Publications

2019

Gross, Alan E, Danny Hanna, Susan A Rowan, Susan C Bleasdale, and Katie J Suda. (2019) 2019. “Successful Implementation of an Antibiotic Stewardship Program in an Academic Dental Practice.”. Open Forum Infectious Diseases 6 (3): ofz067. https://doi.org/10.1093/ofid/ofz067.

BACKGROUND: Most antibiotic use in the United States occurs in the outpatient setting, and 10% of these prescriptions are generated by dentists. The development of comprehensive antibiotic stewardship programs (ASPs) in the dental setting is nascent, and therefore we describe the implementation of a dental ASP.

METHODS: A collaborative team of dentist, pharmacist, and physician leaders conducted a baseline needs assessment and literature evaluation to identify opportunities to improve antibiotic prescribing by dentists within Illinois' largest oral health care provider for Medicaid recipients. A multimodal intervention was implemented that included patient and provider education, clinical guideline development, and an assessment of the antibiotic prescribing rate per urgent care visit before and after the educational interventions.

RESULTS: We identified multiple needs, including standardization of antibiotic prescribing practices for patients with acute oral infections in the urgent care clinics. A 72.9% decrease in antibiotic prescribing was observed in urgent care visits after implementation of our multimodal intervention (preintervention urgent care prescribing rate, 8.5% [24/283]; postintervention, 2.3% [8/352]; P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS: We report the successful implementation of a dental ASP that is concordant with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Core Elements of Antibiotic Stewardship in the Outpatient Setting. Our approach may be adapted to other dental practices to improve antibiotic prescribing.

Fitzpatrick, Margaret A, Katie J Suda, Stephen P Burns, Linda Poggensee, Swetha Ramanathan, and Charlesnika T Evans. (2019) 2019. “Pre-Operative Screening for Asymptomatic Bacteriuria and Associations With Post-Operative Outcomes in Patients With Spinal Cord Injury.”. The Journal of Spinal Cord Medicine 42 (2): 255-59. https://doi.org/10.1080/10790268.2018.1451237.

CONTEXT: Screening for asymptomatic bacteriuria (ASB) before non-urologic surgery is common but of unclear benefit. Our aim was to describe pre-operative ASB screening and post-operative outcomes in patients with neurogenic bladder due to spinal cord injury (SCI).

METHODS: This was a descriptive retrospective cohort study of adults with SCI undergoing neurosurgical spine or orthopedic lower limb surgery from 10/1/2012-9/30/2014 at Veterans Affairs (VA) medical centers. National VA datasets and medical record review was used to describe frequency of pre-operative ASB screening, presence of ASB, and association with post-operative surgical site infection, urinary tract infection, and hospital readmission.

RESULTS: 175 patients were included. Although over half of patients had pre-operative ASB screening, only 30.8% actually had pre-operative ASB. 15.2% of patients screened were treated for ASB with antibiotics before surgery. Post-operative urinary tract infection (UTI) or surgical site infection (SSI) occurred in 10 (5.7%) patients, and 20 patients (11.4%) were readmitted within 30 days. Neither ASB screening nor the presence of pre-operative ASB were associated with these post-op outcomes (p > 0.2 for all).

CONCLUSION: Pre-operative ASB screening is common in patients with SCI undergoing elective spine and lower limb surgery, although ASB occurs in less than 1/3rd of cases. There were no associations between pre-operative ASB and outcomes. Further studies evaluating the clinical benefit of this practice in patients with SCI should be performed.

Chew, Alexander B, Katie J Suda, Ursula C Patel, Margaret A Fitzpatrick, Swetha Ramanathan, Stephen P Burns, and Charlesnika T Evans. (2019) 2019. “Long-Term Prescribing of Nitrofurantoin for Urinary Tract Infections (UTI) in Veterans With Spinal Cord Injury (SCI).”. The Journal of Spinal Cord Medicine 42 (4): 485-93. https://doi.org/10.1080/10790268.2018.1488096.

CONTEXT/OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the impact of long-term nitrofurantoin for UTI prophylaxis in veterans with SCI.

DESIGN: Matched pairs study.

SETTING: Veterans cared for at VA facilities from 10/1/2012-9/30/2013.

PARTICIPANTS: Veterans.

INTERVENTIONS: n/a.

OUTCOMES MEASURES: UTI, positive urine cultures, resistant cultures.

