The influence of co-morbidities on prescribing pharmacotherapy for insomnia: evidence from US national outpatient data 1995-2004

Racial disparities in the pharmacological treatment of insomnia: A time-to-event analysis using real-world data

OBJECTIVE

Examine the association between race and time to pharmacologic treatment of insomnia in a large multi-institutional cohort.

METHODS

Retrospective analysis of electronic medical records from a regional health information exchange. Eligible patients included adults with at least one healthcare visit per year from 2010 to 2019, a new insomnia diagnosis code during the study period, and no prior insomnia diagnosis codes or medications. A Cox frailty model was used to examine the association between race and time to an insomnia medication after diagnosis.

RESULTS

In total, 9557 patients were analyzed, 7773 (81.3%) of whom where White, 1294 (13.5%) Black, 238 (2.5%) Other, and 252 (2.6%) unknown race. About 6.2% of Black and 8% of Other race patients received an order for a Food and Drug Administration-approved insomnia medication after diagnosis compared with 13.5% of White patients. Black patients were significantly less likely to have an order for a Food and Drug Administration-approved insomnia medication at all time points (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] range: 0.37-0.73), and patients reporting Other race were less likely to have received an order at 2 (aHR 0.51, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.28-0.94), 3 (aHR 0.33, 95% CI 0.13-0.79), and 4 years (aHR 0.21, 95% CI 0.06-0.71) of follow-up. Similar results were observed in a sensitivity analysis including off-label medications.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients belonging to racial minority groups are less likely to be prescribed an insomnia medication than White patients after accounting for sociodemographic and clinical factors. Further research is needed to determine the extent to which patient preferences and physician perceptions affect these prescribing patterns and investigate potential disparities in nonpharmacologic treatment.

Clinical Practice Guideline for the Pharmacologic Treatment of Chronic Insomnia in Adults: An American Academy of Sleep Medicine Clinical Practice Guideline

INTRODUCTION

The purpose of this guideline is to establish clinical practice recommendations for the pharmacologic treatment of chronic insomnia in adults, when such treatment is clinically indicated. Unlike previous meta-analyses, which focused on broad classes of drugs, this guideline focuses on individual drugs commonly used to treat insomnia. It includes drugs that are FDA-approved for the treatment of insomnia, as well as several drugs commonly used to treat insomnia without an FDA indication for this condition. This guideline should be used in conjunction with other AASM guidelines on the evaluation and treatment of chronic insomnia in adults.

METHODS

The American Academy of Sleep Medicine commissioned a task force of four experts in sleep medicine. A systematic review was conducted to identify randomized controlled trials, and the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) process was used to assess the evidence. The task force developed recommendations and assigned strengths based on the quality of evidence, the balance of benefits and harms, and patient values and preferences. Literature reviews are provided for those pharmacologic agents for which sufficient evidence was available to establish recommendations. The AASM Board of Directors approved the final recommendations.

RECOMMENDATIONS

The following recommendations are intended as a guideline for clinicians in choosing a specific pharmacological agent for treatment of chronic insomnia in adults, when such treatment is indicated. Under GRADE, a STRONG recommendation is one that clinicians should, under most circumstances, follow. A WEAK recommendation reflects a lower degree of certainty in the outcome and appropriateness of the patient-care strategy for all patients, but should not be construed as an indication of ineffectiveness. GRADE recommendation strengths do not refer to the magnitude of treatment effects in a particular patient, but rather, to the strength of evidence in published data. Downgrading the quality of evidence for these treatments is predictable in GRADE, due to the funding source for most pharmacological clinical trials and the attendant risk of publication bias; the relatively small number of eligible trials for each individual agent; and the observed heterogeneity in the data. The ultimate judgment regarding propriety of any specific care must be made by the clinician in light of the individual circumstances presented by the patient, available diagnostic tools, accessible treatment options, and resources. We suggest that clinicians use suvorexant as a treatment for sleep maintenance insomnia (versus no treatment) in adults. (WEAK). We suggest that clinicians use eszopiclone as a treatment for sleep onset and sleep maintenance insomnia (versus no treatment) in adults. (WEAK). We suggest that clinicians use zaleplon as a treatment for sleep onset insomnia (versus no treatment) in adults. (WEAK). We suggest that clinicians use zolpidem as a treatment for sleep onset and sleep maintenance insomnia (versus no treatment) in adults. (WEAK). We suggest that clinicians use triazolam as a treatment for sleep onset insomnia (versus no treatment) in adults. (WEAK). We suggest that clinicians use temazepam as a treatment for sleep onset and sleep maintenance insomnia (versus no treatment) in adults. (WEAK). We suggest that clinicians use ramelteon as a treatment for sleep onset insomnia (versus no treatment) in adults. (WEAK). We suggest that clinicians use doxepin as a treatment for sleep maintenance insomnia (versus no treatment) in adults. (WEAK). We suggest that clinicians not use trazodone as a treatment for sleep onset or sleep maintenance insomnia (versus no treatment) in adults. (WEAK). We suggest that clinicians not use tiagabine as a treatment for sleep onset or sleep maintenance insomnia (versus no treatment) in adults. (WEAK). We suggest that clinicians not use diphenhydramine as a treatment for sleep onset and sleep maintenance insomnia (versus no treatment) in adults. (WEAK). We suggest that clinicians not use melatonin as a treatment for sleep onset or sleep maintenance insomnia (versus no treatment) in adults. (WEAK). We suggest that clinicians not use tryptophan as a treatment for sleep onset or sleep maintenance insomnia (versus no treatment) in adults. (WEAK). We suggest that clinicians not use valerian as a treatment for sleep onset or sleep maintenance insomnia (versus no treatment) in adults. (WEAK).

The Use of Antidepressants, Anxiolytics, and Hypnotics in People with Type 2 Diabetes and Patterns Associated with Use: The Hoorn Diabetes Care System Cohort

Objective. With depression being present in approximately 20% of people with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), we expect equally frequent prescription of antidepressants, anxiolytics, and hypnotics. Nevertheless, prescription data in people with T2DM is missing and the effect of depression on glycaemic control is contradictory. The aim of this study was to assess the prevalence of antidepressants, anxiolytics, and/or hypnotics use in a large, managed, primary care system cohort of people with T2DM and to determine the sociodemographic characteristics, comorbidities, T2DM medication, and metabolic control associated with its use. Method. The prevalence of antidepressants, anxiolytics, and/or hypnotics use in the years 2007-2012 was assessed in the Hoorn Diabetes Care System Cohort from the Netherlands. Results. From the 7016 people with T2DM, 500 people (7.1%) used antidepressants only, 456 people (6.5%) used anxiolytics and/or hypnotics only, and 254 people (3.6%) used a combination. Conclusion. We conclude that in our managed, primary care system 17% of all people with T2DM used antidepressants, anxiolytics, and/or hypnotics. Users of antidepressants, anxiolytics, and/or hypnotics were more often female, non-Caucasian, lower educated, and more often treated with insulin.

Multimorbidity and Patient Safety Incidents in Primary Care: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Multimorbidity is increasingly prevalent and represents a major challenge in primary care. Patients with multimorbidity are potentially more likely to experience safety incidents due to the complexity of their needs and frequency of their interactions with health services. However, rigorous syntheses of the link between patient safety incidents and multimorbidity are not available. This review examined the relationship between multimorbidity and patient safety incidents in primary care.

METHODS

We followed our published protocol (PROSPERO registration number: CRD42014007434). Medline, Embase and CINAHL were searched up to May 2015. Study design and quality were assessed. Odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) were calculated for the associations between multimorbidity and two categories of patient safety outcomes: 'active patient safety incidents' (such as adverse drug events and medical complications) and 'precursors of safety incidents' (such as prescription errors, medication non-adherence, poor quality of care and diagnostic errors). Meta-analyses using random effects models were undertaken.

RESULTS

Eighty six relevant comparisons from 75 studies were included in the analysis. Meta-analysis demonstrated that physical-mental multimorbidity was associated with an increased risk for 'active patient safety incidents' (OR = 2.39, 95% CI = 1.40 to 3.38) and 'precursors of safety incidents' (OR = 1.69, 95% CI = 1.36 to 2.03). Physical multimorbidity was associated with an increased risk for active safety incidents (OR = 1.63, 95% CI = 1.45 to 1.80) but was not associated with precursors of safety incidents (OR = 1.02, 95% CI = 0.90 to 1.13). Statistical heterogeneity was high and the methodological quality of the studies was generally low.

CONCLUSIONS

The association between multimorbidity and patient safety is complex, and varies by type of multimorbidity and type of safety incident. Our analyses suggest that multimorbidity involving mental health may be a key driver of safety incidents, which has important implication for the design and targeting of interventions to improve safety. High quality studies examining the mechanisms of patient safety incidents in patients with multimorbidity are needed, with the goal of promoting effective service delivery and ameliorating threats to safety in this group of patients.

Insomnia, hypnotic use, and health-related quality of life in a nationally representative sample

PURPOSE

To assess health-related quality of life (HRQoL) associated with insomnia and prescription hypnotic use.

METHODS

Primary outcomes were mental component summary (MCS) and physical component summary (PCS) scores from the 12-item Short-Form Health Survey. Using multiple regression, subjects in the 2005 through 2009 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey with diagnosed insomnia were compared against those without that diagnosis. Among subjects with diagnosed insomnia, users of prescription hypnotics were compared against nonusers.

RESULTS

Of 104,274 adults, 1.3 % (n = 1,401) had an insomnia diagnosis. Of those, 45.6 % (n = 639) used prescription hypnotics. For subjects with insomnia, mean PCS and MCS scores were 9.2 and 7.0 points lower (p < 0.001), respectively. After controlling for demographic and clinical covariates, differences remained significant (PCS:5.1;

MCS

6.2; p < 0.001). Among subjects with insomnia, HRQoL scores were not different between prescription hypnotic users (n = 639) and nonusers (n = 762). Analysis by drug class revealed lower PCS scores (difference: 7.5, p < 0.001) with benzodiazepine use (n = 129) versus benzodiazepine receptor agonist use (n = 493), but the adjusted difference was not significant (difference: 3.8, p = .018).

CONCLUSIONS

Diagnosed insomnia was associated with consistent decreases in both physical and mental HRQoL scores, regardless of whether prescription hypnotics were used. Benzodiazepine use may be associated with a further decrease in physical HRQoL scores. Although limited by its retrospective design, this study provides a first look at real-world hypnotic use outcomes at a national level. Important next steps include studies with patients serving as their own controls, and further evaluation of the sensitivity of HRQoL instruments to the effects of insomnia treatments.