Impact of a drug utilization review program on high-risk use of prescription controlled substances

Prospective Prescription Review System Promotes Safe Use of Analgesics, Improves Clinical Outcomes, and Saves Medical Costs in Surgical Patients: Insights from Nanjing Drum Tower Hospital

Introduction

The rate of awareness of prospective prescription review for inpatient prescriptions remains low, and no study has evaluated prospective prescription review systems among hospitalized patients. In this study we evaluate the effect of a prospective prescription review system on the use of analgesics, clinical outcomes, and medical costs in hospitalized patients who underwent surgery.

Methods

A single-center, real-world study was conducted retrospectively at Drum Tower Hospital, Nanjing, China. Patient data were extracted from the medical records, before (June 2016–May 2017) and after (June 2018–May 2019) prescription review system implementation. The primary outcome was proportion of prescriptions of analgesics with potential risks. The secondary outcomes included prescription of opioids or non-opioids, usage of medications to manage analgesics-related adverse events, clinical outcomes, and medical costs. Propensity score matching was used to balance the cohort of patients before and after implementation of the prescription review system.

Results

A total of 28,150 inpatients were included for study analysis. After implementation of the prescription review system, the proportion of prescriptions of analgesics with potential risk was significantly reduced (6.3% vs 26.1%, P < 0.05). A significant decrease was observed in the proportion of patients prescribed opioids (24.3% vs 27.5%, P < 0.001) and tramadol (4.7% vs 12.1%, P < 0.001). There was a significant decrease in prescription of antiemetics (21.8% vs 34.1%, P < 0.001) and cathartics (38.4% vs 50.6%, P < 0.001) which were used in the management of opioid-related adverse events. There was a decreased length of stay in hospital [median (Q1, Q3) 10 (6, 17) vs 11 (7, 18), P < 0.01)] with similar readmission rates within 30 days post discharge (1.0% vs 0.8%, P = 0.099).

Conclusions

The introduction of the prescription review system was associated with safer prescribing, including a reduction in prescriptions of analgesics with potential risk and necessity of medication to manage analgesics-related adverse events, which resulted in better clinical outcomes and cost saving.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s12325-021-01935-z.

Effect of nationwide concurrent drug utilization review program on drug-drug interactions and related health outcome

BACKGROUND

A computerized drug utilization review (DUR) program has provided physicians and pharmacists with alerts on drug-drug interactions (DDIs), drug-age precautions and therapeutic duplication in Korea since 2010.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the impact of the DUR program on health outcomes associated with DDIs.

METHODS

An uncontrolled before-after study was performed to investigate the impact of the nationwide DUR program on DDIs and related health outcomes. The study population consisted of people who used two types of DDI pairs before DUR implementation (from January 2009 to December 2010) and post-DUR implementation (from January 2012 to December 2013); (i) benzodiazepines with concurrent use of metabolic enzyme inhibitors and (ii) QTc (heart-rate corrected QT interval) prolongation agents. The main outcome measures were all-cause and cause-specific hospitalization admissions or emergency department (ED) visits.

RESULTS

This study included 107 874 people who used benzodiazepines with enzyme inhibitors and 8489 who received co-medication of QTc prolongation agents. For patients receiving a combination of benzodiazepines and enzyme inhibitors, both all-cause hospitalization and cause-specific hospitalization decreased after DUR implementation, from 43.2% to 41.7% and from 4.6% to 4.5% (adjusted odds ratio [OR] = 0.96; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.93-0.98; OR = 0.89, 95% CI = 0.84-0.99, respectively). For patients receiving co-medication of QTc prolongation agents, all-cause hospitalization (54.2%) was lower than before (54.9%) (OR = 0.87, 95% CI = 0.79-0.96), but no significant change was found for cause-specific hospitalization and ED visits.

CONCLUSION

Implementation of a DUR program may reduce the adverse health outcomes posed by DDIs in patients on combination of benzodiazepines and enzyme inhibitors potentially QTc-prolongation agents.

