Dataset Information

Effect of Changing Electronic Health Record Opioid Analgesic Dispense Quantity Defaults on the Quantity Prescribed: A Cluster Randomized Clinical Trial.

ABSTRACT:

Importance

Interventions to improve judicious prescribing of opioid analgesics for acute pain are needed owing to the risks of diversion, misuse, and overdose.

Objective

To assess the effect of modifying opioid analgesic prescribing defaults in the electronic health record (EHR) on prescribing and health service use.

Design, setting, and participants

A cluster randomized clinical trial with 2 parallel arms was conducted between June 13, 2016, and June 13, 2018, in a large urban health care system comprising 32 primary care and 4 emergency department (ED) sites in the Bronx, New York. Data were analyzed using a difference-in-differences method from 6 months before implementation through 18 months after implementation. Data were analyzed from January 2019 to February 2020.

Interventions

A default dispense quantity for new opioid analgesic prescriptions of 10 tablets (intervention) vs no change (control) in the EHR.

Main outcomes and measures

The primary outcome was the quantity of opioid analgesics prescribed with the new default prescription. Secondary outcomes were opioid analgesic reorders and health service use within 30 days after the new prescription. Intention-to-treat analysis was conducted.

Results

Overall, 21 331 patients received a new opioid analgesic prescription from 490 prescribers. Comparing the intervention and control arms, site, prescriber, and patient characteristics were similar. For the new prescription, compared with the control arm, patients in the intervention arm had significantly more prescriptions for 10 tablets or fewer (7.6 percentage points; 95% CI, 6.1-9.2 percentage points), a lower number of tablets prescribed (-2.1 tablets; 95% CI, -3.3 to -0.9 tablets), and lower morphine milligram equivalents (MME) prescribed (-14.6 MME; 95% CI, -22.6 to -6.6 MME). Within 30 days after the new prescription, significant differences remained in the number of tablets prescribed (-2.7 tablets; 95% CI, -4.8 to -0.6 tablets), but not MME (-15.8 MME; 95% CI, -33.8 to 2.2 MME). Within this 30-day period, there were no significant differences between the arms in health service use.

Conclusions and relevance

In this study, implementation of a uniform reduced default dispense quantity of 10 tablets for opioid analgesic prescriptions led to a modest reduction in the quantity prescribed initially, without significantly increasing health service use. However, during 30 days after implementation, the influence on prescribing was mixed. Reducing EHR default dispense quantities for opioid analgesics is a feasible strategy that can be widely disseminated and may modestly reduce prescribing.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03003832.

SUBMITTER: Bachhuber MA

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8063068 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:INTRODUCTION:As opioid analgesic consumption has grown, so have opioid use disorder and opioid-related overdoses. Reducing the quantity of opioid analgesics prescribed for acute non-cancer pain can potentially reduce risks to the individual receiving the prescription and to others who might unintentionally or intentionally consume any leftover tablets. Reducing the default dispense quantity for new opioid analgesic prescriptions in the electronic health record (EHR) is a promising intervention to reduce prescribing. METHODS AND ANALYSIS:This study is a prospective cluster randomised controlled trial with two parallel arms. Primary care sites (n=32) and emergency departments (n=4) will be randomised in matched pairs to either a modification of the EHR so that new opioid analgesic prescriptions default to a dispense quantity of 10 tablets (intervention) or to no EHR change (control). The dispense quantity will remain fully modifiable by providers in both arms. From 6 months preintervention to 18 months postintervention, patient-level data will be analysed (ie, the patient is the unit of inference). Patient eligibility criteria are: (A) received a new opioid analgesic prescription, defined as no other opioid analgesic prescription in the prior 6 months; (B) age ?18 years; and (C) no cancer diagnosis within 1?year prior to the new opioid analgesic prescription. The primary outcome will be the quantity of opioid analgesics prescribed in the initial prescription. Secondary outcomes will include opioid analgesic reorders and health service utilisation within 30 days after the initial prescription. Outcomes will be compared between study arms using a difference-in-differences analysis. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION:This study has been approved by the Montefiore Medical Center/Albert Einstein College of Medicine Institutional Review Board with a waiver of informed consent (2016-6036) and is registered on ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03003832, 6 December 2016). Findings will be disseminated through publication, conferences and meetings with health system leaders. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER:NCT03003832; Pre-results.

