Adherence to coprescribing of laxatives with opioids and associated characteristics in general practices in the Netherlands.

BACKGROUND: Guidelines recommend to prescribe a laxative with an opioid to prevent constipation. We aimed to determine the adherence by general practitioners (GPs) to this recommendation and to explore which GP- and patient related factors were associated with it from the perspective of the GP.  METHODS: We conducted an observational study using GPs' prescription data from the Nivel Primary Care Database combined with a questionnaire asking for reasons of non-adherence. The proportion of first opioid prescriptions prescribed together with a laxative was determined as primary outcome. Possible explanatory factors such as the quality of registration, the level of collaboration with the pharmacy, familiarity with the recommendation and use of a clinical decision support system were explored, as were the self-reported reasons for non-adherence (classified as either GP-related or patient-related). We assessed the association of factors with the primary outcome using univariable multilevel logistic regression analysis. RESULTS: The recommendation was measured in 195 general practices. The median proportion of first opioid prescriptions prescribed together with a laxative in these practices was 54% (practice range 18-88%). None of the determinants was consistently associated with the primary outcome. GPs from 211 practices filled out the questionnaire and the most frequently mentioned reason not to prescribe a laxative was that the patient has laxatives in stock, followed by that the patient doesn't want a laxative; both were patient-related factors. CONCLUSION: There was room for improvement in following the guideline on laxative prescribing in opioid use. A main reason seemed to be that the patient refuses a laxative. Improvement measures should therefore focus on communication between GPs and patients on the relevance of co-using a laxative with opioids. Future studies need to establish the effect of such improvement measures, and determine whether reasons for non-adherence to the guideline changed over time.

Prevalence and incidence rate of hospital admissions related to medication between 2008 and 2013 in The Netherlands.

PURPOSE: In 2009 a Dutch guideline was published containing recommendations to reduce Hospital Admissions Related to Medications (HARMs). This study aims to examine time-trends of HARMs and their potential preventability between 2008 and 2013 in The Netherlands. METHODS: A retrospective prevalence study was conducted using the Dutch PHARMO Database Network. A semi-automated pre-selection was used to make a crude identification of possible HARMs of which four samples were selected. These were independently assessed with respect to causality and potential preventability by a physician and pharmacist. The results were stratified by age into 18-64 years and 65 years and older. For these groups the net prevalences and incidence rates of HARMs and potentially preventable HARMs were calculated for the years 2008, 2009, 2011 and 2013. RESULTS: Four samples of 467 (2008), 447 (2009), 446 (2011) and 408 (2013) admissions were assessed. The net prevalence of HARMs in the 18-64 years group was approximately four times smaller compared to the older group with a mean prevalence of 2.7% (95% confidence interval [CI]:2.4%-3.0%) and 10.2% (95%CI: 9.7%-10.7%) respectively. The potential preventability was 25.1% (18.4%-31.8%) and 48.3% (95%CI: 44.8%-51.8%), respectively. The prevalence of HARMs in both groups did not change significantly between 2008 and 2013 with 2.4% (95%CI: 1.9%-3.0%) and 10.0% (95%CI: 9.0%-11.0%) in 2008 and 3.1% (2.7%-3.5%) and 10.4% (95%CI: 9.4%-11.4%) in 2013, respectively. CONCLUSION: Despite efforts to reduce HARMs, the prevalence did not decrease over time. Additional measures are therefore necessary, especially in the elderly population.