Dataset Information

Opioid prescribing for surgical dental procedures in dental clinics of military treatment facilities.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Variation in opioid prescribing rates among geographic regions is well known and, to the authors' knowledge, there have been no studies of variation from 1 dental clinic to another, and such variation might suggest an excess of opioid prescriptions.

Methods

The authors used a retrospective cohort design study of all dental encounter records for 819,453 soldiers in the dental clinics (n = 250) of the US Military Health System during the period from 2008 through 2017.

Results

There were 743,459 dental surgical encounters. Opioid prescriptions were filled for 36.7% of these encounters. Multinomial multilevel regression found statistically significant between-facility variance in opioid prescribing, which was partially explained via facility-level characteristics (region, type, and percentage of surgeries for young patients), and practice variables (mean percentage extractions, percentage periodontic surgery, and percentage specialists).

Conclusions

The authors found a substantial variation in opioid prescribing among dental clinics in the US Military Health System. Dentists at 11 of the 30 largest military treatment facilities prescribed at a rate 4 percentage points higher than expected, and dentists at 9 of these military treatment facilities had a rate of 4 percentage points lower than expected. Additional study of the factors allowing the low-prescribing facilities to achieve these rates might lead to an overall decrease in opioid prescribing.

Practical implications

The authors' findings of dental opioid prescribing in the military can lead to appreciation of the guidelines from the American Dental Association and the American Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons, which suggest alternatives to opioid prescribing for surgical procedures, particularly for tooth extractions.

SUBMITTER: Richard P

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8207621 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundMisuse of prescription opioids is a well-established contributor to the US opioid epidemic. The primary objective of this study was to identify which level of care delivery (ie patient, prescriber, or hospital) produced the most unwarranted variation in opioid prescribing after common surgical procedures.Study designElectronic health record data from a large multihospital healthcare system were used in conjunction with random-effect models to examine variation in opioid prescribing practices after similar inpatient and outpatient surgical procedures between October 2019 and September 2021. Unwarranted variation was conceptualized as variation resulting from prescriber behavior unsupported by evidence. Covariates identified as drivers of warranted variation included characteristics known to influence pain levels or patient safety. All other model variables, including prescriber specialty and patient race, ethnicity, and insurance status were characterized as potential drivers of unwarranted variation.ResultsAmong 25,188 procedures with an opioid prescription at hospital discharge, 53.5% exceeded guideline recommendations, corresponding to 13,228 patients receiving the equivalent of >140,000 excess 5 mg oxycodone tablets after surgical procedures. Prescribing variation was primarily driven by prescriber-level factors, with approximately half of the total variation in morphine milligram equivalents prescribed observed at the prescriber level and not explained by any measured variables. Unwarranted covariates associated with higher prescribed opioid quantity included non-Hispanic Black race, Medicare insurance, smoking history, later hospital discharge times, and prescription by a surgeon rather than a hospitalist or primary care provider.ConclusionsGiven the large proportion of unexplained variation observed at the provider level, targeting prescribers through education and training may be an effective strategy for reducing postoperative opioid prescribing.

Project description:ImportanceInsurers are increasingly limiting the duration of opioid prescriptions for acute pain. Among patients undergoing surgery, it is unclear whether implementation of these limits is associated with changes in opioid prescribing and patient-reported outcomes, such as pain.ObjectiveTo assess changes in surgical opioid prescribing and patient-reported outcomes after implementation of an opioid prescribing limit by a large commercial insurer in Michigan.Design, setting, and participantsThis was a cross-sectional study with an interrupted time series analysis. Data analyses were conducted from October 1, 2022, to February 28, 2023. The primary data source was the Michigan Surgical Quality Collaborative, a statewide registry containing data on opioid prescribing and patient-reported outcomes from adults undergoing common general surgical procedures. This registry is linked to Michigan's prescription drug monitoring program database, allowing observation of opioid dispensing. The study included 6045 adults who were covered by the commercial insurer and underwent surgery from January 1, 2017, to October 31, 2019.ExposurePolicy limiting opioid prescriptions to a 5-day supply in February 2018.Main outcomes and measuresAmong all patients, segmented regression models were used to assess for level or slope changes during February 2018 in 3 patient-reported outcomes: pain in the week after surgery (assessed on a scale of 1-4: 1 = none, 2 = minimal, 3 = moderate, and 4 = severe), satisfaction with surgical experience (scale of 0-10, with 10 being the highest satisfaction), and amount of regret regarding undergoing surgery (scale of 1-5, with 1 being the highest level of regret). Among patients with a discharge opioid prescription and a dispensed opioid prescription (prescription filled within 3 days of discharge), additional outcomes included total morphine milligram equivalents in these prescriptions, a standardized measure of opioid volume.ResultsAmong the 6045 patients included in the study, mean (SD) age was 48.7 (12.6) years and 3595 (59.5%) were female. Limit implementation was not associated with changes in patient-reported satisfaction or regret and was associated with only a slight level decrease in patient-reported pain score (-0.15 [95% CI, -0.26 to -0.03]). Among 4396 patients (72.7%) with a discharge and dispensed opioid prescription, limit implementation was associated with a -22.3 (95% CI, -32.8 to -11.9) and -26.1 (95% CI, -40.9 to -11.3) level decrease in monthly mean total morphine milligram equivalents of discharge and dispensed opioid prescriptions, respectively. These decreases corresponded approximately to 3 to 3.5 pills containing 5 mg of oxycodone.ConclusionsThis cross-sectional analysis of data from adults undergoing general surgical procedures found that implementation of an insurer's limit was associated with modest reductions in opioid prescribing but not with worsened patient-reported outcomes. Whether these findings generalize to other procedures warrants further study.

Project description:ImportanceUnderstanding whether statewide legislation, such as the Michigan Opioid Laws, is associated with reduction in postoperative opioid prescriptions is informative in guiding future legislation.ObjectiveTo identify changes in opioid prescribing patterns for oculoplastic and orbital procedures associated with the enactment of the Michigan Opioid Laws in 2017 and 2018.Design, setting, and participantsThis cross-sectional study included 3781 patients who underwent any of 10 common oculoplastic and orbital procedures between June 1, 2016, and November 30, 2019, at a tertiary care institution.ExposuresFrom 2017 to 2018, Michigan enacted a series of laws to address the state's worsening opioid epidemic. Two major components of this legislation enacted on June 1, 2018, required prescribers to review a report of patients' opioid use history and obtain signed consent after educating patients on the use and disposal of opioids prior to prescribing.Main outcomes and measuresDemographic information, type of surgery, type and amount of opioid prescriptions, and morphine milligram equivalent (MME) were analyzed. MME was calculated as the product of dose, quantity, and opioid-specific conversion factor for each prescription. Linear interpolation spline regression was used to evaluate the association of prescription MME with time.ResultsOf 3781 patients, 1614 (42.7%) were male. The mean (SD) age at the time of surgery was 63.3 (16.6) years. Of 2026 patients undergoing surgery before June 1, 2018, 1782 (88.0%) were prescribed postoperative opioids; of 1755 patients undergoing surgery after June 1, 2018, 878 (50.0%) were prescribed postoperative opioids (P < .001). There was no difference in age, sex, race/ethnicity, surgery type, or opioids prescribed between these 2 cohorts. Linear interpolation spline regression showed a decrease of 26.025 MMEs (equivalent to a 36.2% reduction of mean MME) between June 1, 2017, and September 30, 2018 (β, -1.735; 95% CI, -0.088 to -0.024; P < .001), stabilizing at a persistently reduced rate of MME prescribed through the end of the study period (October 1, 2018, to November 30, 2019; β, -0.005; 95% CI, -0.039 to 0.016; P = .42). Changes in MME in the 12 months before or 12 months after the period of legislation enactment were not identified.Conclusions and relevanceIn this cross-sectional study, reduction in opioid prescriptions for oculoplastic and orbital procedures was observed during the enactment period of the Michigan Opioid Laws and appeared to be sustained through the end of the study period. Similar statewide or national legislations aimed at increasing prescriber awareness and patient education on opioid use may help curtail the prescription opioid epidemic.

Project description:The prescription of opioid analgesics by dental professionals is widespread in the United States. Policy makers, government agencies, and professional organizations consider this phenomenon a growing public health concern. This study examined trends in the prescription of opioid analgesics for adults by dental professionals and associated factors in the United States. Data from the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey (1996-2013) were analyzed. Descriptive statistics were calculated separately for each year. Logistic regression analyses were conducted to estimate the overall trend during the period with and without adjusting for dental procedures and personal characteristics. Survey weights were incorporated to handle the sampling design. The prescription of opioid analgesics following dental care increased over time. After adjusting for sociodemographic factors, source of payment, and type of dental procedure, the odds ratio (OR) of prescribing opioid analgesics following a dental visit per each decade difference was 1.28 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.19-1.38). Surgical, root canal, and implant procedures had the highest rates of opioid prescriptions and the greatest increases in rates over the study period. After adjusting for personal characteristics and type of dental procedure, the OR of receiving a prescription for opioids comparing blacks, Asians, and Hispanics to whites was 1.29 (95% CI, 1.17-1.41), 0.57 (95% CI, 0.47-0.70), and 0.84 (95% CI, 0.75-0.95), respectively. Opioid analgesic prescriptions following dental visits increased over time after adjusting for personal characteristics and type of dental procedure. The odds of receiving a prescription for opioids were higher for certain racial/ethnic minority groups. Knowledge Transfer Statement: This study highlights dental professionals prescribing practices of opioid analgesics by following dental treatments in the United States. With this knowledge, appropriate guidelines, protocols, and policies can be developed and implemented to address any inappropriate prescribing practices of opioid analgesics. In addition, this information could lead to an improvement in the prescribing practices of dental professionals and to evidence-based therapeutic decision making.

