ArticlePharmacology research & perspectives2021
Declines and pronounced regional disparities in meperidine use in the United States.
Article in Pharmacology research & perspectives, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Observational
- Observational
- Declines in Tapentadol Use in the US but Pronounced Regional Variation.Pharmacy (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Declining but Pronounced State-Level Disparities in Prescription Opioid Distribution in the United States.Pharmacy (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Sedation and Analgesia for the Interventional Radiologist.Seminars in interventional radiology · 2023Review
- Variation in adverse drug events of opioids in the United States.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2023Article
- Pronounced Declines in Meperidine in the US: Is the End Imminent?Pharmacy (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Declines and pronounced regional disparities in meperidine use in the United States.Pharmacology research & perspectives · 2021Article
- Pethidine, Maybe a Rearrangement in the Pharmaceutical Group Is Needed!Iranian journal of pharmaceutical research : IJPRArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
There have been increasing concerns about adverse effects and drug interactions with meperidine. The goal of this study was to characterize meperidine use in the United States. Meperidine distribution data were obtained from the Drug Enforcement Administration's Automated of Reports and Consolidated Orders System. The Medicare Part D Prescriber Public Use File was utilized to capture overall trends in national prescriptions in this observational report. Nationally, meperidine distribution decreased by 94.6% from 2001 to 2019. In 2019, Arkansas, Alabama, Oklahoma, and Mississippi saw significantly greater distribution when compared with the US state average of 9.27 mg per 10 persons (SD = 6.82). Meperidine distribution showed an 18-fold difference between the highest state (Arkansas = 36.8 mg) and lowest state (Minnesota = 2.1 mg). Five of the six states with the lowest distribution were in the Northeast. Meperidine distribution per state was correlated with the prevalence of adult obesity (r(48) = +0.48, p < .001). Family medicine and internal medicine physicians accounted for 28.9% and 20.5%, respectively, of meperidine total daily supply (TDS) in 2017. Interventional pain management (5.66) and pain management (3.48) physicians accounted for the longest TDS per provider. The use of meperidine declined over the last two decades. Meperidine varied by geographic region with south-central states, and those with more obesity, showing greater distribution. Primary care doctors continue to account for the majority of meperidine daily supply. Increasing knowledge of meperidine's undesirable adverse effects like seizures and serious drug-drug interactions is likely responsible for these pronounced reductions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.