Project description:BackgroundMultiple policy initiatives encourage more cautious prescribing of opioids in light of their risks. Electronic health record (EHR) redesign can influence prescriber choices, but some redesigns add to workload.ObjectiveTo estimate the effect of an EHR prescribing redesign on both opioid prescribing choices and keystrokes.DesignQuality improvement quasi-experiment, analyzed as interrupted time series.ParticipantsAdult patients of an academic multispecialty practice and a federally qualified health center (FQHC) who received new prescriptions for short-acting opioids, and their providers.InterventionIn the redesign, new prescriptions of short-acting opioids defaulted to the CDC-recommended minimum for opioid-naïve patients, with no alerts or hard stops, such that 9 keystrokes were required for a guideline-concordant prescription and 24 for a non-concordant prescription.Main measuresProportion of guideline-concordant prescriptions, defined as new prescriptions with a 3-day supply or less, calculated per 2-week period. Number of mouse clicks and keystrokes needed to place prescriptions.Key resultsAcross the 2 sites, 22,113 patients received a new short-acting opioid prescription from 821 providers. Before the intervention, both settings showed secular trends toward smaller-quantity prescriptions. At the academic practice, the intervention was associated with an immediate increase in guideline-concordant prescriptions from an average of 12% to 31% of all prescriptions. At the FQHC, about 44% of prescriptions were concordant at the time of the intervention, which was not associated with an additional significant increase. However, total keystrokes needed to place the concordant prescriptions decreased 62.7% from 3552 in the 6 months before the intervention to 1323 in the 6 months afterwards.ConclusionsAutocompleting prescription forms with guideline-recommended values was associated with a large increase in guideline concordance in an organization where baseline concordance was low, but not in an organization where it was already high. The redesign markedly reduced the number of keystrokes needed to place orders, with important implications for EHR-related stress.Trial registrationwww.ClinicalTrials.gov protocol 1710018646.

Project description:BackgroundPublished research on prescribed opioid analgesic (POA) use during pregnancy and birth outcomes is limited in scope and has not adequately adjusted for potential confounding factors. To help address these gaps, we estimated associations between maternal POAs during pregnancy and two adverse birth outcomes using a large population-based dataset, multiple definitions of POA exposure, and several methods to evaluate the influence of both measured and unmeasured confounding factors.Methods and findingsWe obtained data by linking information from several Swedish registers and conducted a retrospective cohort study on a population-based sample of 620,458 Swedish births occurring between 2007 and 2013 (48.6% female; 44.4% firstborn). We evaluated associations between prenatal POA exposure and risk for preterm birth (PTB; <37 gestational weeks) and small for gestational age (SGA; birth weight 2 standard deviations below the expected weight for gestational age or lower). We evaluated the influence of confounding by adjusting for a wide range of measured covariates while comparing exposed and unexposed infants. Additionally, we adjusted for unmeasured confounding factors by using several advanced epidemiological designs. Infants exposed to POAs anytime during pregnancy were at increased risk for PTB compared with unexposed infants (6.4% exposed versus 4.4% unexposed; adjusted odds ratio [OR] = 1.38, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.31-1.45, p < 0.001). This association was attenuated when we compared POA-exposed infants with acetaminophen-exposed infants (OR = 1.18, 95% CI 1.07-1.30, p < 0.001), infants born to women who used POAs before pregnancy only (OR = 1.05, 95% CI 0.96-1.14, p = 0.27), and unexposed siblings (OR = 0.99, 95% CI 0.85-1.14, p = 0.92). We also evaluated associations with short-term versus persistent POA use during pregnancy and observed a similar pattern of results, although the magnitudes of associations with persistent exposure were larger than associations with any use or short-term use. Although short-term use was not associated with SGA (adjusted ORsingle-trimester = 0.95, 95% CI 0.87-1.04, p = 0.29), persistent use was associated with increased risk for SGA (adjusted ORmultiple-trimester = 1.40, 95% CI 1.17-1.67, p < 0.001) compared with unexposed infants. The association with persistent exposure was attenuated when we used alternative comparison groups (e.g., sibling comparison OR = 1.22, 95% CI 0.60-2.48, p = 0.58). Of note, our study had limitations, including potential bias from exposure misclassification, an inability to adjust for all sources of confounding, and uncertainty regarding generalizability to countries outside of Sweden.ConclusionsOur results suggested that observed associations between POA use during pregnancy and risk of PTB and SGA were largely due to unmeasured confounding factors, although we could not rule out small independent associations, particularly for persistent POA use during pregnancy.

