Trends in Buprenorphine Coverage and Prior Authorization Requirements in US Commercial Formularies, 2017-2021
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Nguyen T
PROVIDER: S-EPMC9270692 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:ImportanceBuprenorphine treatment for opioid use disorder (OUD) is associated with decreased morbidity and mortality. Despite its effectiveness, buprenorphine uptake has been limited relative to the burden of OUD. Prior authorization (PA) policies may present a barrier to treatment, though research is limited, particularly in Medicaid populations.ObjectiveTo assess whether removal of Medicaid PAs for buprenorphine to treat OUD is associated with changes in buprenorphine prescriptions for Medicaid enrollees.Design, setting, and participantsThis state-level, serial cross-sectional study used quarterly data from 2015 through the first quarter (January-March) of 2019 to compare buprenorphine prescriptions in states that did and did not remove Medicaid PAs. Analyses were conducted between June 10, 2021, and August 15, 2023. The study included 23 states with active Medicaid PAs for buprenorphine in 2015 that required similar PA policies in fee-for-service and managed care plans and had at least 2 quarters of pre- and postperiod buprenorphine prescribing data.ExposuresRemoval of Medicaid PA for at least 1 formulation of buprenorphine for OUD.Main outcomes and measuresThe main outcome was number of quarterly buprenorphine prescriptions per 1000 Medicaid enrollees.ResultsBetween 2015 and the first quarter of 2019, 6 states in the sample removed Medicaid PAs for at least 1 formulation of buprenorphine and had at least 2 quarters of pre- and postpolicy change data. Seventeen states maintained buprenorphine PAs throughout the study period. At baseline, relative to states that repealed PAs, states that maintained PAs had lower buprenorphine prescribing per 1000 Medicaid enrollees (median, 6.6 [IQR, 2.6-13.9] vs 24.1 [IQR, 8.7-27.5] prescriptions) and lower Medicaid managed care penetration (median, 38.5% [IQR, 0.0%-74.1%] vs 79.5% [IQR, 78.1%-83.5%] of enrollees) but similar opioid overdose rates and X-waivered buprenorphine clinicians per 100 000 population. In fully adjusted difference-in-differences models, removal of Medicaid PAs for buprenorphine was not associated with buprenorphine prescribing (1.4% decrease; 95% CI, -31.2% to 41.4%). For states with below-median baseline buprenorphine prescribing, PA removal was associated with increased buprenorphine prescriptions per 1000 Medicaid enrollees (40.1%; 95% CI, 0.6% to 95.1%), while states with above-median prescribing showed no change (-20.7%; 95% CI, -41.0% to 6.6%).Conclusions and relevanceIn this serial cross-sectional study of Medicaid PA policies for buprenorphine for OUD, removal of PAs was not associated with overall changes in buprenorphine prescribing among Medicaid enrollees. Given the ongoing burden of opioid overdoses, continued multipronged efforts are needed to remove barriers to buprenorphine care and increase availability of this lifesaving treatment.
| S-EPMC10589810 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesPrior authorization (PA) aims to promote the safe and effective use of medications and to control costs. However, PA-related administrative tasks can contribute to burden on health care providers. This study examines how such tasks affect treatment decisions.Study designCross-sectional, online survey.MethodsWe conducted an online survey of US medical providers in 2020 based on a convenience sample of 100,000 providers. Multivariate path analysis was used to examine associations among provider practice characteristics, step therapy and other health plan requirements, perceived burdens of PA, communication issues with insurers, and prescribing behaviors (prescribing a different medication than planned, avoiding prescribing of newer medications even if evidence-based guideline recommendations are met, and modifying a diagnosis). Weighted analyses were conducted to assess nonresponse bias.ResultsA total of 1173 respondents (1.2% response rate) provided 1147 usable surveys. Step therapy requirements had the largest effect on clinical decision-making. Other significant effects on clinical decision-making included perceived PA likelihood, communication issues, and health plan requirements (eg, clinical documentation). Weighted analyses showed that the study conclusions were unlikely to have been biased by nonresponse.ConclusionsRespondents report that they may alter clinical decisions to avoid PA requirements and related burdens, even in cases in which use of the PA medication was clinically appropriate. Processes that reduce the administrative burden of PA through improved communication and transparency as well as standardized documentation may help ensure that PA more seamlessly achieves its goals of safe and effective use of medications.
