Educational activities for physicians sponsored by opioid manufacturers are implicated in the over- and mis-prescribing of opioids. However, the implications of promotion to nurses are poorly ...understood. Nurses play a key role in assessing pain, addressing the determinants of pain, and administering opioid medications. We sought to understand the nature and content of pain-related educational events sponsored by opioid manufacturers and to compare events targeting physicians and nurses.
We conducted a cross sectional, descriptive analysis of pharmaceutical company reports detailing 116,845 sponsored educational events attended by health professionals from 2011 to 2015 in Australia. We included events that were sponsored by manufacturers of prescription opioid analgesics and were pain related. We compared event characteristics across three attendee groups: (a) physicians only; (b) at least one nurse in attendance; and (c) nurses only. We coded the unstructured data using iteratively generated keywords for variables related to location, format, and content focus.
We identified 3,411 pain-related events sponsored by 3 companies: bioCSL/CSL (n = 15), Janssen (n = 134); and Mundipharma (n = 3,262). Pain-related events were most often multidisciplinary, including at least one nurse (1,964/3,411; 58%); 38% (1,281/3,411) included physicians only, and 5% (166/3,411) nurses only. The majority of events were held in clinical settings (61%) and 43% took the form of a journal club. Chronic pain was the most common event topic (26%) followed by cancer pain and palliative care (18%), and then generic or unspecified references to pain (15%); nearly a third (32%) of event descriptions contained insufficient information to determine the content focus. Nurse-only events were less frequently held in clinical settings (32%; p < .001) and more frequently were product launches (17%; p < .001) and a significantly larger proportion focused on cancer or palliative care (33%; p < .001), generic pain topics (27%; p < .001), and geriatrics (25%; p < .001) than physician-only or multidisciplinary events.
Opioid promotion via sponsored educational events extends beyond physicians to multidisciplinary teams and specifically, nurses. Despite lack of evidence that opioids improve outcomes for long-term chronic non-cancer pain, hundreds of sponsored educational events focused on chronic pain. Regulators should consider the validity of distinguishing between pharmaceutical companies' "promotional" and "non-promotional" activities.
Aim
The aim of this paper is to investigate 25‐year trends in community use of prescribed opioid analgesics in Australia, and to map these trends against major changes to opioid registration and ...subsidy.
Methods
We obtained dispensing data from 1990 to 2014 from two sources: dispensing claims processed under Australia's national drug subsidy programme, the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme, including under co‐payment records from 2012; and estimates of non‐subsidized medicine use from a survey of Australian pharmacies (until 2011). Utilization was expressed in defined daily doses (DDD)/1000 population/day.
Results
Opioid dispensing increased almost four‐fold between 1990 and 2014, from 4.6 to 17.4 DDD/1000 pop/day. In 1990, weak, short‐acting or orally administered opioids accounted for over 90% of utilization. Use of long‐acting opioids increased over 17‐fold between 1990 and 2000, due primarily to the subsidy of long‐acting morphine and increased use of methadone for pain management. Between 2000 and 2011, oxycodone, fentanyl, buprenorphine, tramadol and hydromorphone use increased markedly. Use of strong opioids, long‐acting and transdermal preparations also increased, largely following the subsidy of various opioids for noncancer pain. In 2011, the most dispensed opioids were codeine (41.1% of total opioid use), oxycodone (19.7%) and tramadol (16.1%); long‐acting formulations comprised approximately half, and strong opioids 40%, of opioid dispensing.
Conclusions
Opioid utilization in Australia is increasing, although these figures remain below levels reported in the US and Canada. The increased use of opioids was largely driven by the subsidy of long‐acting formulations and opioids for the treatment of noncancer pain.
ObjectivesTo examine the knowledge and attitudes of Australian general practitioners (GP) towards medicinal cannabis, including patient demand, GP perceptions of therapeutic effects and potential ...harms, perceived knowledge and willingness to prescribe.Design, setting and participantsA cross-sectional survey completed by 640 GPs (response rate=37%) attending multiple-topic educational seminars in five major Australian cities between August and November 2017.Main outcome measuresNumber of patients enquiring about medicinal cannabis, perceived knowledge of GPs, conditions where GPs perceived it to be beneficial, willingness to prescribe, preferred models of access, perceived adverse effects and safety relative to other prescription drugs.ResultsThe majority of GPs (61.5%) reported one or more patient enquiries about medicinal cannabis in the last three months. Most felt that their own knowledge was inadequate and only 28.8% felt comfortable discussing medicinal cannabis with patients. Over half (56.5%) supported availability on prescription, with the preferred access model involving trained GPs prescribing independently of specialists. Support for use of medicinal cannabis was condition-specific, with strong support for use in cancer pain, palliative care and epilepsy, and much lower support for use in depression and anxiety.ConclusionsThe majority of GPs are supportive or neutral with regards to medicinal cannabis use. Our results highlight the need for improved training of GPs around medicinal cannabis, and the discrepancy between GP-preferred models of access and the current specialist-led models.
ObjectivesTo describe and quantify disclosed payments from the pharmaceutical industry to the healthcare sector, and to examine the impact of the 2015 changes to Australia’s self-regulated system of ...transparency.DesignObservational database study.SettingAustralia.ParticipantsPublicly available reports submitted by members of Australian pharmaceutical industry trade organisations, Medicines Australia and the Generic and Biosimilar Medicines Association (GBMA) (October 2011–December 2017).ExposureChanges to transparency reporting requirements with the updates of pharmaceutical industry Codes of Conduct in 2015.Main outcome measuresElements of healthcare sector spending that members of industry organisations are required to publicly disclose; cumulative amount of disclosed spending (monthly average) in the year prior to and following the revision.ResultsThere was a 34.1% reduction in disclosed spending from Medicines Australia member companies in the year after the 2015 changes to the Code of Conduct were introduced ($A89 658 566 in the preceding year, October 2014–September 2015; $A59 052 551 in the following year). The new Code allowed for reduced reporting of spending on food and beverages at events and for sponsored healthcare professionals. However, there was enhanced transparency around identification of individual health professionals receiving payments. GBMA member reporting totalled $A2 580 402 in the year prior to the revision, then ceased.ConclusionsThis study shows the limitations of a self-regulatory system around industry disclosure of spending. We advocate for robust regulatory systems, such as legislation, to promote mandatory long-lasting public transparency.
The Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme (PBS) is Australia's national drug subsidy program. This paper provides a practical guide to researchers using PBS data to examine prescribed medicine use.
Excerpts ...of the PBS data collection are available in a variety of formats. We describe the core components of four publicly available extracts (the Australian Statistics on Medicines, PBS statistics online, section 85 extract, under co-payment extract). We also detail common analytical challenges and key issues regarding the interpretation of utilisation using the PBS collection and its various extracts.
Research using routinely collected data is increasing internationally. PBS data are a valuable resource for Australian pharmacoepidemiological and pharmaceutical policy research. A detailed knowledge of the PBS, the nuances of data capture, and the extracts available for research purposes are necessary to ensure robust methodology, interpretation, and translation of study findings into policy and practice.
Objective:
Longitudinal trends in the dispensing of antidepressant, antipsychotic and ADHD medications from 2009–2012 were examined according to age and gender of patient and prescriber speciality. ...Of particular interest were changing trends in the prescription of psychotropic medications to children, adolescents and young adults.
Method:
Dispensing data for government-subsidised antidepressant, antipsychotic and ADHD medications were obtained from the database maintained by the Department of Human Services. Results were expressed in terms of number of prescriptions dispensed.
Results:
Over the four- year study period, the dispensing of antidepressants, antipsychotics and ADHD medications showed overall increases of 16.1%, 22.7% and 26.1% respectively. The most rapid percentage increases in antidepressant and antipsychotic dispensing occurred in children aged 10–14 (35.5% and 49.1% respectively), while ADHD medication dispensing rose most rapidly in those aged 20–24 (70.9%). Dispensing to males was more common during childhood for all investigated classes while two-thirds of adult antidepressant prescribing was to female patients. The most commonly prescribed antidepressants varied by age and were as follows: fluoxetine (3–19 year olds), desvenlafaxine (20–24 years) and venlafaxine (>25 years). Risperidone was the most common antipsychotic dispensed to children under 15, quetiapine to adolescents and young adults (15–24 years), and olanzapine to adults. Methylphenidate was the most common ADHD medication in those aged under 25, and dexamphetamine the most common in adults. Most antidepressants and antipsychotics were prescribed by GPs (89.9% and 70.6% respectively), while the majority of ADHD medications were prescribed by paediatricians (59.1%).
Conclusions:
Dispensing of psychotropic medications increased markedly from 2009 to 2012, with notable age-specific trends. General adherence to treatment guidelines is apparent, yet concerns exist regarding rapid increases in serotonin noradrenaline reuptake inhibitor (SNRI) antidepressant prescribing, the likely overmedication of persons with mild psychological distress, and the increasing use of powerful psychotropic medications in younger populations despite uncertain risk–benefit profiles.
ObjectivesTo describe the nature, frequency and content of non-vitamin K oral anticoagulant (NOAC)-related events for healthcare professionals sponsored by the manufacturers of the NOACs in ...Australia. A secondary objective is to compare these data to the rate of dispensing of the NOACs in Australia.Design and settingThis cross-sectional study examined consolidated data from publicly available Australian pharmaceutical industry transparency reports from October 2011 to September 2015 on NOAC-related educational events. Data from April 2011 to June 2016 on NOAC dispensing, subsidised under Australia’s Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme (PBS), were obtained from the Department of Health and the Department of Human Services.Main outcome measuresCharacteristics of NOAC-related educational events including costs (in Australian dollars, $A), numbers of events, information on healthcare professional attendees and content of events; and NOAC dispensing rates.ResultsDuring the study period, there were 2797 NOAC-related events, costing manufacturers a total of $A10 578 745. Total expenditure for meals and beverages at all events was $A4 238 962. Events were predominantly attended by general practitioners (42%, 1174/2797), cardiologists (35%, 977/2797) and haematologists (23%, 635/2797). About 48% (1347/2797) of events were held in non-clinical settings, mainly restaurants, bars and cafes. Around 55% (1551/2797) of events consisted of either conferences, meetings or seminars. The analysis of the content presented at two events detected promotion of NOACs for unapproved indications, an emphasis on a favourable benefit/harm profile, and that all speakers had close ties with the manufacturers of the NOACs. Following PBS listings relevant to each NOAC, the numbers of events related to that NOAC and the prescribing of that NOAC increased.ConclusionsOur findings suggest that the substantial investment in NOAC-related events made by four pharmaceutical companies had a promotional purpose. Healthcare professionals should seek independent information on newly subsidised medicines from, for example, government agencies or drug bulletins.
Aims
One tool for protecting quality use of medicines in hospitals is a drug and therapeutics committee (DTC) that oversees medicines availability. Pharmaceutical industry marketing to prescribers is ...associated with less appropriate prescribing and increased costs. There is little data on decision‐making practices of DTCs so it is unknown whether or how they might be vulnerable to pharmaceutical industry influence. This project explores DTC decision‐making with a focus on how pharmaceutical industry influence on access and use of medicines is identified and managed.
Methods
We used a qualitative methodology with individual interviews of 29 participants who were current or recent members of public hospital DTCs across New South Wales, Australia. Participants included medical, pharmacy and nursing staff and 1 citizen. Committees were linked to specific hospitals or regions, and some were affiliated with paediatric, neonatal, rural or mental health services.
Results
Drug committee processes for oversight of medicines in public hospitals are vulnerable to pharmaceutical industry influence at several points. Applications for formulary additions are sometimes initiated and completed by company representatives. Conflict of interest disclosures among applicants and committee members may be incomplete. In some institutions, medicines are available from pharmaceutical companies without committee review, including through free samples and industry‐supported medicines access programmes. Participants noticed the presence and impact of pharmaceutical company marketing activities to local clinicians, resulting in increased prescriber demand for products.
Conclusion
Improved DTC practices and review of hospital policies concerning pharmaceutical marketing activities might preserve the independence of evidence‐based decision‐making for safe, cost‐effective prescribing.
PDF
