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

Deprescribing of proton pump inhibitors in older patients: A cost-effectiveness analysis

Over-prescribing of proton-pump inhibitors (PPIs) is widely observed in older patients. Clinical findings have showed that deprescribing service significantly decreased inappropriate PPIs utilization. We aimed to examine the cost-effectiveness of PPI deprescribing service from the perspective of Hong Kong public healthcare provider. A decision-analytic model was constructed to examine the clinical and economic outcomes of PPI deprescribing service (deprescribing group) and usual care (UC group) in a hypothetical cohort of older PPI-users aged ≥65 years in the ambulatory care setting. The model inputs were retrieved from literature and public data. The model time-frame was one-year. Base-case analysis and sensitivity analysis were performed. Primary model outcomes were direct medical cost and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) loss. In base-case analysis, the deprescribing service (versus UC) reduced total direct medical cost by USD235 and saved 0.0249 QALY per PPI user evaluated. The base-case results were robust to variation of all model inputs in one-way sensitivity analysis. In probabilistic sensitivity analysis, the deprescribing group was accepted as cost-effective (versus the UC group) in 100% of the 10,000 Monte Carlo simulations. In conclusion, the PPI deprescribing service saved QALYs and reduced total direct medical cost in older PPIs users, and showed a high probability to be accepted as the cost-effective option from the perspective of public healthcare provider in Hong Kong.

Proton Pump Inhibitors Increase the Risk of Nonsteroidal Anti-inflammatory Drug-Related Small-Bowel Injury: A Systematic Review With Meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Conflicting results exist on the association between proton-pump inhibitor (PPI) and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID)-related small-bowel damage. The aim of this study was to determine whether PPIs increased the risk of NSAID-related small-bowel damage by meta-analysis.

METHODS

A systematic electronic search in PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science was conducted from the time the database was created until March 31, 2022, for studies reporting associations between PPI use and outcomes, including the endoscopy-verified prevalence of small-bowel injury, mean number of small-bowel injuries per patient, change in hemoglobin level, and risk of small-bowel bleeding in subjects taking NSAIDs. Meta-analytical calculations for odds ratio (OR) and mean difference (MD) were performed with the random-effects model and interpreted with 95% confidence intervals (CIs).

RESULTS

Fourteen studies comprising 1996 subjects were included. Pooled analysis demonstrated that concomitant use of PPIs significantly increased the prevalence and number of endoscopy-verified small-bowel injuries (prevalence: OR = 3.00; 95% CI: 1.74-5.16; number: MD = 2.30; 95% CI: 0.61-3.99) and decreased hemoglobin levels (MD = -0.50 g/dL; 95% CI: 0.88 to -0.12) in NSAID users but did not change the risk of small-bowel bleeding (OR = 1.24; 95% CI: 0.80-1.92). Subgroup analysis demonstrated that PPIs significantly increased the prevalence of small-bowel injury in subjects taking nonselective NSAIDs (OR = 7.05; 95% CI: 4.70-10.59, 4 studies, I 2 = 0) and COX-2 inhibitors (OR = 4.00; 95% CI: 1.18-13.60, 1 study, no calculated I 2 ) when compared with COX-2 inhibitors alone.

DISCUSSION

PPIs increased the risk of NSAID-related small-bowel damage, and the clinical significance of higher prevalence of small-bowel injuries should be studied in the future.

Predictors for inappropriate proton pump inhibitor use: observational study in primary care

Background: Proton pump inhibitor (PPI) indications are limited to gastrointestinal disorders and ulcer prophylaxis. Still, PPIs are among the most frequently prescribed drugs. Aim: To evaluate the appropriateness of PPI prescriptions and identify predictive factors for inappropriate PPI use. Design and Setting: Observational study using a Dutch primary care database with all new PPI prescriptions between 2016 and 2018. Methods: Individual patient data and details on PPI use were collected. Appropriateness of initiation and continuation of PPI prescriptions was evaluated using the applicable guidelines. Results: We evaluated 148,926 patients (≥ 18 years) from 27 general practices. A total of 23,601 (16%) patients started PPI therapy (mean age 57 ± 17 years, 59% female). Valid PPI indications at initiation were seen in 10,466 PPI users (44%). Predictors for inappropriately initiated PPI use were older age (OR 1.03, 95%CI 1.03-1.03), and use of non-selective NSAIDs (OR 5.15, 95%CI 4.70-5.65), ADP receptor inhibitors (OR 5.07, 95%CI 3.46-7.41), coxibs (OR 3.93, 95%CI 2.92-5.28) and low-dose aspirin (OR 3.83, 95%CI 3.07-4.77). Despite an initial valid indication, PPI use was inaccurately continued in 32% of patients on short-course therapy for dyspepsia and in 11% of patients on ulcer prophylaxis. Conclusion: More than half of PPI users in primary care seem to have an inappropriate indication with unnecessary ulcer prophylaxis related to drug use being one of the leading causes. Future initiatives to reduce PPI use for unnecessary ulcer prophylaxis and timely deprescription if PPI is no longer indicated, are needed.

