The limitations of some European healthcare databases for monitoring the effectiveness of pregnancy prevention programmes as risk minimisation measures

COVID-19 Distribution in Pregnancy, Drug Use Patterns and COVID-19 Medication during the Pandemic in Spain: Data from Real-World Electronic Health Records

Although pregnant women were considered a risk population for COVID-19, little is known of their drug use during the pandemic. We aimed to investigate COVID-19 distribution, drug use patterns and COVID-19 medication. We conducted a retrospective cohort of validated pregnancies aged 15-49 years, from January 2020 to December 2022, using the BIFAP database. An identified cohort of pregnant women with COVID-19 was matched by age, gestational age, length of pregnancy and outcome to a cohort free of COVID-19 (8413 vs. 24,975). We performed a descriptive analysis on COVID-19 cases, estimated the drug use patterns and assessed COVID-19-specific drugs within the week prior/after diagnosis, stratified by pandemic wave and gestational week. The results showed that 72% of pregnant women with COVID-19 received at least one prescription vs. 66.6% of those free of COVID-19, with analgesics, antibiotics and thyroid hormones being the most prescribed drugs in both groups. In the COVID-19 group, they were antithrombotics (40 prescriptions per 100 women), analgesic/NSAIDs (19.64/6.29) and antibiotics (6.95). COVID-19 cases gradually increased, peaking at the fifth and second waves. Prescription rates were similar when compared to pre-pandemic studies. The use of drugs compatible with COVID-19 treatments was in line with recommendations.

Risk Minimisation Evaluation with Process Indicators and Behavioural or Health Outcomes in Europe: Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

European Pharmacovigilance regulatory guidance recommends the evaluation of additional risk minimisation measures (aRMMs) with process indicators and outcomes. Evaluation of both measures within the same evaluation helps to establish the relationship between the implementation of aRMMs (across process indicators) and the impact on drug safety-related outcomes. The term risk minimisation evaluation (RMEv) was used to describe a study or group of studies that assesses the effectiveness of aRMMs for one specific product.

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this systematic review was to describe the characteristics and results of RMEv that include both process indicators and outcomes as well as those of studies that conform the RMEv in Europe.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic search in the European Union Register of Post-Authorization Studies, PubMed and grey literature (Google and abstracts of the International Conference on Pharmacoepidemiology and Therapeutic Risk Management) to identify studies that assessed the effectiveness of aRMMs including at least one European country, from 1 January, 2011 to 12 October, 2019. Identified studies linked to one product were considered part of the product RMEv. Only RMEv that included both process indicators and outcomes (behavioural and/or health/safety outcomes) were eligible. Data were abstracted from reports, manuscripts and abstracts.

RESULTS

Eighteen of 102 (18%) RMEv had both process indicators and outcomes, and were included in this review. Of the 18 RMEv, ten consisted of one study only, five of two studies, and three of three or more studies. A total of 30 studies were included within the 18 RMEv. The designs of the studies were: 19 (63%) cross-sectional surveys (47% targeted patients and 89% healthcare professionals), 17 (57%) retrospective studies (47% using pre/post approach) and 3 (10%) prospective studies. Nineteen studies included process indicators that were receipt (n = 14), use (n = 12), knowledge (n = 17) and self-reported behaviour (n = 15). Regarding outcomes, 67% of the 18 RMEv evaluated behavioural outcomes and 50% health/safety outcomes. Three of the 18 RMEv evaluated both behavioural and health/safety outcomes. For five RMEv, correlations between process indicators and outcomes were performed, two at the patient level. Results were available for 14 of the 18 RMEv. In healthcare professional surveys, the median percentage was 57% for receipt, 92% for reading, 80% for use, 77% for knowledge and 74% for behaviour. In patient surveys, the median percentage was 56% for receipt, 87% for reading, 65% for use, 47% for knowledge and 69% for behaviour. Knowledge was better in healthcare professionals than patients (p < 0.05). Of the three RMEv with a correlation analysis, only one found a positive trend for a lower occurrence of outcomes as process indicators improved, though this was not statistically significant.

CONCLUSIONS

A minority of RMEv assessed both process indicators and outcomes. More RMEv require approaches that correlate process indicators and outcomes at the patient level to evaluate more comprehensively the implementation of aRMMs.

An algorithm to identify pregnancies in BIFAP Primary Care database in Spain: Results from a cohort of 155 419 pregnancies

PURPOSE

There has been a notable progress on the development of methods for identification of pregnancies using primary care databases. We aimed to evaluate the prescription of medications during pregnancy applying a novel algorithm.

METHODS

We identified pregnancies in women aged 15 to 49 years registered in the Database for Pharmacoepidemiological Research in Primary Care (BIFAP) between 2002 and 2015. The algorithm applied sequential cycles that searched in hierarchical order for indicators of conception, delivery or pregnancy loss, and other codes suggestive of pregnancy. Length of pregnancy was assessed by searching for last menstrual period (LMP) date, gestational age, and outcomes of pregnancy. Prescription of specific drugs during the pre-pregnancy period and first trimester and time trends during pregnancy were evaluated.

RESULTS

We identified a total of 155 419 pregnancies during the study period (77.5% completed pregnancies, 21.5% pregnancies losses, 0.8% ectopic pregnancies, and 0.2% stillbirths). Excluding vitamins and supplements, 43.8% of women received at least one prescription during the pre-pregnancy period and 68.4% during the first trimester. During the first trimester, the most commonly drugs prescribed were analgesics (16.3%) followed by antibiotics (11.8%). From 2002/2003 to 2014/2015, there was an increase of prescriptions for thyroid hormones (1.0% vs 4.7%), H2 blockers (1.0% vs 2.2%), and PPIs (1.4% vs 2.2%). While antidepressants (2.0% vs 1.5%) and benzodiazepines (3.1% vs 2.4%) decreased in the last period.

CONCLUSION

Having in mind the challenges of identifying pregnancies in health care databases, this study demonstrates the usefulness of BIFAP database for studies on drug utilization during pregnancy.

Use of anti-vascular endothelial growth factor drugs for eye disease in Tuscany: Development and test of indicators of treatment intensity

PURPOSE

We aimed to develop indicators based on electronic administrative data to compare treatment intensity at a hospital level in Tuscany, Italy.

METHODS

Data from 3 university hospitals (UHs), 11 local hospitals (LHs) and 2 private hospitals were analysed. Patients newly treated with an intravitreal injection were followed up for 365 days. Indicator #1 concerned hospitals with >80% of injections linked to a drug and patients with all injections linked to a drug. Indicator #2 included patients who received ⩾3 injections during the first 90 days, regardless of injection-drug linkage.

RESULTS

Indicator #1 was computed on four hospitals and included 3210 patients (48.3%). The average number of injections was 3.24 in the largest UH1. Compared to the latter, indicator #1 was significantly lower in UH2 and UH3 (-0.47 and -0.58, respectively; p < 0.001). Indicator #2 was computed on all hospitals and included 2789 patients (41.9%). UH1 delivered about 4.33 injections. Compared to the latter, LH4 delivered +0.62 injections (p < 0.001) and nine other hospitals delivered between -0.22 and -0.94 injections (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

The two indicators proved to have the potential for supporting clinicians and policy makers in promoting the appropriate treatment intensity with intravitreal anti-vascular endothelial growth factor drugs.