Dataset Information

Opioid prescription patterns among patients who doctor shop; Implications for providers.

ABSTRACT: INTRODUCTION:Patients who doctor shop for opioids are a vulnerable population that present a difficult dilemma for their health care providers regarding best methods of immediate treatment and how to manage their risk of harm from opioids. We aim to describe and compare opioid prescription patterns among high quantity prescription patients who doctor shopped, high quantity prescription patients who did not (doctor shopping eligible patients), and the remaining patients who received opioid prescriptions to guide population health policies for high risk opioid use patients. METHODS:We performed a cross-sectional descriptive analysis of opioid prescriptions during an 8-year period using California's de-identified Controlled Substance Utilization Review and Evaluation System (CURES) database from years 2008-2015. We identified the prevalence of patients who doctor shopped and depicted their opioid prescription patterns including prescriber characteristics, in comparison to the aforementioned groups. Doctor shopping was defined by patients who received greater than 6 or more prescriptions from at least 6 different prescribers within 6 months of time. RESULTS:Among the 3 million individuals who received an opioid prescription during the 8-year period, 1.3% met the doctor shopper definition. These patients received high levels of chronic opioids with 82% and 33% averaging greater than 20 and 100 morphine milligram equivalents (MME) daily, respectively, in comparison to 72% and 18% in the doctor shopping eligible group. Patients who doctor shopped received a significant proportion of their MME from 1 main prescriber (54%) and only received 2-5% of their total MME from episodic care providers, despite 88% receiving a prescription from these providers. CONCLUSIONS:Patients who doctor shop are at high risk of opioid use disorder but represent a small fraction of those with dangerous opioid use. Furthermore, these individuals do not receive substantial opioids from episodic providers, which challenges the utility of prescription reduction programs in curbing use among this population. These results suggest we re-evaluate physician roles in the care of these patients and focus on referral to treatment and harm reduction strategies.

SUBMITTER: Schneberk T

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7250533 | biostudies-literature | 2020

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Opioid prescription patterns among patients who doctor shop; Implications for providers.

Schneberk Todd T Raffetto Brian B Friedman Joseph J Wilson Andrew A Kim David D Schriger David L DL

PloS one 20200526 5

<h4>Introduction</h4>Patients who doctor shop for opioids are a vulnerable population that present a difficult dilemma for their health care providers regarding best methods of immediate treatment and how to manage their risk of harm from opioids. We aim to describe and compare opioid prescription patterns among high quantity prescription patients who doctor shopped, high quantity prescription patients who did not (doctor shopping eligible patients), and the remaining patients who received opioi ...[more]

PMID: 32453745

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundNaloxone co-prescription is recommended for patients on long-term opioids for pain, yet there are few data on the practice.ObjectiveTo explore naloxone co-prescribing acceptability among primary care providers for patients on long-term opioids.DesignWe surveyed providers at six safety-net primary care clinics in San Francisco that had initiated naloxone co-prescribing. Providers were encouraged to offer naloxone to patients on long-term opioids or otherwise at risk of witnessing or experiencing an overdose. Surveys were administered electronically 4 to 11 months after co-prescribing began.Key resultsOne hundred eleven providers (69 %) responded to the survey, among whom 41.4 % were residents; 40.5 % practiced internal medicine and 55.0 % practiced family medicine. Most (79.3 %) prescribed naloxone, to a mean of 7.7 patients; 99.1 % were likely to prescribe naloxone in the future. Providers reported they were likely to prescribe naloxone to most patients, including those on low doses, defined as <20 morphine equivalent mg daily (59.8 %), ≥65 years old (83.9 %), with no overdose history (80.7 %), and with no substance use disorder (73.6 %). Most providers felt that prescribing naloxone did not affect their opioid prescribing, 22.5 % felt that they might prescribe fewer opioids, and 3.6 % felt that they might prescribe more. Concerns about providing naloxone were largely administrative, relating to time and pharmacy or payer logistics. Internists (incidence rate ratio [IRR] = 0.49, 95 % CI = 0.26-0.93, p = 0.029), those licensed for 5-20 years (IRR = 2.10, 95 % CI = 1.35-3.25, p = 0.001), and those with more patients prescribed long-term opioids (IRR = 1.10, 95 % CI = 1.05-1.14, p <0.001) were independently more likely to prescribe a greater number of naloxone compared to participants without these exposures.ConclusionsNaloxone co-prescription is considered acceptable among primary care providers. Barriers such as time and dispensing logistics may be alleviated by novel naloxone formulations intended for laypersons recently approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration.

