4.3 Article

Prescription patterns of opioids and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs in the first year after living kidney donation: An analysis of US Registry and Pharmacy fill records

期刊

CLINICAL TRANSPLANTATION
卷 34, 期 8, 页码 -

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/ctr.14000

关键词

donors and donation; epidemiology; living kidney donor; pain management; pharmacy records; registries

资金

  1. National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases [R01DK120551]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We examined a novel database linking national donor registry identifiers to records from a US pharmaceutical claims warehouse (2007-2015) to describe opioid and NSAID prescription patterns among LKDs during the first year postdonation, divided into three periods: 0-14 days, 15-182 days, and 183-365 days. Associations of opioid and NSAID prescription fills with baseline factors were examined by logistic regression (adjusted odds ratio,(LCL)aOR(UCL)). Among 23,565 donors, opioid prescriptions were highest during days 0-14 (36.6%), but 12.6% of donors filled opioids during days 183-365. NSAID prescriptions rose from 0.5% during days 0-14 to 3.3% during days 183-365. Women filled opioids more commonly than men, and black donors filled both opioids and NSAIDs more commonly than white donors. After covariate adjustment, significant correlates of opioid prescription fills during days 183-365 included obesity (aOR,(1.24)1.38(1.53)), less than college education (aOR,(1.19)1.31(1.43)), smoking (aOR,(1.33)1.45(1.58)), and nephrectomy complications (aOR,(1.11)1.29(1.49)). NSAID prescription fills in year 1 were not associated with differences in estimated glomerular filtration rate, incidence of proteinuria or new-onset hypertension at the first and second year postdonation. Prescription fills for opioids and NSAIDs for LKDs varied with demographic and clinic traits. Future work should examine longer-term outcome implications to help inform safe analgesic regimen choices after donation.

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

4.3
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