4.7 Article

Opioid dispensing patterns after oocyte retrieval

期刊

FERTILITY AND STERILITY
卷 110, 期 5, 页码 905-909

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2018.06.023

关键词

Oocyte retrieval; opioids; pain

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective: To study opioid dispensing patterns following oocyte retrieval. Design: Retrospective cohort. Setting: Not applicable. Patient(s): Women undergoing oocyte retrieval with a maximum of 1 opioid prescription in the 12 weeks prior to the procedure, without an opioid use or other substance use disorder. Intervention(s): None. Main Outcome Measure(s): We measured the frequency of opioids dispensed within 3 days of oocyte retrieval, most common opioids dispensed; and quantity dispensed, in median (interquartile range [IQR] and 10th-90th percentile ranges) oral morphine milligram equivalents (MME). Multivariate regression analyses were used to calculate odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals (CI) to examine the association between patient characteristics and the occurrence of an opioid dispensing. Result(s): In total, 61,463 women with an oocyte retrieval met the criteria for analysis. After oocyte retrieval, 11.9% were dispensed an opioid, most commonly hydrocodone (48.5%), codeine (23.0%), and oxycodone (17.7%). The median (IQR; 10th-90th percentile) oral MME dose dispensed after retrieval was 90 (50-125; 50-207). Women with mood disorders (adjusted odds ratio [aOR]1.17, 95% CI 1.001.36), tobacco use (aOR 1.67, 95% CI 1.18-2.37), or anti-depressant use (aOR 1.62, 95% CI 1.47-1.80) were more likely to fill an opioid prescription, compared to those without these diagnoses. Conclusion(s): Although only a small proportion of women fill a prescription for opioids after oocyte retrieval, there is substantial variation in the amount dispensed. Patients with a concurrent mood disorder or those taking anti-depressants were more likely to fill an opioid prescription. (C) 2018 by American Society for Reproductive Medicine.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据