Dataset Information

Treating patients with opioid overdose at a primary care emergency outpatient clinic: a cost-minimization analysis.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Treating patients with acute poisoning by substances of abuse in a primary care emergency clinic has previously been shown to be a safe strategy. We conducted an economic evaluation of this strategy compared to hospital treatment, which is the usual strategy.

Methods

Assuming equal health outcomes, we conducted a cost-minimization analysis. We constructed a representative opioid overdose patient based on a cohort of 359 patients treated for opioid overdose at the Oslo Accident and Emergency Outpatient Clinic (OAEOC) from 1.10.2011 to 30.9.2012. Using a health care system perspective, we estimated the expected resources used on the representative patient in primary care based on data from the observed OAEOC cohort and on information from key informants at the OAEOC. A likely course of treatment of the same patient in a hospital setting was established from information from key informants on provider procedures at Drammen Hospital, as were estimates of hospital use of resources. We calculated expected costs for both settings. Given that the treatments usually last for less than one day, we used undiscounted cost values.

Results

The estimated per patient cost in primary care was 121 EUR (2018 EUR 1.00 = NOK 9.5962), comprising 97 EUR on personnel costs and 24 EUR on treatment costs. In the hospital setting, the corresponding cost was 612 EUR, comprising 186 EUR on personnel costs, 183 EUR on treatment costs, and 243 EUR associated with intensive care unit admission. The point estimate of the cost difference per patient was 491 EUR, with a low-difference scenario estimated at 264 EUR and a high-difference scenario at 771 EUR.

Conclusions

Compared to hospital treatment, treating patients with opioid overdose in a primary care setting costs substantially less. Our findings are probably generalizable to poisoning with other substances of abuse. Implementing elements of the OAEOC procedure in primary care emergency clinics and in hospital emergency departments could improve the use of health care resources.

SUBMITTER: Vibeto JH

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8335998 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportanceTime pressure to provide a quick fix is commonly cited as a reason why opioids are frequently prescribed in the United States, but there is little evidence of an association between appointment timing and clinical decision-making. As the workday progresses and appointments run behind schedule, physicians may be more likely to prescribe opioids.ObjectiveTo estimate whether characteristics of appointment timing are associated with clinical decision-making about pain treatment.Design, setting, and participantsThis cross-sectional study of physician behavior used data from electronic health record systems in primary care offices in the United States to analyze primary care appointments occurring in 2017 for patients with a new painful condition who had not received an opioid prescription within the past year.Main outcomes and measuresThe association between treatment decisions and 2 dimensions of appointment timing (order of appointment occurrence and delay relative to scheduled start time) were assessed. The rates of opioid prescribing were measured and compared with rates of nonopioid pain medication (ie, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs) prescribing and referral to physical therapy. All rates were estimated within the same physician using physician fixed effects, adjusting for patient, appointment, and seasonal characteristics.ResultsAmong 678 319 primary care appointments (642 262 patients; 392 422 [61.1%] women) with 5603 primary care physicians, the likelihood that an appointment resulted in an opioid prescription increased by 33% as the workday progressed (1st to 3rd appointment, 4.0% [95% CI, 3.9%-4.1%] vs 19th to 21st appointment, 5.3% [95% CI. 5.1%-5.6%]; P < .001) and by 17% as appointments ran behind schedule (0-9 minutes late, 4.4% [95% CI, 4.3%-4.6%] vs ≥60 minutes late, 5.2% [95% CI, 5.0%-5.4%]; P < .001). Prescribing of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and referral to physical therapy did not display similar patterns.Conclusions and relevanceThese findings suggest that, even within an individual physician's schedule, clinical decision-making for opioid prescribing varies by the timing and lateness of appointments.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Although homelessness and opioid overdose are major public health issues in the U.S., evidence is limited as to whether homelessness is associated with an increased risk of opioid overdose. OBJECTIVE:To compare opioid-related outcomes between homeless versus housed individuals in low-income communities. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS:Cross-sectional analysis of individuals who had at least one ED visit or hospitalization in four states (Florida, Maryland, Massachusetts, and New York) in 2014. MEASUREMENTS:Risk of opioid overdose and opioid-related ED visits/hospital admissions were compared between homeless versus low-income housed individuals, adjusting for patient characteristics and hospital-specific fixed effects (effectively comparing homeless versus low-income housed individuals treated at the same hospital). We also examined whether risk of opioid-related outcomes varied by patients' sex and race/ethnicity. RESULTS:A total of 96,099 homeless and 2,869,230 low-income housed individuals were analyzed. Homeless individuals had significantly higher risk of opioid overdose (adjusted risk, 1.8% for homeless vs. 0.3% for low-income housed individuals; adjusted risk difference [aRD], +1.5%; 95%CI, +1.0% to +2.0%; p < 0.001) and opioid-related ED visit/hospital admission (10.4% vs. 1.5%; aRD, +8.9%; 95%CI, +7.2% to +10.6%; p < 0.001) compared to low-income housed individuals. Non-Hispanic White females had the highest risk among the homeless population, whereas non-Hispanic White males had the highest risk among the low-income housed population. LIMITATIONS:Individuals with no ED visit or hospitalization in 2014 were not included. CONCLUSION:Homeless individuals had disproportionately higher adjusted risk of opioid-related outcomes compared to low-income housed individuals treated at the same hospital. Among homeless individuals, non-Hispanic White females incurred the highest risk. These findings highlight the importance of recognizing the homeless population-especially the non-Hispanic White female homeless population-as a high-risk population for opioid overdose.

