A Drug Utility Analysis of the Withdrawal of the Propoxyphene-acetaminophen Combination from a Teaching Hospital in Taiwan

Chin Yee Kok, Bi Li Chen, Shu Chen Chien

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

3 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Purpose: In March 2011, Taiwan's Food and Drug Administration announced license withdrawal of propoxyphene-containing products in response to the finding of propoxyphene-related fatal cardiotoxicity. This study was conducted to review the usage pattern of propoxyphene and acetaminophen combination dosage form (PA) and to assess the clinical impact in association to the withdrawal. Methods: This retrospective observational study was conducted in an 800-bed regional teaching hospital in northern Taiwan accredited by the Joint Institutional Review Board (JIRB). Study participants were outpatients older than 18 years for whom PA was prescribed between September 2010 and March 2011. Data collection was done through review of medical charts and electronic medical records from the health informatics system. Our primary outcomes were the usage pattern of PA and the efficacy of alternative analgesic agents used in replacement before and after the withdrawal of PA as an analgesic agent for pain management. Data analysis was done using descriptive statistics and Wilcoxon signed-rank test. Results: PA was mainly prescribed for pain control in patients with diseases of the musculoskeletal system and connective tissue (60.8%, n = 463) and neoplasms (16.0%, n = 122). Of the 761 included study participants, most of them were short-term users (82.1%; n = 625) and 17.9% (n = 136) were chronic users of PA. Dosages prescribed were within the recommended dosing range. No cardiovascular events were reported due to PA. The most frequently prescribed alternative analgesic agents in PA replacement were nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) (38.7%; n = 63), acetaminophen (22.1%; n = 36), and nonopioid transdermal analgesic agents (14.7%; n = 24) in short-term users. For chronic users, the most frequently prescribed analgesic agent was acetaminophen (35.2%; n = 25), followed by NSAIDs (31.0%; n = 22) and tramadol (11.3%; n = 8). There was no significant difference between the mean numerical rating score with prescription of PA and prescription of alternative analgesic agents in replacement of PA for pain management. Conclusion: PA was mainly prescribed for the management of mild to moderate musculoskeletal- and neoplasm-associated pain. Acetaminophen and NSAIDs were used most often in replacement of PA. There was no significant clinical effect associated with formulary withdrawal of PA because it was mainly prescribed for short-term use and other comparable alternative agents were available.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)260-263
Number of pages4
JournalJournal of Experimental and Clinical Medicine
Volume4
Issue number4
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Aug 2012

Fingerprint

Taiwan
Teaching Hospitals
Analgesics
Acetaminophen
Pharmaceutical Preparations
Dextropropoxyphene
Anti-Inflammatory Agents
Pain Management
Prescriptions
Medical Electronics
Non-Narcotic Analgesics
Formularies
Tramadol
Musculoskeletal System
Informatics
Electronic Health Records
Research Ethics Committees
Dosage Forms
United States Food and Drug Administration
Licensure

Keywords

  • Acetaminophen
  • Drug utility analysis
  • Pain management
  • Propoxyphene

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Medicine(all)

Cite this

A Drug Utility Analysis of the Withdrawal of the Propoxyphene-acetaminophen Combination from a Teaching Hospital in Taiwan. / Kok, Chin Yee; Chen, Bi Li; Chien, Shu Chen.

In: Journal of Experimental and Clinical Medicine, Vol. 4, No. 4, 08.2012, p. 260-263.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{bb2cc7ec810d4defb92c6dc6c8a20568,
title = "A Drug Utility Analysis of the Withdrawal of the Propoxyphene-acetaminophen Combination from a Teaching Hospital in Taiwan",
abstract = "Purpose: In March 2011, Taiwan's Food and Drug Administration announced license withdrawal of propoxyphene-containing products in response to the finding of propoxyphene-related fatal cardiotoxicity. This study was conducted to review the usage pattern of propoxyphene and acetaminophen combination dosage form (PA) and to assess the clinical impact in association to the withdrawal. Methods: This retrospective observational study was conducted in an 800-bed regional teaching hospital in northern Taiwan accredited by the Joint Institutional Review Board (JIRB). Study participants were outpatients older than 18 years for whom PA was prescribed between September 2010 and March 2011. Data collection was done through review of medical charts and electronic medical records from the health informatics system. Our primary outcomes were the usage pattern of PA and the efficacy of alternative analgesic agents used in replacement before and after the withdrawal of PA as an analgesic agent for pain management. Data analysis was done using descriptive statistics and Wilcoxon signed-rank test. Results: PA was mainly prescribed for pain control in patients with diseases of the musculoskeletal system and connective tissue (60.8{\%}, n = 463) and neoplasms (16.0{\%}, n = 122). Of the 761 included study participants, most of them were short-term users (82.1{\%}; n = 625) and 17.9{\%} (n = 136) were chronic users of PA. Dosages prescribed were within the recommended dosing range. No cardiovascular events were reported due to PA. The most frequently prescribed alternative analgesic agents in PA replacement were nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) (38.7{\%}; n = 63), acetaminophen (22.1{\%}; n = 36), and nonopioid transdermal analgesic agents (14.7{\%}; n = 24) in short-term users. For chronic users, the most frequently prescribed analgesic agent was acetaminophen (35.2{\%}; n = 25), followed by NSAIDs (31.0{\%}; n = 22) and tramadol (11.3{\%}; n = 8). There was no significant difference between the mean numerical rating score with prescription of PA and prescription of alternative analgesic agents in replacement of PA for pain management. Conclusion: PA was mainly prescribed for the management of mild to moderate musculoskeletal- and neoplasm-associated pain. Acetaminophen and NSAIDs were used most often in replacement of PA. There was no significant clinical effect associated with formulary withdrawal of PA because it was mainly prescribed for short-term use and other comparable alternative agents were available.",
keywords = "Acetaminophen, Drug utility analysis, Pain management, Propoxyphene",
author = "Kok, {Chin Yee} and Chen, {Bi Li} and Chien, {Shu Chen}",
year = "2012",
month = "8",
doi = "10.1016/j.jecm.2012.06.004",
language = "English",
volume = "4",
pages = "260--263",
journal = "Journal of Experimental and Clinical Medicine",
issn = "1878-3317",
publisher = "Elsevier Taiwan LLC",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - A Drug Utility Analysis of the Withdrawal of the Propoxyphene-acetaminophen Combination from a Teaching Hospital in Taiwan

