Program

In-person AND virtual! – We are pioneering a new conference format that will connect in-person and virtual audiences to create a unique experience. Matching the innovation that comes through our members’ work, ISPOR is pushing the boundaries of innovation to design an event that works in today’s quickly changing environment. 

In-person registration included the full virtual experience, and virtual-only attendees will be able to tune into live in-person sessions and/or watch captured in-person sessions on-demand in addition to having a variety of virtual-only sessions to attend.

Associations between Pharmacy Choice and Influenza Vaccination: A Multi-Approach Comparison

Speaker(s)

Burbage S1, Parikh MA2, Campbell P2, Ramachandran S3, Gatwood J4, Ozawa S5, Urick B5
1University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Seaford, DE, USA, 2Pharmacy Quality Alliance, Alexandria, VA, USA, 3University of Mississippi, Oxford, MS, USA, 4University of Tennessee Health Science Center, Nashville, TN, USA, 5University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA

OBJECTIVES: Observational studies evaluating the association between pharmacy choice and influenza vaccination can account for confounding in various manners. Our objective was to compare three statistical approaches that account for confounding variables in different ways and examine the association between the type of pharmacy a patient uses and influenza vaccination likelihood.

METHODS: Within 2018 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey data, US adults who used community pharmacy (CP) or mail order pharmacy (MOP) were included. Associations between patient-reported pharmacy type and vaccination status were evaluated using unadjusted weighted logistic regression (WLR), multivariable WLR, and a propensity score (PS)-matched sample using WLR. Multivariable analyses adjusted for sociodemographic, health status, and healthcare utilization confounders. PS of confounders were used to create a 3:1 community:mail matched sample. All analyses were stratified by age (<65 and ≥65 years).

RESULTS: The final sample had 8,074 (95,930,349 weighted) respondents <65 and 4,037 (40,163,276 weighted) respondents ≥65. Unadjusted odds of vaccination for CP users compared to MOP users were OR:0.55(0.47,0.64) <65 and OR:0.76(0.64,0.90) ≥65. Adjusted odds were significantly lower for CP users than MOP users among those <65 (AOR:0.71[0.58,0.87]), but not those ≥65 (AOR:0.87[0.69,1.09]). The PS-matched analysis included 2,962 (37,555,393 weighted) respondents <65 and 3,183 (32,681,992 weighted) respondents ≥65, and showed similar odds to multivariable WLR (<65 OR:0.77[0.65,0.91]); ≥65 OR:0.88[0.74,1.05]).

CONCLUSIONS: Multivariable adjustment and PS-matched analyses produced results similar to each other, but significantly different from unadjusted results. While PS matching facilitates comparability of the exposure groups, multivariable WLR quantifies the effect of confounders on the outcome and can be a useful tool to evaluate relationships between variables with high potential for multiple confounders. However, it is unclear whether either technique has adequately accounted for bias in this relationship. The comparison of these fairly well-known techniques within the context of a weighted sample provides further complexity that warrants additional discussion.

Code

MSR69

Topic

Epidemiology & Public Health, Methodological & Statistical Research

Topic Subcategory

Confounding, Selection Bias Correction, Causal Inference, Public Health

Disease

No Additional Disease & Conditions/Specialized Treatment Areas