| S-EPMC10403277 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceState Medicaid programs have implemented initiatives to expand treatment coverage for opioid use disorder (OUD); however, some Medicaid programs still require prior authorizations (PAs) for filling buprenorphine prescriptions.ObjectiveTo evaluate the changes in buprenorphine use for OUD among Medicaid enrollees in states that completely removed buprenorphine PA requirements.Design setting and participantsThis retrospective cross-sectional study analyzed the immediate and trend changes on buprenorphine use during 2013 to 2020 associated with removal of PA requirements using a controlled interrupted time series analysis to account for autocorrelation. Data were collected from Medicaid State Drug Utilization Data for 2 states (California and Illinois) that completely removed a buprenorphine PA during the study period, and buprenorphine prescriptions for OUD treatment were identified among Medicaid enrollees.Main outcomes and measuresQuarterly total number of buprenorphine prescriptions for each state was calculated, and stratification analyses were conducted by dosage form (films and tablets).ResultsAmong the 2 state Medicaid programs (California and Illinois) that removed buprenorphine PAs, there was a total of 702 643 and 415 115 eligible buprenorphine prescription claims, respectively. After removing PA requirements for buprenorphine, there was an immediate increase that was not statistically significant (rate ratio [RR], 1.11; 95% CI, 0.76-1.61) in the number of all buprenorphine prescriptions in California and a statistically significant increase (RR, 6.99; 95% CI, 4.67-10.47) in the number of all buprenorphine prescriptions in Illinois relative to the change in the control states (Alabama, Florida, Idaho, Kansas, Mississippi, Nevada, South Dakota, and Wyoming). Additionally, there was a statistically significant decreasing trend in the number of all buprenorphine prescriptions in California (RR, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.82-0.94) and a statistically significant increasing trend in Illinois (RR, 1.11; 95% CI, 1.05-1.19) relative to the trend in control states.Conclusions and relevanceIn this cross-sectional study, removal of buprenorphine PA requirements was associated with a statistically significant increase in the number of buprenorphine prescription fills among Medicaid populations in 1 of the 2 included states.
| S-EPMC9233239 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionPrior authorizations (PAs) are intended to control prescription drug expenditures.MethodsOne hundred fifty-six physician and advanced practice provider members of the American College of Gastroenterology completed a national survey to assess PA burden and impact.ResultsOne-half of PA requests relate to prescription refills. Greater than 50% of the respondents choose inferior treatments at least weekly because of perceived PA burden for preferred agents. One-half of the respondents reported a patient who experienced serious adverse events due to PA-related care delays.DiscussionPA is an administrative burden that exhausts practice resources and may have a negative impact on patient care.
| S-EPMC9060934 | biostudies-literature
Project description:COVID-19 pandemic-related shifts in healthcare utilization, in combination with trends in non-COVID-19 disease transmission and non-pharmaceutical intervention use, had clear impacts on rates of hospitalization for infectious and chronic diseases. Using a U.S. national healthcare billing database, we estimated the monthly incidence rate ratio of hospitalizations between March 2020 and June 2021 according to 19 ICD-10 diagnostic chapters and 189 subchapters. The majority of primary diagnoses for hospitalization showed an immediate decline in incidence during March 2020. Hospitalizations for reproductive neoplasms, hypertension, and diabetes returned to pre-pandemic levels during late 2020 and early 2021, while others, like those for infectious respiratory disease, did not return to pre-pandemic levels during this period. Our assessment of subchapter-level primary hospitalization codes offers insight into trends among less frequent causes of hospitalization during the COVID-19 pandemic in the U.S.
