Assessing the Risk for Falls in Older Adults After Initiating Gabapentin Versus Duloxetine.

IF 15.2 1区 医学 Q1 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL Annals of Internal Medicine Pub Date : 2025-02-01 Epub Date: 2025-01-07 DOI:10.7326/ANNALS-24-00636
Alexander Chaitoff, Rishi J Desai, Niteesh K Choudhry, Katharina T Jungo, Nancy Haff, Julie C Lauffenburger
{"title":"Assessing the Risk for Falls in Older Adults After Initiating Gabapentin Versus Duloxetine.","authors":"Alexander Chaitoff, Rishi J Desai, Niteesh K Choudhry, Katharina T Jungo, Nancy Haff, Julie C Lauffenburger","doi":"10.7326/ANNALS-24-00636","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The evidence informing the harms of gabapentin use are at risk of bias from comparing users with nonusers.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To describe the risk for fall-related outcomes in older adults starting treatment with gabapentin versus duloxetine.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>New user, active comparator study using a target trial emulation framework.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>MarketScan (IBM) commercial claims between January 2014 and December 2021.</p><p><strong>Participants: </strong>Adults aged 65 years or older with diabetic neuropathy, postherpetic neuralgia, or fibromyalgia and without depression, anxiety, seizures, or cancer in the 365 days before cohort entry.</p><p><strong>Intervention: </strong>New initiation of treatment with gabapentin or duloxetine (comparator).</p><p><strong>Measurements: </strong>The primary outcome was the hazard of experiencing any fall-related visit in the 6 months after initiating gabapentin or duloxetine until discontinuation of treatment. Secondary outcomes were hazard of severe fall-related events defined as a fall associated with hip fracture or emergency department visit or hospitalization associated with a fall. Stabilized inverse probability of treatment weighting was used to adjust for baseline characteristics.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Our analytic cohort included 57 086 older adults with a diagnosis of interest initiating treatment with gabapentin (<i>n</i> = 52 152) or duloxetine (<i>n</i> = 4934). Overall median follow-up duration was 30 days (IQR, 30 to 90 days). Weighted cumulative incidence of a fall-related visit per 1000 person-years at 30, 90, and 180 days was 103.60, 90.44, and 84.44 for gabapentin users and 203.43, 177.73, and 158.21 for duloxetine users, respectively. At 6-month follow-up, incident gabapentin users had lower hazard of falls (hazard ratio, 0.52 [95% CI, 0.43 to 0.64]), but there was no difference in the hazards of experiencing severe falls. Results were similar across sensitivity and subgroup analyses.</p><p><strong>Limitation: </strong>Claims may contain fewer frail adults and undercount falls.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Compared with incident use of duloxetine, incident use of gabapentin was not associated with increased fall-related visits.</p><p><strong>Primary funding source: </strong>None.</p>","PeriodicalId":7932,"journal":{"name":"Annals of Internal Medicine","volume":"178 2","pages":"187-198"},"PeriodicalIF":15.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annals of Internal Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.7326/ANNALS-24-00636","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/7 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: The evidence informing the harms of gabapentin use are at risk of bias from comparing users with nonusers.

Objective: To describe the risk for fall-related outcomes in older adults starting treatment with gabapentin versus duloxetine.

Design: New user, active comparator study using a target trial emulation framework.

Setting: MarketScan (IBM) commercial claims between January 2014 and December 2021.

Participants: Adults aged 65 years or older with diabetic neuropathy, postherpetic neuralgia, or fibromyalgia and without depression, anxiety, seizures, or cancer in the 365 days before cohort entry.

Intervention: New initiation of treatment with gabapentin or duloxetine (comparator).

Measurements: The primary outcome was the hazard of experiencing any fall-related visit in the 6 months after initiating gabapentin or duloxetine until discontinuation of treatment. Secondary outcomes were hazard of severe fall-related events defined as a fall associated with hip fracture or emergency department visit or hospitalization associated with a fall. Stabilized inverse probability of treatment weighting was used to adjust for baseline characteristics.