METHODS: Cases receiving long-term nitrofurantoin (≥90 days supply) were matched to controls by facility. Controls were patients who did not receive long-term nitrofurantoin with a history of ≥3 positive urine cultures and at least one diagnosis of UTI or asymptomatic bacteriuria in the previous year.

RESULTS: 122 SCI cases were identified and matched to 196 controls. After adjusting for differences in baseline demographic characteristics, UTIs were less frequent in cases (OR = 0.60 [95% CI 0.44-0.72]). Cases had a greater mean number of days between positive urine cultures as compared to controls (<0.0001). Cases were more likely to have isolates resistant to nitrofurantoin (P ≤ 0.0001); however, the frequency of multi-drug resistant organisms isolated from the urine was not significantly different.

CONCLUSIONS: Long-term prescription of nitrofurantoin may reduce UTIs in veterans with SCI and there is no evidence that it promotes multi-drug resistance. Future prospective studies should be conducted prior to incorporating routine use of long-term nitrofurantoin into clinical care.

Suda, Katie J, Gregory S Calip, Jifang Zhou, Susan Rowan, Alan E Gross, Ronald C Hershow, Rose I Perez, Jessina C McGregor, and Charlesnika T Evans. (2019) 2019. “Assessment of the Appropriateness of Antibiotic Prescriptions for Infection Prophylaxis Before Dental Procedures, 2011 to 2015.”. JAMA Network Open 2 (5): e193909. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2019.3909.

IMPORTANCE: Antibiotics are recommended before certain dental procedures in patients with select comorbidities to prevent serious distant site infections.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the appropriateness of antibiotic prophylaxis before dental procedures using Truven, a national integrated health claims database.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Retrospective cohort study. Dental visits from 2011 to 2015 were linked to medical and prescription claims from 2009 to 2015. The dates of analysis were August 2018 to January 2019. Participants were US patients with commercial dental insurance without a hospitalization or extraoral infection 14 days before antibiotic prophylaxis (defined as a prescription with ≤2 days' supply dispensed within 7 days before a dental visit).

EXPOSURES: Presence or absence of cardiac diagnoses and dental procedures that manipulated the gingiva or tooth periapex.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Appropriate antibiotic prophylaxis was defined as a prescription dispensed before a dental visit with a procedure that manipulated the gingiva or tooth periapex in patients with an appropriate cardiac diagnosis. To assess associations between patient or dental visit characteristics and appropriate antibiotic prophylaxis, multivariable logistic regression was used. A priori hypothesis tests were performed with an α level of .05.

RESULTS: From 2011 to 2015, antibiotic prophylaxis was prescribed for 168 420 dental visits for 91 438 patients (median age, 63 years; interquartile range, 55-72 years; 57.2% female). Overall, these 168 420 dental visits were associated with 287 029 dental procedure codes (range, 1-14 per visit). Most dental visits were classified as diagnostic (70.2%) and/or preventive (58.8%). In 90.7% of dental visits, a procedure was performed that would necessitate antibiotic prophylaxis in high-risk cardiac patients. Prevalent comorbidities include prosthetic joint devices (42.5%) and cardiac conditions at the highest risk of adverse outcome from infective endocarditis (20.9%). Per guidelines, 80.9% of antibiotic prophylaxis prescriptions before dental visits were unnecessary. Clindamycin was more likely to be unnecessary relative to amoxicillin (odds ratio [OR], 1.10; 95% CI, 1.05-1.15). Prosthetic joint devices (OR, 2.31; 95% CI, 2.22-2.41), tooth implant procedures (OR, 1.66; 95% CI, 1.45-1.89), female sex (OR, 1.21; 95% CI, 1.17-1.25), and visits occurring in the western United States (OR, 1.15; 95% CI, 1.06-1.25) were associated with unnecessary antibiotic prophylaxis.

CONCLUSION AND RELEVANCE: More than 80% of antibiotics prescribed for infection prophylaxis before dental visits were unnecessary. Implementation of antimicrobial stewardship in dental practices is an opportunity to improve antibiotic prescribing for infection prophylaxis.

Suda, Katie J, Michael J Durkin, Gregory S Calip, Walid F Gellad, Hajwa Kim, Peter B Lockhart, Susan A Rowan, and Martin H Thornhill. (2019) 2019. “Comparison of Opioid Prescribing by Dentists in the United States and England.”. JAMA Network Open 2 (5): e194303. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2019.4303.

