42
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Assessing the healthcare resource use associated with inappropriate prescribing of inhaled corticosteroids for people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) in GOLD groups A or B: an observational study using the Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD)

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          Recent recommendations from the Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) position inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) for use in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) patients experiencing exacerbations (≥ 2 or ≥ 1 requiring hospitalisation); i.e. GOLD groups C and D. However, it is known that ICS is frequently prescribed for patients with less severe COPD. Potential drivers of inappropriate ICS use may be historical clinical guidance or a belief among physicians that intervening early with ICS would improve outcomes and reduce resource use. The objective of this study was to compare healthcare resource use in the UK for COPD patients in GOLD groups A and B (0 or 1 exacerbation not resulting in hospitalisation) who have either been prescribed an ICS-containing regimen or a non-ICS-containing regimen.

          Methods

          Linked data from the Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD) and Hospital Episode Statistics (HES) database were used. For the study period (1 July 2005 to 30 June 2015) a total 4009 patients met the inclusion criteria; 1745 receiving ICS-containing therapy and 2264 receiving non-ICS therapy. Treatment groups were propensity score-matched to account for potential confounders in the decision to prescribe ICS, leaving 1739 patients in both treatment arms. Resource use was assessed in terms of frequency of healthcare practitioner (HCP) interactions and rescue therapy prescribing. Treatment acquisition costs were not assessed.

          Results

          Results showed no benefit associated with the addition of ICS, with numerically higher all-cause HCP interactions (72,802 versus 69,136; adjusted relative rate: 1.07 [ p = 0.061]) and rescue therapy prescriptions (24,063 versus 21,163; adjusted relative rate: 1.05 [ p = 0.212]) for the ICS-containing group compared to the non-ICS group. Rate ratios favoured the non-ICS group for eight of nine outcomes assessed. Outcomes were similar for subgroup analyses surrounding potential influential parameters, including patients with poorer lung function (FEV 1 <  50% predicted), one prior exacerbation or elevated blood eosinophils.

          Conclusions

          These data suggest that ICS use in GOLD A and B COPD patients is not associated with a benefit in terms of healthcare resource use compared to non-ICS bronchodilator-based therapy; using ICS according to GOLD recommendations may offer an opportunity for improving patient care and reducing resource use.

          Electronic supplementary material

          The online version of this article (10.1186/s12931-018-0767-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

          Related collections

          Most cited references14

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Validity of diagnostic coding within the General Practice Research Database: a systematic review.

          The UK-based General Practice Research Database (GPRD) is a valuable source of longitudinal primary care records and is increasingly used for epidemiological research. To conduct a systematic review of the literature on accuracy and completeness of diagnostic coding in the GPRD. Systematic review. Six electronic databases were searched using search terms relating to the GPRD, in association with terms synonymous with validity, accuracy, concordance, and recording. A positive predictive value was calculated for each diagnosis that considered a comparison with a gold standard. Studies were also considered that compared the GPRD with other databases and national statistics. A total of 49 papers are included in this review. Forty papers conducted validation of a clinical diagnosis in the GPRD. When assessed against a gold standard (validation using GP questionnaire, primary care medical records, or hospital correspondence), most of the diagnoses were accurately recorded in the patient electronic record. Acute conditions were not as well recorded, with positive predictive values lower than 50%. Twelve papers compared prevalence or consultation rates in the GPRD against other primary care databases or national statistics. Generally, there was good agreement between disease prevalence and consultation rates between the GPRD and other datasets; however, rates of diabetes and musculoskeletal conditions were underestimated in the GPRD. Most of the diagnoses coded in the GPRD are well recorded. Researchers using the GPRD may want to consider how well the disease of interest is recorded before planning research, and consider how to optimise the identification of clinical events.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Blood eosinophil count and exacerbations in severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease after withdrawal of inhaled corticosteroids: a post-hoc analysis of the WISDOM trial

            Blood eosinophil counts might predict response to inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and a history of exacerbations. We used data from the WISDOM trial to assess whether patients with COPD with higher blood eosinophil counts would be more likely to have exacerbations if ICS treatment was withdrawn.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Validity of the general practice research database.

              The United Kingdom General Practice Research Database (GPRD) is an office-based, computer-generated, medical resource designed from its inception to be used for epidemiologic research. A distinct version of the GPRD is maintained by the Boston Collaborative Drug Surveillance Program and has been the source of more than 130 scientific articles primarily addressing drug safety issues. We reviewed evidence related to the validity of the GPRD. Specifically, with our extensive experience with this automated database, we evaluated the quality and completeness of the data that it contains.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                j.chalmers@dundee.ac.uk
                chris.poole.ext@boehringer-ingelheim.com
                samantha.webster@boehringer-ingelheim.com
                abby.tebboth@boehringer-ingelheim.com
                scott.dickinson@boehringer-ingelehim.com
                alicia.gayle@boehringer-ingelheim.com
                Journal
                Respir Res
                Respir. Res
                Respiratory Research
                BioMed Central (London )
                1465-9921
                1465-993X
                11 April 2018
                11 April 2018
                2018
                : 19
                : 63
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Scottish Centre for Respiratory Research, University of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital and Medical School, Dundee, UK
                [2 ]GRID grid.459394.6, Boehringer Ingelheim Ltd, ; Bracknell, UK
                Article
                767
                10.1186/s12931-018-0767-2
                5896104
                29642882
                a3ac1f12-d5e8-4cd0-b4d0-6101069777fd
                © The Author(s). 2018

                Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.

                History
                : 22 February 2018
                : 2 April 2018
                Funding
                Funded by: Boehringer Ingelheim Ltd
                Categories
                Research
                Custom metadata
                © The Author(s) 2018

                Respiratory medicine
                chronic obstructive pulmonary disease,resource use,inhaled corticosteroids, long-acting bronchodilators

                Comments

                Comment on this article