Cargando…

Pain and Analgesic Utilization in Medically Underserved Areas: Five-Year Prevalence Study from the Rochester Epidemiology Project

PURPOSE: There is a paucity of data on pain diagnoses and analgesic utilization in medically underserved areas (MUAs). This study compared the prevalence of pain diagnoses and analgesic medication use between MUAs and non-medically underserved areas (N-MUAs) in Southern Minnesota and Western Wiscons...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: D’Souza, Ryan S, Eller, Jennifer, Hoffmann, Chelsey
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Dove 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9078436/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35535264
http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/JPR.S360645
_version_ 1784702331455012864
author D’Souza, Ryan S
Eller, Jennifer
Hoffmann, Chelsey
author_facet D’Souza, Ryan S
Eller, Jennifer
Hoffmann, Chelsey
author_sort D’Souza, Ryan S
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE: There is a paucity of data on pain diagnoses and analgesic utilization in medically underserved areas (MUAs). This study compared the prevalence of pain diagnoses and analgesic medication use between MUAs and non-medically underserved areas (N-MUAs) in Southern Minnesota and Western Wisconsin using the Rochester Epidemiology Project (REP) database. METHODS: Five-year prevalence per 100 people (January 1, 2011 to January 1, 2016) was extracted from the REP database for multiple pain diagnosis variables and analgesic medications. Primary outcomes included comparison of five-year prevalence of each pain diagnosis and analgesic between MUA and N-MUA; and association between index of medical underservice (IMU) score and five-year prevalence for each pain diagnosis and analgesic. Linear regression models were performed to assess associations and significance thresholds were adjusted per the Bonferroni approach to account for multiplicity. RESULTS: The prevalence per 100 people for a diagnosis of chronic pain was similar between MUAs and N-MUAs (13.8 ± 2.5 vs 14.6 ± 2.0, P = 0.543). Similarly, prevalence per 100 people for other specific pain diagnoses including nonspecific chest pain, abdominal pain, lumbago, somatoform disorder, and painful respiration did not differ based on MUA status. In terms of analgesic use, prevalence per 100 people for use of opioids, non-opioid analgesics, salicylates, and NSAIDs did not differ based on MUA status. An association between higher IMU scores and lower prevalence of painful respiration was identified, although this was not significant after significance threshold adjustment per the Bonferroni method. CONCLUSION: Our data suggest that there are no differences in several pain diagnoses and analgesic utilization between MUAs versus N-MUAs, and that the IMU score did not predict changes in prevalence of pain diagnoses or analgesic utilization. Future powered and national database studies are warranted to increase validity of findings to other populations outside of Southern Minnesota and Western Wisconsin.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9078436
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Dove
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-90784362022-05-08 Pain and Analgesic Utilization in Medically Underserved Areas: Five-Year Prevalence Study from the Rochester Epidemiology Project D’Souza, Ryan S Eller, Jennifer Hoffmann, Chelsey J Pain Res Original Research PURPOSE: There is a paucity of data on pain diagnoses and analgesic utilization in medically underserved areas (MUAs). This study compared the prevalence of pain diagnoses and analgesic medication use between MUAs and non-medically underserved areas (N-MUAs) in Southern Minnesota and Western Wisconsin using the Rochester Epidemiology Project (REP) database. METHODS: Five-year prevalence per 100 people (January 1, 2011 to January 1, 2016) was extracted from the REP database for multiple pain diagnosis variables and analgesic medications. Primary outcomes included comparison of five-year prevalence of each pain diagnosis and analgesic between MUA and N-MUA; and association between index of medical underservice (IMU) score and five-year prevalence for each pain diagnosis and analgesic. Linear regression models were performed to assess associations and significance thresholds were adjusted per the Bonferroni approach to account for multiplicity. RESULTS: The prevalence per 100 people for a diagnosis of chronic pain was similar between MUAs and N-MUAs (13.8 ± 2.5 vs 14.6 ± 2.0, P = 0.543). Similarly, prevalence per 100 people for other specific pain diagnoses including nonspecific chest pain, abdominal pain, lumbago, somatoform disorder, and painful respiration did not differ based on MUA status. In terms of analgesic use, prevalence per 100 people for use of opioids, non-opioid analgesics, salicylates, and NSAIDs did not differ based on MUA status. An association between higher IMU scores and lower prevalence of painful respiration was identified, although this was not significant after significance threshold adjustment per the Bonferroni method. CONCLUSION: Our data suggest that there are no differences in several pain diagnoses and analgesic utilization between MUAs versus N-MUAs, and that the IMU score did not predict changes in prevalence of pain diagnoses or analgesic utilization. Future powered and national database studies are warranted to increase validity of findings to other populations outside of Southern Minnesota and Western Wisconsin. Dove 2022-05-03 /pmc/articles/PMC9078436/ /pubmed/35535264 http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/JPR.S360645 Text en © 2022 D’Souza et al. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited. The full terms of this license are available at https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution – Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/) ). By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed. For permission for commercial use of this work, please see paragraphs 4.2 and 5 of our Terms (https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php).
spellingShingle Original Research
D’Souza, Ryan S
Eller, Jennifer
Hoffmann, Chelsey
Pain and Analgesic Utilization in Medically Underserved Areas: Five-Year Prevalence Study from the Rochester Epidemiology Project
title Pain and Analgesic Utilization in Medically Underserved Areas: Five-Year Prevalence Study from the Rochester Epidemiology Project
title_full Pain and Analgesic Utilization in Medically Underserved Areas: Five-Year Prevalence Study from the Rochester Epidemiology Project
title_fullStr Pain and Analgesic Utilization in Medically Underserved Areas: Five-Year Prevalence Study from the Rochester Epidemiology Project
title_full_unstemmed Pain and Analgesic Utilization in Medically Underserved Areas: Five-Year Prevalence Study from the Rochester Epidemiology Project
title_short Pain and Analgesic Utilization in Medically Underserved Areas: Five-Year Prevalence Study from the Rochester Epidemiology Project
title_sort pain and analgesic utilization in medically underserved areas: five-year prevalence study from the rochester epidemiology project
topic Original Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9078436/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35535264
http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/JPR.S360645
work_keys_str_mv AT dsouzaryans painandanalgesicutilizationinmedicallyunderservedareasfiveyearprevalencestudyfromtherochesterepidemiologyproject
AT ellerjennifer painandanalgesicutilizationinmedicallyunderservedareasfiveyearprevalencestudyfromtherochesterepidemiologyproject
AT hoffmannchelsey painandanalgesicutilizationinmedicallyunderservedareasfiveyearprevalencestudyfromtherochesterepidemiologyproject