IMPORTANCE: The United States consumes most of the opioids worldwide despite representing a small portion of the world's population. Dentists are one of the most frequent US prescribers of opioids despite data suggesting that nonopioid analgesics are similarly effective for oral pain. While oral health and dentist use are generally similar between the United States and England, it is unclear how opioid prescribing by dentists varies between the 2 countries.

OBJECTIVE: To compare opioid prescribing by dentists in the United States and England.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Cross-sectional study of prescriptions for opioids dispensed from outpatient pharmacies and health care settings between January 1 and December 31, 2016, by dentists in the United States and England. Data were analyzed from October 2018 to January 2019.

EXPOSURES: Opioids prescribed by dentists.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Proportion and prescribing rates of opioid prescriptions.

RESULTS: In 2016, the proportion of prescriptions written by US dentists that were for opioids was 37 times greater than the proportion written by English dentists. In all, 22.3% of US dental prescriptions were opioids (11.4 million prescriptions) compared with 0.6% of English dental prescriptions (28 082 prescriptions) (difference, 21.7%; 95% CI, 13.8%-32.1%; P < .001). Dentists in the United States also had a higher number of opioid prescriptions per 1000 population (35.4 per 1000 US population [95% CI, 25.2-48.7 per 1000 population] vs 0.5 per 1000 England population [95% CI, 0.03-3.7 per 1000 population]) and number of opioid prescriptions per dentist (58.2 prescriptions per dentist [95% CI, 44.9-75.0 prescriptions per dentist] vs 1.2 prescriptions per dentist [95% CI, 0.2-5.6 prescriptions per dentist]). While the codeine derivative dihydrocodeine was the sole opioid prescribed by English dentists, US dentists prescribed a range of opioids containing hydrocodone (62.3%), codeine (23.2%), oxycodone (9.1%), and tramadol (4.8%). Dentists in the United States also prescribed long-acting opioids (0.06% of opioids prescribed by US dentists [6425 prescriptions]). Long-acting opioids were not prescribed by English dentists.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: This study found that in 2016, dentists in the United States prescribed opioids with significantly greater frequency than their English counterparts. Opioids with a high potential for abuse, such as oxycodone, were frequently prescribed by US dentists but not prescribed in England. These results illustrate how 1 source of opioids differs substantially in the United States vs England. To reduce dental opioid prescribing in the United States, dentists could adopt measures similar to those used in England, including national guidelines for treating dental pain that emphasize prescribing opioids conservatively.

Thornhill, Martin H, Katie J Suda, Michael J Durkin, and Peter B Lockhart. (2019) 2019. “Is It Time US Dentistry Ended Its Opioid Dependence?”. Journal of the American Dental Association (1939) 150 (10): 883-89. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adaj.2019.07.003.

BACKGROUND: In 2017, 11.4 million US citizens misused prescription opioids, resulting in 46 overdose deaths daily and a $78.5 billion burden on the economy. Dentists are one of the most frequent prescribers of opioids, and there is concern that dental prescribing is contributing to the opioid crisis.

METHODS: A 2019 study showed 22.3% of US dental prescriptions were for opioids compared with 0.6% of dental prescriptions in England where nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and acetaminophen accounted for most analgesic prescriptions. This observation prompted a review of international analgesic prescribing habits and of the advantages and disadvantages of opioids and NSAIDs for treating dental pain.

RESULTS: US opioid prescribing far exceeded that in other countries where NSAIDs accounted for most dental analgesic prescribing. Furthermore, results from reviews published respectively in 2018 and 2016 help confirm that NSAIDs and NSAID-acetaminophen combinations are as effective as or more effective than opioids for controlling dental pain and cause significantly fewer adverse effects.

CONCLUSIONS: In light of the potential for misuse and evidence that NSAIDs are as effective as opioids and have fewer adverse effects, there is clear patient benefit in avoiding opioids for the prevention or management of dental pain.

PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS: A growing preponderance of evidence shows that opioids are not needed for routine oral health care. This article provides an overview of the evidence and outlines possible pain management models to minimize opioid use in dentistry. The purpose is to stimulate debate about this important topic and encourage the development of definitive guidance by professional bodies, health care providers, and state and federal agencies.

Durkin, Michael J, Qianxi Feng, Katie J Suda, Peter B Lockhart, Martin H Thornhill, Kyle Warren, Kiraat D Munshi, Rochelle R Henderson, Victoria J Fraser, and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Epicenters. (2019) 2019. “Longitudinal Antibiotic Prescribing Trends Among US Dental Specialists Within a Pharmacy Benefits Manager, 2013 through 2015.”. Journal of the American Dental Association (1939) 150 (10): 846-853.e5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adaj.2019.05.028.

BACKGROUND: Reducing inappropriate antibiotic prescriptions (Rxs) is a major quality improvement initiative in the United States. Tracking antibiotic prescribing trends is 1 method of assessing improvement in antibiotic prescribing. The purpose of this study was to assess longitudinal antibiotic prescribing practices among dental specialists.

METHODS: This was a retrospective ecological longitudinal trend study. The authors calculated monthly systemic antibiotic Rx counts, and rates per 100,000 beneficiaries, from a pharmacy benefits manager in the United States from 2013 through 2015. The authors calculated average annual antibiotic Rx rates (AARs) for the 3-year study period. The authors used a quasi-Poisson regression model to analyze antibiotic Rx trends. The authors quantified seasonal trends, when present, via peak-to-trough ratios (PTTRs).

RESULTS: Dental specialists prescribed 2.4 million antibiotics to the cohort of 38 million insurance beneficiaries during the 3-year study period (AAR = 2,086 Rxs per 100,000 beneficiaries). Oral and maxillofacial surgeons prescribed the most antibiotics (1,172,104 Rxs; AAR = 1,018 Rxs per 100,000 beneficiaries), followed by periodontists (527,038 Rxs; AAR = 457 Rxs per 100,000 beneficiaries), and endodontists (447,362 Rxs; AAR = 388 Rxs per 100,000 beneficiaries). Longitudinal antibiotic prescribing trends were stable among all dental specialties in the regression models (P > .05). The authors observed substantial seasonal variation in antibiotic Rxs in 2 specialties: pediatric dentistry (PTTR, 1.18; 95% confidence interval, 1.13 to 1.25) and orthodontics and dentofacial orthopedics (PTTR, 1.41; 95% confidence interval, 1.21 to 1.71), with the highest rates of antibiotic Rxs in the spring and winter.

CONCLUSIONS: Antibiotic prescribing practices for dental specialists remained stable. The authors observed seasonal trends in 2 specialties.

PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS: Public health efforts are needed improve antibiotic prescribing among dental specialties.

Schumock, Glen T, JoAnn Stubbings, James M Hoffman, Michelle D Wiest, Katie J Suda, Matthew H Rim, Mina Tadrous, et al. (2019) 2019. “National Trends in Prescription Drug Expenditures and Projections for 2019.”. American Journal of Health-System Pharmacy : AJHP : Official Journal of the American Society of Health-System Pharmacists 76 (15): 1105-21. https://doi.org/10.1093/ajhp/zxz109.

PURPOSE: Historical trends and factors likely to influence future pharmaceutical expenditures are discussed, and projections are made for drug spending in 2019 in nonfederal hospitals, clinics, and overall (all sectors).

METHODS: Drug expenditure data through calendar year 2018 were obtained from the IQVIA National Sales Perspectives database and analyzed. New drug approvals, patent expirations, and other factors that may influence drug spending in hospitals and clinics in 2019 were also reviewed. Expenditure projections for 2019 for nonfederal hospitals, clinics, and overall (all sectors) were made through a combination of quantitative analyses and expert opinion.

RESULTS: U.S. prescription sales in calendar year 2018 totaled $476.2 billion, a 5.5% increase from 2017 spending. The top 3 drugs by expenditures were adalimumab ($19.1 billion), insulin glargine ($9.3 billion), and etanercept ($8.0 billion). Prescription expenditures in nonfederal hospitals totaled $35.8 billion, a 4.8% increase from 2017. Expenditures in clinics in 2018 increased by 13.0% to $80.5 billion. The increase in spending in nonfederal hospitals was largely driven by new products and increased utilization of existing products. The list of the top 25 drugs by expenditures in nonfederal hospitals and clinics was dominated by specialty drugs.

CONCLUSION: We predict continued moderate growth of 4-6% in overall drug expenditures (across the entire U.S. market). We expect the clinic sector to continue to experience high (11-13%) growth in drug spending in 2019. Finally, for nonfederal hospitals we anticipate growth in the range of 3-5%. These estimates are at the national level. Health-system pharmacy leaders should carefully examine local drug utilization patterns to determine their own organization's anticipated spending in 2019.

