| Literature DB >> 32334602 |
Jørn Henrik Vold1,2, Svetlana Skurtveit3,4, Christer Aas5,6, Fatemeh Chalabianloo5,6, Pia Synnøve Kloster5, Kjell Arne Johansson5,6, Lars Thore Fadnes5,6.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Dispensations of benzodiazepines, z-hypnotics, and gabapentinoids to patients on opioid agonist therapy (OAT) are common and have pros and cons. The objectives of the current study are to define the dispensation rates of these potentially addictive drugs, and whether the number and the mean daily doses of dispensed OAT opioids and discontinuing OAT, are associated with being dispensed benzodiazepines, z-hypnotics and gabapentinoids among patients on OAT in Norway in the period 2013 to 2017.Entities:
Keywords: Benzodiazepines; Drug prescriptions; Gabapentin; Opioid substitution treatment; Opioids; Pregabalin; Zolpidem; Zopiclone
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32334602 PMCID: PMC7183604 DOI: 10.1186/s12913-020-05195-5
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Health Serv Res ISSN: 1472-6963 Impact factor: 2.655
Baseline characteristics of patients on opioid agonist therapy in Norway
| Baseline characteristics | 2013 | 2014 | 2015 | 2016 | 2017 | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 7709 | 7914 | 7958 | 7804 | 7709 | ||||||
| 165 | 151 | 138 | 114 | 124 | ||||||
| 7544 | 7763 | 7820 | 7690 | 7585 | ||||||
| - ≤ 25 | 211 | 3 | 185 | 2 | 171 | 2 | 135 | 2 | 120 | 2 |
| - 26-35 | 1590 | 21 | 1570 | 20 | 1551 | 20 | 1403 | 18 | 1333 | 18 |
| - 36-45 | 2724 | 36 | 2730 | 35 | 2605 | 33 | 2508 | 33 | 3292 | 32 |
| - 46-55 | 2283 | 30 | 2449 | 32 | 2544 | 33 | 2540 | 33 | 2548 | 34 |
| - ≥ 56 | 736 | 10 | 829 | 11 | 949 | 12 | 1104 | 14 | 1192 | 16 |
| Men | 5221 | 69 | 5390 | 69 | 5430 | 69 | 5354 | 70 | 5245 | 69 |
| Women | 2323 | 31 | 2373 | 31 | 2390 | 31 | 2336 | 30 | 2340 | 31 |
| Methadone, included levomethadone | 3406 | 45 | 3264 | 42 | 3216 | 41 | 3066 | 40 | 2981 | 39 |
| Buprenorphineb | 4138 | 55 | 4499 | 58 | 4604 | 59 | 4624 | 60 | 4604 | 61 |
| Potentially addictive drugs | ||||||||||
| Dispensed a benzodiazepine and z-hypnoticc | 3747 | 50 | 3809 | 49 | 3714 | 47 | 3758 | 49 | 3762 | 50 |
| Dispensed a gabapentinoid | 708 | 9 | 662 | 9 | 717 | 9 | 762 | 10 | 845 | 11 |
NorPD Norwegian Prescription Database, OAT Opioid agonist therapy, SD Standard deviation
aThe last type of dispensed OAT opioid per year
bInclude buprenorphine-naloxone
cZ-hypnotic includes zolpiclone and zolpidem
Fig. 1The proportion of patients on OAT were dispensed a benzodiazepine or z-hypnotic, and a gabapentinoid. Legend: OAT = opioid agonist therapy. The figures display the proportion of patients who were dispensed 1–2 or 3 or more dispensations of benzodiazepines or z-hypnotics and gabapentinoids, respectively, of those who dispensed an OAT opioid per calendar year in the study period. Each figure a) to d) displays patients on OAT categorized on the number of dispensations of OAT opioids per year: a) 1–6 dispensations, b) 7–12 dispensations, c) 13–51 dispensations, and d) 52 or more dispensations
The daily doses of dispensed potentially addictive drugs
| a) | ||||||
| Benzodiazepine and z-hypnotic dose per patient (in diazepam equivalents) | ||||||
| Mean (mg/day) | 21 (17–29) | 20 (16–27) | 19 (15–25) | 17 (14–23) | 17 (14–22) | |
| Median (mg/day) | 10 (9–12) | 10 (9–12) | 10 (8–12) | 10 (8–12) | 10 (8–11) | |
| 25 percentile (mg/day) | 3 (2–3) | 2 (2–3) | 3 (2–3) | 3 (2–3) | 3 (2–3) | |
