AIMS: The aims of the study were to assess the trend of older and newer anti-epileptic drugs (AEDs) in the elderly population and to analyze the effects of a health-policy intervention with regard to AED use in general practice in a setting in Southern Italy. METHODS: Data were extracted from the 'Caserta-1' Local-Health-Unit Arianna database in the years 2004-07. Patients aged over 65 years, receiving at least one AED prescription and registered in the lists of 88 general practitioners, were selected. The use of older and newer AEDs was calculated as 1 year prevalence and incidence of use and defined daily dose (DDD) per 1000 inhabitants day(-1) . Sub-analyses by gender, age and indication of use were performed. RESULTS: Most of AED users were treated because of neuropathic pain (64.8%). However, the main indication of use for older AEDs (57.8%) was epilepsy, whereas newer AEDs (79.5%) were used for neuropathic pain. Prevalence and incidence of newer AED use increased until 2006, followed by a reduction in 2007. Newer AEDs, particularly gabapentin and pregabalin, were used in the treatment of more patients than older AEDs. However phenobarbital, accounting for more than 50% of total AED volume, was the most prescribed medication during the entire study period. CONCLUSIONS: An increasing use of AEDs has been observed during 2004-07, mostly due to the prescription of newer compounds for neuropathic pain. The fall in the use of newer AEDs during 2007 coincides with revised re-imbursement criteria for gabapentin and pregabalin. The large use of phenobarbital in the elderly should be considered in the light of a risk of adverse drug reactions

Prescribing pattern of antiepileptic drugs in an Italian setting of elderly outpatients: a population-based study during 2004-2007

TRIFIRO', Gianluca;GAGLIOSTRO, maria silvia;BRAMANTI, Placido;SPINA, Edoardo;CAPUTI, Achille;ARCORACI, Vincenzo
2010

Abstract

AIMS: The aims of the study were to assess the trend of older and newer anti-epileptic drugs (AEDs) in the elderly population and to analyze the effects of a health-policy intervention with regard to AED use in general practice in a setting in Southern Italy. METHODS: Data were extracted from the 'Caserta-1' Local-Health-Unit Arianna database in the years 2004-07. Patients aged over 65 years, receiving at least one AED prescription and registered in the lists of 88 general practitioners, were selected. The use of older and newer AEDs was calculated as 1 year prevalence and incidence of use and defined daily dose (DDD) per 1000 inhabitants day(-1) . Sub-analyses by gender, age and indication of use were performed. RESULTS: Most of AED users were treated because of neuropathic pain (64.8%). However, the main indication of use for older AEDs (57.8%) was epilepsy, whereas newer AEDs (79.5%) were used for neuropathic pain. Prevalence and incidence of newer AED use increased until 2006, followed by a reduction in 2007. Newer AEDs, particularly gabapentin and pregabalin, were used in the treatment of more patients than older AEDs. However phenobarbital, accounting for more than 50% of total AED volume, was the most prescribed medication during the entire study period. CONCLUSIONS: An increasing use of AEDs has been observed during 2004-07, mostly due to the prescription of newer compounds for neuropathic pain. The fall in the use of newer AEDs during 2007 coincides with revised re-imbursement criteria for gabapentin and pregabalin. The large use of phenobarbital in the elderly should be considered in the light of a risk of adverse drug reactions
File in questo prodotto:
Non ci sono file associati a questo prodotto.
Pubblicazioni consigliate

Caricamento pubblicazioni consigliate

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11570/1899782
 Attenzione

Attenzione! I dati visualizzati non sono stati sottoposti a validazione da parte dell'ateneo

Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? 14
  • Scopus 37
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 35
social impact