Dataset Information

Changes in Prescribing by Provider Type Following a State Prescription Opioid Restriction Law.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Many states have implemented opioid days' supply restriction policies, leading to reductions in opioid prescribing. Although research within certain provider types exist, no study has evaluated a restriction policy by various provider types.

Objective

To evaluate changes in opioid utilization following a days' supply restriction policy stratified by provider type: surgery, emergency medicine, primary care, specialty care, and dentistry.

Design

Interrupted time series (ITS) PARTICIPANTS: Opioid prescription claims of patients in a private health plan serving a large Florida employer from 1/1/2015 to 3/31/2019. Provider types were determined using the Healthcare Provider Taxonomy Code associated with the national provider identifier (NPI).

Interventions

Florida's opioid restriction policy implemented on July 1, 2018.

Main measures

Changes in mean morphine milligram equivalent (MMEs), mean days' supply, and mean number of units dispensed per opioid prescription before and after policy implementation.

Key results

There were 10,583 opioid initial prescriptions dispensed. Treating providers were classified as surgery (16.4%; n = 1732), emergency care (14.3%; n = 1516), primary care (21.2%; n = 2241), specialty care (11.4%; n = 1207), and dentistry providers (23.7%; n = 2511). Significant reductions in mean days' supply were observed across most provider types ranging from 14% reduction for dentistry providers to 41% reduction for specialty care providers. Significant changes were observed for emergency care and specialty care providers with a 30% (p = 0.001)and 29% (p < 0.001) reduction in mean MME, respectively, and a 27% (p = 0.040) reduction in mean number of units dispensed in emergency care providers, after implementation. Pre-implementation trends in opioid prescribing varied by provider type impacting the effects of the opioid days' supply restriction policy.

Conclusions

Pre-policy opioid prescribing varied by provider type with a differential impact on mean MMEs, mean days' supply, and mean number of units dispensed per prescription following implementation.

SUBMITTER: Valdes IL

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9198141 | biostudies-literature | 2022 Jun

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Changes in Prescribing by Provider Type Following a State Prescription Opioid Restriction Law.

Valdes Ivelisse L IL Possinger Marie-Christin MC Hincapie-Castillo Juan M JM Goodin Amie J AJ Dewar Marvin A MA Sumfest Jill M JM Vouri Scott M SM

Journal of general internal medicine 20210708 8

<h4>Background</h4>Many states have implemented opioid days' supply restriction policies, leading to reductions in opioid prescribing. Although research within certain provider types exist, no study has evaluated a restriction policy by various provider types.<h4>Objective</h4>To evaluate changes in opioid utilization following a days' supply restriction policy stratified by provider type: surgery, emergency medicine, primary care, specialty care, and dentistry.<h4>Design</h4>Interrupted time se ...[more]

PMID: 34236602

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportanceIn response to the growing opioid crisis, states implemented opioid prescribing limits to reduce exposure to opioid analgesics. Research in other clinical contexts has found that these limits are relatively ineffective at changing opioid analgesic prescribing.ObjectiveTo examine the association of state-level opioid prescribing limits with opioid prescribing within the 30-day postpartum period, as disaggregated by type of delivery (vaginal vs cesarean) and opioid naivete.Design, setting, and participantsThis retrospective, observational cohort study used commercial claims data from January 1, 2014, to December 31, 2021, from 49 US states and a difference-in-differences staggered adoption estimator to examine changes in postpartum opioid prescribing among all deliveries to enrollees between the ages of 18 and 44 years in the US.ExposuresThe implementation of a state opioid prescribing limit between 2017 and 2019.Main outcomes and measurementsThe primary outcomes for this analysis were the number of prescriptions for opioid analgesics, proportion of prescriptions with a supply greater than 7 days, and milligrams of morphine equivalent (MMEs) per delivery between 3 days before and 30 days after delivery.ResultsA total of 1 572 338 deliveries (enrollee mean [SD] age, 30.20 [1.59] years) were identified between 2014 and 2021, with 32.3% coded as cesarean deliveries. A total of 98.4% of these were to opioid-naive patients. The mean MMEs per delivery was 310.79, with higher rates in earlier years, states that had an opioid prescribing limit, and cesarean deliveries. In a covariate-adjusted difference-in-differences regression analysis, opioid prescribing limits were associated with a decrease of 148.70 MMEs per delivery (95% CI, -657.97 to 360.57) compared with states without such limits. However, these changes were not statistically significant. The pattern of results was similar among other opioid-prescribing outcomes and types of deliveries.Conclusions and relevanceThe results of this cohort study suggest that opioid prescribing limits are not associated with changes in postpartum opioid prescribing regardless of delivery type or opioid naivete, which is consistent with research findings on these limits in other conditions or settings. Future research could explore what kinds of prevention mechanisms reduce the risk of opioid prescribing during pregnancy and postpartum.

