4.6 Article

Hormone therapy prescribing patterns in the United States

期刊

OBSTETRICS AND GYNECOLOGY
卷 104, 期 5, 页码 1042-1050

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/01.AOG.0000143826.38439.af

关键词

-

资金

  1. AHRQ HHS [U18HS11843-01] Funding Source: Medline
  2. NCI NIH HHS [U19-CA-79689-05] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

OBJECTIVE: We sought to examine prescribing patterns (prevalence and rates of initiation and discontinuation) for estrogen plus progestin (hormone therapy [HT] and estrogen alone [ET]) in the United States in the 2 years before the published results of Women's Health Initiative's (WHI) HT trial's early termination and for 5 months after their release. METHODS: We conducted an observational cohort study of 169,586 women aged 40-80 years who were enrolled in 5 health maintenance organizations in the United States to estimate the prevalence of HT and ET and discontinuation and initiation rates between September 1, 1999, to June 31, 2002 (baseline), and December 31, 2002 (follow-up). We used automated pharmacy data to identify all oral and transdermal estrogen and progestin dispensed during the study period. RESULTS: The prevalence of HT declined 46% from baseline to follow-up (14.6% to 7.9%); ET use declined 28% during the same period (12.6% to 9.1%). ne discontinuation of HT increased almost immediately, from 2.5% at baseline to 13.8% in October 2002. We saw an immediate decrease in HT and ET initiation rates, from 0.4% and 0.3% at baseline, respectively, to 0.2% for W and ET at follow-up. CONCLUSION: ne diffusion of the WHI FIT trial results had an immediate impact on the discontinuation of HT and ET and is likely responsible for the 46% and 28% decline in the initiation of these respective therapies. Further exploration of why women continue to use HT and identification of methods for addressing reasons for continued use are indicated. (C) 2004 by The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists.

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

4.6
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