Influence of Physician Sex and Gender on Prescribing Practices Among Older Adults

Interspecialty Opioid Prescribing Patterns in Ophthalmology Following Declaration of a Public Health Emergency

Purpose: Previous literature has investigated opioid prescription trends in ophthalmology at large, however, little has been done looking at differences between subspecialties. We evaluate if significant trends exist among subspecialties in opioid prescribing patterns. This study aims to illuminate potential over-usage of opioids in ophthalmology that could compromise patient quality of life. Methods: Medicare data and "National Plan and Provider Enumeration System (NPPES) Downloadable File" were queried for cases of ophthalmologists with nonsuppressed opioid prescription data from 2014 to 2019. Ophthalmologists with no subspecialty code or missing regional, gender, degree, or graduation information were excluded. Chi-squared analysis, analysis of variance, t-tests, and multivariate logistic regression were utilized. Results: Five thousand one hundred forty-three physician records were included in analysis, 450 of which were by cornea subspecialists. Most cornea cases were male, graduated before 2005, and practiced in the South. All subspecialties had a significantly increased likelihood of making opioid claims and higher prescription rates compared with cornea (P < 0.050) besides glaucoma (P = 0.357). Only oculoplastics had significantly increased likelihood of greater total supply of opioids compared with cornea (odds ratio [OR] = 22.195, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 12.209-40.350, P < 0.001), while pediatrics (OR = 4.036, 95% CI = 1.377-11.831, P = 0.011) and neuro-ophthalmology (OR = 4.158, 95% CI = 1.237-13.975, P = 0.021) in addition to oculoplastics (OR = 64.380, 95% CI = 26.306-157.560, P < 0.001) were predicted to have significantly greater opioid beneficiaries. Males, the South/Midwest, and graduating before 2005, all were generally associated with increased likelihood of greater total opioid claims, supply, beneficiaries, and prescription rate (P < 0.050). Conclusion: Subspecialty, demographic, chronological, and regional trends exist for opioid prescribing patterns in ophthalmology.

The influence of general practitioner and patient sex on the treatment of major depression

Introduction: Biological and sociocultural factors may lead to a significant gender bias in the treatment of major depression and thus contribute to accentuating gender inequalities. However, the influence of the general practitioner's (GP's) sex on the prescription of antidepressants has not been adequately assessed in previous work and remains unclear. This retrospective cohort study aims to determine the influence of GP and patient sex on the treatment of major depression. Methods: The study population comprised 87,629 patients (33.56% male patients and 66.44% female patients) aged over 15 years newly diagnosed with major depression recorded between 2017 and 2019 in Catalonia, Spain. Logistic regression models were used to evaluate the effect of GP sex on the therapeutic strategy (i.e., whether antidepressants were prescribed at the first diagnostic visit). Cox proportional hazards models and survival analyses were conducted to compare, according to GP and patient sex, the probability that a patient would be prescribed an antidepressant at any time during the study period. Finally, a multiple linear regression analysis was performed to assess the pharmacological intensity of the treatment [monthly fluoxetine-equivalent defined daily dose (DDD)]. Results: Female patients were more likely to be prescribed an antidepressant at the time of diagnosis, both by male [OR = 1.11, 95% CI = (1.05, 1.17), p < 0.001] and female GPs [OR = 1.13, 95% CI = (1.09, 1.17), p < 0.001]. Similarly, female patients were 8% and 9% more likely than male patients to be prescribed an antidepressant from male [HR = 1.08, 95% CI = (1.05, 1.11), p < 0.001] and female GPs [HR = 1.09, 95% CI = (0.92, 1.07), p < 0.001], respectively, during the study period. Female GPs prescribed less antidepressants than male GPs: an average of 0.39 less monthly fluoxetine-equivalent DDD [β = -0.39, 95% CI = (0.10, -3.92), p < 0.001]. Discussion: Few differences are observed between male and female GPs regarding the therapeutic strategy and its intensity for the treatment of major depression. However, both male and female GPs are influenced by biases and stereotypes that entail differential antidepressant-prescribing behaviors in accordance with the sex of the patient and their characteristics.