AU - Kok, Chin Yee

AU - Chen, Bi Li

AU - Chien, Shu Chen

PY - 2012/8

Y1 - 2012/8

N2 - Purpose: In March 2011, Taiwan's Food and Drug Administration announced license withdrawal of propoxyphene-containing products in response to the finding of propoxyphene-related fatal cardiotoxicity. This study was conducted to review the usage pattern of propoxyphene and acetaminophen combination dosage form (PA) and to assess the clinical impact in association to the withdrawal. Methods: This retrospective observational study was conducted in an 800-bed regional teaching hospital in northern Taiwan accredited by the Joint Institutional Review Board (JIRB). Study participants were outpatients older than 18 years for whom PA was prescribed between September 2010 and March 2011. Data collection was done through review of medical charts and electronic medical records from the health informatics system. Our primary outcomes were the usage pattern of PA and the efficacy of alternative analgesic agents used in replacement before and after the withdrawal of PA as an analgesic agent for pain management. Data analysis was done using descriptive statistics and Wilcoxon signed-rank test. Results: PA was mainly prescribed for pain control in patients with diseases of the musculoskeletal system and connective tissue (60.8%, n = 463) and neoplasms (16.0%, n = 122). Of the 761 included study participants, most of them were short-term users (82.1%; n = 625) and 17.9% (n = 136) were chronic users of PA. Dosages prescribed were within the recommended dosing range. No cardiovascular events were reported due to PA. The most frequently prescribed alternative analgesic agents in PA replacement were nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) (38.7%; n = 63), acetaminophen (22.1%; n = 36), and nonopioid transdermal analgesic agents (14.7%; n = 24) in short-term users. For chronic users, the most frequently prescribed analgesic agent was acetaminophen (35.2%; n = 25), followed by NSAIDs (31.0%; n = 22) and tramadol (11.3%; n = 8). There was no significant difference between the mean numerical rating score with prescription of PA and prescription of alternative analgesic agents in replacement of PA for pain management. Conclusion: PA was mainly prescribed for the management of mild to moderate musculoskeletal- and neoplasm-associated pain. Acetaminophen and NSAIDs were used most often in replacement of PA. There was no significant clinical effect associated with formulary withdrawal of PA because it was mainly prescribed for short-term use and other comparable alternative agents were available.

AB - Purpose: In March 2011, Taiwan's Food and Drug Administration announced license withdrawal of propoxyphene-containing products in response to the finding of propoxyphene-related fatal cardiotoxicity. This study was conducted to review the usage pattern of propoxyphene and acetaminophen combination dosage form (PA) and to assess the clinical impact in association to the withdrawal. Methods: This retrospective observational study was conducted in an 800-bed regional teaching hospital in northern Taiwan accredited by the Joint Institutional Review Board (JIRB). Study participants were outpatients older than 18 years for whom PA was prescribed between September 2010 and March 2011. Data collection was done through review of medical charts and electronic medical records from the health informatics system. Our primary outcomes were the usage pattern of PA and the efficacy of alternative analgesic agents used in replacement before and after the withdrawal of PA as an analgesic agent for pain management. Data analysis was done using descriptive statistics and Wilcoxon signed-rank test. Results: PA was mainly prescribed for pain control in patients with diseases of the musculoskeletal system and connective tissue (60.8%, n = 463) and neoplasms (16.0%, n = 122). Of the 761 included study participants, most of them were short-term users (82.1%; n = 625) and 17.9% (n = 136) were chronic users of PA. Dosages prescribed were within the recommended dosing range. No cardiovascular events were reported due to PA. The most frequently prescribed alternative analgesic agents in PA replacement were nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) (38.7%; n = 63), acetaminophen (22.1%; n = 36), and nonopioid transdermal analgesic agents (14.7%; n = 24) in short-term users. For chronic users, the most frequently prescribed analgesic agent was acetaminophen (35.2%; n = 25), followed by NSAIDs (31.0%; n = 22) and tramadol (11.3%; n = 8). There was no significant difference between the mean numerical rating score with prescription of PA and prescription of alternative analgesic agents in replacement of PA for pain management. Conclusion: PA was mainly prescribed for the management of mild to moderate musculoskeletal- and neoplasm-associated pain. Acetaminophen and NSAIDs were used most often in replacement of PA. There was no significant clinical effect associated with formulary withdrawal of PA because it was mainly prescribed for short-term use and other comparable alternative agents were available.

KW - Acetaminophen

KW - Drug utility analysis

KW - Pain management

KW - Propoxyphene

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84865785735&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84865785735&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.jecm.2012.06.004

DO - 10.1016/j.jecm.2012.06.004

M3 - Article

VL - 4

SP - 260

EP - 263

JO - Journal of Experimental and Clinical Medicine

JF - Journal of Experimental and Clinical Medicine

SN - 1878-3317

IS - 4

ER -