Tampi, Malavika P, Lauren Pilcher, Olivia Urquhart, Erinne Kennedy, Kelly K O’Brien, Peter B Lockhart, Elliot Abt, et al. (2019) 2019. “Antibiotics for the Urgent Management of Symptomatic Irreversible Pulpitis, Symptomatic Apical Periodontitis, and Localized Acute Apical Abscess: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis-a Report of the American Dental Association.”. Journal of the American Dental Association (1939) 150 (12): e179-e216. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adaj.2019.09.011.

BACKGROUND: Patients with pulpal and periapical conditions often seek treatment for pain, intraoral swelling, or both. Even when definitive, conservative dental treatment (DCDT) is an option, antibiotics are often prescribed. The purpose of this review was to summarize available evidence regarding the effect of antibiotics, either alone or as adjuncts to DCDT, to treat immunocompetent adults with pulpal and periapical conditions, as well as additional population-level harms associated with antibiotic use.

TYPE OF STUDIES REVIEWED: The authors updated 2 preexisting systematic reviews to identify newly published randomized controlled trials. They also searched for systematic reviews to inform additional harm outcomes. They conducted searches in MEDLINE, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature. Pairs of reviewers independently conducted study selection, data extraction, and assessment of risk of bias and certainty in the evidence using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach.

RESULTS: The authors found no new trials via the update of the preexisting reviews. Ultimately, 3 trials and 8 additional reports proved eligible for this review. Trial estimates for all outcomes suggested both a benefit and harm over 7 days (very low to low certainty evidence). The magnitude of additional harms related to antibiotic use for any condition were potentially large (very low to moderate certainty evidence).

CONCLUSIONS AND PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS: Evidence for antibiotics, either alone or as adjuncts to DCDT, showed both a benefit and a harm for outcomes of pain and intraoral swelling and a large potential magnitude of effect in regard to additional harm outcomes. The impact of dental antibiotic prescribing requires further research.

Radomski, Thomas R, Xinhua Zhao, Joseph T Hanlon, Joshua M Thorpe, Carolyn T Thorpe, Jennifer G Naples, Florentina E Sileanu, et al. (2019) 2019. “Use of a Medication-Based Risk Adjustment Index to Predict Mortality Among Veterans Dually-Enrolled in VA and Medicare.”. Healthcare (Amsterdam, Netherlands) 7 (4). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hjdsi.2019.04.003.

BACKGROUND: There is systemic undercoding of medical comorbidities within administrative claims in the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA). This leads to bias when applying claims-based risk adjustment indices to compare outcomes between VA and non-VA settings. Our objective was to compare the accuracy of a medication-based risk adjustment index (RxRisk-VM) to diagnostic claims-based indices for predicting mortality.

METHODS: We modified the RxRisk-V index (RxRisk-VM) by incorporating VA and Medicare pharmacy and durable medical equipment claims in Veterans dually-enrolled in VA and Medicare in 2012. Using the concordance (C) statistic, we compared its accuracy in predicting 1 and 3-year all-cause mortality to the following models: demographics only, demographics plus prescription count, or demographics plus a diagnostic claims-based risk index (e.g., Charlson, Elixhauser, or Gagne). We also compared models containing demographics, RxRisk-VM, and a claims-based index.

RESULTS: In our cohort of 271,184 dually-enrolled Veterans (mean age = 70.5 years, 96.1% male, 81.7% non-Hispanic white), RxRisk-VM (C = 0.773) exhibited greater accuracy in predicting 1-year mortality than demographics only (C = 0.716) or prescription counts (C = 0.744), but was less accurate than the Charlson (C = 0.794), Elixhauser (C = 0.80), or Gagne (C = 0.810) indices (all P < 0.001). Combining RxRisk-VM with claims-based indices enhanced its accuracy over each index alone (all models C ≥ 0.81). Relative model performance was similar for 3-year mortality.

CONCLUSIONS: The RxRisk-VM index exhibited a high level of, but slightly less, accuracy in predicting mortality in comparison to claims-based risk indices.

IMPLICATIONS: Its application may enhance the accuracy of studies examining VA and non-VA care and enable risk adjustment when diagnostic claims are not available or biased.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level 3.