Division of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, Duke University, Durham, NC 27705, USA.
Health Serv Res. 2013 Aug;48(4):1468-86. doi: 10.1111/1475-6773.12043. Epub 2013 Feb 13.
We examined how the choice of historic medication use criteria for identifying prevalent users may bias estimated adherence changes associated with a medication copayment increase.
From pharmacy claims data in a retrospective cohort study, we identified 6,383 prevalent users of oral diabetes medications from four VA Medical Centers. Patients were included in this prevalent cohort if they had one fill both 3 months prior and 4-12 months prior to the index date, defined as the month in which medication copayments increased. To determine whether these historic medication use criteria introduced bias in the estimated response to a $5 medication copayment increase, we compared adherence trends from cohorts defined from different medication use criteria and from different index dates of copayment change. In an attempt to validate the prior observation of an upward trend in adherence prior to the date of the policy change, we replicated time series analyses varying the index dates prior to and following the date of the policy change, hypothesizing that the trend line associated with the policy change would differ from the trend lines that were not.
Medication adherence trends differed when different medication use criteria were applied. Contrary to our expectations, similar adherence trends were observed when the same medication use criteria were applied at index dates when no copayment changes occurred.
To avoid introducing bias due to study design in outcomes assessments of medication policy changes, historic medication use inclusion criteria must be chosen carefully when constructing cohorts of prevalent users. Furthermore, while pharmacy data have enormous potential for population research and monitoring, there may be inherent logical flaws that limit cohort identification solely through administrative pharmacy records.
我们研究了在识别普遍使用者时选择历史用药标准会如何影响与药物共付额增加相关的估计依从性变化。
我们从四家退伍军人事务部医疗中心的回顾性队列研究中的药房索赔数据中确定了 6383 名口服糖尿病药物的现患使用者。如果患者在索引日期(即药物共付额增加的月份)前 3 个月和前 4-12 个月有一次配药,则将其纳入该现患队列。为了确定这些历史用药标准是否会对估计对 5 美元药物共付额增加的反应产生偏差,我们比较了根据不同用药标准和不同共付额变化索引日期定义的队列中的依从性趋势。为了验证在政策变化日期之前依从性呈上升趋势的先验观察,我们复制了时间序列分析,改变了政策变化日期之前和之后的索引日期,假设与政策变化相关的趋势线将与未发生政策变化的趋势线不同。
当应用不同的用药标准时,药物依从性趋势会有所不同。与我们的预期相反,当在没有共付额变化的索引日期应用相同的用药标准时,观察到了相似的依从性趋势。
为了避免在药物政策变化的结果评估中因研究设计而引入偏差,在构建现患使用者队列时,必须谨慎选择历史用药纳入标准。此外,虽然药房数据在人群研究和监测方面具有巨大潜力,但仅通过行政药房记录识别队列可能存在固有逻辑缺陷。