How Patient-Centred Are Inhaler Device Choices? A Survey of Canadian Prescribers.

Background: The choice of inhaler device type can play a crucial role in managing asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). With various devices available, differences in choice and application may lead to confusion for both prescribers and patients. Furthermore, improper use of a device may lead to suboptimal or inadequate treatment. Objectives: The primary objective was to identify factors that prescribers consider when selecting an inhaler device for a patient. The secondary objective was to evaluate the rankings of these factors, including identification of which factors had greater importance and frequency for prescribers' choice of inhaler device for patients. Methods: A 10-question online survey was developed and distributed in late 2021 to prescribers (physicians, nurse practitioners, and pharmacists) in western Canada in an outpatient setting. Prescribers were asked to use their own words to describe the factors they considered important and were then asked to rank the stated factors in order of importance for 2 scenarios: an 83-year-old woman with COPD and a 21-year-old man with asthma. The results were examined qualitatively and quantitatively. Recurring themes were identified, and each response was categorized on the basis of its corresponding theme. Results: In all, 82 respondents completed the survey (yielding a total of 164 responses across the 2 scenarios). Overall, prescriber experience (84/164, 51%), cost (84/164, 51%), patient ease of use (59/164, 36%), and other patient considerations (49/164, 30%) were the factors most frequently mentioned. The prescriber's experience was most often mentioned as a factor for scenario 1 (COPD), whereas cost was most often mentioned for scenario 2 (asthma). In both scenarios, prescriber experience was the highest-ranked factor. Conclusions: When determining the appropriate type of inhaler device, respondents frequently prioritized their own experience, as well as cost and ease of use. However, many respondents ranked prescriber experience higher than all other factors.

Contexte: Le choix du type d'inhalateur peut jouer un rôle crucial dans la gestion de l'asthme et de la maladie pulmonaire obstructive chronique (MPOC). Étant donné la diversité des dispositifs disponibles, les différences de choix et d'application peuvent prêter à confusion tant pour les prescripteurs que pour les patients. De plus, la mauvaise utilisation d'un appareil peut conduire à un traitement sous-optimal ou inadéquat. Objectifs: L'objectif principal consistait à identifier les facteurs pris en compte par les prescripteurs lors de la sélection de l'inhalateur pour un patient. L'objectif secondaire consistait à évaluer le classement de ces facteurs, notamment l'identification des facteurs les plus importants et des inhalateurs les plus fréquemment choisis par les prescripteurs. Méthodes: Un sondage en ligne de 10 questions a été préparé et distribué fin 2021 aux prescripteurs (médecins, infirmières praticiennes et pharmaciens) de l'ouest du Canada en milieu ambulatoire. Les prescripteurs devaient, dans leurs propres mots, décrire les facteurs qui leur semblaient importants avant de les classer par ordre d'importance dans le cadre de deux scénarios : une femme de 83 ans atteinte de MPOC et un homme de 21 ans avec de l'asthme. Les résultats ont fait l'objet d'un examen qualitatif et quantitatif. Des thèmes récurrents ont été identifiés et chaque réponse a été catégorisée en fonction du thème correspondant. Résultats: Au total, 82 répondants ont répondu au sondage (total de 164 réponses dans les 2 scénarios). Dans l'ensemble, l'expérience du prescripteur (84/164, 51 %), le coût (84/164, 51 %), la facilité d'utilisation pour le patient (59/164, 36 %) et d'autres considérations en rapport avec le patient (49/164, 30 %) étaient les facteurs déterminants les plus fréquemment mentionnés. Pour le scénario 1 (MPOC), l'expérience du prescripteur était le facteur le plus souvent mentionné, alors que le coût l'était pour le scénario 2 (asthme). Dans les deux scénarios, l'expérience du prescripteur était le facteur le plus important. Conclusions: Lors de la détermination du type d'inhalateur approprié, les répondants ont souvent donné la priorité à leur expérience personnelle, ainsi qu'au coût et à la facilité d'utilisation. Cependant, de nombreux répondants ont accordé une note plus élevée à l'expérience du prescripteur qu'à d'autres facteurs.