| S-EPMC9546751 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportancePrior authorization requirements may be a barrier to accessing medications for opioid use disorder treatment and may, therefore, be associated with poor health care outcomes.ObjectiveTo determine the association of prior authorization with use of buprenorphine-naloxone and health care outcomes.Design, setting, and participantsThis comparative interrupted time series analysis examined enrollment and insurance claims data from Medicare beneficiaries with an opioid use disorder diagnosis or who filled a prescription for an opioid use disorder medication between 2012 and 2017. Over this period, 775?874 members were in 1479 Part D plans that always required prior authorization, 113?286 members were in 206 plans that removed prior authorization, 189?461 members were in 489 plans that never required prior authorization, and 619?919 members were in 485 plans that added prior authorization. Data analysis was performed from April 2019 to February 2020.ExposuresRemoval or addition of prior authorization and new prescriptions filled for buprenorphine-naloxone.Main outcomes and measuresBuprenorphine-naloxone use, inpatient admissions, emergency department visits, and prescription drug and medical expenditures.ResultsThe study population in 2012 included 949?206 Medicare beneficiaries (mean [SD] age, 57 [15] years; 550?445 women [58%]). Removal of prior authorization was associated with an increase of 17.9 prescriptions (95% CI, 1.1 to 34.7 prescriptions) filled for buprenorphine-naloxone per plan per year, which is a doubling of the number of prescriptions, on average. Each prescription filled was associated with statistically significant decreases in adverse health care outcomes: substance use disorder-related inpatient admissions decreased by 0.1 admission per plan per year (95% CI, -0.2 to -0.1 admission per plan per year), and substance use disorder-related emergency department visits decreased by 0.1 visit per plan per year (95% CI, -0.13 to -0.03 visit per plan per year) (all P?<?.001). Combining these results, removal of prior authorization was associated with a reduction in substance use disorder-related inpatient admissions by 2.0 admissions per plan per year (95% CI, -4.3 to -0.1 admissions per plan per year) and substance use disorder-related emergency department visits by 1.4 visits per plan per year (95% CI, -3.2 to -0.1 visits per plan per year).Conclusions and relevanceRemoving prior authorization for buprenorphine-naloxone was associated with an increase in the medication use and decreases in health care utilization and expenditures.
| S-EPMC7171554 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo assess the impact of a 2008 dose-based prior authorization policy for Massachusetts Medicaid beneficiaries using buprenorphine + naloxone for opioid addiction treatment. Doses higher than 16 mg required progressively more frequent authorizations.Data sourcesMediciaid claims for 2007 and 2008 linked with Department of Public Health (DPH) service records.Study designWe conducted time series for all buprenorphine users and a longitudinal cohort analysis of 2,049 individuals who began buprenorphine treatment in 2007. Outcome measures included use of relapse-related services, health care expenditures per person, and buprenorphine expenditures.Data collection/extraction methodsWe used ICD-9 codes and National Drug Codes to identify individuals with opioid dependence who filled prescriptions for buprenorphine. Medicaid and DPH data were linked with individual identifiers.Principal findingsIndividuals using doses >24 mg decreased from 16.5 to 4.1 percent. Relapses increased temporarily for some users but returned to previous levels within 3 months. Buprenorphine expenditures decreased but total expenditures did not change significantly.ConclusionPrior authorization policies strategically targeted by dose level appear to successfully reduce use of higher than recommended buprenorphine doses. Savings from these policies are modest and may be accompanied by brief increases in relapse rates. Lower doses may decrease diversion of buprenorphine.
| S-EPMC4237648 | biostudies-literature
Project description:COVID-19 pandemic-related shifts in healthcare utilization, in combination with trends in non-COVID-19 disease transmission and NPI use, had clear impacts on infectious and chronic disease hospitalization rates. Using a national healthcare billing database (C19RDB), we estimated the monthly incidence rate ratio of hospitalizations between March 2020 and June 2021 according to 19 ICD-10 diagnostic chapters and 189 subchapters. The majority of hospitalization causes showed an immediate decline in incidence during March 2020. Hospitalizations for diagnoses such as reproductive neoplasms, hypertension, and diabetes returned to pre-pandemic norms in incidence during late 2020 and early 2021, while others, like those for infectious respiratory disease, never returned to pre-pandemic norms. These results are crucial for contextualizing future research, particularly time series analyses, utilizing surveillance and hospitalization data for non-COVID-19 disease. Our assessment of subchapter level primary hospitalization codes offers new insight into trends among less frequent causes of hospitalization during the COVID-19 pandemic.
