Dataset Information

Prescription opioid overdose and adverse effect hospitalisations among injured workers in eight states (2010-2014).

ABSTRACT:

Objective

High-risk opioid prescribing practices in workers' compensation (WC) settings are associated with excess opioid-related morbidity, longer work disability and higher costs. This study characterises the burden of prescription opioid-related hospitalisations among injured workers.

Methods

Hospital discharge data for eight states (Arizona, Colorado, Michigan, New Jersey, New York, South Carolina, Utah and Washington) were obtained from the State Inpatient Databases, Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. We calculated 5-year (2010-2014) average annual rates of prescription opioid overdose/adverse effect (AE) hospitalisations. Injured workers were identified using payer (WC) and external cause codes.

Results

State-level average annual prescription opioid overdose/AE hospitalisation rates ranged from 0.3 to 1.2 per 100 000 employed workers. Rates for workers aged ≥65 years old were two to six times the overall rates. Among those hospitalised with prescription opioid overdose/AEs, injured workers were more likely than other inpatients to have a low back disorder diagnosis, and less likely to have an opioid dependence/abuse or cancer diagnosis, or a fatal outcome. Averaged across states, WC was the primary expected payer for <1% of prescription opioid overdose/AE hospitalisations vs 6% of injury hospitalisations.

Conclusions

Population-based estimates of prescription opioid morbidity are almost nonexistent for injured workers; this study begins to fill that gap. Rates for injured workers increased markedly with age but were low relative to inpatients overall. Research is needed to assess whether WC as payer adequately identifies work-related opioid morbidity for surveillance purposes, and to further quantify the burden of prescription opioid-related morbidity.

SUBMITTER: Sears JM

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7745640 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportanceThe opioid epidemic continues to be a public health crisis in the US.ObjectiveTo assess the patient factors and early time-varying prescription-related factors associated with opioid-related fatal or nonfatal overdose.Design, setting, and participantsThis cohort study evaluated opioid-naive adult patients in Oregon using data from the Oregon Comprehensive Opioid Risk Registry, which links all payer claims data to other health data sets in the state of Oregon. The observational, population-based sample filled a first (index) opioid prescription in 2015 and was followed up until December 31, 2018. Data analyses were performed from March 1, 2020, to June 15, 2021.ExposuresOverdose after the index opioid prescription.Main outcomes and measuresThe outcome was an overdose event. The sample was followed up to identify fatal or nonfatal opioid overdoses. Patient and prescription characteristics were identified. Prescription characteristics in the first 6 months after the index prescription were modeled as cumulative, time-dependent measures that were updated monthly through the sixth month of follow-up. A time-dependent Cox proportional hazards regression model was used to assess patient and prescription characteristics that were associated with an increased risk for overdose events.ResultsThe cohort comprised 236 921 patients (133 839 women [56.5%]), of whom 667 (0.3%) experienced opioid overdose. Risk of overdose was highest among individuals 75 years or older (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 3.22; 95% CI, 1.94-5.36) compared with those aged 35 to 44 years; men (aHR, 1.29; 95% CI, 1.10-1.51); those who were dually eligible for Medicaid and Medicare Advantage (aHR, 4.37; 95% CI, 3.09-6.18), had Medicaid (aHR, 3.77; 95% CI, 2.97-4.80), or had Medicare Advantage (aHR, 2.18; 95% CI, 1.44-3.31) compared with those with commercial insurance; those with comorbid substance use disorder (aHR, 2.74; 95% CI, 2.15-3.50), with depression (aHR, 1.26; 95% CI, 1.03-1.55), or with 1 to 2 comorbidities (aHR, 1.32; 95% CI, 1.08-1.62) or 3 or more comorbidities (aHR, 1.90; 95% CI, 1.42-2.53) compared with none. Patients were at an increased overdose risk if they filled oxycodone (aHR, 1.70; 95% CI, 1.04-2.77) or tramadol (aHR, 2.80; 95% CI, 1.34-5.84) compared with codeine; used benzodiazepines (aHR, 1.06; 95% CI, 1.01-1.11); used concurrent opioids and benzodiazepines (aHR, 2.11; 95% CI, 1.70-2.62); or filled opioids from 3 or more pharmacies over 6 months (aHR, 1.38; 95% CI, 1.09-1.75).Conclusions and relevanceThis cohort study used a comprehensive data set to identify patient and prescription-related risk factors that were associated with opioid overdose. These findings may guide opioid counseling and monitoring, the development of clinical decision-making tools, and opioid prevention and treatment resources for individuals who are at greatest risk for opioid overdose.