Deprescribing Interventions among Community-Dwelling Older Adults: A Systematic Review of Economic Evaluations

BACKGROUND

Deprescribing can reduce the use of inappropriate or unnecessary medication; however, the economic value of such interventions is uncertain.

OBJECTIVE

This study seeks to identify and synthetise the economic evidence of deprescribing interventions among community-dwelling older adults.

METHODS

Full economic evaluation studies of deprescribing interventions, conducted in the community or primary care settings, in community-dwelling adults aged ≥ 65 years were systematically reviewed. MEDLINE, EconLit, Scopus, Web of Science, CEA-TUFTS, CRD York and Google Scholar databases were searched from inception to February 2021. Two researchers independently screened all retrieved articles according to inclusion and exclusion criteria. The main outcome was the economic impact of the intervention from any perspective, converted into 2019 US Dollars. The World Health Organization threshold of 1 gross domestic product per capita was used to define cost effectiveness. Studies were appraised for methodological quality using the extended Consensus on Health Economics Criteria checklist.

RESULTS

Of 6154 articles identified by the search strategy, 14 papers assessing 13 different interventions were included. Most deprescribing interventions included some type of medication review with or without a supportive educational component (n = 11, 85%), and in general were delivered within a pharmacist-physician care collaboration. Settings included community pharmacies, primary care/outpatient clinics and patients' homes. All economic evaluations were conducted within a time horizon varying from 2 to 12 months with outcomes in most of the studies derived from a single clinical trial. Main health outcomes were reported in terms of quality-adjusted life-years, prevented number of falls and the medication appropriateness index. Cost effectiveness ranged from dominant to an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $112,932 per quality-adjusted life-year, a value above the country's World Health Organization threshold. Overall, 85% of the interventions were cost saving, dominated usual care or were cost effective considering 1 gross domestic product per capita. Nine studies scored > 80% (good) and two scored ≤ 50% (low) on critical quality appraisal.

CONCLUSIONS

There is a growing interest in economic evaluations of deprescribing interventions focused on community-dwelling older adults. Although results varied across setting, time horizon and intervention, most were cost effective according to the World Health Organization threshold. Deprescribing interventions are promising from an economic viewpoint, but more studies are needed.

Potentially inappropriate proton-pump inhibitor prescription in the general population: a claims-based retrospective time trend analysis

BACKGROUND

Proton-pump inhibitors (PPI) are among the most prescribed drugs worldwide, and a large body of evidence raises concerns about their inappropriate use. Previous estimates of inappropriate use varied due to different definitions and study populations.

AIMS

We aimed to measure the population-based incidence and time trends of PPI and potentially inappropriate PPI prescriptions (PIPPI) with a novel method, continuously assessing excessive cumulative doses based on clinical practice guidelines. We also assessed association of patient characteristics with PPI prescriptions and PIPPI.

METHODS

This was an observational study based on a large insurance claims database of persons aged >18 years with continuous claims records of ⩾12 months. The observation period was January 2012 to December 2017. We assessed the incidence and time trends of PPI prescriptions and PIPPI based on doses prescribed, defining ⩾11.5 g of pantoprazole dose equivalents during any consecutive 365 days (average daily dose >31 mg) as inappropriate.

RESULTS

Among 1,726,491 eligible persons, the annual incidence of PPI prescriptions increased from 19.7% (2012) to 23.0% (2017), (p = <0.001), and the incidence of PIPPI increased from 4.8% (2013) to 6.4% (2017), (p = <0.001). Age, male gender, drugs with bleeding risk and multimorbidity were independent determinants of PIPPI (p = <0.001 for all).

CONCLUSIONS

This study provides evidence that one of the most prescribed drug groups is commonly prescribed inappropriately in the general population and that this trend is increasing. Multimorbidity and drugs with bleeding risks were strong determinants of PIPPI. Addressing PPI prescriptions exceeding guideline recommendations could reduce polypharmacy and improve patient safety.