Results: Our analytic cohort included 57 086 older adults with a diagnosis of interest initiating treatment with gabapentin (n = 52 152) or duloxetine (n = 4934). Overall median follow-up duration was 30 days (IQR, 30 to 90 days). Weighted cumulative incidence of a fall-related visit per 1000 person-years at 30, 90, and 180 days was 103.60, 90.44, and 84.44 for gabapentin users and 203.43, 177.73, and 158.21 for duloxetine users, respectively. At 6-month follow-up, incident gabapentin users had lower hazard of falls (hazard ratio, 0.52 [95% CI, 0.43 to 0.64]), but there was no difference in the hazards of experiencing severe falls. Results were similar across sensitivity and subgroup analyses.

Limitation: Claims may contain fewer frail adults and undercount falls.

Conclusion: Compared with incident use of duloxetine, incident use of gabapentin was not associated with increased fall-related visits.

Primary funding source: None.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
评估老年人服用加巴喷丁与度洛西汀后跌倒的风险。
背景:说明加巴喷丁使用危害的证据存在使用者与非使用者比较的偏倚风险。目的:描述开始加巴喷丁与度洛西汀治疗的老年人跌倒相关结果的风险。设计:新用户,使用目标试验仿真框架进行主动比较研究。背景:2014年1月至2021年12月期间的MarketScan (IBM)商业索赔。参与者:65岁或65岁以上患有糖尿病性神经病变、带状疱疹后神经痛或纤维肌痛的成年人,在队列进入前365天内没有抑郁、焦虑、癫痫发作或癌症。干预:加巴喷丁或度洛西汀(比较物)治疗的新开始。测量:主要结果是在开始加巴喷丁或度洛西汀治疗直至停止治疗后6个月内出现任何跌倒相关就诊的危险。次要结局是严重跌倒相关事件的危险性,定义为与髋部骨折相关的跌倒或与跌倒相关的急诊或住院。使用稳定的治疗加权逆概率来调整基线特征。结果:我们的分析队列包括57 086名诊断为感兴趣的老年人,他们开始使用加巴喷丁(n = 52 152)或度洛西汀(n = 4934)治疗。总体中位随访时间为30天(IQR, 30至90天)。加巴喷丁服用者在30,90和180天每1000人年跌倒相关就诊的加权累积发生率分别为103.60,90.44和84.44,度洛西汀服用者分别为203.43,177.73和158.21。在6个月的随访中,加巴喷丁使用者发生跌倒的风险较低(风险比为0.52 [95% CI, 0.43至0.64]),但发生严重跌倒的风险没有差异。敏感性和亚组分析的结果相似。限制:索赔可能包含较少虚弱的成年人和少计的跌倒。结论:与意外使用度洛西汀相比,意外使用加巴喷丁与增加的跌倒相关就诊无关。主要资金来源:无。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Annals of Internal Medicine
Annals of Internal Medicine 医学-医学:内科
CiteScore
23.90
自引率
1.80%
发文量
1136
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Established in 1927 by the American College of Physicians (ACP), Annals of Internal Medicine is the premier internal medicine journal. Annals of Internal Medicine’s mission is to promote excellence in medicine, enable physicians and other health care professionals to be well informed members of the medical community and society, advance standards in the conduct and reporting of medical research, and contribute to improving the health of people worldwide. To achieve this mission, the journal publishes a wide variety of original research, review articles, practice guidelines, and commentary relevant to clinical practice, health care delivery, public health, health care policy, medical education, ethics, and research methodology. In addition, the journal publishes personal narratives that convey the feeling and the art of medicine.
期刊最新文献
BP-lowering drugs reduced major CV events to a similar extent in patients with or without isolated diastolic hypertension. After ischemic stroke in patients receiving aspirin, switching to another antithrombotic regimen does not reduce recurrence. Annals On Call - Managing Hyponatremia Part 2. A Retrospective Study Evaluating the Utilization of G2211. In MINOCA, stratified treatment guided by MINOCA cause vs. standard care improved angina status at 1 y.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1