Dataset Information

Opioid prescribing by multiple providers in Medicare: retrospective observational study of insurance claims.

ABSTRACT:

Objectives

To estimate the frequency and characteristics of opioid prescribing by multiple providers in Medicare and the association with hospital admissions related to opioid use.

Design

Retrospective cohort study.

Setting

Database of prescription drugs and medical claims in 20% random sample of Medicare beneficiaries in 2010.

Participants

1,808,355 Medicare beneficiaries who filled at least one prescription for an opioid from a pharmacy in 2010.

Main outcome measures

Proportion of beneficiaries who filled opioid prescriptions from multiple providers; proportion of these prescriptions that were concurrently supplied; adjusted rates of hospital admissions related to opioid use associated with multiple provider prescribing.

Results

Among 1,208,100 beneficiaries with an opioid prescription, 418,530 (34.6%) filled prescriptions from two providers, 171,420 (14.2%) from three providers, and 143,344 (11.9%) from four or more providers. Among beneficiaries with four or more opioid providers, 110,671 (77.2%) received concurrent opioid prescriptions from multiple providers, and the dominant provider prescribed less than half of the mean total prescriptions per beneficiary (7.9/15.2 prescriptions). Multiple provider prescribing was highest among beneficiaries who were also prescribed stimulants, non-narcotic analgesics, and central nervous system, neuromuscular, and antineoplastic drugs. Hospital admissions related to opioid use increased with multiple provider prescribing: the annual unadjusted rate of admission was 1.63% (95% confidence interval 1.58 to 1.67%) for beneficiaries with one provider, 2.08% (2.03% to 2.14%) for two providers, 2.87% (2.77% to 2.97%) for three providers, and 4.83% (4.70% to 4.96%) for four or more providers. Results were similar after covariate adjustment.

Conclusions

Concurrent opioid prescribing by multiple providers is common in Medicare patients and is associated with higher rates of hospital admission related to opioid use.

SUBMITTER: Jena AB

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3928962 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:OBJECTIVE:To examine the distribution and patterns of opioid prescribing in the United States. DESIGN:Retrospective, observational study. SETTING:National private insurer covering all 50 US states and Washington DC. PARTICIPANTS:An annual average of 669?495 providers prescribing 8.9 million opioid prescriptions to 3.9 million patients from 2003 through 2017. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES:Standardized doses of opioids in morphine milligram equivalents (MMEs) and number of opioid prescriptions. RESULTS:In 2017, the top 1% of providers accounted for 49% of all opioid doses and 27% of all opioid prescriptions. In absolute terms, the top 1% of providers prescribed an average of 748?000 MMEs-nearly 1000 times more than the middle 1%. At least half of all providers in the top 1% in one year were also in the top 1% in adjacent years. More than two fifths of all prescriptions written by the top 1% of providers were for more than 50 MMEs a day and over four fifths were for longer than seven days. In contrast, prescriptions written by the bottom 99% of providers were below these thresholds, with 86% of prescriptions for less than 50 MMEs a day and 71% for fewer than seven days. Providers prescribing high amounts of opioids and patients receiving high amounts of opioids persisted over time, with over half of both appearing in adjacent years. CONCLUSIONS:Most prescriptions written by the majority of providers are under the recommended thresholds, suggesting that most US providers are careful in their prescribing. Interventions focusing on this group of providers are unlikely to effect beneficial change and could induce unnecessary burden. A large proportion of providers have established relationships with their patients over multiple years. Interventions to reduce inappropriate opioid prescribing should be focused on improving patient care, management of patients with complex pain, and reducing comorbidities rather than seeking to enforce a threshold for prescribing.

Project description:BackgroundThis study aimed to determine real-world prescribing patterns and determinants for Japanese patients with Parkinson's disease (PD), with a focus on patients ≥75 years.MethodsThis was a retrospective, observational, longitudinal study of patients with PD (≥30 years, ICD-10: G20 excluding Parkinson's syndrome) from three Japanese nationwide healthcare claim databases. Prescription drugs were tabulated using database receipt codes. Changes in treatment patterns were analyzed using network analysis. Factors associated with prescribing patterns and prescription duration were analyzed using multivariable analysis.ResultsOf 18 million insured people, 39,731 patients were eligible for inclusion (≥75-year group: 29,130; <75-year group: 10,601). PD prevalence was 1.21/100 people ≥75 years. Levodopa was the most commonly prescribed anti-PD drug (total: 85.4%; ≥75 years: 88.3%). Network analysis of prescribing patterns showed that most elderly patients switched from levodopa monotherapy to adjunct prescription patterns, as did younger patients, but with less complexity. Elderly patients who newly initiated PD treatment remained on levodopa monotherapy longer than younger patients; factors significantly associated with levodopa prescriptions were older age and cognitive impairment. Commonly prescribed adjunct therapies were monoamine oxidase type B inhibitors, non-ergot dopamine agonists, and zonisamide, regardless of age. Droxidopa and amantadine were prescribed as adjunct levodopa therapy slightly more frequently among elderly patients; levodopa adjunct therapy was prescribed when the levodopa dose was 300 mg, regardless of age.ConclusionPrescribing patterns for patients ≥75 years were levodopa centered and less complex than for those <75 years. Factors significantly associated with levodopa monotherapy and continued use of levodopa were older age and cognitive disorder.Clinical trial registrationUMIN Clinical Trials Registry, https://center6.umin.ac.jp/cgi-open-bin/ctr_e/ctr_view.cgi?recptno=R000053425 (UMIN000046823).