Prescribing for acute migraine in a rural Australian hospital.

IF 2 4区 医学 Q3 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
Rural and remote health Pub Date : 2025-04-01 Epub Date: 2025-04-02 DOI:10.22605/RRH8686
John J van Bockxmeer, Sarah Briody, Marshall Makate, Jack Kalotas
{"title":"Prescribing for acute migraine in a rural Australian hospital.","authors":"John J van Bockxmeer, Sarah Briody, Marshall Makate, Jack Kalotas","doi":"10.22605/RRH8686","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Migraine is an episodic, debilitating form of headache. Guidelines exist for the management of acute migraine, concluding that opioids should be avoided, unless as a last resort. Australian research shows a poor consistency in ED prescribing patterns with no published rural hospital data. Treatment of acute migraine often involves multiple medications used in succession. The overprescription of opioids is reported and often accompanied by an underuse of triptans. Previous studies do not differentiate prescriber intervention over time. It is unclear if opioid medications are routinely selected as first-line therapy in rural Australian EDs. The aim of this research is to complete an evaluation of migraine management in a rural Australian ED and compare trends to pre-existing data.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This study is a retrospective cohort analysis of clinician-diagnosed migraine patients presenting to a single Australian ED between 1 January 2017 and 31 December 2021. Cases with migraine were defined by a primary G439 diagnosis (International Classification of Diseases 10th Revision). Patients with alternative diagnoses and those who did not wait were excluded. Cases underwent a non-blinded chart review extracting demographic and clinical data. Diagnoses were not evaluated against the international headache society criteria. ED interventions were recorded as first-, second-, third- or fourth-line based on the ordering time by the prescribing doctor. Medications were classified as being compliant or non-complaint with current standards of care. Trends were compared to previous studies.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 341 patients were diagnosed with migraine, 72.4% female, median 35 years. A total of 6.5% arrived by ambulance, 76.8% had a prior history of migraine, 6.5% were admitted, 36.4% underwent blood investigations and 12.0% neuroimaging. A total of 7.6% of patients received opioids as first-line therapy, 44.3% failed self-medication and 21.7% of patients with migraine history trialled opioids prior to presentation. Regarding prescriptions, 795 were written, 18.1% were non-compliant with guidelines. Seventy percent of patients received dopamine and 5-HT3 antagonists, 43.1% non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), 27.0% serotonin receptor agonists and 27.0% opioids. There was a statistically significant prescribing difference for aspirin, used in 16.4% of those with a migraine history and 5.1% without (p=0.01). A total of 13.8% reported allergies/contraindications to guideline therapies.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Prescribing for acute migraine in Australia is highly variable by context. This single-site study has similarities and differences with prior research. Rates of opioid prescribing were lower, possibly due to the known sparing effect of serotonin receptor agonist usage. Similar rates of NSAID and intravenous hydration prescription occurred. Patterns of intervention over time in this rural ED demonstrated strong adherence to guidelines and low opioid utilisation. Contextual differences proposed to impact prescribing include staff training, medication availability and shorter wait times. Imaging and pathology investigation rates were lower than in prior research and did not change disposition. Future studies across multiple rural hospitals may help understanding of this topic.</p>","PeriodicalId":21460,"journal":{"name":"Rural and remote health","volume":"25 2","pages":"8686"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Rural and remote health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.22605/RRH8686","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/4/2 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Migraine is an episodic, debilitating form of headache. Guidelines exist for the management of acute migraine, concluding that opioids should be avoided, unless as a last resort. Australian research shows a poor consistency in ED prescribing patterns with no published rural hospital data. Treatment of acute migraine often involves multiple medications used in succession. The overprescription of opioids is reported and often accompanied by an underuse of triptans. Previous studies do not differentiate prescriber intervention over time. It is unclear if opioid medications are routinely selected as first-line therapy in rural Australian EDs. The aim of this research is to complete an evaluation of migraine management in a rural Australian ED and compare trends to pre-existing data.

Methods: This study is a retrospective cohort analysis of clinician-diagnosed migraine patients presenting to a single Australian ED between 1 January 2017 and 31 December 2021. Cases with migraine were defined by a primary G439 diagnosis (International Classification of Diseases 10th Revision). Patients with alternative diagnoses and those who did not wait were excluded. Cases underwent a non-blinded chart review extracting demographic and clinical data. Diagnoses were not evaluated against the international headache society criteria. ED interventions were recorded as first-, second-, third- or fourth-line based on the ordering time by the prescribing doctor. Medications were classified as being compliant or non-complaint with current standards of care. Trends were compared to previous studies.

