Generating evidence from computerized healthcare utilization databases

Hypertension

Volumn 65, Issue 3, 2015, Pages 490-498

  Corrao, Giovanni ^a   Mancia, Giuseppe ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MILANO BICOCCA   (Italy)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ANTIDIABETIC AGENT; ANTIHYPERTENSIVE AGENT; ANTILIPEMIC AGENT;

ANTIHYPERTENSIVE THERAPY; ARTICLE; CARDIOVASCULAR DISEASE; CLINICAL EFFECTIVENESS; COMPUTER AIDED DESIGN; COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS; DATA BASE; DRUG EXPOSURE; DRUG SAFETY; DRUG USE; HEALTH CARE UTILIZATION; HUMAN; HYPERTENSION; MEDICAL INFORMATICS; MEDICAL RESEARCH; MEDICATION COMPLIANCE; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PATIENT COMPLIANCE; PATIENT SAFETY; POSTMARKETING SURVEILLANCE; PRESCRIPTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL (TOPIC); COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS; ECONOMICS; EVIDENCE BASED PRACTICE; FACTUAL DATABASE; ITALY; PATIENT ATTITUDE; PROCEDURES; STATISTICS AND NUMERICAL DATA;

ANTIHYPERTENSIVE AGENTS; COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; DATABASES, FACTUAL; EVIDENCE-BASED PRACTICE; HUMANS; HYPERTENSION; ITALY; PATIENT ACCEPTANCE OF HEALTH CARE; PATIENT COMPLIANCE; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIALS AS TOPIC;

EID: 84924240231     PISSN: 0194911X     EISSN: 15244563     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1161/HYPERTENSIONAHA.114.04858     Document Type: Article

References (82)

1. Dieppe P, Bartlett C, Davey P, Doyal L, Ebrahim S. Balancing benefits and harms: the example of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. BMJ. 2004;329:31-34. doi: 10.1136/bmj.329.7456.31.
2. Concato J, Shah N, Horwitz RI. Randomized, controlled trials, observational studies, and the hierarchy of research designs. N Engl J Med. 2000;342:1887-1892. doi: 10.1056/NEJM200006223422507.
3. Concato J. Observational versus experimental studies: what's the evidence for a hierarchy? NeuroRx. 2004;1:341-347. doi: 10.1602/neurorx.1.3.341.
4. Avorn J. In defense of pharmacoepidemiology-embracing the yin and yang of drug research. N Engl J Med. 2007;357:2219-2221. doi: 10.1056/NEJMp0706892.
5. Fitz-Simon N, Bennett K, Feely J. A review of studies of adherence with antihypertensive drugs using prescription databases. Ther Clin Risk Manag. 2005;1:93-106.
6. Mazzaglia G, Mantovani LG, Sturkenboom MC, Filippi A, Trifirò G, Cricelli C, Brignoli O, Caputi AP. Patterns of persistence with antihypertensive medications in newly diagnosed hypertensive patients in Italy: a retrospective cohort study in primary care. J Hypertens. 2005;23:2093-2100.
7. Van Wijk BL, Klungel OH, Heerdink ER, de Boer A. Rate and determinants of 10-year persistence with antihypertensive drugs. J Hypertens. 2005;23:2101-2107.
8. Burke TA, Sturkenboom MC, Lu SE, Wentworth CE, Lin Y, Rhoads GG. Discontinuation of antihypertensive drugs among newly diagnosed hypertensive patients in UK general practice. J Hypertens. 2006;24:1193-1200. doi: 10.1097/01.hjh.0000226211.95936.f5.
9. Elliott WJ, Plauschinat CA, Skrepnek GH, Gause D. Persistence, adherence, and risk of discontinuation associated with commonly prescribed antihypertensive drug monotherapies. J Am Board Fam Med. 2007;20:72-80. doi: 10.3122/jabfm.2007.01.060094.
10. Corrao G, Zambon A, Parodi A, Poluzzi E, Baldi I, Merlino L, Cesana G, Mancia G. Discontinuation of and changes in drug therapy for hypertension among newly-treated patients: a population-based study in Italy. J Hypertens. 2008;26:819-824. doi: 10.1097/HJH.0b013e3282f4edd7.
11. Vrijens B, Vincze G, Kristanto P, Urquhart J, Burnier M. Adherence to prescribed antihypertensive drug treatments: longitudinal study of electronically compiled dosing histories. BMJ. 2008;336:1114-1117. doi: 10.1136/bmj.39553.670231.25.
