Literature DB >> 24664805

Instrumental variable applications using nursing home prescribing preferences in comparative effectiveness research.

Krista F Huybrechts1, Tobias Gerhard, Jessica M Franklin, Raisa Levin, Stephen Crystal, Sebastian Schneeweiss.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Nursing home residents are of particular interest for comparative effectiveness research given their susceptibility to adverse treatment effects and systematic exclusion from trials. However, the risk of residual confounding because of unmeasured markers of declining health using conventional analytic methods is high. We evaluated the validity of instrumental variable (IV) methods based on nursing home prescribing preference to mitigate such confounding, using psychotropic medications to manage behavioral problems in dementia as a case study.
METHODS: A cohort using linked data from Medicaid, Medicare, Minimum Data Set, and Online Survey, Certification and Reporting for 2001-2004 was established. Dual-eligible patients ≥65 years who initiated psychotropic medication use after admission were selected. Nursing home prescribing preference was characterized using mixed-effects logistic regression models. The plausibility of IV assumptions was explored, and the association between psychotropic medication class and 180-day mortality was estimated.
RESULTS: High-prescribing and low-prescribing nursing homes differed by a factor of 2. Each preference-based IV measure described a substantial proportion of variation in psychotropic medication choice (β(IV → treatment): 0.22-0.36). Measured patient characteristics were well balanced across patient groups based on instrument status (52% average reduction in Mahalanobis distance). There was no evidence that instrument status was associated with markers of nursing home quality of care.
CONCLUSION: Findings indicate that IV analyses using nursing home prescribing preference may be a useful approach in comparative effectiveness studies, and should extend naturally to analyses including untreated comparison groups, which are of great scientific interest but subject to even stronger confounding.
Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Entities:  

Keywords:  comparative effectiveness; confounding; epidemiologic methods; instrumental variable; nursing home; pharmacoepidemiology; prescribing preference

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24664805      PMCID: PMC4116440          DOI: 10.1002/pds.3611

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf        ISSN: 1053-8569            Impact factor:   2.890


  32 in total

1.  An introduction to instrumental variables for epidemiologists.

Authors:  S Greenland
Journal:  Int J Epidemiol       Date:  2000-08       Impact factor: 7.196

2.  Channeling bias in the interpretation of drug effects.

Authors:  H Petri; J Urquhart
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  1991-04       Impact factor: 2.373

3.  Observational studies of drug safety.

Authors:  A M Walker; M J Stampfer
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  1996-08-24       Impact factor: 79.321

4.  Psychotropic drug use in nursing homes--diagnostic indications and variations between institutions.

Authors:  S Ruths; J Straand; H A Nygaard
Journal:  Eur J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2001-09       Impact factor: 2.953

5.  Paradoxical relations of drug treatment with mortality in older persons.

Authors:  R J Glynn; E L Knight; R Levin; J Avorn
Journal:  Epidemiology       Date:  2001-11       Impact factor: 4.822

6.  Neuroleptic drug therapy in older adults newly admitted to nursing homes: incidence, dose, and specialist contact.

Authors:  Susan E Bronskill; Geoffrey M Anderson; Kathy Sykora; Walter P Wodchis; Sudeep Gill; Kenneth I Shulman; Paula A Rochon
Journal:  J Am Geriatr Soc       Date:  2004-05       Impact factor: 5.562

7.  The exclusion of the elderly and women from clinical trials in acute myocardial infarction.

Authors:  J H Gurwitz; N F Col; J Avorn
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1992-09-16       Impact factor: 56.272

8.  Does more intensive treatment of acute myocardial infarction in the elderly reduce mortality? Analysis using instrumental variables.

Authors:  M McClellan; B J McNeil; J P Newhouse
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1994-09-21       Impact factor: 56.272

9.  The use of atypical antipsychotics in nursing homes.

Authors:  Rosa Liperoti; Vincent Mor; Kate L Lapane; Claudio Pedone; Giovanni Gambassi; Roberto Bernabei
Journal:  J Clin Psychiatry       Date:  2003-09       Impact factor: 4.384

10.  Differential risk of death in older residents in nursing homes prescribed specific antipsychotic drugs: population based cohort study.

Authors:  K F Huybrechts; T Gerhard; S Crystal; M Olfson; J Avorn; R Levin; J A Lucas; S Schneeweiss
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2012-02-23
View more
  3 in total

1.  Too many, too few, or too unsafe? Impact of inappropriate prescribing on mortality, and hospitalization in a cohort of community-dwelling oldest old.

Authors:  Maarten Wauters; Monique Elseviers; Bert Vaes; Jan Degryse; Olivia Dalleur; Robert Vander Stichele; Thierry Christiaens; Majda Azermai
Journal:  Br J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2016-08-03       Impact factor: 4.335

2.  Antipsychotics and mortality: adjusting for mortality risk scores to address confounding by terminal illness.

Authors:  Yoonyoung Park; Jessica M Franklin; Sebastian Schneeweiss; Raisa Levin; Stephen Crystal; Tobias Gerhard; Krista F Huybrechts
Journal:  J Am Geriatr Soc       Date:  2015-03-06       Impact factor: 5.562

Review 3.  When Can Nonrandomized Studies Support Valid Inference Regarding Effectiveness or Safety of New Medical Treatments?

Authors:  Jessica M Franklin; Richard Platt; Nancy A Dreyer; Alex John London; Gregory E Simon; Jonathan H Watanabe; Michael Horberg; Adrian Hernandez; Robert M Califf
Journal:  Clin Pharmacol Ther       Date:  2021-05-09       Impact factor: 6.903

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.