Project description:ImportanceAn increase in opioid prescription has been observed in the Netherlands. It is vital to understand this increase and to identify risk factors for opioid prescription to ensure that health interventions remain appropriately targeted.ObjectivesTo determine the prevalence of opioid prescriptions and adverse events associated with opioids, and to identify risk factors associated with opioid prescription in the Dutch population.Design, setting, and participantsThis cohort study used national statistics from the Netherlands from January 1, 2013, to December 31, 2017, including the full Dutch population of 16?779?575 people in 2013 and 17?081?507 people in 2017. Data from the Dutch Health Monitor surveys of 2012 and 2016 were also included. Databases were anonymized prior to analysis. All analyses were performed between December 2018 and February 2019.ExposureOpioid prescription.Main outcomes and measuresThe main outcomes were the dynamics of opioid prescriptions, hospital admissions for opioid overdose, and opioid overdose mortalities. The secondary outcome was risk factors associated with opioid prescription.ResultsIn 2013, 814?211 individuals (4.9% of the total population) received an opioid prescription. In 2017, 1?027?019 individuals (6.0% of the total population) received at least 1 opioid prescription (mean [SD] age, 59.3 [18.5] years; 613?203 [59.7%] women). The rate of hospital admissions for opioid overdose was 9.2 per 100?000 inhabitants in 2013 and 13.1 per 100?000 inhabitants in 2017 (relative risk, 1.43 [95% CI, 1.34-1.52]). Similarly, an increased risk of opioid overdose death was observed, from 0.83 per 100?000 inhabitants in 2013 to 1.2 per 100?000 inhabitants in 2017 (relative risk, 1.49 [95% CI, 1.20-1.85]). Based on data from the 2012 Dutch Health Monitor survey, risk factors associated with opioid prescription included being older than 65 years (odds ratio [OR], 4.20 [95% CI, 3.98-4.43]), having only a primary school education (OR, 3.62 [95% CI, 3.46-3.77]), being widowed (OR, 3.30 [95% CI, 3.13-3.49]), reporting always feeling symptoms of depression (OR, 3.77 [95% CI, 3.41-4.18]), and reporting poor or very poor physical health (OR, 10.40 [95% CI, 10.01-10.81]). Self-reported back pain (OR, 4.34 [95% CI, 4.23-4.46]) and rheumatoid arthritis or fibromyalgia (OR, 3.77 [95% CI, 3.65-3.90]) were also associated with opioid prescription. However, unemployment (OR, 1.05 [95% CI, 0.96-1.13]) was not associated with opioid prescription, and alcohol use disorder (OR, 0.76 [95% CI, 0.73-0.80]) was negatively associated with opioid prescription.Conclusions and relevanceThis study found that opioid prescriptions have increased in the Netherlands. Although the risk of adverse events is still relatively low, there is an urgent need to review pain management to prevent a further increase in opioid prescription.

Project description:BackgroundWhen being treated at a university-based hospital, a patient may encounter multiple levels of physicians, including trainees during a single emergency visit. Patients want to know the roles of their providers, but their understanding of the medical education hierarchy is poor.ObjectivesOur study explored patient understanding of commonly used physician and trainee titles as well as the factors that contribute to patient understanding in our emergency department patient population. Additionally, we evaluated a new badge buddy system that identifies medical personnel impacts patient's perceptions of providers. We examined how the increasing prevalence of medicine in media may change patient perceptions of the medical hierarchy.MethodsPatients pending discharge from the emergency room was assessed through a knowledge-based and opinion-based questionnaire. Questions quantified the percentage of patients who understood titles of their team.ResultsOf 423 patients who completed the study, 88% (N = 365) felt it was very important to know the level of training of their doctor when being treated in the emergency department. Seventy-four percent (N = 303) believed they knew the role of their care providers but the mean knowledge score was 4.7 of 8, suggesting a poor understanding of the medical training hierarchy. Younger patients and those who felt that knowing the level of training of their doctor was very important noticed the badge buddies more frequently (80.9%, P = .020 and 81%, P < .001).ConclusionsOur study found that patients had a poor understanding of the medical training hierarchy, but felt that it is important to know the level of training of their staff. The implementation of a badge buddy served this purpose for most patients, but was less effective for older patients. Further research may be needed to evaluate if a different intervention, such as a detailed video or teach-back techniques explaining the levels of medical training, would be more effective for a larger population of patients.

