Impact of FDA Drug Risk Communications on Health Care Utilization and Health Behaviors

A Systematic Review

Bibliographic Data

ID9103733
AuthorsStacie B Dusetzina (0000-0002-3907-9196, Harvard University, corresponding author), Ashley S Higashi (University of Chicago), E Ray Dorsey (0000-0002-5140-1248, Johns Hopkins Hospital), Rena M Conti (0000-0002-4190-1839, University of Chicago), Rena Conti, Haiden A Huskamp (0000-0002-1860-3956, Harvard University, corresponding author), Shu Zhu (0000-0003-2919-5473, University of Chicago), Craig F Garfield (0000-0002-6512-6005, NorthShore University HealthSystem), G Caleb Alexander (0000-0002-5622-2986, University of Illinois Chicago)
Year2012
Volume50
Issue6
Pages466-478
Publication date2012-06-01
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessNo
TypeARTICLE
VenueMedical Care (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 0025-7079 • E-ISSN: 1537-1948
PublisherOvid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health) (PUBLISHER)
DOI10.1097/mlr.0b013e318245a160
PMID22266704
PMCIDPMC3342472
OpenAlexW2080033724
LanguageEN
Citations received8
References cited51

OBJECTIVE: To review literature on the impact of The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) drug risk communications on medication utilization, health care services use, and health outcomes. DATA SOURCES: The authors searched MEDLINE and the Web of Science for manuscripts published between January 1990 and November 2010 that included terms related to drug utilization, the FDA, and advisories or warnings. We manually searched bibliographies and works citing selected articles and consulted with experts to guide study selection. STUDY SELECTION: Studies were included if they involved an empirical analysis evaluating the impact of an FDA risk communication. DATA EXTRACTION: We extracted the drug(s) analyzed, relevant FDA communication(s), data source, analytical method, and main outcome(s) assessed. RESULTS: Of the 1432 records screened, 49 studies were included. These studies covered 16 medicines or therapeutic classes; one third examined communications regarding antidepressants. Most used medical or pharmacy claims and a few rigorously examined patient-provider communication, decision making, or risk perceptions. Advisories recommending increased clinical or laboratory monitoring generally led to decreased drug use, but only modest, short-term increases in monitoring. Communications targeting specific subpopulations often spilled over to other groups. Repeated or sequential advisories tended to have larger but delayed effects and decreased incident more than prevalent use. Drug-specific warnings were associated with particularly large decreases in utilization, although the magnitude of substitution within therapeutic classes varied across clinical contexts. CONCLUSIONS: Although some FDA drug risk communications had immediate and strong impacts, many had either delayed or had no impact on health care utilization or health behaviors. These data demonstrate the complexity of using risk communication to improve the quality and safety of prescription drug use, and suggest the importance of continued assessments of the effect of future advisories and label changes. Identifying factors that are associated with rapid and sustained responses to risk communications will be important for informing future risk communication efforts

Drug · Environmental health · Family medicine · Food and drug administration · Health care · Medical emergency · Medical record · MEDLINE · Medication Adherence and Compliance · Medicine · Pharmaceutical industry and healthcare · Pharmacology · Pharmacovigilance and Adverse Drug Reactions · Pharmacy