Euni Lee1, Mary K Maneno, Anthony K Wutoh, Ilene H Zuckerman. 1. Department of Clinical and Administrative Pharmacy Sciences, School of Pharmacy, Howard University, Center for Minority Health Services Research, Washington, District of Columbia, USA. eunlee@chonnam.ac.kr
Abstract
AIM: To describe long-term prescribing patterns of osteoporosis therapy before and after the Women's Health Initiative (WHI) publication. METHODS: We conducted a time-series analysis from 1997 to 2005 using nationally representative data based on office-based physician and hospital ambulatory clinic visits. Bivariate and multivariable analyses were conducted using chi-square tests and logistic regression, respectively, and trends in the prevalence of osteoporosis therapies were evaluated per 6-month (semiannual) intervals. Linear regression and graphic techniques were used to determine statistical differences in the prevalence trends between the two periods. RESULTS: Overall prevalence of therapeutic or preventive osteoporosis therapy was similar between the WHI periods. However, a significant decrease in estrogen therapy and increases in bisphosphonates, calcium/vitamin D were observed in the period after the WHI publication (p < 0.05). Multiple logistic regression analysis showed older age and white race were associated with a higher likelihood of antiosteoporosis medication (AOM) prescription, and Medicaid insurance type was associated with a lower likelihood of an AOM prescription. Excluding calcium/vitamin D, nonestrogen therapy was more likely to be prescribed in the after-WHI period (office-based physician clinic: [adjusted OR, aOR] 2.49 [2.04-4.04]; hospital-based clinic: aOR 2.42 [1.67-7.50]) Nonestrogen therapy was more prevalent in visits made by older women, women of white race, women with contraindicated conditions for estrogen therapy, and women from the Northeast region. CONCLUSIONS: After the WHI publication, the overall prevalence of osteoporosis therapy did not change; however, a shift from estrogen to nonestrogen therapy was observed after the WHI publication. Black women were less likely to receive nonestrogen antiosteoporosis therapy in hospital-based clinics.
AIM: To describe long-term prescribing patterns of osteoporosis therapy before and after the Women's Health Initiative (WHI) publication. METHODS: We conducted a time-series analysis from 1997 to 2005 using nationally representative data based on office-based physician and hospital ambulatory clinic visits. Bivariate and multivariable analyses were conducted using chi-square tests and logistic regression, respectively, and trends in the prevalence of osteoporosis therapies were evaluated per 6-month (semiannual) intervals. Linear regression and graphic techniques were used to determine statistical differences in the prevalence trends between the two periods. RESULTS: Overall prevalence of therapeutic or preventive osteoporosis therapy was similar between the WHI periods. However, a significant decrease in estrogen therapy and increases in bisphosphonates, calcium/vitamin D were observed in the period after the WHI publication (p < 0.05). Multiple logistic regression analysis showed older age and white race were associated with a higher likelihood of antiosteoporosis medication (AOM) prescription, and Medicaid insurance type was associated with a lower likelihood of an AOM prescription. Excluding calcium/vitamin D, nonestrogen therapy was more likely to be prescribed in the after-WHI period (office-based physician clinic: [adjusted OR, aOR] 2.49 [2.04-4.04]; hospital-based clinic: aOR 2.42 [1.67-7.50]) Nonestrogen therapy was more prevalent in visits made by older women, women of white race, women with contraindicated conditions for estrogen therapy, and women from the Northeast region. CONCLUSIONS: After the WHI publication, the overall prevalence of osteoporosis therapy did not change; however, a shift from estrogen to nonestrogen therapy was observed after the WHI publication. Black women were less likely to receive nonestrogen antiosteoporosis therapy in hospital-based clinics.
Authors: Robert A Yood; Srinivas Emani; John I Reed; Barbara Edelman Lewis; Mary Charpentier; Eva Lydick Journal: Osteoporos Int Date: 2003-09-19 Impact factor: 4.507
Authors: Anna N A Tosteson; Margaret R Grove; Cristina S Hammond; Megan M Moncur; G Thomas Ray; Gwen M Hebert; Alice R Pressman; Bruce Ettinger Journal: Am J Med Date: 2003-08-15 Impact factor: 4.965
Authors: Jacques E Rossouw; Garnet L Anderson; Ross L Prentice; Andrea Z LaCroix; Charles Kooperberg; Marcia L Stefanick; Rebecca D Jackson; Shirley A A Beresford; Barbara V Howard; Karen C Johnson; Jane Morley Kotchen; Judith Ockene Journal: JAMA Date: 2002-07-17 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Alexandra Papaioannou; George Ioannidis; Jonathan D Adachi; Rolf J Sebaldt; Nicole Ferko; Mark Puglia; Jacques Brown; Alan Tenenhouse; Wojciech P Olszynski; Pauline Boulos; David A Hanley; Robert Josse; Timothy M Murray; Annie Petrie; Charlie H Goldsmith Journal: Osteoporos Int Date: 2003-09-11 Impact factor: 4.507
Authors: A F Brown; E J Pérez-Stable; E E Whitaker; S F Posner; M Alexander; J Gathe; A E Washington Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 1999-11 Impact factor: 5.128