A Rapid Review of the Impact of Systems-Level Policies and Interventions on Population-Level Outcomes Related to the Opioid Epidemic, United States and Canada, 2014-2018

OBJECTIVES

In the United States, rising rates of overdose deaths and recent outbreaks of hepatitis C virus and HIV infection are associated with injection drug use. We updated a 2014 review of systems-level opioid policy interventions by focusing on evidence published during 2014-2018 and new and expanded opioid policies.

METHODS

We searched the MEDLINE database, consistent with the 2014 review. We included articles that provided original empirical evidence on the effects of systems-level interventions on opioid use, overdose, or death; were from the United States or Canada; had a clear comparison group; and were published from January 1, 2014, through July 19, 2018. Two raters screened articles and extracted full-text data for qualitative synthesis of consistent or contradictory findings across studies. Given the rapidly evolving field, the review was supplemented with a search of additional articles through November 17, 2019, to assess consistency of more recent findings.

RESULTS

The keyword search yielded 535 studies, 66 of which met inclusion criteria. The most studied interventions were prescription drug monitoring programs (PDMPs) (59.1%), and the least studied interventions were clinical guideline changes (7.6%). The most common outcome was opioid use (77.3%). Few articles evaluated combination interventions (18.2%). Study findings included the following: PDMP effectiveness depends on policy design, with robust PDMPs needed for impact; health insurer and pharmacy benefit management strategies, pill-mill laws, pain clinic regulations, and patient/health care provider educational interventions reduced inappropriate prescribing; and marijuana laws led to a decrease in adverse opioid-related outcomes. Naloxone distribution programs were understudied, and evidence of their effectiveness was mixed. In the evidence published after our search's 4-year window, findings on opioid guidelines and education were consistent and findings for other policies differed.

CONCLUSIONS

Although robust PDMPs and marijuana laws are promising, they do not target all outcomes, and multipronged interventions are needed. Future research should address marijuana laws, harm-reduction interventions, health insurer policies, patient/health care provider education, and the effects of simultaneous interventions on opioid-related outcomes.

Screening, Brief Intervention, and Referral to Treatment in a Retail Pharmacy Setting: The Pharmacist's Role in Identifying and Addressing Risk of Substance Use Disorder

OBJECTIVE

This study determined the feasibility of interviewing and screening patients presenting to a retail pharmacy using Screening, Brief Intervention, and Referral to Treatment (SBIRT) interview protocols, and to compare SBIRT results to a risk score calculated from Prescription Drug Monitoring Program (PDMP) data.

METHODS

Using the NIDA Quick Screen and NIDA Modified-ASSIST (NM-ASSIST) and the Alcohol Use Disorder Identification Test (AUDIT), retail pharmacy customers were screened for substance and alcohol use disorder and tobacco use. PDMP reports were collected on subjects and a PDMP-risk score was calculated based on the numbers of Schedule II-V prescriptions and prescribers over the previous 12 months.

RESULTS

A total of 24 patients were included in this study (67% response rate). SBIRT screening revealed that 20.8% were at-risk for substance use disorder (SUD), 16.7% for alcohol use disorder, and 37.5% used tobacco. Overall, 33.3% of subjects were at-risk for SUD or alcohol use disorder. Fifty percent of subjects required education and/or brief intervention based on their responses, 37.5% of all subjects were deemed at-risk based on their PDMP-risk score, and 60% of patients who were risk-positive by SBIRT screening were also PDMP-risk positive.

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrates the feasibility of performing SBIRT-based screenings in a retail pharmacy setting and combining these with PDMP-risk analysis to screen patients for prescription and illicit drug misuse. Findings from this study will inform the design of larger multisite studies, which should validate these findings and include follow-up analysis to assess the efficacy of intervention on this patient population.

An Experimental Test of the Effectiveness of Unsolicited Reporting by a Prescription Drug Monitoring Program in Reducing Inappropriate Acquisition of Opioids

OBJECTIVES

This research looked at whether notifying prescribers and pharmacies about patients who use multiple providers to obtain opioids reduces their prescribing activity (including use of multiple providers, numbers of opioid prescriptions, or amounts of opioids obtained).

DESIGN

Nevada's prescription drug monitoring program (PDMP) identified patients using multiple providers to obtain opioids and assigned them alternately to an intervention or control group. Controlled substance prescription histories were sent only to intervention patients' providers. Subsequent opioid purchases by patients in both groups were compared.

