File Download

There are no files associated with this item.

  Links for fulltext
     (May Require Subscription)
Supplementary

Article: Comparison of antiepileptic drug prescribing in children in three European countries

TitleComparison of antiepileptic drug prescribing in children in three European countries
Authors
Issue Date2010
PublisherWiley-Blackwell Publishing, Inc.. The Journal's web site is located at http://www.epilepsia.com/
Citation
Epilepsia, 2010, v. 51 n. 5, p. 789-796 How to Cite?
AbstractPurpose: Antiepileptic drug (AED) use in young people is increasing. However, evidence of its use at a multinational level is limited. This study aims to characterize AED prescribing in the young in three European countries and to assess the capacity of drug safety surveillance. Methods: A retrospective cohort study was conducted in 2001-2005 using primary care databases: PEDIANET (Italy, 0-11 years), IPCI (The Netherlands, 0-18 years), and IMS Disease Analyzer (United Kingdom, 0-18 years). Prescribing prevalence was calculated by country, patient age, and drug type. Results: In 2005, AED prevalence in children (0-11 years) was highest in Italy [3.9 subjects/1,000 person-years (PY)] followed by the United Kingdom (3.0 subjects/1,000 PY) and The Netherlands (2.2 subjects/1,000 PY). Over the study period, prescribing prevalence in 0-11 year olds was stable in all countries. In contrast, a steady rise of AED prevalence was observed in adolescents (12-18 years) in the United Kingdom (p = 0.0003) but not in The Netherlands (p = 0.88). All countries showed a slight increase in prevalence for newer AEDs. Simultaneously, the prevalence of conventional AEDs decreased in The Netherlands and Italy, but not in the United Kingdom. In 2005, lamotrigine use was highest in The Netherlands and the United Kingdom, whereas topiramate was favored in Italy. Discussion: In Europe, conventional AEDs are still the main treatment choice for children with epilepsy, and the use of newer AEDs remains low. Our study highlights a lack of research capacity to conduct multinational AED safety studies in children. Further work should explore large databases and other health care settings to meet these research needs. © 2009 International League Against Epilepsy.
Persistent Identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/171401
ISSN
2015 Impact Factor: 4.706
2015 SCImago Journal Rankings: 2.579
ISI Accession Number ID
References

 

DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorHsia, Yen_US
dc.contributor.authorNeubert, Aen_US
dc.contributor.authorSturkenboom, MCJMen_US
dc.contributor.authorMurray, MLen_US
dc.contributor.authorVerhamme, KMCen_US
dc.contributor.authorSen, Fen_US
dc.contributor.authorGiaquinto, Cen_US
dc.contributor.authorCeci, Aen_US
dc.contributor.authorWong, ICKen_US
dc.date.accessioned2012-10-30T06:13:55Z-
dc.date.available2012-10-30T06:13:55Z-
dc.date.issued2010en_US
dc.identifier.citationEpilepsia, 2010, v. 51 n. 5, p. 789-796en_US
dc.identifier.issn0013-9580en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/171401-
dc.description.abstractPurpose: Antiepileptic drug (AED) use in young people is increasing. However, evidence of its use at a multinational level is limited. This study aims to characterize AED prescribing in the young in three European countries and to assess the capacity of drug safety surveillance. Methods: A retrospective cohort study was conducted in 2001-2005 using primary care databases: PEDIANET (Italy, 0-11 years), IPCI (The Netherlands, 0-18 years), and IMS Disease Analyzer (United Kingdom, 0-18 years). Prescribing prevalence was calculated by country, patient age, and drug type. Results: In 2005, AED prevalence in children (0-11 years) was highest in Italy [3.9 subjects/1,000 person-years (PY)] followed by the United Kingdom (3.0 subjects/1,000 PY) and The Netherlands (2.2 subjects/1,000 PY). Over the study period, prescribing prevalence in 0-11 year olds was stable in all countries. In contrast, a steady rise of AED prevalence was observed in adolescents (12-18 years) in the United Kingdom (p = 0.0003) but not in The Netherlands (p = 0.88). All countries showed a slight increase in prevalence for newer AEDs. Simultaneously, the prevalence of conventional AEDs decreased in The Netherlands and Italy, but not in the United Kingdom. In 2005, lamotrigine use was highest in The Netherlands and the United Kingdom, whereas topiramate was favored in Italy. Discussion: In Europe, conventional AEDs are still the main treatment choice for children with epilepsy, and the use of newer AEDs remains low. Our study highlights a lack of research capacity to conduct multinational AED safety studies in children. Further work should explore large databases and other health care settings to meet these research needs. © 2009 International League Against Epilepsy.en_US
dc.languageengen_US
dc.publisherWiley-Blackwell Publishing, Inc.. The Journal's web site is located at http://www.epilepsia.com/en_US
dc.relation.ispartofEpilepsiaen_US
dc.subject.meshAdolescenten_US
dc.subject.meshAge Factorsen_US
dc.subject.meshAnticonvulsants - Therapeutic Useen_US
dc.subject.meshChilden_US
dc.subject.meshCohort Studiesen_US
dc.subject.meshDrug Prescriptions - Statistics & Numerical Dataen_US
dc.subject.meshDrug Utilizationen_US
dc.subject.meshEpilepsy - Drug Therapyen_US
dc.subject.meshFemaleen_US
dc.subject.meshFructose - Analogs & Derivatives - Therapeutic Useen_US
dc.subject.meshGreat Britainen_US
dc.subject.meshHealth Care Surveysen_US
dc.subject.meshHumansen_US
dc.subject.meshItalyen_US
dc.subject.meshMaleen_US
dc.subject.meshNetherlandsen_US
dc.subject.meshPhysician's Practice Patternsen_US
dc.subject.meshRetrospective Studiesen_US
dc.subject.meshTriazines - Therapeutic Useen_US
dc.titleComparison of antiepileptic drug prescribing in children in three European countriesen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.identifier.emailWong, ICK:wongick@hku.hken_US
dc.identifier.authorityWong, ICK=rp01480en_US
dc.description.naturelink_to_subscribed_fulltexten_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1111/j.1528-1167.2009.02331.xen_US
dc.identifier.pmid19817815-
dc.identifier.scopuseid_2-s2.0-77951532694en_US
dc.relation.referenceshttp://www.scopus.com/mlt/select.url?eid=2-s2.0-77951532694&selection=ref&src=s&origin=recordpageen_US
dc.identifier.volume51en_US
dc.identifier.issue5en_US
dc.identifier.spage789en_US
dc.identifier.epage796en_US
dc.identifier.isiWOS:000277000900010-
dc.publisher.placeUnited Statesen_US
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridHsia, Y=35068032100en_US
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridNeubert, A=7003774960en_US
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridSturkenboom, MCJM=21743803900en_US
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridMurray, ML=7403583537en_US
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridVerhamme, KMC=6507849095en_US
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridSen, F=36070870100en_US
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridGiaquinto, C=7006585659en_US
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridCeci, A=7006836326en_US
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridWong, ICK=7102513915en_US

Export via OAI-PMH Interface in XML Formats


OR


Export to Other Non-XML Formats