Search

Objectives To quantify the relationship between home medicines review (HMR) receipt in older adults and sociodemographic, medication-related and health factors. Design Prospective cohort analysis. Settings, participants, measurements Questionnaire data from a population-based cohort study of individuals aged ≥45 years, Sydney, Australia were linked with primary healthcare data, medication and hospitalisation data, to ascertain factors associated with HMR receipt during the period July 2009-June 2014. Medicationrelated factors included exposure to five and more medications (polypharmacy), narrow therapeutic index medicines, potentially inappropriate prescribing defined using Beers Criteria medicines, and anticholinergic and sedative drugs, defined using the Drug Burden Index (DBI). Poisson and Cox regression models were used to evaluate HMR receipt in relation to sociodemographic, behavioural and health characteristics, and time-varying factors including medication use and hospitalisations. Primary outcome HMR receipt during the 5-year study period. Results Over 5 years of follow-up, 4.7% (n=6115) of 131 483 participants received at least one HMR. Five-year HMR receipt was: 1.5% in people using <5 medications at baseline, 6.8% with 5-9 medications, 12.7% with ≥10 medications, 8.8% using Narrow Therapeutic Index medicines, 6.8% using Beers Criteria potentially inappropriate medicines and 7.4% using DBI medicines. Age-sex stratified HRs for HMR receipt were 6.07 (95% CI: 5.58 to 6.59) and 12.46 (11.42 to 13.59) for concurrent use of 5-9 and ≥10 versus <5 medications, respectively. The age-sex adjusted rate ratio for HMR receipt was 2.65 (2.51 to 2.80) with poor versus good self-reported health; this association was attenuated substantially following additional adjustment for polypharmacy. Conclusions HMR was common in individuals using multiple medications, a formal indication for general practitioner referral and, to a lesser extent, with poorer health and other markers of high-risk prescribing. Despite this, HMR use over a 5-year period was generally below 10%, even in high-risk groups, suggesting substantial potential for improvement in uptake and targeting. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Low back pain (LBP) is the leading cause of disability worldwide. Of those patients who present to primary care with acute LBP, 40% continue to report symptoms 3 months later and develop chronic LBP. Although it is possible to identify these patients early, effective interventions to improve their outcomes are not available. This double-blind (participant/outcome assessor) randomised controlled trial will investigate the efficacy of a brief educational approach to prevent chronic LBP in 'at-risk' individuals. Methods/analysis: Participants will be recruited from primary care practices in the Sydney metropolitan area. To be eligible for inclusion participants will be aged 18-75 years, with acute LBP (<4 weeks' duration) preceded by at least a 1 month pain-free period and at-risk of developing chronic LBP. Potential participants with chronic spinal pain and those with suspected serious spinal pathology will be excluded. Eligible participants who agree to take part will be randomly allocated to receive 2x1 h sessions of pain biology education or 2x1 h sessions of sham education from a specially trained study physiotherapist. The study requires 101 participants per group to detect a 1-point difference in pain intensity 3 months after pain onset. Secondary outcomes include the incidence of chronic LBP, disability, pain intensity, depression, healthcare utilisation, pain attitudes and beliefs, global recovery and recurrence and are measured at 1 week post-intervention, and at 3, 6 and 12 months post LBP onset. Ethics/dissemination: Ethical approval was obtained from the University of New South Wales Human Ethics Committee in June 2013 (ref number HC12664). Outcomes will be disseminated through publication in peer-reviewed journals and presentations at international conference meetings. Trial registration number: https://www.anzctr.org.au/ Trial/Registration/TrialReview.aspx? ACTRN=12612001180808 [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: The POPPY II cohort is an Australian state-based cohort linking data for a population of individuals prescribed opioid medicines, constructed to allow a robust examination of the long-term patterns and outcomes of prescription opioid use., Participants: The cohort includes 3 569 433 adult New South Wales residents who initiated a subsidised prescription opioid medicine between 2003 and 2018, identified through pharmacy dispensing data (Australian Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme) and linked to 10 national and state datasets and registries including rich sociodemographic and medical services data., Findings to Date: Of the 3.57 million individuals included in the cohort, 52.7% were female and 1 in 4 people were aged ≥65 years at the time of cohort entry. Approximately 6% had evidence of cancer in the year prior to cohort entry. In the 3 months prior to cohort entry, 26.9% used a non-opioid analgesic and 20.5% used a psychotropic medicine. Overall, 1 in 5 individuals were initiated on a strong opioid (20.9%). The most commonly initiated opioid was paracetamol/codeine (61.3%), followed by oxycodone (16.3%)., Future Plans: The POPPY II cohort will be updated periodically, both extending the follow-up duration of the existing cohort, and including new individuals initiating opioids. The POPPY II cohort will allow a range of aspects of opioid utilisation to be studied, including long-term trajectories of opioid use, development of a data-informed method to assess time-varying opioid exposure, and a range of outcomes including mortality, transition to opioid dependence, suicide and falls. The duration of the study period will allow examination of population-level impacts of changes to opioid monitoring and access, while the size of the cohort will also allow examination of important subpopulations such as people with cancer, musculoskeletal conditions or opioid use disorder., Competing Interests: Competing interests: The authors declare no direct competing interests relevant to this study. LD has received untied educational grant funding from Indivior, Mundipharma, Seqirus, and Reckitt Benckiser. AD has received untied educational grant funding from Braeburn/Camerus, Indivior, and Mundipharma. SL has received untied educational grant funding from Indivior. AW is paid by the Australian Commonwealth government as the chair of the Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory Committee (PBAC). SAP is a member of the Drug Utilisation Sub-Committee (DUSC) of the PBAC., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2023. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Introduction: Potentially preventable hospitalisation (PPH) has been adopted widely by international health systems as an indicator of the accessibility and overall effectiveness of primary care. The Assessing Preventable Hospitalisation InDicators (APHID) study will validate PPH as a measure of health system performance in Australia and Scotland. APHID will be the first large-scale study internationally to explore longitudinal relationships between primary care and PPH using detailed person-level information about health risk factors, health status and health service use., Methods and Analysis: APHID will create a new longitudinal data resource by linking together data from a large-scale cohort study (the 45 and Up Study) and prospective administrative data relating to use of general practitioner (GP) services, dispensing of pharmaceuticals, emergency department presentations, hospital admissions and deaths. We will use these linked person-level data to explore relationships between frequency, volume, nature and costs of primary care services, hospital admissions for PPH diagnoses, and health outcomes, and factors that confound and mediate these relationships. Using multilevel modelling techniques, we will quantify the contributions of person-level, geographic-level and service-level factors to variation in PPH rates, including socioeconomic status, country of birth, geographic remoteness, physical and mental health status, availability of GP and other services, and hospital characteristics., Ethics and Dissemination: Participants have consented to use of their questionnaire data and to data linkage. Ethical approval has been obtained for the study. Dissemination mechanisms include engagement of policy stakeholders through a reference group and policy forum, and production of summary reports for policy audiences in parallel with the scientific papers from the study.