Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31021412›Full record

Observational studyThe British journal of dermatology2020

A multiyear cross-sectional study of U.S. national prescribing patterns of first-generation sedating antihistamines in older adults with skin disease.

I Cenzer, N Nkansah-Mahaney, M Wehner, M M Chren, T Berger, K Covinsky, K Berger, K Abuabara, E Linos

Abstract readObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in The British journal of dermatology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. European S2k Guideline on Chronic PruritusActa dermato-venereologica · 2025
    Guideline
  2. Article
  3. The pharmacology of itch.British journal of pharmacology · 2019
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

I CenzerDivision of Geriatrics, University of California, San Francisco, CA, U.S.A.ORCID 0000-0002-5839-1070
N Nkansah-MahaneyDepartment of Dermatology, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA, U.S.A.
M WehnerDepartment of Dermatology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, U.S.A.
M M ChrenDepartment of Dermatology, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN, U.S.A.
T BergerProgram for Clinical Research, Department of Dermatology, University of California, San Francisco, CA, U.S.A.
K CovinskyDivision of Geriatrics, University of California, San Francisco, CA, U.S.A.
K BergerDivision of Geriatrics, University of California, San Francisco, CA, U.S.A.
K AbuabaraProgram for Clinical Research, Department of Dermatology, University of California, San Francisco, CA, U.S.A.ORCID 0000-0002-7736-6946
E LinosDepartment of Dermatology, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA, U.S.A.ORCID 0000-0003-2538-0700

Funding

Penn Dermatology Research Training ProgramT32AR007465 · NIAMS · UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA · PI Elizabeth Anne Grice, David Joel Margolis · 1986 to 2026
$9.0M
Patient Oriented Research in Vulnerable Populations with Skin DiseaseK24AR075060 · NIAMS · STANFORD UNIVERSITY · PI Eleni Linos · 2019 to 2026
$1.6M
Involving older adults in decision making for skin cancerK76AG054631 · NIA · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO · PI LINOS, ELENI · 2016 to 2018
$644k
NIAMS NIH HHS K24 AR075060NIAMS NIH HHS T32 AR007465NIA NIH HHS K76 AG054631
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundFirst-generation antihistamines (FGAs) are classified as 'potentially inappropriate' for use in older patients (patients aged ≥ 65 years). However, the prevalence of and factors associated with FGA prescription have not been studied.

objectivesTo examine FGA prescription rates for older patients who visited dermatology offices, and compare them to those for younger patients (patients aged 18-65 years) who visited dermatology offices and those for older patients who visited primary-care physicians (PCPs).

methodsThis was a multiyear cross-sectional observational study using data from the U.S. National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey (2006-2015). Visits by patients aged 18 years or older were included in the study; the data comprised 15 243 dermatology office visits and 66 036 PCP office visits. The main outcome was FGA prescription. Other variables included physician specialty (dermatologist or PCP), patient's age, diagnosis of dermatological conditions and reason for visit.

resultsFor dermatology visits, the overall FGA prescription rate for older patients was similar to that for younger patients (1·5% vs. 1·2%; P = 0·19), even when the diagnosis was dermatitis or pruritus (3·7% vs. 4·8%; P = 0·21) or when itch was a complaint (7·6% vs. 6·7%; P = 0·64). However, the rate of FGA prescription for dermatology visits was lower than that for PCP visits, in analyses matched for patient and visit characteristics (3·9% vs. 7·4%; P = 0·02).

conclusionsOur findings suggest that FGAs are overprescribed to older patients but that dermatologists are less likely to prescribe FGAs than PCPs. What's already known about this topic? First-generation antihistamines (FGAs) have been shown to pose substantial risks to older adults, including cognitive impairment, falls, confusion, dry mouth and constipation. Therefore, FGAs have been classified as 'potentially inappropriate' for use in older patients by the American Geriatrics Society. It has also been shown that dermatologists do not always take patient characteristics (e.g. age or life expectancy) into account when deciding on a treatment, instead following a 'one-size-fits-all' approach. What does this study add? FGAs are often prescribed during dermatology visits, and prescription rates do not differ between older and younger patients. There were no significant differences in prescription rates when comparing younger and older adults with the same diagnosis or symptom (e.g. dermatitis, pruritus or itch). FGAs are prescribed at higher rates in primary-care offices than in dermatology offices.

Indexed as

Histamine H1 AntagonistsSkin DiseasesAdolescentAdultAgedCross-Sectional StudiesHealth Care SurveysHumansMiddle AgedOffice VisitsPractice Patterns, Physicians'United StatesYoung AdultHistamine H1 Antagonists

Identifiers

PMID31021412
PMCPMC6814489

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.