The Effects of Demographic, Training, and Specialization Differences of Physicians in COVID-19 Treatment in Turkey

INTRODUCTION

The study aimed to determine how physicians' professional and institutional characteristics affect their treatment approaches for COVID-19 antiviral and supportive treatment, as well as their demographic characteristics and participation in COVID-19 trainings that may influence these orientations.

METHODS

After researching the literature and conducting interviews with the experts, a questionnaire was prepared. The convenience sampling method was used to distribute the questionnaire online to 408 physicians across the nation in January 2021. Exploratory factor analysis was used to verify the research scale, and the Cronbach's Alpha test was used to confirm its reliability. During the data analysis, descriptive and inferential statistical tests were used.

RESULTS

It was observed that the physicians were willing to give COVID-19 patients the antivirals but hesitant to provide and suggest supportive care. The training status for COVID-19 treatment was varied. Female physicians prescribed more antiviral drugs than male physicians, received more training, and scored higher across the scale than male physicians ( p = 0.001). The treatment approaches of physicians varied according to their specializations ( p = 0.002) all over the scale.

CONCLUSION

The publication of current Ministry of Health guidelines on a variety of themes related to COVID-19 treatment, as seen in Turkey, is both beneficial and important. However, because all physicians, regardless of specialty, are affected by current and will be in the future pandemics, it is necessary to design and maintain a continuous training program on pandemics and their management for all physicians.

Evaluation of Factors Associated With Appropriate Drug Prescription and Effectiveness of Informative and Educational Interventions—The EDU.RE.DRUG Project

Background: EDU.RE.DRUG study is a prospective, multicentre, open-label, parallel-arm, controlled, pragmatic trial directed to general practitioners (GPs) and their patients.

Methods: The study data were retrieved from health-related administrative databases of four local health units (LHUs) of Lombardy and four LHUs in Campania. According to the LHUs, the GPs/patients were assigned to (A) intervention on both GPs (feedback reports about appropriate prescribing among their patients and online courses) and patients (flyers and posters on proper drug use), (B) intervention on GPs, (C) intervention on patients, and (D) no intervention (control arm). A set of appropriate prescribing indicators (potential drug–drug interactions [pDDIs], potential and unnecessary therapeutic duplicates [pTDs], and inappropriate prescriptions in the elderly [ERD-list]) were measured at baseline and after the intervention phase. The effectiveness of the intervention was evaluated estimating the absolute difference in percentages of selected indicators carrying out linear random-intercept mixed-effect models.

Results: A cohort of 3,586 GPs (2,567 in intervention groups and 1,019 in the control group) was evaluated. In Campania, the mean pre-intervention percentage of patients with at least one pDDI was always greater than 20% and always lower than 15% in Lombardy. The pre–post difference was quite heterogeneous among the LHUs, ranging from 1.9 to −1.4 percentage points. The mean pre-intervention percentage of patients with pTDs ranged from 0.59 to 2.1%, with slightly higher values characterizing Campania LHUs. The magnitude of the pre–post difference was very low, ranging from −0.11 to 0.20. In Campania, the mean pre-intervention percentage of patients with at least one ERD criterium was considerably higher than in Lombardy (approximately 30% in Lombardy and 50% in Campania). The pre–post difference was again quite heterogeneous. The results from the models accounting for GP geographical belonging suggested that none of the interventions resulted in a statistically significant effect, for all the three indicators considered.

Conclusion: The proposed strategy was shown to be not effective in influencing the voluntary changes in GP prescription performance. However, the use of a set of explicit indicators proved to be useful in quantifying the inappropriateness. Further efforts are needed to find more efficient strategies and design more tailored interventions.

The Person's Care Requires a Sex and Gender Approach

There is an urgent need to optimize pharmacology therapy with a consideration of high interindividual variability and economic costs. A sex-gender approach (which considers men, women, and people of diverse gender identities) and the assessment of differences in sex and gender promote global health, avoiding systematic errors that generate results with low validity. Care for people should consider the single individual and his or her past and present life experiences, as well as his or her relationship with care providers. Therefore, intersectoral and interdisciplinary studies are urgently required. It is desirable to create teams made up of men and women to meet the needs of both. Finally, it is also necessary to build an alliance among regulatory and ethic authorities, statistics, informatics, the healthcare system and providers, researchers, the pharmaceutical and diagnostic industries, decision makers, and patients to overcome the gender gap in medicine and to take real care of a person in an appropriate manner.