Project description:BackgroundRadiation oncologists (ROs) play an important role in managing cancer pain; however, their opioid prescribing patterns remain poorly described.MethodsThe 2016 Medicare Physician Compare National Downloadable and the 2016 Medicare Part D Prescriber Data files were cross-linked to identify RO-written opioid prescriptions.ResultsOf 4,627 identified ROs, 1,360 (29.3%) wrote >10 opioid prescriptions. The average number of opioid prescriptions written was significantly (P ≤ .05) associated with the following RO characteristics: sex [13.1 ± 36.5 male vs 7.5 ± 16.9 female]; years since medical school graduation [4.5 ± 11.5 1-10 years vs 12.6 ± 26.0 11-24 years vs 13.3 ± 40.9 ≥25 years]; practice size [15.5 ± 44.6 size ≤10 vs 13.3 ± 25.9 size 11-49 vs 8.5 ± 12.7 size 50-99 vs 8.8 ± 26.9 size ≥100]; Medicare Physician Quality Reporting System (PQRS) participation [12.6 ± 31.8 yes vs 7.0 ± 35.4 no]; and practice location [17.4 ± 47.0 South vs 10.6 ± 29.4 Midwest vs 8.1 ± 13.9 West vs 6.9 ± 15.2 Northeast]. On multivariable regression modeling, male sex (RR 1.29, 95% CI 1.22-1.35, P < .001), ≥25 years since graduation (RR 0.78, 95% CI 0.64-0.70, 1-10 years vs ≥25 years; RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.96 - 1.04, 11-24 years vs ≥25 years; P < .001), practice size <10 members (RR 1.51, CI 1.44-1.59, ≤10 vs ≥100 members, RR 1.27, CI 1.20-1.34, 10-49 vs ≥100 members, RR 0.86, CI 0.80-0.92, 50-99 vs ≥100 members, P < .001), PQRS participation (RR 1.12, CI 1.04-1.19, P < .002), and Southern location (RR 0.67, CI 0.64-0.70, Midwest vs South; RR 0.39, CI 0.37-0.41, Northeast vs South; RR 0.43, CI 0.41-0.46, West vs South; P < .001) were predictive of higher opioid prescription rates.ConclusionsFactors associated with increased number of RO-written opioid prescriptions were male sex, ≥25 years since graduation, group practice <10, PQRS participation, and Southern location. Additional research is required to establish optimal opioid prescribing practices for ROs.

Project description:ImportanceSafe opioid prescribing practices are critical to mitigate the risk of prescription opioid overdose in adolescents and young adults. However, studies that examine opioid prescribing patterns associated with prescription opioid overdose have mostly focused on older adults. The generalizability of these studies to adolescents and young adults is unclear.ObjectiveTo identify opioid prescribing patterns associated with prescription opioid overdose in adolescents and young adults.Design, setting, and participantsThis retrospective cohort study assessed privately insured patients aged 12 to 21 years with opioid prescription claims in the IBM MarketScan Commercial Claims and Encounters database between July 1, 2009, and October 1, 2017, and no cancer diagnosis. Data analysis was performed from January 1 to April 30, 2019.Main outcomes and measuresThe outcome was a treated opioid overdose as indicated by diagnosis codes. On the basis of days supplied, opioid prescription claims were converted to person-days (the unit of analysis) on which opioid exposure would occur if patients took medications as prescribed. Logistic regression with clustered SEs at the patient level was used to model the occurrence of overdose on a person-day as a function of daily opioid dosage category (<30, 30-59, 60-89, 90-119, or ≥120 morphine milligram equivalents), concurrent benzodiazepine use, and extended-release or long-acting opioid use. Regressions controlled for demographic characteristics, year, opioid use within 180 days, and comorbidities (mental health disorder, substance use disorder, and other chronic condition).ResultsA total of 2 752 612 patients (mean [SD] age at cohort entry, 17.2 [2.5] years; 1 451 918 [52.8%] female) participated in the study. Patients had 4 686 355 opioid prescription claims, corresponding to 21 605 444 person-days. Overdose occurred on 255 person-days among 249 patients (0.01% of the sample). Each increase in daily opioid dosage category was associated with higher overdose risk (adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 1.18; 95% CI, 1.05-1.31). Compared with no use, both concurrent benzodiazepine use (AOR, 1.83; 95% CI, 1.24-2.71) and extended-release or long-acting opioid use (AOR, 2.01; 95% CI, 1.16-3.46) were associated with increased overdose risk.Conclusions and relevanceThe findings suggest that when prescribing opioids to adolescents and young adults, practitioners could potentially mitigate overdose risk by using the lowest effective daily dosage, avoiding concurrent opioid and benzodiazepine prescribing, and relying on short-acting opioids. Findings are broadly consistent with prior opioid safety studies focused on older adults.

