National trends in prescription proton pump inhibitor use and expenditure in the United States in 2002-2017

Mishuk, Ahmed Ullah; Chen, Li; Gaillard, Philippe; Westrick, Salisa C.; Hansen, Richard A; Qian, Jingjing

doi:10.1016/j.japh.2020.09.015

Cited by 23 publications

(40 citation statements)

References 36 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“… 3 Moreover, PPI use among the US population has increased over time, from 5.7% in 2002–2003 to 6.73% in 2016. 4 In addition, the use of non-prescription over-the-counter (OTC) PPIs is considered to be substantial in the United States. 1 , 2 …”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Risk of bias in non-randomized observational studies assessing the relationship between proton-pump inhibitors and adverse kidney outcomes: a systematic review

Rajan

Iglay

Rhodes

et al. 2022

Therap Adv Gastroenterol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Proton-pump inhibitors (PPIs) are widely prescribed as acid-suppression therapy. Some observational studies suggest that long-term use of PPIs is potentially associated with certain adverse kidney outcomes. We conducted a systematic literature review to assess potential bias in non-randomized studies reporting on putative associations between PPIs and adverse kidney outcomes (acute kidney injury, acute interstitial nephritis, chronic interstitial nephritis, acute tubular necrosis, chronic kidney disease, and end-stage renal disease). Methods: We searched the medical literature within 10 years of 17 December 2020. Pre-specified criteria guided identification of relevant English language articles for assessment. Risk of bias on an outcome-specific basis was evaluated using the Risk of Bias in Non-randomized Studies of Interventions (ROBINS-I) tool by two independent reviewers. Results: Of 620 initially identified records, 26 studies met a priori eligibility criteria and underwent risk of bias assessment. Nineteen studies were judged as having a moderate risk of bias for reported adverse kidney outcomes, while six studies were judged as having a serious risk of bias (mainly due to inadequate control of confounders and selection bias). We were unable to determine the overall risk of bias in two studies (one of which was assessed as having a moderate risk of bias for a different adverse kidney outcome) due to insufficient information presented. Effect estimates for PPIs in relation to adverse kidney outcomes varied widely (0.24–7.34) but associations mostly showed increased risk. Conclusion: Using ROBINS-I, we found that non-randomized observational studies suggesting kidney harm by PPIs have moderate to serious risk of bias, making it challenging to establish causality. Additional high-quality, real-world evidence among generalizable populations are needed to better understand the relation between PPI treatment and acute and chronic kidney outcomes, accounting for the effects of varying durations of PPI treatment, self-treatment with over-the-counter PPIs, and potential critical confounders.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Risk of bias in non-randomized observational studies assessing the relationship between proton-pump inhibitors and adverse kidney outcomes: a systematic review

Rajan

Iglay

Rhodes

et al. 2022

Therap Adv Gastroenterol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Our study identified an increase for acid related disorders drugs between 1998 and 2018 in volume and days of treatment, similar with the trends in proton pump inhibitor use indicated in a study conducted in the United States. It has been reported an increase from 5.70% in 2002 -2003 to 6.73% in 2016 -2017, in line with the high prevalence and costs of gastrooesophageal reflux disease [13].…”

Section: Atc2 Therapeutic Groupsmentioning

confidence: 95%

The Alimentary and Metabolism Market in Romania 1998 - 2018. Analysis and Evolution

PANĂ¹

2021

FARMACIA

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The alimentary tract and metabolism medicines market in Romania has grown significantly over the last twenty years. For this reason, we aimed to analyse the evolution of the drug consumption by volume (units) and days of treatment (DOT). A retrospective study was conducted based on the pharmaceutical data extracted from Pharma & Hospital Report, issued by Cegedim between 1998 and 2018 in Romania. The results of the study have revealed that the highest share (in descending order) in units, concerning the therapeutic groups, belongs to: A02 (drugs for acid-related disorders), A16 (vitamins), A03 (drugs for functional gastrointestinal disorders), A10 (drugs used in diabetes), A05 (bile and liver therapy), A07 (antidiarrheals, intestinal antiinflammatory/antiinfectives). Taking into consideration the product type, generic medicines are dominating in volume. By launching year, established medicines, having enough years of clinical experience, are of greater interest than the others. Furthermore, concerning market layers, the volume is quite balanced between the 3 layers (Bucharest and large cities, medium cities, small cities), but almost 2/3 of the population stays in the 3 rd layer that raises questions about the treatment accessibility in small cities and villages. Regarding the antidiabetic market, there is a spectacular growth in the use of antidiabetic drugs (both in volume and DOT). Our study has showed an increasing trend for most of the groups of alimentary tract and metabolism drugs. Measures should be taken by national authorities to encourage prevention, management of drug therapy and rational use of medicines. RezumatPiața medicamentelor destinate tractului alimentar și metabolismului în România s-a dezvoltat susținut în ultimii douăzeci de ani. Din acest motiv, ne-am propus să analizăm evoluția consumului de medicamente la nivel de volum (unități) și zile de tratament (DOT). A fost derulat un studiu retrospectiv cu ajutorul informațiilor farmaceutice obținute din raportul Pharma & Hospital, elaborat de către Cegedim între 1998 și 2018 în România. Rezultatele studiului au arătat că, pe grupe terapeutice, cota de piață în volum, în ordine descrescătoare, este reprezentată astfel: A02 (antiacide), A16 (vitamine), A03 (tulburări gastrointestinale funcționale), A10 (antidiabetice), A05 (terapia colecistului si a ficatului), A07 (antidiareice, antiinflamatoare/ antiinfecțioase intestinale). Ca tip de produs, medicamentele generice domină din punct de vedere al unităților eliberate. Conform variabilei "anul de lansare", analiza arată că medicamentele tradiționale, care au suficienți ani de experiență clinică, sunt predominante. Din punct de vedere demografic, volumele sunt bine reprezentate în cele trei direcții (București și orașele mari, orașele medii și orașele mici), dar aproape două treimi din populație aparține celei de-a treia zone; de aceea ne punem întrebarea dacă accesibilitatea la tratament este bună la nivelul orașelor mici și al satelor. În ceea ce privește piața medicamentelor utilizată pentru tra...

show abstract

“…The overall proportion of PPI users increased from 5.70% in 2002-2003 to 6.73% in 2016-2017. 1 Data from the Dialysis Outcomes and Practice Patterns Study (DOPPS) found that 19.3% of dialysis patients in the United States were prescribed PPIs. 2 In patients on dialysis for less than one year, 53.8% were receiving PPIs.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Do Proton-Pump Inhibitors Cause CKD and Progression of CKD?: PRO

Awdishu

Abagyan

2022

Kidney360

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

National trends in prescription proton pump inhibitor use and expenditure in the United States in 2002-2017

Cited by 23 publications

References 36 publications

Risk of bias in non-randomized observational studies assessing the relationship between proton-pump inhibitors and adverse kidney outcomes: a systematic review

Risk of bias in non-randomized observational studies assessing the relationship between proton-pump inhibitors and adverse kidney outcomes: a systematic review

The Alimentary and Metabolism Market in Romania 1998 - 2018. Analysis and Evolution

Do Proton-Pump Inhibitors Cause CKD and Progression of CKD?: PRO

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About