Back

Examining the burden of opioid prescribing for non-cancer pain considering socio-economic differences, in Wales. A retrospective database study examining trends between 2005 and 2015

Davies, E.; Sewell, B.; Jones, M.; Phillips, C.; Rance, J.

2019-11-29 pain medicine
10.1101/19012625
Show abstract

ObjectivesTo use a proxy-measure of oral morphine equivalent dose (OMED) to determine trends in opioid burden in people with non-cancer pain and explore differences related to deprivation status. Design, setting and participantsRetrospective cohort study using cross-sectional and longitudinal trend analyses of opioid prescribing data from 78% of Welsh Primary Care General Practices, whose data is shared with the Secure Anonymised Information Linkage (SAIL) databank. Anonymised data for the period 2005 to 2015, for people aged 18 or over, without a recorded cancer diagnosis and who received at least one prescription for an opioid medicine was included. Primary and Secondary outcomesA proxy-measure of oral morphine equivalence dose (OMED) was used to describe trends in opioid burden over the study period. OMED burden was stratified by 8 drug groups and deprivation, based on the quintile measures of the Welsh Index of Multiple Deprivation 2011 (WIMD2011). ResultsIn the 11 years examined, 22 641 424 prescriptions for opioids were issued from 345 primary care general practices in Wales. Daily OMED per 1000 population increased by 94.7% (from 16 266 mg to 31 665 mg). Twenty-eight percent of opioid prescribing occurred in the most deprived quintile. More than 100 000 000mg more OMED was prescribed in the most deprived areas of Wales, compared to the least deprived. Codeine prescribing accounted for 35% of the OMED burden in Wales over the study period. ConclusionsWhilst opioid prescription numbers increased 44% between 2005 and 2015, the OMED burden nearly doubled, with a disproportionate OMED load in the most deprived communities in Wales. Using OMED provides an insightful representation of opioid burden, more so than prescription numbers alone. Socio-economic differences are likely to affect pain presentation, access to support services and increase the likelihood of receiving an opioid prescription. Strengths and limitations of this studyO_LIThis study forms part of the first large-scale examination of opioid prescribing in Wales and is the first to use oral morphine equivalent dose as an outcome measure. C_LIO_LIAccess to anonymously linked data allows more detailed examination of demographic influences on opioid prescribing. C_LIO_LIThe study used a proxy-measure for oral morphine equivalent dose due to unavailability of anonymously linked prescription dispensing data. C_LIO_LIDisproportionate levels of prescribing in particular populations have been reported in many countries; further research should seek to understand the reasons for the differences and develop means to address any inequality noted. C_LI

Matching journals

1
BMJ Open
BMJ · based on 553 published papers
Top 1%
9.3× avg
2
BJGP Open
Royal College of General Practitioners · based on 12 published papers
#1
209× avg
3
BMJ Open Quality
BMJ · based on 15 published papers
Top 0.1%
75× avg
4
PLOS ONE
Public Library of Science (PLoS) · based on 1737 published papers
Top 55%
8.1%
5
Pain
Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health) · based on 15 published papers
Top 0.5%
39× avg
6
British Journal of Anaesthesia
Elsevier BV · based on 13 published papers
Top 0.6%
34× avg
7
The Journal of Pain
Elsevier BV · based on 11 published papers
Top 0.6%
34× avg
8
British Journal of General Practice
Royal College of General Practitioners · based on 22 published papers
Top 0.7%
24× avg
9
Journal of Medical Internet Research
JMIR Publications Inc. · based on 81 published papers
Top 10%
2.1× avg
10
Scientific Reports
Springer Science and Business Media LLC · based on 701 published papers
Top 75%
1.4%
11
Social Science & Medicine
Elsevier BV · based on 15 published papers
Top 2%
10× avg
12
PLOS Medicine
Public Library of Science (PLoS) · based on 95 published papers
Top 13%
1.6× avg
13
Clinical Pharmacology & Therapeutics
Wiley · based on 19 published papers
Top 1%
7.1× avg
14
International Journal of Drug Policy
Elsevier BV · based on 11 published papers
Top 0.8%
13× avg
15
International Journal of Medical Informatics
Elsevier BV · based on 25 published papers
Top 6%
3.5× avg
16
BMC Neurology
Springer Science and Business Media LLC · based on 11 published papers
Top 4%
8.6× avg