Project description:IntroductionOpioids are one of the most important and effective drug classes in pain medicine with a key role in most medical fields. The increase of opioid prescription over time has led to higher numbers of prescription opioid misuse, abuse and opioid-related deaths in most developed OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development) countries around the world. Whilst reliable data on the prevalence of opioid treatment is accessible for many countries, data on Germany specifically is still scarce. Considering Germany being the largest country in the European Union, the lack of evidence-based strategies from long-term studies is crucial. The aim of this work is to review and summarise relevant published literature on the prevalence of opioid prescription in Germany to adequately inform health policy strategies.MethodsA systematic review of the epidemiology of opioid prescription in Germany was conducted, searching PubMed and Web of Science. Eligibility criteria were defined prior to conducting the search. Literature concerning Germany, published in English and German was included and the search was replicated by three independent researchers. Two levels of screening were employed. Disagreement was resolved by face-to-face discussion, leading to a consensus judgement.ResultsOur electronic search yielded 735 articles. Reviewing titles and abstracts yielded 19 relevant articles. Three authors examined each article's full text more closely and determined that twelve papers should be included. Of the twelve identified studies-with publication dates ranging from 1985 to 2016-six were retrospective cross-sectional studies and six were retrospective repeated-measures cross-sectional studies. Sample sizes ranged from 92,842 to ? 11,000,000 participants. Data sources of included studies showed vast heterogeneity. The reviewed literature suggested an increase in the number of patients with opioid prescriptions and defined daily doses of opioids per recipient in Germany over time. The majority of opioid prescriptions was used for patients with non-cancer pain. Opioid use was more common in older people, women and in the north of Germany. Fentanyl was shown to be the most prescribed strong opioid in outpatient settings in Germany, despite not being the first-line choice for chronic pain conditions. All data published before 2000-but none of the more recent studies-suggested an insufficient treatment of pain using opioids. There were no signs for a current opioid epidemic in Germany.ConclusionsDespite some limitations of the review and the heterogeneity of studies, it can be stated that the number of opioid prescriptions overall as well as the number of people receiving opioid treatment have increased over time. Most prescriptions were found to be for strong opioids and patients with non-cancer pain. Even though patterns of opioid prescription follow trends observed in other developed countries, there are no signs of an opioid epidemic in Germany. Therefore, this review could currently not find a need for urgent health policy interventions regarding opioid prescription practices. However, critical gaps in the literature remain and more research is needed to make more reliable judgements.

Project description:Background One of the major barriers to adequate cancer pain management in Taiwan is the limited prescription options regarding strong opioids. Internationally recommended strong opioids, including oxycodone and hydromorphone, were not introduced in Taiwan until late 2014. We analysed the patterns in opioid prescription for cancer pain management, after the introduction of new opioid options. Methods All inpatient and outpatient clinical visits from January 1, 2012, to December 31, 2017, with the diagnosis of cancer and the analgesic prescriptions were collected from the database of National Health Insurance, Taiwan, and analysed. Opioids were grouped into strong opioids, weak opioids, and guideline non-recommended opioids. Findings A total of 1, 292, 905 patients with cancers were included. Approximately 50% of patients used analgesics, 50% of which were opioids; the proportions were stable during the study period. The annual cumulative opioid use per patient (defined daily dose, DDD) significantly decreased from 36•41±102•59 (Mean±SD) in 2012 to 32•42±100•99 in 2017 (p < •001). The annual cumulative strong opioid use per patient increased significantly from 17•54±89•23 in 2012 to 19•28±94•97 in 2017 (+9•90%, p < •001). In parallel, the annual cumulative weak opioids use per patient decreased from 18•64±40•81 in 2012 to 13•04±26•79 in 2017 (-30•04%, p < •001). Among extended-release strong opioids, the use of transdermal fentanyl significantly decreased after oxycodone and hydromorphone were introduced (p < •001). Interpretation Increased therapeutic options in strong opioid prescriptions led opioid prescription patterns to evolve towards international cancer pain management guidelines. In addition, increased accessibility to a wider range of different strong opioids may facilitate more efficient opioid titration and rotation - and thus decrease, not increase, the opioid usage. Funding This study was supported by Ministry of Science and Technology, Taiwan (MOST-106-2314-B-002-213 and MOST-108-2314-B-002-072-MY3), Ministry of Health and Welfare, Taiwan (MOHW109-TDU-B-211-114002), National Taiwan University Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan (NTUH-103-002314 and NTUH. 105-S2954), and National Center of Excellence for Clinical Trial & Research, National Taiwan University Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan (NCTRC201208 and NCTRC201603).

Dataset Information

Opioid prescription patterns among patients who doctor shop; Implications for providers.

Publications

Opioid prescription patterns among patients who doctor shop; Implications for providers.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets