Patterns and predictors of prescription medication use in the management of headache: findings from the 2000 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey

Rheumatologists' insight into medication adherence in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: A qualitative study

BACKGROUND

Medication non-adherence is prevalent among patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Rheumatologists are specialists in medication prescribing and counselling for RA, but their insights regarding medication adherence have not been studied.

OBJECTIVE

To explore rheumatologists' insights into medication adherence in patients with RA.

METHODS

A qualitative study using semi-structured interviews with 10 rheumatologists in Iran was undertaken. Thematic analysis was conducted to identify how rheumatologists assess medication adherence and their perceived determinants of adherence. The identified determinants of adherence were mapped according to the Andersen's Behavioral Model of Health Service Use.

RESULTS

Six participants were male, and the mean age was 47 years. The mean years of experience as a rheumatologist was 8.6 (SD = 7.1) years. Rheumatologists did not use a validated tool for medication adherence assessment. They assessed medication adherence either by asking their patients simple questions or using laboratory test results. The identified determinants of adherence were divided into 3 groups: patient-, rheumatologist- and healthcare organization-related determinants. The proposed suggestions to improve adherence were: (a) to understand a patient's financial situation before prescribing more expensive medications; (b) to employ a dose-reducing strategy; (c) to give hope to patients regarding remission; and (d) to arrange a session with the nurse educator.

CONCLUSION

The findings of this study provide insight into rheumatologists' perspectives on medication adherence of patients with RA. The identified determinants of adherence could be considered when developing initiatives to improve medication adherence in this group of patients.

Tricyclic and Tetracyclic Antidepressants for the Prevention of Frequent Episodic or Chronic Tension-Type Headache in Adults: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Tension-type headaches are a common source of pain and suffering. Our purpose was to assess the efficacy of tricyclic (TCA) and tetracyclic antidepressants in the prophylactic treatment of tension-type headache.

METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, EMBASE, the ISI Web of Science, and clinical trial registries through 11 March 2017 for randomized controlled studies of TCA or tetracyclic antidepressants in the prevention of tension-type headache in adults. Data were pooled using a random effects approach.

KEY RESULTS

Among 22 randomized controlled trials, eight included a placebo comparison and 19 compared at least two active treatments. Eight studies compared TCAs to placebo, four compared TCAs to selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs), and two trials compared TCAs to behavioral therapies. Two trials compared tetracyclics to placebo. Single trials compared TCAs to tetracyclics, buspirone, spinal manipulation, transcutaneous electrical stimulation, massage, and intra-oral orthotics. High-quality evidence suggests that TCAs were superior to placebo in reducing headache frequency (weighted mean differences (WMD): -4.8 headaches/month, 95% CI: -6.63 to -2.95) and number of analgesic medications consumed (WMD: -21.0 doses/month, 95% CI: -38.2 to -3.8). TCAs were more effective than SSRIs. Low-quality studies suggest that TCAs are superior to buspirone, but equivalent to behavioral therapy, spinal manipulation, intra-oral orthotics, and massage. Tetracyclics were no better than placebo for chronic tension-type headache.

CONCLUSIONS

Tricyclic antidepressants are modestly effective in reducing chronic tension-type headache and are superior to buspirone. In limited studies, tetracyclics appear to be ineffective in the prophylactic treatment of chronic tension-type headache.

Impact of Depression on Health and Medical Care Utilization and Expenses in US Adults With Migraine: A Retrospective Cross Sectional Study

BACKGROUND

The association between migraine and depression has been extensively examined and a bidirectional hypothesis of the comorbidity between the 2 diseases has been reported. However, the economic impact of comorbid depression on migraine has not been fully explored.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study is to determine the impact of depression on medical utilization and health care expenses among subjects reporting migraine.

METHODS

The Medical Expenditure Panel Survey (MEPS) household component longitudinal data files (2006-2012) identified subjects (≥ 18 years) with migraines. Two groups were created from all eligible subjects with migraine based on whether comorbid depression was reported or not. The major outcome measures were annualized average total and migraine-related health care expenses and medical utilization during a 2-year period. The impact of depression on health expenses was assessed by multivariable linear regression models with log transformations. Multivariable logistic regression identified factors associated with depression and examined the likelihood of emergency department (ED) visit adjusting for demographic and health-related variables.

RESULTS

Among 2,400 subjects with migraine (approximate 54.3 million United States [US] individuals for years 2006-2012), 804 reported depression (representing 18.4 million individuals in the United States, 33.9%). Among migraineurs, nearly one-third received anti-migraine prescription drugs and approximately 65% with comorbid depression used antidepressants. Race (black vs white, odds ratio [OR]: 0.36, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.25, 0.52), sex (male vs female, OR: 0.67, 95% CI: 0.51, 0.87), perceived health status (fair to poor vs excellent-very good, OR: 2.58, 95% CI: 2.72. 4.71), insurance coverage (public vs private, OR: 1.59, 95%CI: 1.13, 2.24), and greater comorbidity (OR: 1.70, 95% CI: 1.28, 2.26) were significantly associated with comorbid depression in the subjects with migraine. Compared to migraine subjects without depression, the mean annual total health expenses per person ($10,012 vs. $4,740, P <.001) and mean migraine-related health expenses ($723 vs $499, P = .014) were significantly higher in those with depression. The odds of ED visit in migraineurs with comorbid depression were higher than in those without depression (OR: 1.36, 95% CI: 1.08, 1.71).

CONCLUSION

Comorbid depression in subjects with migraine was associated with higher total and migraine-related health expenses and increased likelihood of all-cause ED visits. Comorbid depression management might be incorporated into migraine intervention program to improve treatment outcomes and produce potential cost savings. Further studies are needed to assess long-term effects of depression on migraine progression and health care utilization patterns.

Maternal butalbital use and selected defects in the national birth defects prevention study

BACKGROUND

Butalbital is a barbiturate contained in combination products with caffeine and an analgesic prescribed for the treatment of migraine and tension-type headaches. Controversy exists as to whether butalbital should continue to be prescribed in the United States because of the potential for abuse, overuse headache, and withdrawal syndromes. Butalbital crosses the placenta but there is limited information about potential teratogenicity.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate associations between butalbital and a wide range of specific birth defects.

METHODS

The National Birth Defects Prevention Study is an ongoing, case-control study of nonsyndromic, major birth defects conducted in 10 states. The detailed case classification and large number of cases in the National Birth Defects Prevention Study allowed us to examine the association between maternal self-reported butalbital use and specific birth defects. We conducted an analysis of 8373 unaffected controls and 21,090 case infants with estimated dates of delivery between 1997 and 2007; included were birth defects with 250 or more cases. An exploratory analysis examined groups with 100 to 249 cases.

RESULTS

Seventy-three case mothers and 15 control mothers reported periconceptional butalbital use. Of 30 specific defect groups evaluated, adjusted odds ratios for maternal periconceptional butalbital use were statistically significant for 3 congenital heart defects: tetralogy of Fallot (adjusted odds ratio = 3.04; 95% confidence interval = 1.07-8.62), pulmonary valve stenosis (adjusted odds ratio = 5.73; 95% confidence interval = 2.25-14.62), and secundum-type atrial septal defect (adjusted odds ratio = 3.06; 95% confidence interval = 1.07-8.79). In the exploratory analysis, an elevated odds ratio was detected for 1 congenital heart defect, single ventricle.

CONCLUSIONS

We observed relationships between maternal periconceptional butalbital use and certain congenital heart defects. These associations have not been reported before, and some may be spurious. Butalbital use was rare and despite the large size of the National Birth Defects Prevention Study, the number of exposed case and control infants was small. However, if confirmed in additional studies, our findings will be useful in weighing the risks and benefits of butalbital for the treatment of migraine and tension-type headaches.

Prescription headache medication in OEF/OIF veterans: results from the Women Veterans Cohort Study

OBJECTIVE

To examine differences in male and female veterans of Operations Enduring Freedom/Iraqi Freedom (OEF/OIF) period of service in taking prescription headache medication, and associations between taking prescription headache medication and mental health status, psychiatric symptoms, and rates of traumatic events.

BACKGROUND

Headaches are common among active service members and are associated with impairment in quality of life. Little is known about headaches in OEF/OIF veterans.

METHODS

Veterans participating in the Women Veterans Cohort Study responded to a cross-sectional survey to assess taking prescription headache medication, mental health status (Post Deployment Health Assessment), psychiatric symptoms (portions of the Brief Patient Health Questionnaire and the Posttraumatic Stress Disorder Checklist), and traumatic events (the Traumatic Life Events Questionnaire and queries regarding military trauma). Gender differences among taking prescription headache medication, health status, psychiatric symptoms, and traumatic events were examined. Regression analyses were used to examine the influence of gender on the associations between taking prescription headache medication and health status, psychiatric symptoms, and traumatic events.

RESULTS

139/551 (25.2%) participants reported taking prescription headache medication in the past year. A higher proportion of women veterans (29.1%) reported taking prescription medication for headache in the last year compared with men (19.7%). Taking prescription headache medication was associated with poorer perceived mental health status, higher anxiety and posttraumatic stress disorder symptoms, and higher rates of traumatic events. The association between prescription headache medication use and perceived mental health status, and with the association between prescription headache medication use and posttraumatic stress disorder symptoms, was stronger for men than for women.

CONCLUSIONS

Among OEF/OIF veterans, the prevalence of clinically relevant headache is high, particularly among women veterans. Taking prescription headache medication is associated with poor mental health status, higher rates of psychiatric symptoms, and higher rates of traumatic events; however, these variables did not appear to meaningfully account for gender differences in prevalence of taking prescription headache medication. Future research should endeavor to identify factors that might account for the observed differences.

Multidisciplinary integrated headache care: a prospective 12-month follow-up observational study

This prospective study investigated the effectiveness of a three-tier modularized out- and inpatient multidisciplinary integrated headache care program. N = 204 patients with frequent headaches (63 migraine, 11 tension-type headache, 59 migraine + tension-type headache, 68 medication-overuse headache and 3 with other primary headaches) were enrolled. Outcome measures at baseline, 6- and 12-month follow-ups included headache frequency, Migraine Disability Assessment (MIDAS), Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), standardized headache diary and a medication survey. Mean reduction in headache frequency was 5.5 ± 8.5 days/month, p < 0.001 at 6 months’ follow-up and 6.9 ± 8.3 days/month, p < 0.001 after 1 year. MIDAS decreased from 53.0 ± 60.8 to 37.0 ± 52.4 points, p < 0.001 after 6 months and 34.4 ± 53.2 points, p < 0.001 at 1 year. 44.0 % patients demonstrated at baseline an increased HAD-score for anxiety and 16.7 % of patients revealed a HAD-score indicating a depression. At the end of treatment statistically significant changes could be observed for anxiety (p < 0.001) and depression (p < 0.006). The intake frequency of attack-aborting medication decreased from 10.3 ± 7.3 days/month at admission to 4.7 ± 4.1 days/month, p < 0.001 after 6 months and reached 3.8 ± 3.5 days/month, p < 0.001 after 1 year. At baseline 37.9 % of patients had experience with non-pharmacological treatments and 87.0 % at 12-month follow-up. In conclusion, an integrated headache care program was successfully established. Positive health-related outcomes could be obtained with a multidisciplinary out- and inpatient headache treatment program.

Validation of criterion-based patient assignment and treatment effectiveness of a multidisciplinary modularized managed care program for headache

This prospective observational study evaluates the validity of an algorithm for assigning patients to a multidisciplinary modularized managed care headache treatment program. N = 545 chronic headache sufferers [migraine (53.8 %), migraine + tension type (30.1 %), tension type (8.3 %) or medication overuse headache (6.2 %), other primary headaches (1.5 %)] were assigned to one of four treatment modules differing with regard to the number and types of interventions entailed (e.g., medication, psychological intervention, physical therapy, etc.). A rather simple assignment algorithm based on headache frequency, medication use and psychiatric comorbidity was used. Patients in the different modules were compared with regard to the experienced burden of disease. 1-year follow-up outcome data are reported (N = 160). Headache frequency and analgesic consumption differed significantly among patients in the modules. Headache-related disability was highest in patients with high headache frequency with/without medication overuse or psychiatric comorbidity (modules 2/3) compared to patients with low headache frequency and medication (module 0). Physical functioning was lowest in patients with chronic headache regardless of additional problems (modules 1/2/3). Psychological functioning was lowest in patients with severe chronicity with/without additional problems (module 2/3) compared to headache suffers with no/moderate chronicity (module 0/1). Anxiety or depression was highest in patients with severe chronicity. In 1-year follow-up, headache frequency (minus 45.3 %), consumption of attack-aborting drugs (minus 71.4 %) and headache-related disability decreased (minus 35.9 %). Our results demonstrate the clinical effectiveness and the criterion validity of the treatment assignment algorithm based on headache frequency, medication use and psychiatric comorbidity.

Didactic migraine education in US doctor of pharmacy programs

OBJECTIVE

To compare didactic migraine education in doctor of pharmacy (PharmD) programs in the United States with the Headache Consortium's evidence-based migraine treatment recommendations.

METHODS

A self-administered survey instrument was mailed to all 90 Accreditation Council for Pharmacy Education (ACPE) approved PharmD programs in the United States.

RESULTS

Seventy-seven programs responded (86%) and 69 useable survey instruments were analyzed. Fifty-five percent of programs discussed the Consortium's guidelines, 49% discussed the selection of nonprescription versus prescription agents, 45% recommended a butalbital-containing product as migraine treatment, and 20% educated students about tools for assessing migraine-related debilitation. At least 50% of programs taught information consistent with the remaining Consortium recommendations.

CONCLUSION

Approximately half of the PharmD programs teach concepts about migraine headache treatment consistent with the US Headache Consortium's recommendations.

Chronic migraine and medication overuse headache: clarifying the current International Headache Society classification criteria

Despite the recent advances in the understanding and classification of the chronic daily headaches, considerable controversy still exists regarding the classification of individual headaches, including chronic migraine (CM) and medication overuse headache (MOH). The original criteria, published in 2004, were difficult to apply to most patients with these disorders and were subsequently revised, resulting in broader clinical applicability. Nonetheless, they remain a topic of debate, and the revisions to the criteria have further added to the confusion. Even some prominent headache specialists are unsure which criteria to use. We aimed to explain the nature of the controversies surrounding the entities of CM and MOH. A clinical case will be used to illustrate some of the problems faced by clinicians in diagnosing patients with chronic daily headache.

Race, ethnicity, and use of thiazolidinediones among US adults with diabetes

OBJECTIVE

Significant race and ethnic disparities exist in diabetes-related health care. Using a nationally representative database, we sought to determine if use of thiazolidinediones (TZDs) differs by race and ethnicity. As a secondary objective, we sought to determine if race and ethnicity is associated with use of older oral antidiabetic agents, such as sulfonylureas and metformin.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

Adult respondents to the 2003 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey with diabetes, identified by diagnosis code or self-report, were included. Race/ethnic groups were defined as: White/not-Hispanic; Black/not-Hispanic; Hispanic; or Other/not-Hispanic. Associations between use of oral antidiabetic agents (defined as > or = 1 prescription for a TZD, sulfonylurea, or metformin) and race/ethnicity, sex, age, insurance status, poverty status, and having a usual source of care were evaluated in univariate analyses with chi(2) tests and in adjusted analyses using logistic regression methods for survey data.

RESULTS

A total of 1873 US adults with diabetes were identified, with use of oral antidiabetic agents varying by drug class: 23.1% received TZDs, 45.3% received metformin, and 43.8% received sulfonylureas. Use of oral antidiabetic agents, by drug class, did not differ significantly by race/ethnicity (p = 0.33 for TZDs, p = 0.43 for metformin, p = 0.38 for sulfonylureas). In univariate analyses, only insurance status was significantly associated with use of TZDs (p = 0.03), and no variables were associated with use of sulfonylureas or metformin. In adjusted logistic regression analyses, there were no significant predictors of the use of TZDs or metformin, and only age was significantly associated with the use of sulfonylureas.

CONCLUSIONS

In a nationally representative database, fewer US adults with diabetes received TZDs compared with sulfonylureas or metformin in 2003. Although we were not able to differentiate between type 1 and type 2 diabetes, nor did we assess oral agent monotherapy versus combination therapy, we found that use of TZDs, sulfonylureas, and metformin did not differ based on race/ethnicity or other demographic variables such as sex, insurance status, poverty status, or having a usual source of health care.

Optimizing migraine therapy: evidence-based and patient-centered care

Migraine is a chronic, intermittently debilitating neurovascular condition that affects the physical, mental and social aspects of health-related quality of life. Primary care provider interactions with migraine sufferers are common, highlighting the need for clinicians to provide optimal therapy. A comprehensive therapy plan should encompass the whole patient, via a patient-physician partnership where goals and strategies are mutually established. Key treatments include nondrug approaches, such as education and lifestyle modifications, to reduce the occurrence of attacks, as well as acute medications to address the immediate need for relief during an attack. Routine assessment and adjustment of therapy based on data recorded by patient diaries is paramount. Clinical trials support the use of triptans and dihydroergotamine for moderate-to-severe migraine and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (alone or in combination with antiemetics or caffeine) for mild-to-moderate migraine, as the treatments of choice to reduce pain and disability time in a cost-effective manner. Published evidence also endorses stratified care, where medication selection is geared towards disease severity, instead of step care, where nonspecific mediations are given to all patients. Thus, patients with significant migraine-induced debilitation, as assessed by tools, such as the Migraine Disability Assessment Scale or the Headache Impact Test, are prescribed migraine-specific agents from the onset of therapy, thereby avoiding the inherent failures of step care. For individuals experiencing a high frequency of attacks or routine debilitation, preventive medications are warranted.