Patient values and preferences regarding communicating risk versus benefit of benzodiazepine initiation: A cross-sectional survey study.

Background and Aims: Communicating information about the risks and benefits of benzodiazepines so that it is meaningful to the patient has not been previously described. This study aims to determine patient preferences regarding information received before initiating a benzodiazepine. Methods: An online survey was distributed through social media and advertisements to Canadians ≥18 years old over a 6-month period (May-Oct 2022) to collect participant's rating of importance of statements and factors about the risk and benefits of benzodiazepines before initiating treatment using a 10-point Likert-type scale. Treatment preferences based on efficacy and risk information were also elicited. The survey was developed and pilot-tested in collaboration with an advisory committee of individuals with lived and living experience with benzodiazepine use. Results: Thirty-seven participants responded to the survey (mean age 30 years old, 81.1% identified as female). The majority of respondents had a history of anxiety (83.8%) or insomnia (32.4%), and 10 (27.0%) respondents had used a benzodiazepine. Patient counseling related to withdrawal symptoms of benzodiazepines, risk of harm in combination with other sedating agents, risk of physical and psychological dependence, and risk of effects on cognition were rated high in the importance of receiving this information before starting a benzodiazepine relative to efficacy endpoints, such as improvement in sleep parameters. When provided with information about the chance of efficacy and risk of harm, 100% would have selected cognitive behavioral therapy as the best treatment option. The most frequently reported source of medication information where patients have sought information was from the internet (25.0%), followed by doctors (21.9%) and pharmacists (18.8%). Conclusions: This study identified patient important factors and statements viewed as important to communicate before initiating a benzodiazepine. The findings of this survey study will help inform decision-making when considering treatment options for managing anxiety or insomnia.

Actualisation 2023 des lignes directrices de pratique clinique pour la prise en charge de l'ostéoporose et la prévention des fractures au Canada.

CONTEXTE: Au Canada, plus de 2 millions de personnes vivent avec l'ostéoporose, une maladie qui accroît le risque de fracture, ce qui fait augmenter la morbidité et la mortalité, et entraîne une perte de qualité de vie et d'autonomie. La présente actualisation des lignes directrices vise à accompagner les professionnelles et professionnels de la santé au Canada dans la prestation de soins visant à optimiser la santé osseuse et à prévenir les fractures chez les femmes ménopausées et les hommes de 50 ans et plus. MÉTHODES: Le présent document fournit une actualisation des lignes directrices de pratique clinique de 2010 d'Ostéoporose Canada sur le diagnostic et la prise en charge de l'ostéoporose au pays. Nous avons utilisé l'approche GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) et effectué l'assurance de la qualité conformément aux normes de qualité et de présentation des rapports de la grille AGREE II (Appraisal of Guidelines for Research & Evaluation). Les médecins de premier recours et les patientes et patients partenaires ont été représentés à tous les niveaux des comités et des groupes ayant participé à l'élaboration des lignes directrices, et ont participé à toutes les étapes du processus pour garantir la pertinence des informations pour les futurs utilisateurs et utilisatrices. Le processus de gestion des intérêts concurrents a été entamé avant l'élaboration des lignes directrices et s'est poursuivi sur toute sa durée, selon les principes du Réseau international en matière de lignes directrices. Dans la formulation des recommandations, nous avons tenu compte des avantages et des risques, des valeurs et préférences de la patientèle, des ressources, de l'équité, de l'acceptabilité et de la faisabilité; la force de chacune des recommandations a été déterminée en fonction du cadre GRADE. RECOMMANDATIONS: Les 25 recommandations et les 10 énoncés de bonne pratique sont répartis en sections : activité physique, alimentation, évaluation du risque de fracture, instauration du traitement, interventions pharmacologiques, durée et séquence du traitement, et monitorage. La prise en charge de l'ostéoporose devrait se fonder sur le risque de fracture, établi au moyen d'une évaluation clinique réalisée avec un outil d'évaluation du risque de fracture validé. L'activité physique, l'alimentation et la pharmacothérapie sont des éléments essentiels à la stratégie de prévention des fractures, qui devraient être personnalisés. INTERPRÉTATION: Les présentes lignes directrices ont pour but d'outiller les professionnelles et professionnels de la santé et la patientèle afin qu'ensemble ils puissent parler de l'importance de la santé osseuse et du risque de fracture tout au long de la vie adulte avancée. La détection et la prise en charge efficace de la fragilité osseuse peuvent contribuer à réduire les fractures et à préserver la mobilité, l'autonomie et la qualité de vie.

