccination for women vaccinated during pregnancy, and missed vaccination opportunities for unvaccinated women. Identify factors associated with vaccination during the optimal period of 27-36 weeks gestation.Study designRetrospective analysis of privately insured women 15-49 years who delivered live births during 2009-2016 conducted using 2009-2016 MarketScan data. Tdap vaccination coverage and the timing of Tdap vaccine administration were assessed for women continuously enrolled from 6 months before pregnancy to 1 month after delivery. Multivariable logistic regression was performed to identify factors independently associated with receipt of Tdap vaccine at 27-36 weeks gestation.ResultsTdap vaccination coverage during pregnancy increased from 0.4% in 2009 to 6.2% in 2012 and to 53.2% in 2016. The proportion of vaccinated women receiving Tdap at 27-36 weeks gestation increased from <10% in 2009 to nearly 90% in 2016, with most vaccination occurring at 27-32 weeks gestation. Women of older age, residing in a metropolitan statistical area, residing outside the South, and having a capitated health insurance plan were more likely to receive Tdap at 27-36 weeks gestation than their counterparts. Among women not vaccinated during pregnancy, 77.7% had a pregnancy-related medical claim between 27 and 36 weeks gestation.ConclusionTdap vaccination coverage during pregnancy increased significantly from 2009 to 2016, with the greatest increase occurring after the revised Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices recommendation. Most women who did not receive Tdap vaccine had a missed vaccination opportunity during pregnancy, indicating potential for much higher vaccination coverage and consequent infant protection against pertussis.

Project description:ImportanceThe prevalence of diabetes among Hispanic and Asian American subpopulations in the United States is unknown.ObjectiveTo estimate racial/ethnic differences in the prevalence of diabetes among US adults 20 years or older by major race/ethnicity groups and selected Hispanic and non-Hispanic Asian subpopulations.Design, setting, and participantsNational Health and Nutrition Examination Surveys, 2011-2016, cross-sectional samples representing the noninstitutionalized, civilian, US population. The sample included adults 20 years or older who had self-reported diagnosed diabetes during the interview or measurements of hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c), fasting plasma glucose (FPG), and 2-hour plasma glucose (2hPG).ExposuresRace/ethnicity groups: non-Hispanic white, non-Hispanic black, Hispanic and Hispanic subgroups (Mexican, Puerto Rican, Cuban/Dominican, Central American, and South American), non-Hispanic Asian and non-Hispanic Asian subgroups (East, South, and Southeast Asian), and non-Hispanic other.Main outcomes and measuresDiagnosed diabetes was based on self-reported prior diagnosis. Undiagnosed diabetes was defined as HbA1c 6.5% or greater, FPG 126 mg/dL or greater, or 2hPG 200 mg/dL or greater in participants without diagnosed diabetes. Total diabetes was defined as diagnosed or undiagnosed diabetes.ResultsThe study sample included 7575 US adults (mean age, 47.5 years; 52% women; 2866 [65%] non-Hispanic white, 1636 [11%] non-Hispanic black, 1952 [15%] Hispanic, 909 [6%] non-Hispanic Asian, and 212 [3%] non-Hispanic other). A total of 2266 individuals had diagnosed diabetes; 377 had undiagnosed diabetes. Weighted age- and sex-adjusted prevalence of total diabetes was 12.1% (95% CI, 11.0%-13.4%) for non-Hispanic white, 20.4% (95% CI, 18.8%-22.1%) for non-Hispanic black, 22.1% (95% CI, 19.6%-24.7%) for Hispanic, and 19.1% (95% CI, 16.0%-22.1%) for non-Hispanic Asian adults (overall P < .001). Among Hispanic adults, the prevalence of total diabetes was 24.6% (95% CI, 21.6%-27.6%) for Mexican, 21.7% (95% CI, 14.6%-28.8%) for Puerto Rican, 20.5% (95% CI, 13.7%-27.3%) for Cuban/Dominican, 19.3% (95% CI, 12.4%-26.1%) for Central American, and 12.3% (95% CI, 8.5%-16.2%) for South American subgroups (overall P < .001). Among non-Hispanic Asian adults, the prevalence of total diabetes was 14.0% (95% CI, 9.5%-18.4%) for East Asian, 23.3% (95% CI, 15.6%-30.9%) for South Asian, and 22.4% (95% CI, 15.9%-28.9%) for Southeast Asian subgroups (overall P = .02). The prevalence of undiagnosed diabetes was 3.9% (95% CI, 3.0%-4.8%) for non-Hispanic white, 5.2% (95% CI, 3.9%-6.4%) for non-Hispanic black, 7.5% (95% CI, 5.9%-9.1%) for Hispanic, and 7.5% (95% CI, 4.9%-10.0%) for non-Hispanic Asian adults (overall P < .001).Conclusions and relevanceIn this nationally representative survey of US adults from 2011 to 2016, the prevalence of diabetes and undiagnosed diabetes varied by race/ethnicity and among subgroups identified within the Hispanic and non-Hispanic Asian populations.