Dataset Information

Assessing local California trends in emergency physician opioid prescriptions from 2012 to 2020: Experiences in a large academic health system.

ABSTRACT:

Objectives

There has been increased focus nationally on limiting opioid prescriptions. National data demonstrates a decrease in annual opioid prescriptions among emergency medicine physicians. We analyzed data from 2012 to 2020 from a large academic health system in California to understand trends in opioid prescribing patterns for emergency department (ED) discharged patients and assessed the potential impact of two initiatives at limiting local opioid prescriptions.

Methods

In 2012-2020, monthly ED visit data was used to evaluate the total number of outpatient opioid prescriptions and percent of ED visits with opioid prescriptions (as primary outcomes). Descriptive statistics, graphic representation, and segmented regression with interrupted times series were used based on two prespecified time points associated with intensive local initiatives directed at limiting opioid prescribing1) comprehensive emergency medicine resident education and 2) electronic health record (EHR)-based intervention.

Results

Between March 2012 and July 2020, a total of 41,491 ED discharged patients received an opioid prescription. The three most commonly prescribed drugs were hydrocodone (84.1%), oxycodone (10.8%), and codeine (2.8%). After implementing comprehensive emergency medicine resident education, the total number of opioid prescriptions, the percentage of opioid prescriptions over total ED visit numbers and the total tablet number showed decreasing trends (p's ≤ 0.01), in addition to the natural (pre-intervention) decreasing trends. In contrast, later interventions in the EHR tended to show attenuated decreasing trends.

Conclusions

From 2012 to 2020, we found that total opioid prescriptions decreased significantly for discharged ED patients. This trend is seen nationally. However, our specific interventions further heightened this downward trend. Evidence-based legislation, policy changes, and educational initiatives that impact prescribing practices should guide future efforts.

SUBMITTER: Elder JW

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8684538 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe United States is undergoing a crippling opioid epidemic, spurred in part by overuse of prescription opioids by adults 25 to 64 years of age. Of concern are long-duration and high-dose initial prescriptions, which place the patients and their friends and relatives at heightened risk for long-term opioid use, misuse, overdose, and death.MethodsWe estimated the incidence of initial opioid prescriptions in each month between July 2012 and December 2017 using administrative-claims data from across the United States (accessed through Blue Cross-Blue Shield [BCBS] Axis); monthly incidence was estimated as the percentage of enrollees who received an initial opioid prescription among those who had not used opioids (i.e., no opioid prescription or a diagnosis of opioid use disorder in the 6 months before a given month). We then estimated the percentage of enrollees initiating opioid therapy who received a long-duration or high-dose initial opioid prescription in each month during this period. We also calculated the number of providers who initiated opioid therapy in any patient who had not used opioids in each month and examined monthly trends in the duration and dose of initial opioid prescriptions in prescriber and patient subgroups. Our study sample included 63,817,512 enrollees who had not used opioids (mean, 15,897,673 per month).ResultsThe monthly incidence of initial opioid prescriptions among enrollees who had not used opioids declined by 54%, from 1.63% in July 2012 to 0.75% in December 2017. This decline was accompanied by a decreasing number of providers (from 114,043 in July 2012 to 80,462 in December 2017) who initiated opioid therapy in any patient who had not used opioids. Nonetheless, among the shrinking subgroup of physicians who initiated opioid therapy in such patients, high-risk prescribing (i.e., prescriptions for more than a 3-day supply or for a dose of 50 morphine milligram equivalents per day or higher) persisted at a monthly rate of 115,378 prescriptions per 15,897,673 enrollees who had not used opioids.ConclusionsAs the opioid crisis progressed between July 2012 and December 2017, many providers stopped initiating opioid therapy. Although the number of initial opioid prescriptions declined, a subgroup of providers continued to write high-risk initial opioid prescriptions. (Funded by the National Institute on Aging and a gift from Owen and Linda Robinson.).

Project description:ObjectiveDescribe trends and patterns in long-term opioid prescriptions among adults with musculoskeletal conditions (MSK).DesignInterrupted time-series analysis based on an open cohort study.SettingA representative sample of 402 Australian general practices contributing data to the MedicineInsight database.Participants811 174 patients aged 18+ years with an MSK diagnosis and three or more consultations in any two consecutive years between 2012 and 2018. Males represented 44.5% of the sample, 28.4% were 65+ years and 1.9% were Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islanders.Primary and secondary outcome measuresAnnual prevalence and cumulative incidence (%) of long-term opioid prescribing (3+ prescriptions in 90 days) among patients with an MSK. Average duration of these episodes in each year between 2012 and 2018.ResultsThe prevalence of long-term opioid prescribing increased from 5.5% (95% CI 5.2 to 5.8) in 2012 to 9.1% (95% CI 8.8 to 9.7) in 2018 (annual change OR 1.09, 95% CI 1.08 to 1.09), but a slightly lower incidence was observed in 2018 (3.0% vs 3.6%-3.8% in other years; annual change OR 0.99, 95% CI 0.98 to 0.99). The incidence was between 37% and 52% higher among practices located in rural Australia or lower socioeconomic areas. Individual risk factors included increasing age (3.4 times higher among those aged 80+ years than the 18-34 years group in 2012, increasing to 4.8 times higher in 2018), identifying as Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander (1.7-1.9 higher incidence than their peers), or living in disadvantaged areas (36%-57% more likely than among those living in wealthiest areas). Long-term opioid prescriptions lasted in average 287-301 days between 2012 and 2016, reducing to 229 days in 2017 and 140 days in 2018. A longer duration was observed in practices from more disadvantaged areas and females in all years, except in 2018.ConclusionsThe continued rise in the prevalence of long-term opioid prescribing is of concern, despite a recent reduction in the incidence and duration of opioid management.