Clinical practice guideline for management of osteoporosis and fracture prevention in Canada: 2023 update.

BACKGROUND: In Canada, more than 2 million people live with osteoporosis, a disease that increases the risk for fractures, which result in excess mortality and morbidity, decreased quality of life and loss of autonomy. This guideline update is intended to assist Canadian health care professionals in the delivery of care to optimize skeletal health and prevent fractures in postmenopausal females and in males aged 50 years and older. METHODS: This guideline is an update of the 2010 Osteoporosis Canada clinical practice guideline on the diagnosis and management of osteoporosis in Canada. We followed the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) framework and quality assurance as per Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE II) quality and reporting standards. Primary care physicians and patient partners were represented at all levels of the guideline committees and groups, and participated throughout the entire process to ensure relevance to target users. The process for managing competing interests was developed before and continued throughout the guideline development, informed by the Guideline International Network principles. We considered benefits and harms, patient values and preferences, resources, equity, acceptability and feasibility when developing recommendations; the strength of each recommendation was assigned according to the GRADE framework. RECOMMENDATIONS: The 25 recommendations and 10 good practice statements are grouped under the sections of exercise, nutrition, fracture risk assessment and treatment initiation, pharmacologic interventions, duration and sequence of therapy, and monitoring. The management of osteoporosis should be guided by the patient's risk of fracture, based on clinical assessment and using a validated fracture risk assessment tool. Exercise, nutrition and pharmacotherapy are key elements of the management strategy for fracture prevention and should be individualized. INTERPRETATION: The aim of this guideline is to empower health care professionals and patients to have meaningful discussions on the importance of skeletal health and fracture risk throughout older adulthood. Identification and appropriate management of skeletal fragility can reduce fractures, and preserve mobility, autonomy and quality of life.

PEER simplified lipid guideline 2023 update: Prevention and management of cardiovascular disease in primary care.

OBJECTIVE: To update the 2015 clinical practice guideline and provide a simplified approach to lipid management in the prevention of cardiovascular disease (CVD) for primary care. METHODS: Following the Institute of Medicine's Clinical Practice Guidelines We Can Trust, a multidisciplinary, pan-Canadian guideline panel was formed. This panel was represented by primary care providers, free from conflicts of interest with industry, and included the patient perspective. A separate scientific evidence team performed evidence reviews on statins, ezetimibe, proprotein convertase subtilisin-kexin type 9 inhibitors, fibrates, bile acid sequestrants, niacin, and omega-3 supplements (docosahexaenoic acid with eicosapentaenoic acid [EPA] or EPA ethyl ester alone [icosapent]), as well as on 11 supplemental questions. Recommendations were finalized by the guideline panel through use of the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation methodology. RECOMMENDATIONS: All recommendations are presented in a patient-centred manner designed with the needs of family physicians and other primary care providers in mind. Many recommendations are similar to those published in 2015. Statins remain first-line therapy for both primary and secondary CVD prevention, and the Mediterranean diet and physical activity are recommended to reduce cardiovascular risk (primary and secondary prevention). The guideline panel recommended against using lipoprotein a, apolipoprotein B, or coronary artery calcium levels when assessing cardiovascular risk, and recommended against targeting specific lipid levels. The team also reviewed new evidence pertaining to omega-3 fatty acids (including EPA ethyl ester [icosapent]) and proprotein convertase subtilisin-kexin type 9 inhibitors, and outlined when to engage in informed shared decision making with patients on interventions to lower cardiovascular risk. CONCLUSION: These updated evidence-based guidelines provide a simplified approach to lipid management for the prevention and management of CVD. These guidelines were created by and for primary health care professionals and their patients.

