Emily A Karanges1, Nicholas A Buckley2, Jonathan Brett1, Bianca Blanch3, Melisa Litchfield1, Louisa Degenhardt4, Sallie-Anne Pearson1,5. 1. Medicines Policy Research Unit, Centre for Big Data Research in Health, University of New South Wales, Kensington, Australia. 2. Discipline of Pharmacology, School of Medical Sciences, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia. 3. Faculty of Pharmacy, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia. 4. National Drug and Alcohol Research Centre, Faculty of Medicine, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia. 5. Menzies Centre for Health Policy, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Population-based observational studies have documented global increases in opioid analgesic use. Many studies have used a single population-adjusted metric (number of dispensings, defined daily doses [DDDs], or oral morphine equivalents [OMEs]). We combine these volume-based metrics with a measure of the number of persons dispensed opioids to gain insights into Australian trends in prescribed opioid use. METHODS: We obtained records of prescribed opioid dispensings (2006-2015) subsidised under Australia's Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme. We used dispensing claims to quantify annual changes in use according to 3 volume-based metrics: DDD/1000 pop/day, OME/1000 pop/day, and dispensings/1000 pop. We estimated the number of persons dispensed at least one opioid in a given year (persons)/1000 pop using data from a 10% random sample of Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme-eligible Australians. RESULTS: Total opioid use increased according to all metrics, especially OME/1000 pop/day (51% increase) and dispensings/1000 pop (44%). Weaker opioid use remained stable or declined; strong opioid use increased. The rate of persons accessing weaker opioids only decreased 31%, and there was a 238% increase in persons dispensed only strong opioids. Strong opioid use also increased according to dispensings/1000 pop (140%), OME/1000 pop/day (80%), and DDD/1000 pop/day (71% increase). CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that the increases in total opioid use between 2006 and 2015 were predominantly driven by a growing number of people treated with strong opioids at lower medicine strengths/doses. This method can be used with or without person-level data to provide insights into factors driving changes in medicine use over time.
PURPOSE: Population-based observational studies have documented global increases in opioid analgesic use. Many studies have used a single population-adjusted metric (number of dispensings, defined daily doses [DDDs], or oral morphine equivalents [OMEs]). We combine these volume-based metrics with a measure of the number of persons dispensed opioids to gain insights into Australian trends in prescribed opioid use. METHODS: We obtained records of prescribed opioid dispensings (2006-2015) subsidised under Australia's Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme. We used dispensing claims to quantify annual changes in use according to 3 volume-based metrics: DDD/1000 pop/day, OME/1000 pop/day, and dispensings/1000 pop. We estimated the number of persons dispensed at least one opioid in a given year (persons)/1000 pop using data from a 10% random sample of Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme-eligible Australians. RESULTS: Total opioid use increased according to all metrics, especially OME/1000 pop/day (51% increase) and dispensings/1000 pop (44%). Weaker opioid use remained stable or declined; strong opioid use increased. The rate of persons accessing weaker opioids only decreased 31%, and there was a 238% increase in persons dispensed only strong opioids. Strong opioid use also increased according to dispensings/1000 pop (140%), OME/1000 pop/day (80%), and DDD/1000 pop/day (71% increase). CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that the increases in total opioid use between 2006 and 2015 were predominantly driven by a growing number of people treated with strong opioids at lower medicine strengths/doses. This method can be used with or without person-level data to provide insights into factors driving changes in medicine use over time.
Authors: Jonathan Brett; Claire E Wylie; Jacques Raubenheimer; Geoff K Isbister; Nick A Buckley Journal: Br J Clin Pharmacol Date: 2019-07-17 Impact factor: 4.335
Authors: Sarah Larney; Matthew Hickman; David A Fiellin; Timothy Dobbins; Suzanne Nielsen; Nicola R Jones; Richard P Mattick; Robert Ali; Louisa Degenhardt Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2018-08-05 Impact factor: 2.692