Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31560115›Full record

ArticleDrugs & aging2020

Cost-Utility and Budget Impact Analysis for Stopping the Inappropriate Use of Proton Pump Inhibitors After Cessation of NSAID or Low-Dose Acetylsalicylic Acid Treatment.

Sek Hung Chau, Reinier Luuk Sluiter, Jacqueline Geertruida Hugtenburg, Michel Wensing, Wietske Kievit, Martina Teichert

Erratum issuedOpen access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Drugs & aging, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.8field-weighted citation impact, top 25% of its field
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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Sek Hung ChauDepartment of Clinical Pharmacology and Pharmacy, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, De Boelelaan 1117, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. s.chau@amsterdamumc.nl.ORCID 0000-0002-0690-5009
Reinier Luuk SluiterDepartment for Health Evidence, Radboud University Medical Center, Geert Grooteplein 21, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-7422-968X
Jacqueline Geertruida HugtenburgDepartment of Clinical Pharmacology and Pharmacy, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, De Boelelaan 1117, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0001-6098-2438
Michel WensingRadboud University Medical Center, Scientific Institute for Quality of Healthcare (IQ Healthcare), Geert Grooteplein 21, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0001-6569-8137
Wietske KievitDepartment for Health Evidence, Radboud University Medical Center, Geert Grooteplein 21, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-3984-1769
Martina TeichertDepartment of Clinical Pharmacy and Toxicology, Leiden University Medical Center, Albinusdreef 2, Leiden, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0001-8411-3325
Radboud University Nijmegen · NLAmsterdam Neuroscience · NLAmsterdam University Medical Centers · NLLeiden University Medical Center · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn accordance with current guidelines, proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are now generally prescribed as a protective co-medication in patients taking non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) or low-dose acetylsalicylic acid (LDASA). However, less attention is paid to the corresponding discontinuation of a PPI after cessation of NSAID or LDASA treatment.

objectiveThe aim of this study was to assess the extent of inappropriate PPI use, as the proportion of patients who started a PPI as a protective co-medication but continued using these drugs after cessation of NSAID and LDASA treatment. We also sought to estimate the potential cost savings and effect gains of discontinuing inappropriate PPI use and the resulting decrease in adverse effects and their detrimental consequences.

methodsPharmacy dispensing data were used to map inappropriate PPI use in 2014 for community-dwelling patients. Strategies with or without PPI continuation were compared in the cost-utility analysis for a time horizon of 5 years from a healthcare perspective. Subsequently, incremental costs and effects (quality-adjusted life-years) were estimated with a Markov model.

resultsRelated to NSAID and LDASA treatment, 11.0% and 5%, respectively, of the PPI users were found to inappropriately continue PPI co-treatment. Discontinuation in 71- to 80-year-old patients suggested cost savings of €170.46 (95% confidence interval 75-282) at a 0.003 (95% confidence interval 0.001-0.005) quality-adjusted life-year increase. The total budget impact of stopping inappropriate PPI use related to NSAID/LDASA treatment in the Netherlands would amount to almost €1,050,000 after 1 year. Correspondingly, successful interventions to stop a patient's inappropriate use would cost up to €29 and probably would pay for themselves in the following years.

conclusionsA substantial number of patients inappropriately continue to use a PPI after cessation of NSAID or LDASA treatment. Because adverse effects and their detrimental consequences are avoided, interventions to stop inappropriate PPI use, particularly in older patients, are likely to pay for themselves.

Indexed as

AgedAged, 80 and overAnti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-SteroidalAspirinCost-Benefit AnalysisHumansInappropriate PrescribingMiddle AgedProton Pump InhibitorsAnti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-SteroidalAspirinProton Pump Inhibitors

Identifiers

PMID31560115
PMCPMC6965335
OpenAlexW4256090624

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.