Project description:ImportanceElectronic health records are a potentially valuable source of information for identifying patients with opioid use disorder (OUD).ObjectiveTo evaluate whether proxy measures from electronic health record data can be used reliably to identify patients with probable OUD based on Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (Fifth Edition) (DSM-5) criteria.Design, setting, and participantsThis retrospective cross-sectional study analyzed individuals within the Geisinger health system who were prescribed opioids between December 31, 2000, and May 31, 2017, using a mixed-methods approach. The cohort was identified from 16 253 patients enrolled in a contract-based, Geisinger-specific medication monitoring program (GMMP) for opioid use, including patients who maintained or violated contract terms, as well as a demographically matched control group of 16 253 patients who were prescribed opioids but not enrolled in the GMMP. Substance use diagnoses and psychiatric comorbidities were assessed using automated electronic health record summaries. A manual medical record review procedure using DSM-5 criteria for OUD was completed for a subset of patients. The analysis was conducted beginning from June 5, 2017, until May 29, 2020.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary outcome was the prevalence of OUD as defined by proxy measures for DSM-5 criteria for OUD as well as the prevalence of comorbidities among patients prescribed opioids within an integrated health system.ResultsAmong the 16 253 patients enrolled in the GMMP (9309 women [57%]; mean [SD] age, 52 [14] years), OUD diagnoses as defined by diagnostic codes were present at a much lower rate than expected (291 [2%]), indicating the necessity for alternative diagnostic strategies. The DSM-5 criteria for OUD can be assessed using manual medical record review; a manual review of 200 patients in the GMMP and 200 control patients identifed a larger percentage of patients with probable moderate to severe OUD (GMMP, 145 of 200 [73%]; and control, 27 of 200 [14%]) compared with the prevalence of OUD assessed using diagnostic codes.Conclusions and relevanceThese results suggest that patients with OUD may be identified using information available in the electronic health record, even when diagnostic codes do not reflect this diagnosis. Furthermore, the study demonstrates the utility of coding for DSM-5 criteria from medical records to generate a quantitative DSM-5 score that is associated with OUD severity.

Project description:BackgroundClinical guidelines and public health authorities lack recommendations on scalable approaches to defining and monitoring the occurrence and severity of bleeding in populations prescribed antithrombotic therapy.MethodsWe examined linked primary care, hospital admission and death registry electronic health records (CALIBER 1998-2010, England) of patients with newly diagnosed atrial fibrillation, acute myocardial infarction, unstable angina or stable angina with the aim to develop algorithms for bleeding events. Using the developed bleeding phenotypes, Kaplan-Meier plots were used to estimate the incidence of bleeding events and we used Cox regression models to assess the prognosis for all-cause mortality, atherothrombotic events and further bleeding.ResultsWe present electronic health record phenotyping algorithms for bleeding based on bleeding diagnosis in primary or hospital care, symptoms, transfusion, surgical procedures and haemoglobin values. In validation of the phenotype, we estimated a positive predictive value of 0.88 (95% CI 0.64, 0.99) for hospitalised bleeding. Amongst 128,815 patients, 27,259 (21.2%) had at least 1 bleeding event, with 5-year risks of bleeding of 29.1%, 21.9%, 25.3% and 23.4% following diagnoses of atrial fibrillation, acute myocardial infarction, unstable angina and stable angina, respectively. Rates of hospitalised bleeding per 1000 patients more than doubled from 1.02 (95% CI 0.83, 1.22) in January 1998 to 2.68 (95% CI 2.49, 2.88) in December 2009 coinciding with the increased rates of antiplatelet and vitamin K antagonist prescribing. Patients with hospitalised bleeding and primary care bleeding, with or without markers of severity, were at increased risk of all-cause mortality and atherothrombotic events compared to those with no bleeding. For example, the hazard ratio for all-cause mortality was 1.98 (95% CI 1.86, 2.11) for primary care bleeding with markers of severity and 1.99 (95% CI 1.92, 2.05) for hospitalised bleeding without markers of severity, compared to patients with no bleeding.ConclusionsElectronic health record bleeding phenotyping algorithms offer a scalable approach to monitoring bleeding in the population. Incidence of bleeding has doubled in incidence since 1998, affects one in four cardiovascular disease patients, and is associated with poor prognosis. Efforts are required to tackle this iatrogenic epidemic.

Project description:Background and aimsTopiramate is a medication that is widely prescribed to treat a variety of conditions, including alcohol use disorder (AUD). We used electronic health record (EHR) data to measure topiramate's effects on drinking in individuals differentiated by a history of AUD.DesignParallel-groups comparison of patients prescribed topiramate and a propensity score-matched comparison group.SettingA large US integrated health-care system.ParticipantsPatients with Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test-Consumption (AUDIT-C) scores prior to and after a minimum of 180 days of topiramate prescription for any indication and a propensity score-matched group. The sample included 5918 patients with an electronic health record diagnosis of alcohol use disorder at any time (AUD-hx-pos) (1738 topiramate-exposed and 4180 controls) and 23 614 patients with no EHR diagnosis of AUD (AUD-hx-neg) (6324 topiramate-exposed and 17 290 controls).MeasurementsRegression analyses compared difference-in-difference (DiD) estimates, separately by AUD history. DiD estimates represent exposure-group (i.e. topiramate versus control) differences on the pre-post difference in AUDIT-C score. Effects of baseline AUDIT-C score and daily topiramate dosage were also tested.FindingsAUD-hx-neg patients who received topiramate had a greater reduction in AUDIT-C score (-0.11) than matched controls (-0.04). This yielded a DiD score of -0.07 [95% confidence interval (CI) = -0.11,-0.03; P = 0.002], with the greatest effect among AUD-hx-neg patients with a baseline AUDIT-C score of 4+ (DiD = -0.35, 95% CI = -0.49, -0.21; P < 0.0001) and those prescribed > 150 mg/day of the medication (DiD = -0.15, 95%CI = -0.23, -0.07; P < 0.001).DiscussionAmong individuals with no history of alcohol use disorder, topiramate appears to be associated with reduced drinking. This small effect is most evident among patients with higher baseline drinking levels and at a higher average daily topiramate dosage.

Project description:ObjectivesTo prospectively characterise: (1) postoperative opioid analgesic prescribing practices; (2) experience of patients undergoing elective ambulatory surgeries and (3) impact of patient risk for medication misuse on postoperative pain management.DesignLongitudinal survey of patients 7 days before and 7-14 days after surgery.SettingAcademic urban safety-net hospital.Participants181 participants recruited, 18 surgeons, follow-up data from 149 participants (82% retention); 54% women; mean age: 49 years.InterventionsNone.Primary and secondary outcome measuresTotal morphine equivalent dose (MED) prescribed and consumed, percentage of unused opioids.ResultsSurgeons postoperatively prescribed a mean of 242 total MED per patient, equivalent to 32 oxycodone (5 mg) pills. Participants used a mean of 116 MEDs (48%), equivalent to 18 oxycodone (5 mg) pills (~145 mg of oxycodone remaining per patient). A 10-year increase in patient age was associated with 12 (95% CI (-2.05 to -0.35)) total MED fewer prescribed opioids. Each one-point increase in the preoperative Graded Chronic Pain Scale was associated with an 18 (6.84 to 29.60) total MED increase in opioid consumption, and 5% (-0.09% to -0.005%) fewer unused opioids. Prior opioid prescription was associated with a 55 (5.38 to -104.82) total MED increase in opioid consumption, and 19% (-0.35% to -0.02%) fewer unused opioids. High-risk drug use was associated with 9% (-0.19% to 0.002%) fewer unused opioids. Pain severity in previous 3 months, high-risk alcohol, use and prior opioid prescription were not associated with postoperative prescribing practices.ConclusionsParticipants with a preoperative history of chronic pain, prior opioid prescription, and high-risk drug use were more likely to consume higher amounts of opioid medications postoperatively. Additionally, surgeons did not incorporate key patient-level factors (eg, substance use, preoperative pain) into opioid prescribing practices. Opportunities to improve postoperative opioid prescribing include system changes among surgical specialties, and patient education and monitoring.