Association Between Gabapentinoid Use and Changes in Claims-Based Frailty Among Long-Term Opioid Users.

IF 3.4 3区 医学 Q2 GERIATRICS & GERONTOLOGY
Jordan Westra, Mukaila Raji, Jacques Baillargeon, Rajender R Aparasu, Yong-Fang Kuo
{"title":"Association Between Gabapentinoid Use and Changes in Claims-Based Frailty Among Long-Term Opioid Users.","authors":"Jordan Westra, Mukaila Raji, Jacques Baillargeon, Rajender R Aparasu, Yong-Fang Kuo","doi":"10.1007/s40266-025-01216-2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Assess the association of opioids and gabapentinoids with changes in frailty among Medicare beneficiaries who used opioids for 90 or more consecutive days.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Using a Medicare sample between 2014 and 2020, this study included long-term opioid users who were eligible for Medicare parts A, B, and D for 3 years and had no prior gabapentinoid use. The study was broken into three 1-year periods: lookback, exposure, and outcome. The exposure of interest was gabapentinoid and opioid use measured in period 2. The primary outcome was difference in frailty between periods 1 and 3. Linear regression was used to assess the difference in frailty change by gabapentinoid and opioid use. Multinomial regression was also used to assess the odds of categorical frailty change by gabapentinoid and opioid use.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Overall, the changes in frailty between assessment periods were small. Those who had no continued opioid/no gabapentinoid use showed decreases in frailty (- 0.0005), while each of the other three groups increased in frailty between the assessment periods (opioids only, 0.0040; gabapentinoids only, 0.0136; opioids + gabapentinoids, 0.0142). In addition, each of the drug groups showed increased odds for large increases in frailty compared with those who had no continued opioid/no gabapentinoid use (opioids only, odds ratio (OR): 1.25, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.04-1.49; gabapentinoids only, OR: 3.12, 95% CI 1.75-5.55; opioids + gabapentinoids, OR: 2.30, 95% CI 1.85-2.87).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Using gabapentinoids, opioids, or a combination of the two showed greater increases in frailty compared with those who used neither drug after long-term opioid use.</p>","PeriodicalId":11489,"journal":{"name":"Drugs & Aging","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Drugs & Aging","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40266-025-01216-2","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"GERIATRICS & GERONTOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: Assess the association of opioids and gabapentinoids with changes in frailty among Medicare beneficiaries who used opioids for 90 or more consecutive days.

Methods: Using a Medicare sample between 2014 and 2020, this study included long-term opioid users who were eligible for Medicare parts A, B, and D for 3 years and had no prior gabapentinoid use. The study was broken into three 1-year periods: lookback, exposure, and outcome. The exposure of interest was gabapentinoid and opioid use measured in period 2. The primary outcome was difference in frailty between periods 1 and 3. Linear regression was used to assess the difference in frailty change by gabapentinoid and opioid use. Multinomial regression was also used to assess the odds of categorical frailty change by gabapentinoid and opioid use.

Results: Overall, the changes in frailty between assessment periods were small. Those who had no continued opioid/no gabapentinoid use showed decreases in frailty (- 0.0005), while each of the other three groups increased in frailty between the assessment periods (opioids only, 0.0040; gabapentinoids only, 0.0136; opioids + gabapentinoids, 0.0142). In addition, each of the drug groups showed increased odds for large increases in frailty compared with those who had no continued opioid/no gabapentinoid use (opioids only, odds ratio (OR): 1.25, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.04-1.49; gabapentinoids only, OR: 3.12, 95% CI 1.75-5.55; opioids + gabapentinoids, OR: 2.30, 95% CI 1.85-2.87).

Conclusions: Using gabapentinoids, opioids, or a combination of the two showed greater increases in frailty compared with those who used neither drug after long-term opioid use.

在长期阿片类药物使用者中,加巴喷丁类药物的使用与基于索赔的虚弱变化之间的关系。
目的:评估阿片类药物和加巴喷丁类药物与连续使用阿片类药物90天或更长时间的医疗保险受益人虚弱变化的关系。方法:使用2014年至2020年的医疗保险样本,本研究包括符合医疗保险a, B和D部分3年且先前未使用加巴喷丁类药物的长期阿片类药物使用者。这项研究分为三个为期一年的阶段:回顾、接触和结果。在第2期测量加巴喷丁类药物和阿片类药物的使用。主要结果是第1期和第3期虚弱程度的差异。采用线性回归评估加巴喷丁类药物和阿片类药物使用对衰弱变化的差异。多项回归也用于评估加巴喷丁类药物和阿片类药物使用导致分类虚弱改变的几率。结果:总体而言,虚弱程度在评估期间的变化很小。那些没有继续使用阿片类药物/加巴喷丁类药物的人虚弱程度下降(- 0.0005),而其他三组在评估期间的虚弱程度均有所增加(仅阿片类药物,0.0040;仅加巴喷丁类,0.0136;阿片类药物+加巴喷丁素,0.0142)。此外,与不继续使用阿片类药物/不使用加巴喷丁类药物的患者相比,每个药物组的脆弱性大幅增加的几率都有所增加(仅使用阿片类药物,优势比(OR): 1.25, 95%可信区间(CI) 1.04-1.49;仅加巴喷丁类,OR: 3.12, 95% CI 1.75-5.55;阿片+加巴喷丁类药物,OR: 2.30, 95% CI 1.85-2.87)。结论:与长期使用阿片类药物的患者相比,使用加巴喷丁类药物、阿片类药物或两者联合使用的患者虚弱程度增加更大。
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
Drugs & Aging
Drugs & Aging 医学-老年医学
CiteScore
5.50
自引率
7.10%
发文量
68
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Drugs & Aging delivers essential information on the most important aspects of drug therapy to professionals involved in the care of the elderly. The journal addresses in a timely way the major issues relating to drug therapy in older adults including: the management of specific diseases, particularly those associated with aging, age-related physiological changes impacting drug therapy, drug utilization and prescribing in the elderly, polypharmacy and drug interactions.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信