Present: Marianne Burke, Abby Crocker, Kairn Kelley, Amanda
Kennedy, Ben Littenberg, Charlie MacLean, Connie van Eeghen
1.
Start Up: Connie
reported back from a poster presentation in Denver; great opportunity to meet
new colleagues
2.
Presentation: Charlie
MacLean: Exploration of analytical plan for Natural History of Acute Opioid Use
a. Key
points from the 2009 Boudreau article that Amanda found in her lit review: Trends in De-facto Long-term Opioid Therapy
for Chronic Non-Cancer Pain (CNCP)
i.
CONSORT study of adults enrolled in two health plans serving
> 1% of US population (4m)
ii.
Automated health plan data to construct episodes of
opioid use 1997-2005; incidence & prevalence; rates of change
iii.
Long term episode: >90 days with 120+ days’ supply or
10+ opioid rx in one year
iv.
Results: incident long term use increased from 8.5 to
12.1/1000 (Group Health) with 6% annual change (PCA) and 6.3 to 8.6/1000
(Kaiser Permanente) with 5.5 PCA
1. Small
increases observed in overall use of opioids: 2.2 PCA and 0.83 PCA
2. Prevalent
long term use almost doubled: 8.1 PCA and 8.6 PCA
3. Incident
long term use lasted > 1 year for 75% of episodes
v.
Non-Schedule II opioids most common and increased in
long term use
1. MEq
dose was stable for incident long term opioid users
vi.
Regular users of sedative hypnotics: 28.6% (GH) and
30.2% (KPNC)
vii.
Conclusion: increasing prevalence; need to study
benefits and risks. Need to study
concurrent use of opioids and sedative-hypnotics, which were unexpectedly
common
b. Amanda
provide a draft introduction and her search strategy.
i.
Target population: adults getting their first dose of
opioids with the intention of short term management.
c. Research
Question: what proportion of opioid naïve adult patients started on an opioid
become long term users? What are the
characteristics of use? What are the
predictors of long term use?
i.
Previous study (Boudreau, above) provides definitions
for “long term,” although we may not be able to determine “days’ supply.” Can be estimated and evaluated with a
sensitivity analysis. We can look only at
first to last claim, not scripts.
ii.
Can be constructed as a survival analysis, with the
“survivors” being those who continue to generate additional claims.
d. Ben
& Abby sketched out statistical analyses
i.
Kaplan-Meier survival analysis
ii.
Logistic regression based on whether or not patient
became long term/chronic, with variables of interest:
1. Should
cancer-related opioid use be included?
Literature is separate. We cannot
easily determine patients considered terminally ill and long term consequences
of opioid use for this population is not a great concern. May be identifiable
by provider or treatments. Retain the
data and examine: does the inclusion of cancer patients make a difference? Plan
to stratify on cancer patients.
2. Eliminate
non-opioid patients.
3. Eliminate
non-opioid medications as inclusion criteria; keep as covariates. Include all opioids, including non-Schedule
II.
4. Classify
each episode as acute or chronic.
5. Collect
predictive data: age, sex, nearness of provider (zip code), prior episodes,
prior rx, prior chronic episodes, recent diagnoses (low back pain, headache),
other med use, prescriber (specialty: PCP, ED, other; buprenorphine
prescribers; methadone prescribers; chronicity index-preference for prescribing
opioids), length of days of dose, dosage, insurer, co-morbid mental health
conditions (anti-depressant use, diagnosis within past six months… but keep
benzo’s separate), history of substance use disorder (previous SA claims), zip
code linked to median income and education; out-of-state pharmacy (mail or
picked up) based on pharmacy zip code
6. Drug
index: was the initial drug a long or short acting formulation?
7. Hospital
initiation: Will not see hospital prescriptions but will include hospital
claims. 96 hours post-hospital filled rx
is likely to be a hospital-initiated drug.
iii.
Charlie: how do the prescribers cluster in prescribing
patterns or preferences
e. Specification
for data report
i.
One record for each claim, linking medication data and
patient data: Charlie and Abby over the next two weeks (on May 17th)
1. Steve
Kappel this morning released a 5 gig data base for Charlie to review: all
prescriptions from all prescribers; not the other claims: Charlie will import
and clean
ii.
Test data for face validity BEFORE excluding any claims
from the study
1. Clean
in STATA: Abby and Charlie
2. Run
descriptive analyses – in CROW: Abby and Charlie
iii.
Meet with Neil S on validation plan (Abby to join
biweekly Tuesday meetings)
1. Request
IRB permission for validation process
2. Validation
process needed to confirm that patient identifiers are unique (not shared with
other patients ) and not duplicated (only one per patient). May need to cross-validate with other data
sources, under supervision by the IRB.
a. Use
four years of data to build predication model; test model on data from year 5 –
or hold out 20% of data, to avoid problems with a time trend – or both
b. One
time related issue is the policy decision to avoid prescribing NSAIDs to
elderly (over 65) in order to avoid stomach and kidney problems, resulting in
greater use of opioids
iv.
Analysis – CROW session TBD
3.
Summer sessions:
consider Wed 11:30 – 1:00 starting June 5.
Will ask Sylvie for help in figuring this out.
a.
May 16: Connie: Feedback on poster presentation on
“Quick Turns in Tight Places: Implementing Change in Small Practices” and the
Introduction and Methods sections of manuscript with working title: “Integrating
Behavioral Health using Workflow (Lean)”
b.
May 23:
c.
May 30:
d.
June 5: New summer schedule will start
e. Future
agenda to consider:
i.
Christina Cruz, 3rd year FM resident with
questionnaire for mild serotonin withdrawal syndrome?
ii.
Peter Callas or other faculty on multi-level modeling
iii.
Charlie MacLean: demonstration of Tableau
iv.
Journal article: Gomes, 2013, Opioid Dose and MVA in
Canada (Charlie)
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.