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: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:US opioid overdose death rates have increased between 2000 and 2014. While, the increase in prescription opioid use has been linked to the increase in heroin use, there are reasons to view this relationship as a partial explanation for the recent increase in heroin-related harms. This study documents the differences in trends in prescription opioid overdose-related (POD) and heroin overdose-related (HOD) hospitalizations.Data come from the National Inpatient Sample (NIS) for the years 2000 through 2014. POD and HOD hospitalizations were abstracted from ICD-9 codes. Rates of POD and HOD by census region and census division were constructed along with separate rates for age and race. Regression analysis analyzing trends across region were estimated along with graphs for documenting differences in POD and HOD rates.POD hospitalization rates were highest in the South and lowest in the Northeast. HOD hospitalization rates were highest in the Northeast region and grew the fastest in the Midwest. There was statistically significant heterogeneity in HOD trends but not POD trends across the four regions between 2000 and 2014. Between 2012 and 2014 POD rates decreased in eight of the nine census divisions, with only New England showing an increase. HOD hospitalization rates increased in all nine census divisions between 2012 and 2014. Both POD and HOD rates show different demographic patterns across the nine census divisions.Comparing POD and HOD hospitalization trends reveals significant disparities in geographic as well as demographic distributions. These epidemics are evolving and the simple opioid-to-heroin transition story is both supported and challenged by this paper. The opioid pill, heroin and fentanyl crises are intertwined yet increasingly have drivers and outcomes that support examining them as distinct. Addressing these complex and interrelated epidemics will require innovative public health research and interventions which need to consider local and regional contexts.

Project description:ImportanceDeaths due to opioid overdose have tripled in the last decade. Efforts to curb this trend have focused on restricting the prescription opioid supply; however, the near-term effects of such efforts are unknown.ObjectiveTo project effects of interventions to lower prescription opioid misuse on opioid overdose deaths from 2016 to 2025.Design, setting, and participantsThis system dynamics (mathematical) model of the US opioid epidemic projected outcomes of simulated individuals who engage in nonmedical prescription or illicit opioid use from 2016 to 2025. The analysis was performed in 2018 by retrospectively calibrating the model from 2002 to 2015 data from the National Survey on Drug Use and Health and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.InterventionsComparison of interventions that would lower the incidence of prescription opioid misuse from 2016 to 2025 based on historical trends (a 7.5% reduction per year) and 50% faster than historical trends (an 11.3% reduction per year), vs a circumstance in which the incidence of misuse remained constant after 2015.Main outcomes and measuresOpioid overdose deaths from prescription and illicit opioids from 2016 to 2025 under each intervention.ResultsUnder the status quo, the annual number of opioid overdose deaths is projected to increase from 33 100 in 2015 to 81 700 (95% uncertainty interval [UI], 63 600-101 700) in 2025 (a 147% increase from 2015). From 2016 to 2025, 700 400 (95% UI, 590 200-817 100) individuals in the United States are projected to die from opioid overdose, with 80% of the deaths attributable to illicit opioids. The number of individuals using illicit opioids is projected to increase by 61%-from 0.93 million (95% UI, 0.83-1.03 million) in 2015 to 1.50 million (95% UI, 0.98-2.22 million) by 2025. Across all interventions tested, further lowering the incidence of prescription opioid misuse from 2015 levels is projected to decrease overdose deaths by only 3.0% to 5.3%.Conclusions and relevanceThis study's findings suggest that interventions targeting prescription opioid misuse such as prescription monitoring programs may have a modest effect, at best, on the number of opioid overdose deaths in the near future. Additional policy interventions are urgently needed to change the course of the epidemic.