Project description:ImportanceOpioid addiction or dependency is a serious crisis in the US that affects public health as well as social and economic welfare. The State of California passed Assembly Bill (AB) 2760 in 2018 that mandates the coprescription of naloxone and opioids for patients with a high overdose risk.ObjectiveTo assess whether the AB 2760-based electronic prompts were associated with increased naloxone orders for opioid users and reduced opioid prescribing when integrated into the practitioner workflow.Design, setting, and participantsThis cohort study used interrupted time series mixed models to evaluate data obtained from the regional integrated health care system Kaiser Permanente Southern California (KPSC) from January 1, 2018, to December 31, 2019. Clinician participants were continuously employed at KPSC during the study period and ordered an opioid analgesic for eligible patients in 2018. Patient participants were KPSC members aged 18 years or older who received an opioid analgesic prescription during the study period. A series of AB 2760-based electronic prompts were integrated into the KPSC electronic health record system on December 27, 2018. The prompts are triggered or activated when 1 or more opioid prescribing conditions, defined in the AB 2760, are met at outpatient visits. Data were analyzed from January 8, 2021, to September 15, 2021.ExposuresAssembly Bill 2760-based electronic prompts for outpatient opioid prescriptions in the electronic health record system.Main outcomes and measuresPrimary outcomes were changes in outpatient naloxone order rates among patients who were prescribed opioids and changes in outpatient opioid prescribing rates. Secondary outcomes were total morphine milligram equivalents (MMEs) ordered per prescriber-month, prompts-targeted objectives, and unintended consequences. Risk for opioid abuse among 3 types of patients was also assessed.ResultsThe 6515 eligible clinicians (mean [SD] age, 45.9 [9.43] years; 3604 men [55.3%]) included in the study served 500 711 unique patients in 1 903 289 outpatient encounters (mean [SD] age, 60.4 [15.67] years; 1 121 004 women [58.9%]) in which an opioid analgesic was prescribed. Naloxone order rate increased from 2.0% in December 2018 to 13.2% in January 2019 and then continued to increase to 27.1% in December 2019. Outpatient opioid prescribing rates decreased by 15.1% (rate ratio [RR], 0.85; 95% CI, 0.83-0.87) per prescriber-month when the electronic prompts were implemented. The postimplementation trend increased by 0.7% per prescriber-month (RR, 1.01; 95% CI, 1.01-1.01); the overall trend was still decreasing. The total MMEs per prescriber-month decreased by 7.8% (RR, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.89-0.96) after implementation of the prompts. The postimplementation trend tapered off. Other safe opioid prescribing measures also improved after implementation (decreases in concomitant muscle relaxants orders [RR, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.89-1.00], initial [RR, 0.86; 0.83-0.89] and renewal [RR, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.62-0.69] opioid orders, and long-term high-dose orders [RR, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.94-0.98]).Conclusions and relevanceThis study found an association between implementation of AB 2760-based prompts and increased naloxone order rate; improved opioid prescribing measures (ie, decreased concomitant muscle relaxants orders, initial and renewal opioid orders, and long-term high-dose orders), except monthly median MMEs; and reduced opioid prescribing. The findings suggest that opioid overdose risks can be mitigated by encouraging safe prescribing habits.

Project description:BackgroundIn response to the opioid overdose crisis in the United States, many states implemented policies to guide opioid prescribing, but their impact on overdose mortality (prescription and non-prescription) remains poorly understood. We examined the impact of U.S. state opioid-prescribing policies on opioid overdose mortality following implementation.MethodsWe calculated opioid overdose mortality rates from 1999-2016 by U.S. state using the CDC WONDER database, overall and separately for overdose deaths from prescription and non-prescription opioids. For each state, policies active on 1/1/2014 were reviewed for the presence and strength of six provisions recommending judicious opioid prescribing practices; "strong" provisions used the words "should," "shall," or "must". Interrupted time series (ITS) tested the association of each strong provision with overdose mortality, overall and separately for prescription and non-prescription opioids, in the two years following implementation. Sensitivity analyses compared between states, used time-lagged analyses, and excluded synthetic opioids from non-prescription opioid deaths.ResultsAll six provisions had consistent direction of effect in ITS and sensitivity analyses. Strong provisions for prescriber training and limits on opioid dose reduced the slope of overall and prescription opioid overdose mortality in both ITS and sensitivity analyses. Reduced non-prescription opioid overdose mortality was only associated with strong provision for prescriber training. Some provisions had a negative impact. In ITS, strong provision for prescriber response to misuse increased the slope of non-prescription opioid overdose mortality. Strong provision for mandatory prescription drug monitoring program use had no relationship with overdose mortality in ITS and was associated with increased overall, prescription and non-prescription opioid overdose mortality in between-state sensitivity analysis.ConclusionOpioid prescribing policies in U.S. states at the peak of the prescription opioid epidemic had modest mortality benefit, and did not reduce non-prescription opioid overdose mortality. A strong provision for prescriber training was the only provision associated with reduced prescription and non-prescription opioid overdose mortality. These findings can inform future efforts addressing prescription drug epidemics.

