Dataset Information

Predictors of Chronic Opioid Use: A Population-level Analysis of North Carolina Cancer Survivors Using Multi-Payer Claims.

ABSTRACT:

Background

No population-based studies have examined chronic opioid use among cancer survivors who are diverse with respect to diagnosis, age group, and insurance status.

Methods

We conducted a retrospective cohort study using North Carolina (NC) cancer registry data linked with claims from public and private insurance (2006-2016). We included adults with non-metastatic cancer who had no prior chronic opioid use (N = 38,366). We used modified Poisson regression to assess the adjusted relative risk of chronic opioid use in survivorship (>90-day continuous supply of opioids in the 13-24 months following diagnosis) associated with patient characteristics.

Results

Only 3.0% of cancer survivors in our cohort used opioids chronically in survivorship. Predictors included younger age (adjusted risk ratio [aRR], 50-59 vs 60-69 = 1.23, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.05-1.43), baseline depression (aRR = 1.22, 95% CI = 1.06-1.41) or substance use (aRR = 1.43, 95% CI = 1.15-1.78) and Medicaid (aRR vs Private = 1.93, 95% CI = 1.56-2.40). Survivors who used opioids intermittently (vs not at all) before diagnosis were twice as likely to use opioids chronically in early survivorship (aRR = 2.62, 95% CI = 2.28-3.02). Those who used opioids chronically (vs intermittently or not at all) during active treatment had a nearly 17-fold increased likelihood of chronic use in survivorship (aRR = 16.65, 95 CI = 14.30-19.40).

Conclusions

Younger and low-income survivors, those with baseline depression or substance use, and those who require chronic opioid therapy during treatment are at increased risk for chronic opioid use in survivorship. Our findings point to opportunities improve assessment of psychosocial histories and to engage patients in shared decision-making around long-term pain management, when chronic opioid therapy is required during treatment.

SUBMITTER: Check DK

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8562975 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundRecent increases in state laws to reduce opioid prescribing have demonstrated a need to understand how they are interpreted and implemented in healthcare systems. The purpose of this study was to explore the systems, strategies, and resources that hospital administrators and prescribers used to implement the 2017 North Carolina Strengthen Opioid Prevention (STOP) Act opioid prescribing limits, which limited initial prescriptions to a five (for acute) or seven (for post-surgical) days' supply.MethodsWe interviewed 14 hospital administrators and 38 prescribers with degrees in medicine, nursing, pharmacy, business administration and public health working across North Carolina. Interview guides, informed by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research, explored barriers and facilitators to implementation. Interview topics included communication, resources, and hospital system support. Interviews were recorded and transcribed, then analyzed using flexible coding, integrating inductive and deductive coding, to inform analytic code development and identify themes.ResultsWe identified three main themes around implementation of STOP act mandated prescribing limits: organizational communication, prescriber education, and changes in the electronic medical record (EMR) systems. Administrators reflected on implementation in the context of raising awareness and providing reminders to facilitate changes in prescriber behavior, operationalized through email and in-person communications as well as dedicated resources to EMR changes. Prescribers noted administrative communications about prescribing limits often focused on legality, suggesting a directive of the organization's policy rather than a passive reminder. Prescribers expressed a desire for more spaces to have their questions answered and resources for patient communications. While hospital administrators viewed compliance with the law as a priority, prescribers reflected on concerns for adequately managing their patients' pain and limited time for clinical care.ConclusionsHospital administrators and prescribers approached implementation of the STOP act prescribing limits with different mindsets. While administrators were focused on policy compliance, prescribers were focused on their patients' needs. Strategies to implement the mandate then had to balance patient needs with policy compliance. As states continue to legislate to prevent opioid overdose deaths, understanding how laws are implemented by healthcare systems and prescribers will improve their effectiveness through tailoring and maximizing available resources.

Project description:ImportanceRapid reduction or discontinuation of long-term opioid therapy may increase risk of opioid overdose or opioid use disorder (OUD). Current guidelines for chronic pain management caution against rapid dose reduction but are based on limited evidence.ObjectiveTo characterize the association between rapid reduction or abrupt discontinuation of opioid therapy (vs maintained or gradual reduction) and incidence of opioid overdose and OUD among patients prescribed high-dose, long-term opioid therapy (HDLTOT).Design, setting, and participantsThis retrospective cohort study was conducted among patients aged 18 to 64 years who were prescribed HDLTOT (≥90 daily morphine milligram equivalents for ≥90% of 90 days) from January 2006 to September 2018, with follow-up up to 4 years after cohort entry. Claims data were drawn from a large private health insurer in North Carolina and analyzed from March 1, 2006, to September 30, 2018.ExposuresTime-varying exposure of rapid dose reduction or discontinuation (>10% dose reduction/week) vs maintenance, increase, or gradual reduction or discontinuation.Main outcomes and measuresThe main outcome was incident opioid overdose (fatal or nonfatal) or diagnosed OUD. Inverse probability-weighted cumulative incidence of outcomes were estimated using the cumulative incidence function and hazard ratios (HRs) using marginal structural Fine-Gray models as a function of rapid dose tapering or discontinuation (vs gradual reduction or discontinuation or maintained or increased), accounting for competing risks.ResultsA total of 19 443 patients (median [IQR] age, 49 [41-55] years; 10 073 [51.8%] men) who received HDLTOT were identified. Rapid reduction or discontinuation was associated with higher risk of fatal and nonfatal overdoses compared with gradual reduction after the first year (year 1: HR, 1.43; 95% CI, 0.94-2.18; years 2-4: HR, 1.95; 95% CI, 1.31-2.90). There was no association between rapid reduction or discontinuation and diagnosed OUD through 2 years of follow-up; however, the hazard of incident OUD among patients exposed to rapid tapering or discontinuation was greater 25 to 48 months after the start of follow-up (HR, 1.28; 95% CI, 1.01-1.63).Conclusions and relevanceIn this cohort study, rapid dose reduction or discontinuation was associated with increased risk of opioid overdose and OUD during long-term follow-up. These findings reinforce prior concerns about safety of rapid dose reductions for patients receiving HDLTOT and highlight the need for caution when reducing opioid doses.