Lipid-lowering therapies for cardiovascular disease prevention and management in primary care: PEER umbrella systematic review of systematic reviews.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the benefits and harms of lipid-lowering therapies used to prevent or manage cardiovascular disease including bile acid sequestrants (BAS), ezetimibe, fibrates, niacin, omega-3 supplements, proprotein convertase subtilisin-kexin type 9 (PCSK9) inhibitors, and statins. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and a grey literature search. STUDY SELECTION: Systematic reviews of randomized controlled trials published between January 2017 and March 2022 looking at statins, ezetimibe, PCSK9 inhibitors, fibrates, BAS, niacin, and omega-3 supplements for preventing cardiovascular outcomes were selected. Outcomes of interest included major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), cardiovascular mortality, all-cause mortality, and adverse events. SYNTHESIS: A total of 76 systematic reviews were included. Four randomized controlled trials were also included for BAS because no efficacy systematic review was identified. Statins significantly reduced MACE (6 systematic reviews; median risk ratio [RR]=0.74; interquartile range [IQR]=0.71 to 0.76), cardiovascular mortality (7 systematic reviews; median RR=0.85, IQR=0.83 to 0.86), and all-cause mortality (8 systematic reviews; median RR=0.91, IQR=0.88 to 0.92). Major adverse cardiovascular events were also significantly reduced by ezetimibe (3 systematic reviews; median RR=0.93, IQR=0.93 to 0.94), PCSK9 inhibitors (14 systematic reviews; median RR=0.84, IQR=0.83 to 0.87), and fibrates (2 systematic reviews; mean RR=0.86), but these interventions had no effect on cardiovascular or all-cause mortality. Fibrates had no effect on any cardiovascular outcomes when added to a statin. Omega-3 combination supplements had no effect on MACE or all-cause mortality but significantly reduced cardiovascular mortality (5 systematic reviews; median RR=0.93, IQR=0.93 to 0.94). Eicosapentaenoic acid ethyl ester alone significantly reduced MACE (1 systematic review, RR=0.78) and cardiovascular mortality (2 systematic reviews; RRs of 0.82 and 0.82). In primary cardiovascular prevention, only statins showed consistent benefits on MACE (6 systematic reviews; median RR=0.75, IQR=0.73 to 0.78), cardiovascularall-cause mortality (7 systematic reviews, median RR=0.83, IQR=0.81 to 0.90), and all-cause mortality (8 systematic reviews; median RR=0.91, IQR=0.87 to 0.91). CONCLUSION: Statins have the most consistent evidence for the prevention of cardiovascular complications with a relative risk reduction of about 25% for MACE and 10% to 15% for mortality. The addition of ezetimibe, a PCSK9 inhibitor, or eicosapentaenoic acid ethyl ester to a statin provides additional MACE risk reduction but has no effect on all-cause mortality.

Lignes directrices simplifiées de PEER sur les lipides : actualisation 2023: Prévention et prise en charge des maladies cardiovasculaires en soins primaires.

