Short-term risk of falls among initiators of controlled-release tapentadol versus oxycodone: A population-based cohort study
Camacho, X.; Schaffer, A. L.; Brett, J.; Hopkins, R.; Gisev, N.; Marsh, S.; Filion, K. B.; Pratt, N.; Henry, D.; Pearson, S.-A.
Show abstract
ObjectiveGiven the potential severity and economic burden of falls, we compared the short-term risk of falls following initiation of sustained-release (SR) tapentadol versus controlled-release (CR) oxycodone in real-world clinical practice. DesignActive comparator, new user retrospective cohort study using routinely collected health data from 2014 to 2020. SettingNew South Wales, Australia. ParticipantsPeople aged [≥]18 years initiating publicly subsidised tapentadol (SR) or oxycodone (CR). InterventionsInitiation of tapentadol (SR) or oxycodone (CR). Main outcome measuresComposite measure of fall-related emergency department presentations, hospitalisations or deaths. We used propensity score matching to adjust for baseline confounding and approximated relative risks (RR) of falls at 7, 14, and 28 days after initiation using conditional logistic regression models. We calculated absolute risk differences and estimated the number of people that would need to be treated with oxycodone (CR) vs tapentadol (SR) for one additional fall to occur (NNTH). We conducted subgroup analyses restricted to people aged [≥]65 and [≥]80 years and by recent opioid exposure (within 90 days prior to initiation). ResultsWe identified 103,924 tapentadol (SR) and 419,732 oxycodone (CR) initiators; after matching each cohort comprised 103,758 initiators. Most people (74%) were aged between 45-84 years, and slightly more than half were female. Within 28 days of initiation, 652 (0.6%) oxycodone (CR) initiators and 457 (0.4%) tapentadol initiators suffered a fall. Across all time points, tapentadol (SR) initiation was associated with a lower risk of falls compared with oxycodone (CR) (7 days: RR 0.57 [95% CI 0.48 to 0.69]; 14 days: 0.62 [0.54 to 0.71]; 28 days: 0.70 [0.62 to 0.79]). Absolute differences were small at all time points (approximately 1-2 fewer falls per 1,000 patients treated), corresponding to NNTH for one additional fall ranging from 739 to 529. These patterns persisted regardless of recent opioid exposure. Relative risks were similar in the older age groups while absolute differences were slightly larger ([≥]65 years: 2-3 fewer falls/1,000; [≥]80 years: 4-8 fewer falls/1,000). The greatest absolute differences were among opioid-naive people aged [≥]80 years (6-10 fewer falls/1,000, corresponding to NNTH ranging from 173 to 97). Fall risks were attenuated among people aged [≥]80 years with recent opioid exposure. ConclusionsTapentadol (SR) was associated with a lower risk of falls than oxycodone (CR) up to four weeks after initiation, although absolute differences were small. The reduction in risk may be an important consideration in older patients where the consequences of falls are most severe. What is already known on this topicO_LIClinical trials suggest that sustained-release (SR) tapentadol has a lower incidence of adverse central nervous system effects compared to controlled-release (CR) oxycodone C_LIO_LIpioids are associated with increased risks of falls, particularly immediately following initiation C_LI What this study addsO_LIInitiation of tapentadol (SR) was associated with a lower short-term risk of falls resulting in ED presentation, hospitalisation, or death compared to initiation of oxycodone (CR) C_LIO_LIAbsolute risk differences were small but reached 1% among opioid-naive people aged 80 years and older where consequences of falls are most severe C_LI
Matching journals
The top 10 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Acute Pain Pathways: protocol for a prospective cohort study 93%
- A text messaging intervention to support patients with chronic pain during prescription opioid tapering: protocol for a double-blind randomised controlled trial 92%
- The Antidepressant Advisor (ADeSS): A Decision Support System for Antidepressant Treatment for Depression in UK primary care – a feasibility study 92%
Similar papers in this journal
- Time trends and prescribing patterns of opioid drugs in UK primary care patients with non-cancer pain: a retrospective cohort study 91%
- Clinical benefits of modifying the evening light environment in an acute psychiatric unit: A single-centre, two-arm, parallel-group, pragmatic effectiveness randomised controlled trial 91%
- Rapid Epidemiological Analysis of Comorbidities and Treatments as risk factors for COVID-19 in Scotland (REACT-SCOT): a population-based case-control study 91%
Similar papers in this journal
- Trends of long-term opioid therapy and subsequent discontinuation among people with chronic non-cancer pain in UK primary care: a retrospective cohort study 95%
- Effect of common maintenance drugs on the risk and severity of COVID-19 in elderly patients 93%
- Healthcare presentations with self-harm and the association with COVID-19: an e-cohort whole-population-based study using individual-level linked routine electronic health records in Wales, UK, 2016 - March 2021 92%
Similar papers in this journal
- Systematic analysis of electronic health records identifies drugs reducing risk of COVID-19 hospitalization and severity 91%
- Sleep Regularity and Mortality: A Prospective Analysis in the UK Biobank 90%
- The effect of calcium supplementation in people under 35 years old: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials 88%
Similar papers in this journal
- Frailty in individuals with depression, bipolar disorder and anxiety disorders: longitudinal analyses of all-cause mortality 90%
- Efficacy and safety of esketamine for treatment resistant depression: registered report for a Systematic Review with an Individual Patient Data Meta-analysis of Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Trials 90%
- Determinants of pre-vaccination antibody responses to SARS-CoV-2: a population-based longitudinal study (COVIDENCE UK) 90%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.