| 75 percentile (mg/day) | 23 (20–29) | 22 (19–27) | 21 (18–26) | 21 (18–26) | 20 (18–25) | |
| Pregabalin dose per patient | Mean (mg/day) | 365 | 365 | 371 | 381 | 386 |
| Median (mg/day) | 205 | 230 | 249 | 285 | 255 | |
| 25 percentile (mg/day) | 46 | 74 | 62 | 84 | 69 | |
| 75 percentile (mg/day) | 506 | 552 | 552 | 561 | 552 | |
| Gabapentin dose per patient | Mean (mg/day) | 911 | 970 | 997 | 960 | 1047 |
| Median (mg/day) | 411 | 488 | 493 | 493 | 513 | |
| 25 percentile (mg/day) | 82 | 124 | 82 | 82 | 164 | |
| 75 percentile (mg/day) | 1228 | 1314 | 1383 | 1286 | 1430 | |
| b) | ||||||
| Mean dose (95 % CI) | Mean dose (95% CI) | |||||
| Benzodiazepine and z-hypnotic dose per patient (in diazepam equivalents) | Mean (mg/day) | 21 (20–23)a | 17 (16–17)b | |||
| Pregabalin dose per patient | Mean (mg/day) | 365 (309–421)c | 386 (349–423)d | |||
| Gabapentin dose per patient | Mean (mg/day) | 911 (753–1068)e | 1047 (885–1209)f | |||
Df Degrees of freedom, Lowest Lowest equipotency dose, Highest Highest equipotency dose, and Mean = Min + Max divided by 2
aOne sample t-test, df = 3746, bone sample t-test, df = 3761, cone sample t-test, df = 486, done sample t-test, df = 590, eone sample t-test, df = 260, and fone sample t-test, df = 309
The table a) displays the daily doses (mean, median, 25 percentile, and 75 percentile) of dispensed benzodiazepines or z-hypnotics (calculated in diazepam equivalents), pregabalin and gabapentin per year among patients on OAT in Norway in period 2013 to 2017
The table b) displays the mean daily doses of dispensed benzodiazepines or z-hypnotics (calculated in diazepam equivalents), pregabalin and gabapentin in 2013 and 2017. The 95% confidence intervals were calculated by one-sample t-test analyses
For table a) and b), an equipotency table for benzodiazepines and z-hypnotics were used to make sensitivity analyses displaying the lowest equipotency dose and the highest equipotency dose of the included benzodiazepines and z-hypnotics. The results were presented in parentheses. All dispensed benzodiazepines and z-hypnotics were summarized per year
The proportion of patients who were dispensed benzodiazepines, z-hypnotics, and gabapentinoids, respectively
| Year | 2013 | 2014 | 2015 | 2016 | 2017 | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Oxazepam | 2094 | 28 | 2091 | 27 | 2124 | 27 | 2183 | 28 | 2229 | 29 |
| Diazepam | 1216 | 16 | 1251 | 16 | 1222 | 16 | 1272 | 17 | 1289 | 17 |
| Zopiclone | 1026 | 14 | 964 | 12 | 932 | 12 | 936 | 12 | 863 | 11 |
| Nitrazepam | 757 | 10 | 759 | 10 | 747 | 10 | 737 | 10 | 701 | 9 |
| Clonazepam | 479 | 6 | 432 | 6 | 362 | 5 | 331 | 4 | 268 | 4 |
| Zolpidem | 351 | 5 | 359 | 5 | 333 | 4 | 315 | 4 | 327 | 4 |
| Alprazolam | 305 | 4 | 304 | 4 | 237 | 3 | 206 | 3 | 196 | 3 |
| Flunitrazepam | 41 | 1 | 38 | 0 | 37 | 0 | 32 | 0 | 36 | 0 |
| Pregabalin | 487 | 6 | 449 | 6 | 491 | 6 | 523 | 7 | 591 | 8 |
| Gabapentin | 260 | 3 | 240 | 3 | 277 | 4 | 291 | 4 | 310 | 4 |
No. Number of patients, OAT Opioid agonist therapy
aPercent of all patients who were dispensed an OAT opioid
The table displays the proportion of all OAT patients who were dispensed different benzodiazepines, z-hypnotics, and gabapentinoids
Logistic regression analyses of variables associated with being dispensed a benzodiazepine or z-hypnotic, and a gabapentinoid
| a) | ||||
| Dispensed a benzodiazepine or z-hypnotic | ||||
| - ≤ 25 | 1.0 (ref.) | 1.0 (ref.) | ||
| - 26-35 | 1.0 | .80 | 0.9 (0.6–1.4) | .76 |
| - 36-45 | 1.0 | .85 | 1.0 (0.7–1.5) | .94 |
| - 46-55 | ||||
| - ≥ 56 | ||||
