Observational studyBMJ open2024
New opioid prescription claims and their clinical indications: results from health administrative data in Quebec, Canada, over 14 years.
Observational study in BMJ open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesDescribe new opioid prescription claims, their clinical indications and annual trends among opioid naïve adults covered by the Quebec's public drug insurance plan (QPDIP) for the fiscal years 2006/2007-2019/2020. DESIGN AND
settingA retrospective observational study was conducted using data collected between 2006/2007 and 2019/2020 within the Quebec Integrated Chronic Disease Surveillance System, a linkage administrative data.
participantsA cohort of opioid naïve adults and new opioid users was created for each study year (median number=2 263 380 and 168 183, respectively, over study period).
interventionNo. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE AND ANALYSES: A new opioid prescription was defined as the first opioid prescription claimed by an opioid naïve adult during a given fiscal year. The annual incidence proportion for each year was then calculated and standardised for age. A hierarchical algorithm was built to identify the most likely clinical indication for this prescription. Descriptive and trend analyses were performed.
resultsThere was a 1.7% decrease of age-standardised annual incidence proportion during the study period, from 7.5% in 2006/2007 to 5.8% in 2019/2020. The decrease was highest after 2016/2017, reaching 5.5% annual percentage change. Median daily dose and days' supply decreased from 27 to 25 morphine milligram equivalent/day and from 5 to 4 days between 2006/2007 and 2019/2020, respectively. Between 2006/2007 and 2019/2020, these prescriptions' most likely clinical indications increased for cancer pain from 34% to 48%, for surgical pain from 31% to 36% and for dental pain from 9% to 11%. Inversely, the musculoskeletal pain decreased from 13% to 2%. There was good consistency between the clinical indications identified by the algorithm and prescriber's specialty or user's characteristics.
conclusionsNew opioid prescription claims (incidence, dose and days' supply) decreased slightly over the last 14 years among QPDIP enrollees, especially after 2016/2017. Non-surgical and non-cancer pain became less common as their clinical indication.
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.