Project description:ImportanceEvidence suggests that opioid prescribing was reduced nationally following the 2016 release of the Guideline for Prescribing Opioids for Chronic Pain by the US Centers for Diseases Control and Prevention (CDC). State-to-state variability in postguideline changes has not been quantified and could point to further avenues for reducing opioid-related harms.ObjectiveTo estimate state-level changes in opioid dispensing following the 2016 CDC Guideline release and explore state-to-state heterogeneity in those changes.Design, setting, and participantsThis cross-sectional study included information on opioid prescriptions for US individuals between 2012 and 2018 from an administrative database. Serial cross-sections of monthly opioid dispensing trajectories in each US state and the District of Columbia were analyzed using segmented regression to characterize preguideline dispensing trajectories and to estimate how those trajectories changed following the 2016 guideline release. Data were analyzed January to March 2023.ExposureThe March 2016 CDC Guideline for Prescribing Opioids for Chronic Pain.Main outcomes and measuresFour measures of opioid dispensing: opioid dispensing rate per 100 000 persons, long-acting opioid dispensing rate per 100 000 persons, high-dose (90 or more morphine milligram equivalents [MME] per day) dispensing rate per 100 000 persons, and average per capita MME. All measures were calculated monthly, from January 2012 through December 2018.ResultsData from approximately 58 900 retail pharmacies were included in analysis, representing approximately 92% of US retail prescriptions. The overall monthly dispensing rate in the US in early 2012 was approximately 7000 per 100 000 population. Following the 2016 guideline release, the already-decreasing slope accelerated nationally for the overall dispensing rate (preguideline slope, -23.19; postguideline slope, -48.97; change in slope, 25.97 [95% CI, 18.67-32.95]), long-acting dispensing rate (preguideline slope, -1.03; postguideline slope, -5.94; change in slope, 4.90 [95% CI, 4.26-5.55]), high-dose dispensing (preguideline slope, -3.52; postguideline slope, -7.63; change in slope, 4.11 [95% CI, 3.49-4.73]), and per-capita MME (preguideline slope, -0.22; postguideline slope, -0.58; change in slope, 0.36 [95% CI, 0.30-0.42]). For all outcomes, nearly all states showed analogous acceleration of an already-decreasing slope, but there was substantial state-to-state heterogeneity. Slope changes (preguideline - postguideline slope) ranged from 9.15 (Massachusetts) to 74.75 (Mississippi) for overall dispensing, 1.88 (Rhode Island) to 13.41 (Maine) for long-acting dispensing, 0.71 (District of Columbia) to 13.68 (Maine) for high-dose dispensing, and 0.06 (Hawaii) to 0.91 (Arkansas) for per capita MME.Conclusions and relevanceThe 2016 CDC Guideline release was associated with broad reductions in prescription opioid dispensing, and those changes showed substantial geographic variability. Determining the factors associated with these state-level differences may inform further improvements to ensure safe prescribing practices.

Project description:ObjectiveTo evaluate the effects of state opioid prescribing cap laws on opioid prescribing after surgery.Data sourcesOptumLabs Data Warehouse administrative claims data covering all 50 states from July 2012 through June 2019.Study designWe included individuals from 20 states that had implemented prescribing cap laws without exemptions for postsurgical pain by June 2019 and individuals from 16 control states plus the District of Columbia. We used a difference-in-differences approach accounting for differential timing in law implementation across states to estimate the effects of state prescribing cap laws on postsurgical prescribing of opioids. Outcome measures included filling an opioid prescription within 30 days after surgery; filling opioid prescriptions of specific doses or durations; and the number, days' supply, daily dose, and pill quantity of opioid prescriptions. To assess the validity of the parallel counterfactual trends assumption, we examined differences in outcome trends between law-implementing and control states in the years preceding law implementation using an equivalence testing framework.Data collection/extraction methodsWe included the first surgery in the study period for opioid-naïve individuals undergoing one of eight common surgical procedures.Principal findingsState prescribing cap laws were associated with 0.109 lower days' supply of postsurgical opioids on the log scale (95% Confidence Interval [CI]: -0.139, -0.080) but were not associated with the number (Average treatment effect on the treated [ATT]: -0.011; 95% CI: -0.043, 0.021) or daily dose of postsurgical opioid prescriptions (ATT: -0.013; 95% CI: -0.030, 0.005). The negative association observed between prescribing cap laws and the probability of filling a postsurgical opioid prescription (ATT: -0.041; 95% CI: -0.054, -0.028) was likely spurious, given differences between law-implementing and control states in the pre-law period.ConclusionsPrescribing cap laws appear to have minimal effects on postsurgical opioid prescribing.

Dataset Information

Changes in Prescribing by Provider Type Following a State Prescription Opioid Restriction Law.

Background

Objective

Design

Interventions

Main measures

Key results

Conclusions

Publications

Changes in Prescribing by Provider Type Following a State Prescription Opioid Restriction Law.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets