Individualized prescribing portraits to reduce inappropriate initiation of opioid analgesics to opioid naïve patients in primary care: Protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

Background Opioid analgesics are frequently initiated for chronic and acute pain despite weak evidence of benefit, although prescribing rates of some analgesics decreased in the context of the epidemic. In some populations, up to a quarter of opioid naïve persons prescribed opioids for non-cancer pain develop prescription opioid use disorder (OUD). Audit and feedback interventions rely on constructive use of routinely collected data to align professional behaviours and clinical practice with best evidence. These interventions have been shown to help reduce inappropriate initiation. However, effectiveness and acceptability of individualized "portraits" of physicians' prescribing patterns, to reduce inappropriate initiation of opioid analgesics to opioid naïve persons, have not been evaluated. Methods REDONNA is a mixed-methods randomized study testing the effectiveness of individualized prescribing Portraits to reduce inappropriate initiation of opioid analgesics. This intervention to improve safety of opioid prescribing in primary care in British Columbia (BC), Canada involves mailing individual prescribing portraits to an 'early group' of 2604 family physicians, followed in 6 months by a mailing to 2553 family physicians in the 'delayed group'. Primary outcome is number of new opioid prescriptions initiated in opioid naïve people, measured using administrative data from a centralized medication monitoring database covering all prescription opioids dispensed from BC community pharmacies. Secondary endpoints will compare prescribing impact between the two groups. A qualitative sub-study will examine feasibility among a purposive sample of physicians and patients. Discussion This trial provides important evidence on the intervention's potential to steer policy and practice on inappropriate opioid analgesics initiation. Trial registration: The study was registered prospectively on 30 March 2020 at the ISRCTN Register (https://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN34246811).

Osteoporosis medication prescribing in British Columbia and Ontario: impact of public drug coverage.

UNLABELLED: We compared the patterns of osteoporosis medication prescribing between two provinces in Canada with different public drug coverage policies. Oral bisphosphonates were the primary drugs used, yet access to the second-generation oral bisphosphonates (alendronate, risedronate) was limited in one region. Implications of differential access to oral bisphosphonates warrants further study. INTRODUCTION: Approved therapies for treating osteoporosis in Canada include bisphosphonates, calcitonin, denosumab, raloxifene, and teriparatide. However, significant variation in access to these medications through public drug coverage exists across Canada. We sought to compare patterns of osteoporosis medication prescribing between British Columbia (BC) and Ontario. METHODS: Using dispensing data from BC (PharmaNet) and Ontario (Ontario Drug Benefits), we identified all new users of osteoporosis medications aged 66 or more years from 1995/1996 to 2008/2009. We summarized the number of new users by fiscal year, sex, and index drug for each province. BC data were also stratified by whether drugs were dispensed within or outside public PharmaCare. RESULTS: We identified 578,254 (n = 122,653 BC) eligible new users. Overall patterns were similar between provinces: (1) most patients received an oral bisphosphonate (93% in BC and 99% in Ontario); (2) etidronate prescribing declined after 2001/2002, reaching a low of 41% in BC and 10% in Ontario in 2008/2009; and (3) the proportion of males treated increased over time, from 7% in 1996/1997 to 25% in 2008/2009. However, we note major differences within versus outside the BC PharmaCare system. In particular, <2% of drugs dispensed within PharmaCare compared to 79% of drugs dispensed outside PharmaCare were for a second-generation bisphosphonate (alendronate or risedronate). CONCLUSIONS: Oral bisphosphonates are the primary drugs used to treat osteoporosis in Canada. Prescribing practices changed over time as newer medications came to market, yet access to second-generation bisphosphonates through BC PharmaCare was limited. Implications of differential access to oral bisphosphonates warrants further study.

Influences of educational interventions and adverse news about calcium-channel blockers on first-line prescribing of antihypertensive drugs to elderly people in British Columbia.

BACKGROUND: The way in which dissemination of evidence changes medical practice needs to be better understood. Controversy about calcium-channel blockers (CCB) in the past 3 years has provided a natural experiment, enabling assessment of the impact of media stories, a national warning letter, a teleconference, small group workshops, and newsletters on first-line prescribing of antihypertensive drugs. METHODS: We included all physicians (4403) in British Columbia who prescribed a thiazide diuretic, beta-blocker, inhibitor of angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE), or CCB as the first antihypertensive agent for 36,507 residents aged 66 years and over, with no previous or concurrent sign of underlying cardiovascular disease. We used a database covering all prescriptions to elderly people to measure the change in proportion of newly treated patients who received each class of drug as first-line therapy. We used a matched cohort design for assessment of the teleconference and workshops, a randomised community design for the newsletters, and time-series analysis for the media impacts. FINDINGS: The proportion of patients who received a CCB as first-line therapy declined gradually from 22% in early 1994 to 15% in late 1996. This proportion was not affected by two waves of adverse news about CCBs in 1995, but fell by 5% for 5 months and by 3% for 1 month after two waves in 1996. The proportion of patients who received either a CCB or an ACE inhibitor as first-line therapy, contrary to guidelines, was still 42% overall in 1996. The workshops and newsletters were followed by shifts from first-line CCB to first-line thiazide prescribing. INTERPRETATION: Changes in prescribing practices occur gradually with the accumulation of small impacts from educational interventions and lay media attention.