Search

ObjectivesTo establish a prescription opioid registry protocol in a large health system and to describe algorithms to characterize individuals using prescription opioids, opioid use episodes, and concurrent use of sedative/hypnotics.Study designProtocol development and retrospective cohort study.MethodsUsing Kaiser Permanente Northern California (KPNC) electronic health record data, we selected patients using prescription opioids in 2011. Opioid and sedative/hypnotic fills, and physical and psychiatric comorbidity diagnoses, were extracted for years 2008 to 2014. Algorithms were developed to identify each patient's daily opioid and sedative/hypnotic use, and morphine daily-dose equivalent. Opioid episodes were classified as long-term, episodic, or acute. Logistic regression was used to predict characteristics associated with becoming a long-term opioid user.ResultsIn 2011, 18% of KPNC adult members filled at least 1 opioid prescription. Among those patients, 25% used opioids long term and their average duration of use was more than 4 years. Sedative/hypnotics were used by 76% of long-term users. Being older, white, living in a more deprived neighborhood, having a chronic pain diagnosis, and use of sedative/hypnotics were predictors of initiating long-term opioid use.ConclusionsThis study established a population-based opioid registry that is flexible and can be used to address important questions of prescription opioid use. It will be used in future studies to answer a broad range of other critical public health issues relating to prescription opioid use.

PurposeTo describe the design and baseline characteristics of participants in the Study of COmparative Treatments for REtinal Vein Occlusion 2 (SCORE2) and to compare with cohorts from other retinal vein occlusion trials.DesignPhase III prospective, multicenter, randomized clinical trial designed to assess whether intravitreal bevacizumab is noninferior to intravitreal aflibercept for treatment of decreased vision attributable to macular edema associated with central retinal vein occlusion (CRVO) or hemiretinal vein occlusion (HRVO).ParticipantsTotal of 362 participants: 307 with CRVO and 55 with HRVO.MethodsDemographic and study eye characteristics are summarized and compared between CRVO and HRVO study participants.Main outcome measuresBaseline ophthalmic characteristics, including visual acuity and retinal thickness, and medical history characteristics, including hypertension, diabetes mellitus, and coronary artery disease.ResultsThe mean age of participants was 69 years, 76% of participants were white, and 90% were non-Hispanic. There was a racial disparity with respect to disease type, with 38% of HRVO patients being black compared with 11% of CRVO patients (P value adjusted for multiple testing = 0.0001). This is similar to findings from the previous SCORE Study. Comorbidities included hypertension (77%), diabetes mellitus (31%), and coronary artery disease (15%). At baseline, mean visual acuity letter score was 50 (20/100) (range, 19-73 [20/400 to 20/40]), mean optical coherence tomography (OCT)-measured central subfield thickness was 678 μm (range, 300-1203 μm), and mean number of months from diagnosis of macular edema to randomization was 6 (range, 0-104 months). One hundred twenty (33%) SCORE2 participants had been treated previously with anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) therapy, with these participants having baseline visual acuity letter score and OCT-measured central subfield thickness similar to those without prior anti-VEGF treatment, but longer mean duration of macular edema before randomization (18 months vs. 1 month for those without prior anti-VEGF treatment; P < 0.0001).ConclusionsThe SCORE2 cohort is a heterogeneous population, including both CRVO and HRVO eyes and both treatment-naïve eyes and eyes treated previously with anti-VEGF, which will allow study results to have broad applicability to CRVO and HRVO patients receiving treatment for macular edema. Similarities of the baseline characteristics of the SCORE2 population to other CRVO trial cohorts will allow meaningful comparisons of outcome results across trials.

PurposeTo describe the design and baseline characteristics of participants in the Study of COmparative Treatments for REtinal Vein Occlusion 2 (SCORE2) and to compare with cohorts from other retinal vein occlusion trials.DesignPhase III prospective, multicenter, randomized clinical trial designed to assess whether intravitreal bevacizumab is noninferior to intravitreal aflibercept for treatment of decreased vision attributable to macular edema associated with central retinal vein occlusion (CRVO) or hemiretinal vein occlusion (HRVO).ParticipantsTotal of 362 participants: 307 with CRVO and 55 with HRVO.MethodsDemographic and study eye characteristics are summarized and compared between CRVO and HRVO study participants.Main outcome measuresBaseline ophthalmic characteristics, including visual acuity and retinal thickness, and medical history characteristics, including hypertension, diabetes mellitus, and coronary artery disease.ResultsThe mean age of participants was 69 years, 76% of participants were white, and 90% were non-Hispanic. There was a racial disparity with respect to disease type, with 38% of HRVO patients being black compared with 11% of CRVO patients (P value adjusted for multiple testing = 0.0001). This is similar to findings from the previous SCORE Study. Comorbidities included hypertension (77%), diabetes mellitus (31%), and coronary artery disease (15%). At baseline, mean visual acuity letter score was 50 (20/100) (range, 19-73 [20/400 to 20/40]), mean optical coherence tomography (OCT)-measured central subfield thickness was 678 μm (range, 300-1203 μm), and mean number of months from diagnosis of macular edema to randomization was 6 (range, 0-104 months). One hundred twenty (33%) SCORE2 participants had been treated previously with anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) therapy, with these participants having baseline visual acuity letter score and OCT-measured central subfield thickness similar to those without prior anti-VEGF treatment, but longer mean duration of macular edema before randomization (18 months vs. 1 month for those without prior anti-VEGF treatment; P < 0.0001).ConclusionsThe SCORE2 cohort is a heterogeneous population, including both CRVO and HRVO eyes and both treatment-naïve eyes and eyes treated previously with anti-VEGF, which will allow study results to have broad applicability to CRVO and HRVO patients receiving treatment for macular edema. Similarities of the baseline characteristics of the SCORE2 population to other CRVO trial cohorts will allow meaningful comparisons of outcome results across trials.

ObjectivesTo establish a prescription opioid registry protocol in a large health system and to describe algorithms to characterize individuals using prescription opioids, opioid use episodes, and concurrent use of sedative/hypnotics.Study designProtocol development and retrospective cohort study.MethodsUsing Kaiser Permanente Northern California (KPNC) electronic health record data, we selected patients using prescription opioids in 2011. Opioid and sedative/hypnotic fills, and physical and psychiatric comorbidity diagnoses, were extracted for years 2008 to 2014. Algorithms were developed to identify each patient's daily opioid and sedative/hypnotic use, and morphine daily-dose equivalent. Opioid episodes were classified as long-term, episodic, or acute. Logistic regression was used to predict characteristics associated with becoming a long-term opioid user.ResultsIn 2011, 18% of KPNC adult members filled at least 1 opioid prescription. Among those patients, 25% used opioids long term and their average duration of use was more than 4 years. Sedative/hypnotics were used by 76% of long-term users. Being older, white, living in a more deprived neighborhood, having a chronic pain diagnosis, and use of sedative/hypnotics were predictors of initiating long-term opioid use.ConclusionsThis study established a population-based opioid registry that is flexible and can be used to address important questions of prescription opioid use. It will be used in future studies to answer a broad range of other critical public health issues relating to prescription opioid use.