OBJECTIF: Actualiser le guide de pratique clinique de 2015 et présenter une approche simplifiée de la prise en charge des lipides dans la prévention des maladies cardiovasculaires (MCV) en première ligne. MÉTHODES: Conformément aux recommandations de l'Institute of Medicine dans Clinical Practice Guidelines We Can Trust, un panel pancanadien d'experts multidisciplinaires en lignes directrices a été formé. Ce panel était représentatif des cliniciens en soins primaires, libre de tout conflit d'intérêts avec l'industrie, et il tenait compte des points de vue des patients. Une équipe distincte, responsable des données probantes scientifiques, a passé en revue l'information sur les statines, l'ézétimibe, les inhibiteurs de la proprotéine convertase subtilisine-kexine de type 9, les fibrates, les chélateurs des acides biliaires, la niacine et les suppléments d'omega-3 (acide docosahexaénoïque avec acide eicosapentaénoïque [EPA] ou ester éthylique de l'EPA seul [icosapent]), ainsi que sur la réponse à 11 questions supplémentaires. Le panel des lignes directrices a finalisé les recommandations en utilisant la méthodologie GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation). RECOMMANDATIONS: Toutes les recommandations sont présentées de manière à être centrées sur le patient et conçues en ayant à l'esprit les besoins des médecins de famille et des autres cliniciens des soins primaires. De nombreuses recommandations sont semblables à celles publiées en 2015. Les statines demeurent le traitement de première intention pour la prévention tant primaire que secondaire des MCV, et le régime méditerranéen et l'activité physique sont recommandés pour réduire le risque cardiovasculaire (en prévention primaire et secondaire). Le panel des lignes directrices a recommandé de ne pas utiliser le dosage des lipoprotéines a, des apolipoprotéines B ou le score calcique coronarien (SCC) dans l'évaluation du risque cardiovasculaire, et de ne pas cibler de seuils précis de taux lipidiques. L'équipe a aussi passé en revue de nouvelles données concernant les acides gras omega-3 (y compris l'ester éthylique d'EAP [icosapent]) et les inhibiteurs de la proprotéine convertase subtilisine-kexine de type 9, et a précisé les moments où il convient de procéder à une prise de décision partagée avec les patients sur les interventions pour diminuer le risque cardiovasculaire. CONCLUSION: Ces lignes directrices actualisées et fondées sur des données probantes présentent une approche simplifiée de la prise en charge des lipides pour la prévention et le traitement des MCV. Ce guide de pratique clinique a été conçu par et pour des professionnels de la santé en soins primaires et leurs patients.

Adherence to Psychotropic Medication Before and During COVID-19: A Population-Wide Retrospective Observational Study.

BACKGROUND: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic and associated public health measures have shifted the way people access health care. We aimed to study the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on psychotropic medication adherence. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study using administrative data from the Manitoba Centre for Health Policy Manitoba Population Research Data Repository was conducted. Outpatients who received at least 1 prescription for an antidepressant, antipsychotic, anxiolytic/sedative-hypnotic, cannabinoid, lithium, or stimulants from 2015 to 2020 in Manitoba, Canada, were included. Adherence was measured using the proportion of individuals with a mean possession ratio of ≥0.8 over each quarter. Each quarter of 2020 after COVID-19-related health measures were implemented was compared with the expected trend using autoregression models for time series data plus indicator variables. Odds ratio of drug discontinuation among those previously adherent in 2020 was compared with each respective quarter of 2019. RESULTS: There were 1,394,885 individuals in the study population in the first quarter of 2020 (mean [SD] age, 38.9 [23.4] years; 50.3% female), with 36.1% having a psychiatric diagnosis in the preceding 5 years. Compared with the expected trend, increases in the proportions of individuals adherent to antidepressants and stimulants were observed in the fourth quarter (October-December) of 2020 (both P < 0.001). Increases in the proportions of individuals with anxiolytic and cannabinoid adherence were observed in the third quarter (July-September) of 2020 (both P < 0.05), whereas a decrease was seen with stimulants in the same quarter ( P < 0.0001). No significant changes were observed for antipsychotics. All drug classes except lithium had decreases in drug discontinuation in previously adherent patients during the pandemic compared with 2019. CONCLUSIONS: Improved adherence to most psychotropic medications in the 9 months after public health restrictions were enacted was observed. Patients who were already adherent to their psychotropic medications were less likely to discontinue them during the pandemic.

Top studies of 2022 relevant to primary care: From the PEER team.

OBJECTIVE: To summarize 10 high-quality medical articles published in 2022 that are relevant to primary care physicians. SELECTING THE EVIDENCE: Routine surveillance of tables of contents in relevant medical journals and EvidenceAlerts was conducted by the PEER (Patients, Experience, Evidence, Research) team, a group of primary care health care professionals with an interest in evidence-based medicine. Articles were selected and ranked based on relevance to practice. MAIN MESSAGE: Published articles from 2022 most likely to influence primary care practice examined the following subjects: reducing dietary sodium for heart failure; timing of blood pressure medications to reduce cardiovascular outcomes; adding as-needed corticosteroids to rescue puffers for asthma exacerbations; influenza vaccination after myocardial infarction; comparing various medications for diabetes management; tirzepatide for weight loss; low FODMAP diet for irritable bowel syndrome; prune juice for constipation; impact of regular acetaminophen use on patients with hypertension; and time required to care for patients in primary care. Two "honourable mention" studies are also summarized. CONCLUSION: Research published in 2022 yielded several high-quality articles on various conditions relevant to primary care, including hypertension, heart failure, asthma, and diabetes.

Preterm birth and stillbirth rates associated with socioeconomic disparities during COVID-19 pandemic: a population-based cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: Conflicting evidence exists on the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic restrictions on preterm birth (PTB) and stillbirth rates. We aimed to evaluate changes in PTB and stillbirth rates before and during the pandemic period and assess the potential effect modification of socioeconomic status (SES). METHODS: Using the linked administrative health databases from Manitoba, Canada, we conducted a cross-sectional study among all pregnant women, comparing 3.5 years pre-pandemic (1 October 2016 to 29 February 2020) to the first year of the pandemic (1 March 2020 to 31 March 2021). We used generalised linear models to assess the quarterly rates of PTB (<37 weeks) and stillbirths. We calculated the predicted trends based on pre-pandemic period data. Finally, we evaluated the PTB and stillbirth rates among lower and higher SES pregnant women (average annual household income) using subgroup analysis and interaction models. RESULTS: We examined 70 931 pregnancies in Manitoba during the study period. The risk of PTB increased by 7.7% (95%CI 1.01 to 1.13) and stillbirths by 33% (95% CI 1.08 to 1.64) during the pandemic period. Following COVID-19 restrictions implemented in March 2020, there were increases in the quarterly rates of both PTB (immediate increase (ß2)=1.37; p=0.0247) and stillbirths (immediate increase (ß2)=0.12; p=0.4434). Among the lower income groups, the pandemic restrictions resulted in an immediate relative increase in PTB and stillbirth rates by 20.12% (immediate increase (ß2)=3.17; p=0.0057) and 27.19% (immediate increase (ß2)=0.48; p=0.0852). However, over the pandemic, the overall PTB rate significantly decreased as a rebound effect by 0.85% per quarter (p=0.0004), whereas the overall stillbirth rate did not decrease significantly (slope decrease (ß3) =-0.01; p=0.8296) compared with the pre-pandemic period. The quarterly rates during the pandemic among the higher income group decreased by 0.39% (p=0.1296) for PTB and increased by 0.07% (p=0.1565) for stillbirth. We observed an effect modification by SES for PTB rates (p=0.047). CONCLUSION: While the onset of COVID-19 pandemic restrictions was not associated with significant effects on stillbirth rates, we observed an immediate and rebound effect on PTB rates. The impact of COVID-19 on preterm birth was dependent on SES, with higher influence on families with lower SES. Further studies are needed to detect future trend changes during pandemic waves after 2021 and assess potential underlying mechanisms.

Signal and Noise: Proton Pump Inhibitors and the Risk of Dementia?

The association between proton pump inhibitor (PPI) use and dementia remains controversial. This cohort study re-examines this issue, addressing shortcomings identified in previous publications using a population-based and a high-dimension propensity-score matched cohort to follow patients for up to 22 years. Cox regression models using baseline characteristics, a lag period, and time-varying variables were used to examine the risk of dementia by cumulative PPI exposure. High-dose PPI users (> 180 days of use) had significantly higher risk of dementia in crude Cox models. After adjustment for medical diagnoses and prescription drug use, these associations disappeared. Among high-dose users starting PPI therapy between 46 and 55 years old, the unadjusted hazard ratio (HR) was 1.55 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.14, 2.10); the adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) was 1.10 (95% CI 0.80, 1.51). For high-dose users starting therapy between 56 and 65 years, HR = 1.22 (95% CI1.03, 1.44); aHR = 0.99 (95% CI 0.83, 1.17). High-dose users between the ages of 66 and 75 years had no association with the risk of dementia. The use of lag models or time-varying parameters similarly found some association with dementia in crude, but not multivariable Cox models. Although high-dose PPI users were more likely to develop dementia, they were more likely to be diagnosed with dementia risk factors, such as diabetes and cardiovascular disease, which are risk factors for dementia. Controlling for these conditions using multivariable models or a propensity-score matched cohort eliminated this association.

Sex differences among users of NSAIDs and opioids during COVID-19 Pandemic.

BACKGROUND: Sex-based inequalities in healthcare have been exposed and amplified during the COVID-19 pandemic. However, few studies have reported sex differences in medication utilization and no studies have examined sex differences in prescribed non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and opioids utilization. AIM: To compare the utilization patterns of prescribed NSAIDs and opioids between males and females in Manitoba, Canada during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHOD: A cohort of incident and prevalent users of prescribed NSAIDs and opioids was created. Interrupted times series analysis using autoregressive models were used to evaluate the quarterly change in the prevalent and incident users before and after COVID-19 restrictions were applied (first quarter of 2020). RESULTS: COVID-19 restrictions were associated with a significant decrease in the utilization of prescribed NSAIDs and opioids in all users, followed by a revert to the pre-pandemic trends. Among female prevalent and incident NSAIDs users, there was a significant change in trend after COVID-19 restrictions were introduced (ß3 = 0.087 and 0.078, P = 0.023 and 0.028, respectively). However, there was non-significant change in trend among male prevalent and incident NSAIDs and opioids users during the pandemic. CONCLUSION: In this study, a significant sharp decline in the use of prescribed NSAIDs and opioids was shown in both sexes at the onset of the pandemic. However, a significant upward trend is observed in female NSAIDs users as restrictions began to be lifted.

Drug utilization patterns before and during COVID-19 pandemic in Manitoba, Canada: A population-based study.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has led the Canadian provincial governments to take unprecedented measures, including restrictions to healthcare services and pharmacists. Limited evidence exists on changes in prescription trends in Canada during the pandemic period. OBJECTIVES: To examine the trend of prescription medications' utilization before and during COVID-19, among incident and prevalent users in the general population. We examined 18 major classes of medications. METHODS: We used the administrative health databases from the province of Manitoba, Canada, to conduct a province-wide cross-sectional study. Incident and prevalent use was compared between two time periods; pre-COVID-19: July 2016-March 2020 and during COVID-19: April 2020-March 2021. Interrupted time series analysis using autoregressive models was used to quantify the change in level and slope in quarterly medication use among incident and prevalent users. RESULTS: The quarterly study population ranged from 1,353,485 to 1,411,630 Manitobans. The most common comorbidities were asthma (26.67%), hypertension (20.64%), and diabetes (8.31%). On average, the pandemic restrictions resulted in a 45.55% and 12.17% relative decline in the aggregated utilization of all drugs among both incident and prevalent users, respectively. Subclass analysis showed a 46.83%, 23.05%, and 30.98% relative drop among incident users of antibiotics, cardiovascular drugs and opioids use, respectively. We observed a significant slope increase during COVID-19 among the quarterly cardiovascular, antidiabetics, alpha-1 blockers, and statins incident users compared to the pre-COVID-19 period. We noted a significant decrease in level among NSAIDs, opioids, and antibiotic prevalent users, however, no significant changes in slope were observed. CONCLUSION: Our findings show a significant impact of COVID-19 measures on prescription trends in the general population. The observed decline among several medication classes was temporary. Further research is needed to monitor prescription trends and better understand if those changes were associated with increased health services and worsened outcomes.