Socioeconomic status and HRT prescribing: a study of practice-level data in England.


Journal

The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners
ISSN: 1478-5242
Titre abrégé: Br J Gen Pract
Pays: England
ID NLM: 9005323

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
11 2020
Historique:
received: 19 02 2020
accepted: 07 05 2020
pubmed: 30 9 2020
medline: 25 6 2021
entrez: 29 9 2020
Statut: epublish

Résumé

Concerns have been raised that women from deprived backgrounds are less likely to be receiving hormone replacement therapy (HRT) treatment and its benefits, although evidence in support of this is lacking. To investigate general practice HRT prescription trends and their association with markers of socioeconomic deprivation. Cross-sectional study of primary care prescribing data in England in 2018. Practice-level prescribing rate was defined as the number of items of HRT prescribed per 1000 registered female patients aged ≥40 years. The association between Index of Multiple Deprivation (IMD) score and HRT prescribing rate was tested using multivariate Poisson regression, adjusting for practice proportions of obesity, smoking, hypertension, diabetes, coronary heart disease and cerebrovascular disease, and practice list size. The overall prescribing rate of HRT was 29% lower in practices from the most deprived quintile compared with the most affluent (incidence rate ratio [IRR] = 0.71; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.68 to 0.73). After adjusting for all cardiovascular disease outcomes and risk factors, the prescribing rate in the most deprived quintile was still 18% lower than in the least deprived quintile (adjusted IRR = 0.82; 95% CI = 0.77 to 0.86). In more deprived practices, there was a significantly higher tendency to prescribe oral HRT than transdermal preparations ( This study highlights inequalities associated with HRT prescription. This may reflect a large unmet need in terms of menopause care in areas of deprivation. Further research is needed to identify the factors from patient and GP perspectives that may explain this.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND
Concerns have been raised that women from deprived backgrounds are less likely to be receiving hormone replacement therapy (HRT) treatment and its benefits, although evidence in support of this is lacking.
AIM
To investigate general practice HRT prescription trends and their association with markers of socioeconomic deprivation.
DESIGN AND SETTING
Cross-sectional study of primary care prescribing data in England in 2018.
METHOD
Practice-level prescribing rate was defined as the number of items of HRT prescribed per 1000 registered female patients aged ≥40 years. The association between Index of Multiple Deprivation (IMD) score and HRT prescribing rate was tested using multivariate Poisson regression, adjusting for practice proportions of obesity, smoking, hypertension, diabetes, coronary heart disease and cerebrovascular disease, and practice list size.
RESULTS
The overall prescribing rate of HRT was 29% lower in practices from the most deprived quintile compared with the most affluent (incidence rate ratio [IRR] = 0.71; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.68 to 0.73). After adjusting for all cardiovascular disease outcomes and risk factors, the prescribing rate in the most deprived quintile was still 18% lower than in the least deprived quintile (adjusted IRR = 0.82; 95% CI = 0.77 to 0.86). In more deprived practices, there was a significantly higher tendency to prescribe oral HRT than transdermal preparations (
CONCLUSION
This study highlights inequalities associated with HRT prescription. This may reflect a large unmet need in terms of menopause care in areas of deprivation. Further research is needed to identify the factors from patient and GP perspectives that may explain this.

Identifiants

pubmed: 32988956
pii: bjgp20X713045
doi: 10.3399/bjgp20X713045
pmc: PMC7523922
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

e772-e777

Informations de copyright

© British Journal of General Practice 2020.

Références

Endocr Pract. 2017 Jul;23(7):869-880
pubmed: 28703650
J Psychosom Res. 1976;20(5):425-30
pubmed: 1003364
J Antimicrob Chemother. 2019 Jan 1;74(1):242-250
pubmed: 30239809
Endocr Rev. 2017 Jun 1;38(3):173-188
pubmed: 28323934
Lancet Psychiatry. 2019 Feb;6(2):140-150
pubmed: 30580987
BJOG. 2002 Dec;109(12):1319-30
pubmed: 12504965
J Clin Pharm Ther. 2001 Apr;26(2):93-101
pubmed: 11350531
JAMA. 2002 Jul 17;288(3):321-33
pubmed: 12117397
Climacteric. 2012 Jun;15(3):281-7
pubmed: 22612616
Fam Pract. 2020 Mar 25;37(2):194-199
pubmed: 31641756
Fam Pract. 2010 Oct;27(5):499-506
pubmed: 20530133
J Epidemiol Community Health. 1995 Aug;49(4):389-94
pubmed: 7650462
Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2011 Jan;283(1):83-90
pubmed: 20013287

Auteurs

Sarah Hillman (S)

Unit of Academic Primary Care.

Saran Shantikumar (S)

National Institute for Health Research clinical lecturer and registrar in public health.

Ali Ridha (A)

University of Warwick, Coventry.

Dan Todkill (D)

Communicable Disease Control Evidence & Epidemiology.

Jeremy Dale (J)

Unit of Academic Primary Care.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH