Timothy S Anderson1,2, Bocheng Jing3,4, Charlie M Wray5, Sarah Ngo3,4, Edison Xu3,4, Kathy Fung3,4, Michael A Steinman3,4. 1. Division of General Medicine and Primary Care, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, MA. 2. Division of General Internal Medicine. 3. Division of Geriatrics, University of California San Francisco. 4. Division of Geriatrics, San Francisco VA Medical Center. 5. Department of Medicine, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Pharmacy dispensing data are frequently used to identify prevalent medication use as a predictor or covariate in observational research studies. Although several methods have been proposed for using pharmacy dispensing data to identify prevalent medication use, little is known about their comparative performance. OBJECTIVES: The authors sought to compare the performance of different methods for identifying prevalent outpatient medication use. RESEARCH DESIGN: Outpatient pharmacy fill data were compared with medication reconciliation notes denoting prevalent outpatient medication use at the time of hospital admission for a random sample of 207 patients drawn from a national cohort of patients admitted to Veterans Affairs hospitals. Using reconciliation notes as the criterion standard, we determined the test characteristics of 12 pharmacy database algorithms for determining prevalent use of 11 classes of cardiovascular and diabetes medications. RESULTS: The best-performing algorithms included a 180-day fixed look-back period approach (sensitivity, 93%; specificity, 97%; and positive predictive value, 89%) and a medication-on-hand approach with a grace period of 60 days (sensitivity, 91%; specificity, 97%; and positive predictive value, 91%). Algorithms that have been commonly used in previous studies, such as defining prevalent medications to include any medications filled in the prior year or only medications filled in the prior 30 days, performed less well. Algorithm performance was less accurate among patients recently receiving hospital or nursing facility care. CONCLUSION: Pharmacy database algorithms that balance recentness of medication fills with grace periods performed better than more simplistic approaches and should be considered for future studies which examine prevalent chronic medication use.
BACKGROUND: Pharmacy dispensing data are frequently used to identify prevalent medication use as a predictor or covariate in observational research studies. Although several methods have been proposed for using pharmacy dispensing data to identify prevalent medication use, little is known about their comparative performance. OBJECTIVES: The authors sought to compare the performance of different methods for identifying prevalent outpatient medication use. RESEARCH DESIGN:Outpatient pharmacy fill data were compared with medication reconciliation notes denoting prevalent outpatient medication use at the time of hospital admission for a random sample of 207 patients drawn from a national cohort of patients admitted to Veterans Affairs hospitals. Using reconciliation notes as the criterion standard, we determined the test characteristics of 12 pharmacy database algorithms for determining prevalent use of 11 classes of cardiovascular and diabetes medications. RESULTS: The best-performing algorithms included a 180-day fixed look-back period approach (sensitivity, 93%; specificity, 97%; and positive predictive value, 89%) and a medication-on-hand approach with a grace period of 60 days (sensitivity, 91%; specificity, 97%; and positive predictive value, 91%). Algorithms that have been commonly used in previous studies, such as defining prevalent medications to include any medications filled in the prior year or only medications filled in the prior 30 days, performed less well. Algorithm performance was less accurate among patients recently receiving hospital or nursing facility care. CONCLUSION: Pharmacy database algorithms that balance recentness of medication fills with grace periods performed better than more simplistic approaches and should be considered for future studies which examine prevalent chronic medication use.
Authors: Natasa Gisev; Sallie-Anne Pearson; Emily A Karanges; Briony Larance; Nicholas A Buckley; Sarah Larney; Timothy Dobbins; Bianca Blanch; Louisa Degenhardt Journal: Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf Date: 2017-10-19 Impact factor: 2.890
Authors: Jacqueline M Cohen; Mollie E Wood; Sonia Hernandez-Diaz; Hedvig Nordeng Journal: Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf Date: 2018-02-28 Impact factor: 2.890
Authors: Kevin T Stroupe; Bridget M Smith; Lauren Bailey; Jamal Adas; Walid F Gellad; Katie Suda; Zhiping Huo; Sean Tully; Muriel Burk; Francesca Cunningham Journal: Am J Health Syst Pharm Date: 2017-02-01 Impact factor: 2.637
Authors: Dima M Qato; G Caleb Alexander; Rena M Conti; Michael Johnson; Phil Schumm; Stacy Tessler Lindau Journal: JAMA Date: 2008-12-24 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Timothy S Anderson; Charlie M Wray; Bocheng Jing; Kathy Fung; Sarah Ngo; Edison Xu; Ying Shi; Michael A Steinman Journal: BMJ Date: 2018-09-12
Authors: Timothy S Anderson; Alexandra K Lee; Bocheng Jing; Sei Lee; Shoshana J Herzig; W John Boscardin; Kathy Fung; Anael Rizzo; Michael A Steinman Journal: JAMA Netw Open Date: 2021-10-01
Authors: Timothy S Anderson; Sei Lee; Bocheng Jing; Kathy Fung; Sarah Ngo; Molly Silvestrini; Michael A Steinman Journal: JAMA Netw Open Date: 2020-03-02