Project description:ImportancePatients treated in emergency departments (EDs) for opioid overdose often need drug treatment yet are rarely linked to services after discharge. Emergency department-based peer support is a promising approach for promoting treatment linkage, but evidence of its effectiveness is lacking.ObjectiveTo examine the association of the Opioid Overdose Recovery Program (OORP), an ED peer recovery support service, with postdischarge addiction treatment initiation, repeat overdose, and acute care utilization.Design, setting, and participantsThis intention-to-treat retrospective cohort study used 2014 to 2020 New Jersey Medicaid data for Medicaid enrollees aged 18 to 64 years who were treated for nonfatal opioid overdose from January 2015 to June 2020 at 70 New Jersey acute care hospitals. Data were analyzed from August 2022 to November 2023.ExposureHospital OORP implementation.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary outcome was medication for opioid use disorder (MOUD) initiation within 60 days of discharge. Secondary outcomes included psychosocial treatment initiation, medically treated drug overdoses, and all-cause acute care visits after discharge. An event study design was used to compare 180-day outcomes between patients treated in OORP hospitals and those treated in non-OORP hospitals. Analyses adjusted for patient demographics, comorbidities, and prior service use and for community-level sociodemographics and drug treatment access.ResultsA total of 12 046 individuals were included in the study (62.0% male). Preimplementation outcome trends were similar for patients treated in OORP and non-OORP hospitals. Implementation of the OORP was associated with an increase of 0.034 (95% CI, 0.004-0.064) in the probability of 60-day MOUD initiation in the half-year after implementation, representing a 45% increase above the preimplementation mean probability of 0.075 (95% CI, 0.066-0.084). Program implementation was associated with fewer repeat medically treated overdoses 4 half-years (-0.086; 95% CI, -0.154 to -0.018) and 5 half-years (-0.106; 95% CI, -0.184 to -0.028) after implementation. Results differed slightly depending on the reference period used, and hospital-specific models showed substantial heterogeneity in program outcomes across facilities.Conclusions and relevanceIn this cohort study of patients treated for opioid overdose, OORP implementation was associated with an increase in MOUD initiation and a decrease in repeat medically treated overdoses. The large variation in outcomes across hospitals suggests that treatment effects were heterogeneous and may depend on factors such as implementation success, program embeddedness, and availability of other hospital- and community-based OUD services.