Project description:BackgroundDrug overdose has become a leading cause of accidental death in the United States. Between 2000 and 2015, the rate of deaths from drug overdoses increased 137%, including a 200% increase in the rate of overdose deaths involving opioids (including opioid pain relievers and heroin). Unnecessary opioid prescribing is one of the factors driving this epidemic.ObjectivesThe primary objective of this paper is to share lessons learned while conducting a randomized trial to de-implement opioids for post-extraction pain management utilizing clinical decision support (CDS) with and without patient education. The lessons learned from conducting this trial in a real-world setting can be applied to future dissemination and implementation oral health research.MethodsThe sources informing lessons learned were generated from qualitative interviews conducted with 20 of the forty-nine dental providers involved in the study following the implementation phase of the trial. Ongoing policy, social and environmental factors were tracked throughout the study.ResultsDental providers in the trial identified the impact of training that involved health professionals sharing information about the personal impact of pain and opioid use. Additionally, they found utility in being presented with a dashboard detailing their prescribing patterns related to other dentists. For the 30 general dentists with access to the CDS, use of its portal varied widely, with most using it 10%-49% of the time related to extractions.ConclusionsIn the context of a downward trend in opioid prescribing and considering the influence of the COVID pandemic during the trial, dental providers indicated benefit in training about negative personal impacts of prescribing opioids, and personally relevant feedback about their prescribing patterns. Only modest use of the CDS was realized. Implementation of this trial was impacted by governmental and health system policies and the COVID pandemic, prompt the consideration of implications regarding continuing ways to limit opioid prescribing among dental providers.

Project description:BackgroundA range of surgical and non-surgical techniques have received increasing attention in recent years in an effort to reduce the duration of a course of orthodontic treatment. Various surgical techniques have been used; however, uncertainty exists in relation to the effectiveness of these procedures and the possible adverse effects related to them.ObjectivesTo assess the effects of surgically assisted orthodontics on the duration and outcome of orthodontic treatment.Search methodsWe searched the following electronic databases: the Cochrane Oral Health Group's Trials Register (to 10 September 2014), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library 2014, Issue 8), MEDLINE via OVID (1946 to 10 September 2014), EMBASE via OVID (1980 to 10 September 2014), LILACS via BIREME (1980 to 10 September 2014), metaRegister of Controlled Trials (to 10 September 2014), ClinicalTrials.gov (to 10 September 2014), and the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (to 10 September 2014). We checked the reference lists of all trials identified for further studies. There were no restrictions regarding language or date of publication in the electronic searches.Selection criteriaRandomised controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating the effect of surgical adjunctive procedures for accelerating tooth movement compared with conventional treatment (no surgical adjunctive procedure).Data collection and analysisAt least two review authors independently assessed the risk of bias in the trials and extracted data. We used the fixed-effect model and expressed results as mean differences (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). We investigated heterogeneity with reference to both clinical and methodological factors.Main resultsWe included four RCTs involving a total of 57 participants ranging in age from 11 to 33 years. The interventions evaluated were corticotomies to facilitate orthodontic space closure or alignment of an ectopic maxillary canine, with the effect of repeated surgical procedures assessed in one of these studies. The studies did not report directly on the primary outcome as prespecified in our protocol: duration of orthodontic treatment, number of visits during active treatment (scheduled and unscheduled) and duration of visits. The main outcome assessed within the trials was the rate of tooth movement, with periodontal effects assessed in one trial and pain assessed in one trial. A maximum of just three trials with small sample sizes were available for each comparison and outcome. We assessed all of the studies as being at unclear risk of bias.Tooth movement was found to be slightly quicker with surgically assisted orthodontics in comparison with conventional treatment over periods of one month (MD 0.61 mm; 95% CI 0.49 to 0.72; P value < 0.001) and three months (MD 2.03 mm, 95% CI 1.52 to 2.54; P value < 0.001). Our results and conclusions should be interpreted with caution given the small number of included studies. Information on adverse events was sought; however, no data were reported in the included studies.Authors' conclusionsThis review found that there is limited research concerning the effectiveness of surgical interventions to accelerate orthodontic treatment, with no studies directly assessing our prespecified primary outcome. The available evidence is of low quality, which indicates that further research is likely to change the estimate of the effect. Based on measured outcomes in the short-term, these procedures do appear to show promise as a means of accelerating tooth movement. It is therefore possible that these procedures may prove useful; however, further prospective research comprising assessment of the entirety of treatment with longer follow-up is required to confirm any possible benefit.