Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Comparative Analysis of Instrumental Variables on the Assignment of Buprenorphine/Naloxone or Methadone for the Treatment of Opioid Use Disorder.
Homayra, Fahmida; Enns, Benjamin; Min, Jeong Eun; Kurz, Megan; Bach, Paxton; Bruneau, Julie; Greenland, Sander; Gustafson, Paul; Karim, Mohammad Ehsanul; Korthuis, P Todd; Loughin, Thomas; MacLure, Malcolm; McCandless, Lawrence; Platt, Robert William; Schnepel, Kevin; Shigeoka, Hitoshi; Siebert, Uwe; Socias, Eugenia; Wood, Evan; Nosyk, Bohdan.
Affiliation
  • Homayra F; From the Centre for Health Evaluation and Outcome Sciences, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.
  • Enns B; From the Centre for Health Evaluation and Outcome Sciences, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.
  • Min JE; From the Centre for Health Evaluation and Outcome Sciences, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.
  • Kurz M; From the Centre for Health Evaluation and Outcome Sciences, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.
  • Bach P; British Columbia Centre on Substance Use, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.
  • Bruneau J; Department of Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.
  • Greenland S; Department of Family Medicine and Emergency Medicine, Université de Montréal, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
  • Gustafson P; Department of Epidemiology, University of California, Los Angeles, CA.
  • Karim ME; Department of Statistics, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.
  • Korthuis PT; From the Centre for Health Evaluation and Outcome Sciences, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.
  • Loughin T; School of Population and Public Health, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.
  • MacLure M; Addiction Medicine Section, Department of Medicine, School of Medicine, Oregon Health and Science University, Portland, OR.
  • McCandless L; Department of Statistics and Actuarial Sciences, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, British Columbia, Canada.
  • Platt RW; Department of Anesthesiology, Pharmacology & Therapeutics, Faculty of Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.
  • Schnepel K; Faculty of Health Sciences, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, British Columbia, Canada.
  • Shigeoka H; Department of Epidemiology, Biostatistics and Occupational Health, McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
  • Siebert U; Department of Economics, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, British Columbia, Canada.
  • Socias E; Department of Economics, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, British Columbia, Canada.
  • Wood E; Department of Public Health, Health Services Research, and Health Technology Assessment, UMIT-University for Health Sciences, Medical Informatics, and Technology, Hall in Tirol, Austria.
  • Nosyk B; Department of Health Policy and Management, Center for Health Decision Science, Harvard T. H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, MA.
Epidemiology ; 35(2): 218-231, 2024 Mar 01.
Article in En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38290142
ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND:

Instrumental variable (IV) analysis provides an alternative set of identification assumptions in the presence of uncontrolled confounding when attempting to estimate causal effects. Our objective was to evaluate the suitability of measures of prescriber preference and calendar time as potential IVs to evaluate the comparative effectiveness of buprenorphine/naloxone versus methadone for treatment of opioid use disorder (OUD).

METHODS:

Using linked population-level health administrative data, we constructed five IVs prescribing preference at the individual, facility, and region levels (continuous and categorical variables), calendar time, and a binary prescriber's preference IV in analyzing the treatment assignment-treatment discontinuation association using both incident-user and prevalent-new-user designs. Using published guidelines, we assessed and compared each IV according to the four assumptions for IVs, employing both empirical assessment and content expertise. We evaluated the robustness of results using sensitivity analyses.

RESULTS:

The study sample included 35,904 incident users (43.3% on buprenorphine/naloxone) initiated on opioid agonist treatment by 1585 prescribers during the study period. While all candidate IVs were strong (A1) according to conventional criteria, by expert opinion, we found no evidence against assumptions of exclusion (A2), independence (A3), monotonicity (A4a), and homogeneity (A4b) for prescribing preference-based IV. Some criteria were violated for the calendar time-based IV. We determined that preference in provider-level prescribing, measured on a continuous scale, was the most suitable IV for comparative effectiveness of buprenorphine/naloxone and methadone for the treatment of OUD.

CONCLUSIONS:

Our results suggest that prescriber's preference measures are suitable IVs in comparative effectiveness studies of treatment for OUD.
Subject(s)

Full text: 1 Collection: 01-internacional Database: MEDLINE Main subject: Methadone / Opioid-Related Disorders Type of study: Guideline / Prognostic_studies Aspects: Patient_preference Limits: Humans Language: En Journal: Epidemiology Journal subject: EPIDEMIOLOGIA Year: 2024 Document type: Article Affiliation country: Canada

Full text: 1 Collection: 01-internacional Database: MEDLINE Main subject: Methadone / Opioid-Related Disorders Type of study: Guideline / Prognostic_studies Aspects: Patient_preference Limits: Humans Language: En Journal: Epidemiology Journal subject: EPIDEMIOLOGIA Year: 2024 Document type: Article Affiliation country: Canada