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:Importance:The ongoing opioid epidemic in the United States has been fueled by prescription opioids. Increases in opioid-related deaths and complications mandate clinicians in all fields to scrutinize their prescribing patterns. Objective:To characterize the current status and potential complications of opioid prescribing practices among dermatologists for Medicare beneficiaries. Design, Setting, and Participants:A cross-sectional study used Medicare Part D prescriber data to evaluate opioid prescriptions by dermatologists from January 1 to December 31, 2014. The number of prescribers, opioid claims, beneficiaries, and days supplied as well as the type of opioid and geographic location of prescribers were extracted and analyzed. The top 1% of dermatologists prescribing opioids were identified and compared with a random sample of the same size among the remaining dermatologists based on sex, geographic location, type of practice, and time in practice. A systematic literature review was conducted to estimate the outcome of opioid prescribing practices on the exposed population. Main Outcome and Measures:Practice characteristics, epidemiologic factors, and consequences of opioids prescribed by dermatologists. Results:Of the 12?537 dermatologists in the study, 5305 (42.3%) prescribed no opioid claims, 5408 (43.1%) prescribed 1 to 10 opioid claims, and 1824 (14.5%) prescribed more than 10 opioid claims. Among dermatologists prescribing at least 10 opioid claims, a mean of 1.0 opioid claims was given to each beneficiary, with a supply lasting a mean of 4.4 days. A total of 108 dermatologists (93.9%) in the top 1% of opioid prescribers (n?=?115) work in a surgical practice. Estimates suggest that opioids prescribed by dermatologists could annually lead to 3877 to 7602 beneficiaries continuing to use opioids at 1 year and 1825 to 4209 continuing to use opioids at 3 years. A total of 9882 to 22?806 beneficiaries could experience gastrointestinal tract or central nervous system adverse effects and 588 to 999 could experience fractures. Conclusions and Relevance:Opioid prescribing among dermatologists is limited and concentrated in the surgical setting, but it may be associated with a substantial number of adverse events that serve as a reminder to emphasize nonopioid pain medications in the postoperative setting.

Project description:PurposeTo identify targets for corrective interventions and guide improved opioid stewardship, we studied opioid prescribing patterns of attending surgeons compared with surgical trainees for 2 upper-extremity surgeries: open reduction internal fixation (ORIF) of distal radius fractures (DRF), and carpal tunnel release (CTR).MethodsWe retrospectively reviewed records for all patients who underwent CTR or DRF ORIF at 6 hospitals across a large health system from 2016 to 2018. We collected prescriber training level (attending vs trainee), analgesic prescribed, and amount initially prescribed after surgery converted to oral morphine equivalents (OMEs). Regression models evaluated OMEs by prescriber and surgery type. Our final models included an interaction term between prescriber training level and year of surgery to assess group changes over time. No prescription guidelines or formal training was provided during the study period.ResultsWe included 707 CTR and 383 DRF ORIF patients. Opioids prescribed by trainees ranged from 90 to 300 OMEs (median, 180 OMEs). Opioids prescribed by attendings ranged from 100 to 225 OMEs (median, 150 OMEs). Early in the analyses, trainees prescribed significantly more than attendings (320 versus 180). Over time, trainees reduced overprescribing significantly more, by an additional 40 OME/y. By the end of the analysis period, trainees were prescribing less OME than were attendings (112.5 vs 150). Both groups continued to prescribe more than recently suggested amounts for both procedures.ConclusionsOur study found that both attendings and trainees overprescribed opioids after surgery. Trainees prescribed more than attendings over the study period; however, when analyzing for improvement over time and with no formal intervention or training, trainees showed greater improvement, eventually dropping to levels at or below that of attendings. Considering that most change was seen at the trainee level, education for established providers may be an area in which more improvement can be made.Clinical relevanceUnderstanding which providers are more likely to overprescribe opioids can help guide interventions that improve opioid stewardship.