12. Perreault S, Dragomir A, Blais L, Bérard A, Lalonde L, White M. Impact of adherence to statins on chronic heart failure in primary prevention. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2008;66:706-716. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2125.2008.03269.x.
13. Hlatky MA, Ray RM, Burwen DR, et al. Use of Medicare data to identify coronary heart disease outcomes in the Women's Health Initiative. Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes. 2014;7:157-162. doi: 10.1161/CIRCOUTCOMES.113.000373.
14. National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute Working Group on Future Directions in Hypertension Treatment Trials. Major clinical trials of hypertension: what should be done next? Hypertension. 2005;46:1-6.
15. Sox HC, Goodman SN. The methods of comparative effectiveness research. Annu Rev Public Health. 2012;33:425-445. doi: 10.1146/annurev-publhealth-031811-124610.
16. Strom BL. Pharmacoepidemiology. 4th edn. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons Ltd; 2005.
17. Gandhi SK, Salmon W, Kong SX, Zhao SZ. Administrative databases and outcomes assessment: an overview of issues and potential utility. J Managed Care Pharm. 1999;5:215-222.
18. Scandinavian Simvastatin Survival Study Group. Randomized trial of cholesterol lowering in 444 patients with coronary heart disease: the Scandinavian simvastatin survival study (4S). Lancet. 1994;344:1383-1389.
19. Wilson PW, D'Agostino RB, Sullivan L, Parise H, Kannel WB. Overweight and obesity as determinants of cardiovascular risk: the Framingham experience. Arch Intern Med. 2002;162:1867-1872.
20. Hennessy S, Carson JL, Ray WA, Strom BL. Medicaid databases. In: Strom BL, ed. Pharmacoepidemiology. 4th ed. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons; 2005:281-94.
21. Gelfand JM, Margolis DJ, Dattani H. The UK General Practice Research Database. In: Strom BL, ed. Pharmacoepidemiology. 4th ed. New York: John Wiley; 2005:337-46.
22. Suissa S, Garbe E. Primer: administrative health databases in observational studies of drug effects-advantages and disadvantages. Nature Clin Pract Rheumatol. 2007;3:725-732.
23. Walley T, Mantgani A. The UK General Practice Research Database. Lancet. 1997;350:1097-1099. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(97)04248-7.
24. van der Lei J, Duisterhout JS, Westerhof HP, van der Does E, Cromme PV, Boon WM, van Bemmel JH. The introduction of computer-based patient records in The Netherlands. Ann Intern Med. 1993;119:1036-1041.
25. Filippi A, Vanuzzo D, Bignamini AA, Sessa E, Brignoli O, Mazzaglia G. Computerized general practice databases provide quick and costeffective information on the prevalence of angina pectoris. Ital Heart J. 2005;6:49-51.
26. Kjeldsen SE, Stålhammar J, Hasvold P, Bodegard J, Olsson U, Russell D. Effects of losartan vs candesartan in reducing cardiovascular events in the primary treatment of hypertension. J Hum Hypertens. 2010;24:263-273. doi: 10.1038/jhh.2009.77.
27. Hasvold LP, Bodegård J, Thuresson M, Stålhammar J, Hammar N, Sundström J, Russell D, Kjeldsen SE. Diabetes and CVD risk during angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor or angiotensin II receptor blocker treatment in hypertension: a study of 15,990 patients. J Hum Hypertens. 2014;28:663-669. doi: 10.1038/jhh.2014.43.
28. Schneeweiss S. Developments in post-marketing comparative effectiveness research. Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2007;82:143-156. doi: 10.1038/sj.clpt.6100249.
29. Heckbert SR, Kooperberg C, Safford MM, Psaty BM, Hsia J, McTiernan A, Gaziano JM, Frishman WH, Curb JD. Comparison of self-report, hospital discharge codes, and adjudication of cardiovascular events in the Women's Health Initiative. Am J Epidemiol. 2004;160:1152-1158. doi: 10.1093/aje/.
30. Andrade SE, Kahler KH, Frech F, Chan KA. Methods for evaluation of medication adherence and persistence using automated databases. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf. 2006;15:565-574; discussion 575. doi: 10.1002/pds.1230.
31. McCarney R, Warner J, Iliffe S, van Haselen R, Griffin M, Fisher P. The Hawthorne Effect: a randomised, controlled trial. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2007;7:30. doi: 10.1186/1471-2288-7-30.
32. Corrao G, Zambon A, Parodi A, Merlino L, Mancia G. Incidence of cardiovascular events in Italian patients with early discontinuations of antihypertensive, lipid-lowering, and antidiabetic treatments. Am J Hypertens. 2012;25:549-555. doi: 10.1038/ajh.2011.261.
33. Corrao G, Parodi A, Zambon A, Heiman F, Filippi A, Cricelli C, Merlino L, Mancia G. Reduced discontinuation of antihypertensive treatment by two-drug combination as first step. Evidence from daily life practice. J Hypertens. 2010;28:1584-1590. doi: 10.1097/HJH.0b013e328339f9fa.
34. Mancia G, Zambon A, Soranna D, Merlino L, Corrao G. Factors involved in the discontinuation of antihypertensive drug therapy: an analysis from real life data. J Hypertens. 2014;32:1708-1715; discussion 1716. doi: 10.1097/HJH.0000000000000222.
35. Mancia G, Fagard R, Narkiewicz K, et al Task Force Members. 2013 ESH/ESC Guidelines for the management of arterial hypertension: the Task Force for the management of arterial hypertension of the European Society of Hypertension (ESH) and of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC). J Hypertens. 2013;31:1281-1357. doi: 10.1097/01.hjh.0000431740.32696.cc.
36. Cochrane AL. Effectiveness and Efficiency: Random Reflection on Health Services. London: Nuffield Provincial Hospitals Trust; 1972.
37. Corrao G, Parodi A, Nicotra F, Zambon A, Merlino L, Cesana G, Mancia G. Better compliance to antihypertensive medications reduces cardiovascular risk. J Hypertens. 2011;29:610-618. doi: 10.1097/HJH.0b013e328342ca97.
38. Corrao G, Conti V, Merlino L, Catapano AL, Mancia G. Results of a retrospective database analysis of adherence to statin therapy and risk of nonfatal ischemic heart disease in daily clinical practice in Italy. Clin Ther. 2010;32:300-310. doi: 10.1016/j.clinthera.2010.02.004.
39. Corrao G, Ibrahim B, Nicotra F, Zambon A, Merlino L, Pasini TS, Catapano AL, Mancia G. Long-term use of statins reduces the risk of hospitalization for dementia. Atherosclerosis. 2013;230:171-176. doi: 10.1016/j.atherosclerosis.2013.07.009.
40. Corrao G, Ibrahim B, Nicotra F, Soranna D, Merlino L, Catapano AL, Tragni E, Casula M, Grassi G, Mancia G. Statins and the risk of diabetes: evidence from a large population-based cohort study. Diabetes Care. 2014;37:2225-2232. doi: 10.2337/dc13-2215.
41. Lv HL, Jin DM, Liu M, Liu YM, Wang JF, Geng DF. Long-term efficacy and safety of statin treatment beyond six years: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials with extended follow-up. Pharmacol Res. 2014;81:64-73. doi: 10.1016/j.phrs.2014.02.006.
42. Wang W, Zhang B. Statins for the prevention of stroke: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. PLoS One. 2014;9:e92388. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0092388.
43. Garber A, Weinstein M, Torrance G, Kamlet M. Theoretical foundations of cost-effectiveness analysis. In: Gold M, Siegel J, Russell L, Weinstein M, ed. Cost-Effectiveness in Health and Medicine. New York, NY: Oxford University Press; 1996:25-53.
44. Weinstein MC, Stason WB. Foundations of cost-effectiveness analysis for health and medical practices. N Engl J Med. 1977;296:716-721. doi: 10.1056/NEJM197703312961304.
45. Corrao G, Scotti L, Zambon A, Baio G, Nicotra F, Conti V, Capri S, Tragni E, Merlino L, Catapano AL, Mancia G. Cost-effectiveness of enhancing adherence to therapy with statins in the setting of primary cardiovascular prevention. Evidence from an empirical approach based on administrative databases. Atherosclerosis. 2011;217:479-485. doi: 10.1016/j.atherosclerosis.2011.04.014.
46. Scotti L, Baio G, Merlino L, Cesana G, Mancia G, Corrao G. Costeffectiveness of enhancing adherence to therapy with blood pressurelowering drugs in the setting of primary cardiovascular prevention. Value Health. 2013;16:318-324. doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2012.11.008.
47. Stergachis AS. Record linkage studies for postmarketing drug surveillance: data quality and validity considerations. Drug Intell Clin Pharm. 1988;22:157-161.
48. Levy AR, O'Brien BJ, Sellors C, Grootendorst P, Willison D. Coding accuracy of administrative drug claims in the Ontario Drug Benefit database. Can J Clin Pharmacol. 2003;10:67-71.
49. McKenzie DA, Semradek J, McFarland BH, Mullooly JP, McCamant LE. The validity of medicaid pharmacy claims for estimating drug use among elderly nursing home residents: the Oregon experience. J Clin Epidemiol. 2000;53:1248-1257.
50. Strom BL. Overview of automated databases in pharmacoepidemiology. In: Strom BL, ed. Pharmacoepidemiology. 4th ed. New York: Wiley; 2005:219-222.
51. Yood MU, Campbell UB, Rothman KJ, Jick SS, Lang J, Wells KE, Jick H, Johnson CC. Using prescription claims data for drugs available over-the-counter (OTC). Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf. 2007;16:961-968. doi: 10.1002/pds.1454.
52. Suissa S. Immeasurable time bias in observational studies of drug effects on mortality. Am J Epidemiol. 2008;168:329-335. doi: 10.1093/aje/kwn135.
53. WHO Collaborating Centre for Drug Statistics Methodology. ATC Index With DDD. Oslo, Norway: WHO; 2003.
54. Dormuth C, Schneeweiss S. Rapid monitoring of drug discontinuation rates in response to restrictions in drug reimbursement. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf. 2004;13:S310-S311.
55. Chu H, Wang Z, Cole SR, Greenland S. Sensitivity analysis of misclassification: a graphical and a Bayesian approach. Ann Epidemiol. 2006;16:834-841. doi: 10.1016/j.annepidem.2006.04.001.
56. Fox MP, Lash TL, Greenland S. A method to automate probabilistic sensitivity analyses of misclassified binary variables. Int J Epidemiol. 2005;34:1370-1376. doi: 10.1093/ije/dyi184.
57. Kelsey JL, Whittemore AS, Evans AS, Thompson WD. Methods in Observational Epidemiology. 2nd ed. New York: Oxford University Press; 1996.
58. Schneeweiss S, Avorn J. A review of uses of health care utilization databases for epidemiologic research on therapeutics. J Clin Epidemiol. 2005;58:323-337. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2004.10.012.
59. Wilchesky M, Tamblyn RM, Huang A. Validation of diagnostic codes within medical services claims. J Clin Epidemiol. 2004;57:131-141. doi: 10.1016/S0895-4356(03)00246-4.
60. Jick H, Jick SS, Derby LE. Validation of information recorded on general practitioner based computerised data resource in the United Kingdom. BMJ. 1991;302:766-768.
61. Currie O, Mangin D, Williman J, McKinnon-Gee B, Bridgford P. The comparative risk of new-onset diabetes after prescription of drugs for cardiovascular risk prevention in primary care: a national cohort study. BMJ Open. 2013;3:e003475. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2013-003475.
62. Borah BJ, Moriarty JP, Crown WH, Doshi JA. Applications of propensity score methods in observational comparative effectiveness and safety research: where have we come and where should we go? J Comp Eff Res. 2014;3:63-78. doi: 10.2217/cer.13.89.
63. Corrao G, Ghirardi A, Segafredo G, Zambon A, Della Vedova G, Lapi F, Cipriani F, Caputi A, Vaccheri A, Gregori D, Gesuita R, Vestri A, Staniscia T, Mazzaglia G, Di Bari M; BEST Investigators. User-only design to assess drug effectiveness in clinical practice: application to bisphosphonates and secondary prevention of fractures. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf. 2014;23:859-867. doi: 10.1002/pds.3650.
64. Schneeweiss S, Patrick AR, Stürmer T, Brookhart MA, Avorn J, Maclure M, Rothman KJ, Glynn RJ. Increasing levels of restriction in pharmacoepidemiologic database studies of elderly and comparison with randomized trial results. Med Care. 2007;45(10 suppl 2):S131-S142. doi: 10.1097/MLR.0b013e318070c08e.
65. Ray WA. Evaluating medication effects outside of clinical trials: new-user designs. Am J Epidemiol. 2003;158:915-920.
66. Maclure M, Fireman B, Nelson JC, Hua W, Shoaibi A, Paredes A, Madigan D. When should case-only designs be used for safety monitoring of medical products? Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf. 2012;21(suppl 1):50-61. doi: 10.1002/pds.2330.
67. Farrington CP. Relative incidence estimation from case series for vaccine safety evaluation. Biometrics. 1995;51:228-235.