| S-EPMC9094108 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Study designAn observational study.ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of a health plan's prior authorization (PA) programs for low back pain (LBP) in a non-Medicare population by assessing changes in pre-surgical nonoperative care; lumbar fusion trends; and overall back surgery rates compared with another health plan with a similar program and national benchmarks. The PA programs require mandatory physiatrist consultation before surgical evaluation, with subsequent additional LBP surgery PA.Summary of background dataLBP is prevalent and concern exists that spinal fusion is overutilized for LBP.MethodsAnnual rates of lumbar fusion trended over 6 years, and analysis of changes in standardized costs for LBP-related services among a 501-member subset who underwent lumbar fusion before and after program implementations, during the period January 1, 2008, through December 31, 2013, among commercial members aged 18 and 65 years enrolled in a health maintenance organization with commercial membership averaging >500,000 annually.ResultsAfter initiation of the physiatrist PA in December 2010, lumbar fusions decreased from 76.27/100,000 in 2010 to 62.63/100,000 in 2011 with subsequent increases to 64.24/100,000 and 73.84/100,000 in years 2012 and 2013. For members who had lumbar fusion, per-member, pre-surgical costs increased by $2,233 with the physiatrist PA and an additional $1,370 with implementation of the LBP surgery PA (March 2013). Spinal injections and inpatient admissions were the greatest contributors to the overall increase in costs. The physiatrist and LBP surgery PA programs were also associated with lengthening of LBP episodes ending in surgery by 309 and 198 days.ConclusionMandatory referral to a physiatrist before surgical evaluation did not result in persistent reduction in lumbar fusions. Instead, these programs were associated with the unintended consequence of increased costs from more nonoperative care for only a transitory change in the lumbar fusion rate, likely from delays due to the introduction of both PA programs.Level of evidence3.
| S-EPMC4834807 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceSystematic reviews can help to justify a new randomized clinical trial (RCT), inform its design, and interpret its results in the context of prior evidence.ObjectiveTo assess trends and factors associated with citing (a marker of the use of) prior systematic reviews in RCT reports.Design, setting, and participantsThis cross-sectional study investigated 737 Cochrane reviews assessing health interventions to identify 4003 eligible RCTs, defined as those included in an updated version but not in the first version of a Cochrane review and published 2 years after the first version of the Cochrane review was published.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary outcome was the citation of prior systematic reviews, Cochrane or others, as determined by screening references of eligible RCTs. Factors that may be associated with the citation of prior systematic reviews were also examined.ResultsAmong 4003 eligible RCTs, 1241 studies (31.0%) cited Cochrane reviews, 1698 studies (42.4%) cited prior non-Cochrane reviews, and 2265 studies (56.6%) cited either type of systematic review or both; 1738 RCTs (43.4%) cited no systematic reviews. The percentage of RCTs citing prior Cochrane reviews, non-Cochrane reviews, and either or both types of review increased from 28 studies (15.3%), 46 studies (25.1%), and 65 studies (35.5%) of 183 RCTs before 2008 to 42 studies (40.8%), 65 studies (64.1%), and 73 studies (71.8%) of 102 RCTs since 2020, respectively; the annual increases were 1.9% (95% CI, 1.4%-2.3%), 3.3% (95% CI, 2.9%-3.7%), and 3.0% (95% CI, 2.5%-3.5%), respectively. The proportion of RCTs citating prior systematic reviews varied considerably across clinical specialties, ranging from 28 of 106 RCTs (26.4%) in ophthalmology to 386 of 553 RCTs (69.8%) in psychiatry (P < .001). RCTs with 100 participants or more (risk ratio [RR], 1.16; 95% CI, 1.03-1.30), nonindustry funding (RR, 1.43; 95% CI, 1.27-1.61), and authors from high-income countries (RR, 1.10; 95% CI, 1.03-1.17) were more likely to cite systematic reviews than those with fewer than 100 participants, industry funding, and authors from low- and middle-income countries, respectively. A journal requirement to cite systematic reviews was not associated with the likelihood of citing a systematic review.Conclusions and relevanceThis study found that the citation of prior systematic reviews in RCT reports improved over time, but approximately 40% of RCTs failed to do so. These findings suggest that reference to prior evidence for initiating, designing, and reporting RCTs should be further emphasized to assure clinical relevance, improve methodological quality, and facilitate interpretation of new results.
| S-EPMC10037150 | biostudies-literature