Project description:ImportanceGiven the mortality disparities among children and adolescents in rural vs urban areas, the unique health care needs of pediatric patients, and the annual emergency department volume for this patient population, understanding the availability of pediatric emergency physicians (EPs) is important. Information regarding the available pediatric EP workforce is limited, however.ObjectiveTo describe the demographic characteristics, training, board certification, and geographic distribution of the 2020 clinically active pediatric EP workforce in the US.Design, setting, and participantsThis national cross-sectional study of the 2020 pediatric EP workforce used the American Medical Association Physician Masterfile database, which was linked to American Board of Medical Specialties board certification information. Self-reported training data in the database were analyzed to identify clinically active physicians who self-reported pediatric emergency medicine (EM) as their primary or secondary specialty. The Physician Masterfile data were obtained on March 11, 2020.Main outcomes and measuresThe Physician Masterfile was used to identify all clinically active pediatric EPs in the US. The definition of EM training was completion of an EM program (inclusive of both an EM residency and/or a pediatric EM fellowship) or a combined EM program (internal medicine and EM, family medicine and EM, or pediatrics and EM). Physician location was linked and classified by county-level Urban Influence Codes. Pediatric EP density was calculated and mapped using US Census Bureau population estimates.ResultsA total of 2403 clinically active pediatric EPs were working in 2020 (5% of all clinically active emergency physicians), of whom 1357 were women (56%) and the median (interquartile range) age was 46 (40-55) years. The overall pediatric EP population included 1718 physicians (71%) with EM training and 641 (27%) with pediatric training. Overall, 1639 (68%) were board certified in pediatric EM, of whom 1219 (74%) reported EM training and 400 (24%) reported pediatrics training. Nearly all pediatric EPs worked in urban areas (2369 of 2402 [99%]), and pediatric EPs in urban compared with rural areas were younger (median [interquartile range] age, 46 [40-55] years vs 59 [48-65] years). Pediatric EPs who completed their training 20 years ago or more compared with those who completed training more recently were less likely to work in urban settings (633 [97%] vs 0-4 years: 440 [99%], 5-9 years: 547 [99%], or 10-19 years: 723 [99%]; P = .006). Three states had 0 pediatric EPs (Montana, South Dakota, and Wyoming), and 3 states had pediatric EPs in only 1 county (Alaska, New Mexico, and North Dakota). Less than 1% of counties had 4 or more pediatric EPs per 100 000 population.Conclusions and relevanceThis study found that almost all pediatric EPs worked in urban areas, leaving rural areas of the US with limited availability of pediatric emergency care. This finding may have profound implications for children and adolescents needing emergency care.

Project description:IntroductionDespite the increasing diversity of individuals entering medicine, physicians from racial and sexual minority groups continue to experience bias and discrimination in the workplace. The objective of this study was to determine the current experiences and perceptions of discrimination on the basis of race and sexual orientation among academic emergency medicine (EM) faculty.MethodsWe conducted a cross-sectional survey of a convenience sample of EM faculty across six programs. Survey items included the Overt Gender Discrimination at Work (OGDW) Scale adapted for race and sexual orientation, and the frequency and source of experienced and observed discrimination. Group comparisons were made using t-tests or chi-square analyses, and relationships between race or sexual orientation, and we evaluated physicians' experiences using correlation analyses.ResultsA total of 141 out of 352 (40.1%) subjects completed at least a portion of the survey. Non-White physicians reported higher mean racial OGDW scores than their White counterparts (13.4 vs 8.6; 95% confidence interval (CI) for difference, -7.7 - -2.9). Non-White EM faculty were also more likely to report having experienced discriminatory treatment based on race than were White EM faculty (48.0% vs 12.6%; CI for difference, 16.6% - 54.2%), although both groups were equally likely to report having observed race-based discrimination of another physician. EM faculty who identified as sexual minorities reported higher mean sexual minority OGDW scores than their heterosexual counterparts (11.1 vs 7.1; 95% CI for difference, -7.3 - -0.6). There were no significant differences between sexual minority and heterosexual faculty in their reports of experiencing or observing discrimination based on sexual orientation.ConclusionEM faculty from racial and sexual minority groups perceived more discrimination based on race or sexual orientation in their workplace than their majority counterparts. EM faculty regardless of race or sexual orientation were similar in their observations of discriminatory treatment of another physician based on race or sexual orientation.