Results: A total of 341 patients were diagnosed with migraine, 72.4% female, median 35 years. A total of 6.5% arrived by ambulance, 76.8% had a prior history of migraine, 6.5% were admitted, 36.4% underwent blood investigations and 12.0% neuroimaging. A total of 7.6% of patients received opioids as first-line therapy, 44.3% failed self-medication and 21.7% of patients with migraine history trialled opioids prior to presentation. Regarding prescriptions, 795 were written, 18.1% were non-compliant with guidelines. Seventy percent of patients received dopamine and 5-HT3 antagonists, 43.1% non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), 27.0% serotonin receptor agonists and 27.0% opioids. There was a statistically significant prescribing difference for aspirin, used in 16.4% of those with a migraine history and 5.1% without (p=0.01). A total of 13.8% reported allergies/contraindications to guideline therapies.

Conclusion: Prescribing for acute migraine in Australia is highly variable by context. This single-site study has similarities and differences with prior research. Rates of opioid prescribing were lower, possibly due to the known sparing effect of serotonin receptor agonist usage. Similar rates of NSAID and intravenous hydration prescription occurred. Patterns of intervention over time in this rural ED demonstrated strong adherence to guidelines and low opioid utilisation. Contextual differences proposed to impact prescribing include staff training, medication availability and shorter wait times. Imaging and pathology investigation rates were lower than in prior research and did not change disposition. Future studies across multiple rural hospitals may help understanding of this topic.

澳大利亚一家乡村医院为急性偏头痛开处方。
简介:偏头痛是一种发作性的、使人虚弱的头痛。急性偏头痛的管理指南,结论是阿片类药物应避免,除非作为最后的手段。澳大利亚的研究表明,在没有公布农村医院数据的情况下,急诊科处方模式的一致性很差。急性偏头痛的治疗通常需要连续使用多种药物。据报道,阿片类药物的过度处方往往伴随着曲坦类药物的使用不足。以前的研究没有区分开处方者干预的时间。目前尚不清楚阿片类药物是否被常规选择作为澳大利亚农村急诊科的一线治疗。本研究的目的是完成对澳大利亚农村ED偏头痛管理的评估,并将趋势与已有数据进行比较。方法:本研究对2017年1月1日至2021年12月31日期间出现单一澳大利亚ED的临床诊断偏头痛患者进行回顾性队列分析。偏头痛病例由初级G439诊断(国际疾病分类第10版)定义。替代诊断的患者和没有等待的患者被排除在外。病例进行了非盲法图表回顾,提取了人口统计学和临床数据。诊断没有按照国际头痛协会的标准进行评估。ED干预被记录为第一,第二,第三或第四线基于处方医生的订购时间。药物被分类为符合现行护理标准或无投诉。趋势与之前的研究进行了比较。结果:共有341例患者被诊断为偏头痛,其中72.4%为女性,中位年龄35岁。6.5%的人是救护车来的,76.8%的人有偏头痛病史,6.5%的人住院,36.4%的人接受了血液检查,12.0%的人接受了神经影像学检查。共有7.6%的患者接受阿片类药物作为一线治疗,44.3%的患者自我药物治疗失败,21.7%的偏头痛病史患者在发病前试用过阿片类药物。处方795张,18.1%不符合指南要求。70%的患者使用多巴胺和5-HT3拮抗剂,43.1%的患者使用非甾体抗炎药(NSAIDs), 27.0%的患者使用血清素受体激动剂,27.0%的患者使用阿片类药物。有偏头痛病史的患者中使用阿司匹林的比例为16.4%,无偏头痛病史的患者中使用阿司匹林的比例为5.1%,差异有统计学意义(p=0.01)。共有13.8%的人报告了指南治疗的过敏/禁忌症。结论:澳大利亚急性偏头痛的处方因环境而异。本研究与以往的研究有异同之处。阿片类药物处方率较低,可能是由于已知的5 -羟色胺受体激动剂使用的节约效应。非甾体抗炎药和静脉补水处方的发生率相似。在这个农村急诊科,随着时间的推移,干预模式显示出对指南的强烈遵守和低阿片类药物的使用。影响处方的环境差异包括员工培训、药物可用性和更短的等待时间。影像学和病理调查率低于先前的研究,并没有改变处置。未来对多家农村医院的研究可能有助于理解这一主题。
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 求助全文
来源期刊
Rural and remote health
Rural and remote health Rural Health-
CiteScore
2.00
自引率
9.50%
发文量
145
审稿时长
8 weeks
期刊介绍: Rural and Remote Health is a not-for-profit, online-only, peer-reviewed academic publication. It aims to further rural and remote health education, research and practice. The primary purpose of the Journal is to publish and so provide an international knowledge-base of peer-reviewed material from rural health practitioners (medical, nursing and allied health professionals and health workers), educators, researchers and policy makers.
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信