| - Men | 1.0 (ref.) | 1.0 (ref.) | ||
| - Women | ||||
| - ≥ 52 | 1.0 (ref.) | 1.0 (ref.) | ||
| - 13-51 | ||||
| - 7-12 | 1.1 | .27 | 1.0 (0.9–1.3) | .73 |
| - 1-6 | 1.1 (0.9–1.4) | .23 | ||
| - Buprenorphine (incl. combinations) | 1.0 (ref.) | 1.0 (ref.) | ||
| - Methadone (incl. Levomethadone) | ||||
| Dispensed a non-OAT opioid | ||||
| Dispensed a gabapentinoid | ||||
| b) | ||||
| Dispensed a gabapentinoid | ||||
| - ≤ 25 | 1.0 (ref.) | 1.0 (ref.) | ||
| - 26-35 | 1.1 | .71 | 1.2 (0.6–2.2) | .60 |
| - 36-45 | 1.0 | .90 | 1.1 (0.6–2.0) | .79 |
| - 46-55 | 1.0 | .99 | 0.9 (0.5–1.7) | .75 |
| - ≥ 56 | 1.0 | .95 | 0.8 (0.4–1.5) | .45 |
| - Men | 1.0 (ref.) | 1.0 (ref.) | ||
| - Women | 1.3 | < .01 | 1.1 (1.0–1.3) | .16 |
| - ≥ 52 | 1.0 (ref.) | 1.0 (ref.) | ||
| - 13-51 | 0.9 | .62 | 0.9 (0.7–1.1) | .31 |
| - 7-12 | 1.0 | .95 | 0.9 (0.7–1.3) | .72 |
| - 1-6 | 1.2 (0.9–1.7) | .26 | ||
| - Buprenorphine (incl. combinations) | 1.0 (ref.) | 1.0 (ref.) | ||
| - Methadone (incl. Levomethadone) | 1.1 | .46 | 1.1 (0.9–1.3) | .41 |
| Dispensed a non-OAT opioid | ||||
| Dispensed a benzodiazepine or z-hypnotic | ||||
cOR crude odds ratio, aOR adjusted odds ratio, CI Confidence interval, and OAT Opioid agonist therapy
aThe last type of dispensed OAT opioid
Table a) and b) display unadjusted (crude) and adjusted odds ratio for all independent variables of patients who were dispensed at least a benzodiazepine or z-hypnotic, and a gabapentinoid, respectively, in 2017 in Norway. a) Being dispensed at least a benzodiazepine or z-hypnotic was defined as a dependent variable, and age, gender, ‘the number of dispensations of OAT opioids,’ ‘OAT opioids,’ ‘dispensed a non-OAT opioid,’ and ‘dispensed a gabapentinoid’ were defined as categorical and independent variables. b) Being dispensed a gabapentinoid was defined as a dependent variable, and age, gender, ‘the number of dispensations of OAT opioids,’ ‘OAT opioids,’ ‘dispensed a non-OAT opioid,’ and ‘dispensed a benzodiazepine or z-hypnotic’ were defined as categorical and independent variables
Fig. 2Daily doses of benzodiazepines and z-hypnotics among patients who discontinued OAT. Legends: CI = Confidence interval, df = degrees of freedom, lowest = lowest equipotency dose, highest = highest equipotency dose, and OAT = opioid agonist therapy. 1) Paired t-test, df = 155, comparing mean daily dose ≥0 - ≤90 days to baseline related to discontinuation. 2) Paired t-test, df = 24, comparing mean daily dose ≥0 - ≤90 days to baseline related to discontinuation. 3) Paired t-test, df = 32, comparing mean daily dose ≥0 - ≤90 days to ≥90 - < 0 days related to discontinuation. Displays the daily doses of dispensed benzodiazepines and z-hypnotics, in the following period related to the date of the last dispensation of an OAT opioids: 1) 180–90 days before discontinuation (baseline), 2) 90–0 days before discontinuation, and 3) 0–90 days after discontinuation. Discontinuation was defined as all patients on OAT who had the last dispensation of an OAT opioid in the period January 1, 2017, to September 30, 2017, and no dispensation until the end of March 31, 2018. The daily doses were stated in mean, median, 25 percentile, and 75 percentile. An equipotency table for benzodiazepines and z-hypnotics were used to make sensitivity analyses, displaying the lowest equipotency dose and the highest equipotency dose of the included benzodiazepines and z-hypnotics. The results were presented in parentheses. All dispensed benzodiazepines and z-hypnotics were summarized per year