68. Corrao G, Soranna D, La Vecchia C, Catapano A, Agabiti-Rosei E, Gensini G, Merlino L, Mancia G. Medication persistence and the use of generic and brand-name blood pressure-lowering agents. J Hypertens. 2014;32:1146-1153; discussion 1153. doi: 10.1097/HJH.0000000000000130.
69. Schneeweiss S. Sensitivity analysis and external adjustment for unmeasured confounders in epidemiologic database studies of therapeutics. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf. 2006;15:291-303. doi: 10.1002/pds.1200.
70. Brookhart MA, Wang PS, Solomon DH, Schneeweiss S. Evaluating shortterm drug effects using a physician-specific prescribing preference as an instrumental variable. Epidemiology. 2006;17:268-275. doi: 10.1097/01.ede.0000193606.58671.c5.
71. Stürmer T, Schneeweiss S, Avorn J, Glynn RJ. Adjusting effect estimates for unmeasured confounding with validation data using propensity score calibration. Am J Epidemiol. 2005;162:279-289. doi: 10.1093/aje/kwi192.
72. Corrao G, Nicotra F, Parodi A, Zambon A, Heiman F, Merlino L, Fortino I, Cesana G, Mancia G. Cardiovascular protection by initial and subsequent combination of antihypertensive drugs in daily life practice. Hypertension. 2011;58:566-572. doi: 10.1161/HYPERTENSIONAHA.111.177592.
73. Corrao G, Nicotra F, Parodi A, Zambon A, Soranna D, Heiman F, Merlino L, Mancia G. External adjustment for unmeasured confounders improved drug-outcome association estimates based on health care utilization data. J Clin Epidemiol. 2012;65:1190-1199. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2012.03.014.
74. Weiss NS. The new world of data linkages in clinical epidemiology: are we being brave or foolhardy? Epidemiology. 2011;22:292-294. doi: 10.1097/EDE.0b013e318210aca5.
75. Ray WA. Improving automated database studies. Epidemiology. 2011;22:302-304. doi: 10.1097/EDE.0b013e31820f31e1.
76. Coloma PM, Schuemie MJ, Trifirò G, Gini R, Herings R, Hippisley-Cox J, Mazzaglia G, Giaquinto C, Corrao G, Pedersen L, van der Lei J, Sturkenboom M; EU-ADR Consortium. Combining electronic healthcare databases in Europe to allow for large-scale drug safety monitoring: the EU-ADR Project. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf. 2011;20:1-11. doi: 10.1002/pds.2053.
77. Hernán MA. With great data comes great responsibility: publishing comparative effectiveness research in epidemiology. Epidemiology. 2011;22:290-291. doi: 10.1097/EDE.0b013e3182114039.
78. Berger ML, Mamdani M, Atkins D, Johnson ML. Good research practices for comparative effectiveness research: defining, reporting and interpreting nonrandomized studies of treatment effects using secondary data sources: the ISPOR Good Research Practices for Retrospective Database Analysis Task Force Report-Part I. Value Health. 2009;12:1044-1052. doi: 10.1111/j.1524-4733.2009.00600.x.
79. Cox E, Martin BC, Van Staa T, Garbe E, Siebert U, Johnson ML. Good research practices for comparative effectiveness research: approaches to mitigate bias and confounding in the design of nonrandomized studies of treatment effects using secondary data sources: the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research Good Research Practices for Retrospective Database Analysis Task Force Report-Part II. Value Health. 2009;12:1053-1061. doi: 10.1111/j.1524-4733.2009.00601.x.
80. Johnson ML, Crown W, Martin BC, Dormuth CR, Siebert U. Good research practices for comparative effectiveness research: analytic methods to improve causal inference from nonrandomized studies of treatment effects using secondary data sources: the ISPOR Good Research Practices for Retrospective Database Analysis Task Force Report-Part III. Value Health. 2009;12:1062-1073. doi: 10.1111/j.1524-4733.2009.00602.x.
81. Velentgas P, Dreyer NA, Nourjah P, Smith SR, Torchia MM, ed. Developing a Protocol for Observational Comparative Effectiveness Research: A User's Guide. Rockville, MD: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (US), AHRQ Methods for Effective Health Care; 2013.
82. Dreyer NA, Schneeweiss S, McNeil BJ, Berger ML, Walker AM, Ollendorf DA, Gliklich RE; GRACE Initiative. GRACE principles: recognizing high-quality observational studies of comparative effectiveness. Am J Manag Care. 2010;16:467-471.