SETTING

All pharmacies and dispensers in the state are required to report every prescription for Schedule II-IV opioids dispensed to the PDMP.

SUBJECTS

All patients receiving opioids from more than four different Nevada prescribers and more than four pharmacies during the previous six months assigned to the intervention (N = 436) or control group (N = 441).

METHODS

We used ordinary least squares regression to estimate notification effects on each outcome, accounting for preexisting differences among groups.

RESULTS

Providers receiving unsolicited notices were 13% less likely to continue prescribing to patients than providers not notified. Eighty-four percent of the intervention patients' prescribers discontinued prescribing to them after assignment, compared with 80.5% of the control group's prescribers-who were not notified. Because patients in both groups found other prescribers to replace discontinued prescribers, notification had at most a small effect on patients' use of multiple providers, numbers of opioid prescriptions, or amounts of opioids purchased.

CONCLUSIONS

Requiring prescribers to solicit patients' prescription histories is likely to be a more effective use of PDMP resources than proactive notification.

Changes in Concurrent Opioid and Benzodiazepine Use Following a Low-Touch Prescriber Fax Intervention

BACKGROUND

Concurrent use of opioids and benzodiazepines (COB) can lead to additive respiratory and central nervous system effects, putting patients at increased risk of fatal overdose. In 2016, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention released an opioid-prescribing guideline recommending against COB, and the Pharmacy Quality Alliance (PQA) endorsed a COB measure in its core opioid set. From May 1, 2017, to December 4, 2017, a California Medicaid plan launched a COB-focused prescriber outreach intervention for members receiving recent opioid and benzodiazepine claims with the intent of decreasing concurrent use.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the effect of a prescriber fax intervention by a Medicaid plan on COB.

METHODS

Two retrospective analyses were conducted using administrative pharmacy claims data: a comparison of the PQA COB rate among selected California Medicaid plans for 2016 and 2017 and a cohort utilization analysis of members identified for the fax intervention compared with controls. Intervention and control members were matched based on 12 pre-index utilization characteristics. Outcomes assessed included proportion of members with resolution of COB in the post-index period, change in mean number of COB days before and after the index date, and proportion of members with decreased benzodiazepine daily dose after the index date. Analyses were also performed for the subgroups of members with < 30 days of COB and ≥ 30 days of COB in the pre-index period.

RESULTS

All California Medicaid plans in the study saw an improvement in the PQA COB rate between 2016 and 2017. In the utilization analysis, 4,182 intervention members were eligible according to study criteria and matched to similar control members. Many differences in medication use existed between the subgroups with < 30 days and ≥ 30 days of COB in the pre-index period, with the latter group consisting of much more chronic, complex users. The intervention cohort had a statistically significant higher proportion of members with complete resolution of COB compared with the control cohort (43.8% vs. 40.0%; P < 0.01), which was also statistically significant for the 2 subgroups. The intervention cohort had a decrease in the mean number of COB days from pre- to post-index periods, but this was only statistically significant for the subgroup with < 30 COB days (-2.5 vs. -1.5; P = 0.0217). No statistically significant differences were detected between cohorts in proportion of members with decreased benzodiazepine dose.

CONCLUSIONS

Our analyses demonstrated that this low-touch prescriber fax intervention produced statistically significant improvements in COB outcomes, despite the overall trend of declining COB among the other California Medicaid plans. Low-touch, targeted prescriber outreach can be an inexpensive yet effective tool to affect prescriber behavior, particularly before COB becomes chronic.

DISCLOSURES

No outside funding was used to support this study. The authors do not have any financial relationships or potential conflicts of interest relevant to this article to disclose. At the time of conducting this research, all authors were employees of MedImpact Healthcare Systems. The results of this study were presented at the AMCP Managed Care & Specialty Pharmacy Annual Meeting 2019; March 25-28, 2019; San Diego, CA.

Evidence for state, community and systems-level prevention strategies to address the opioid crisis

BACKGROUND

Practitioners and policy makers need evidence to facilitate the selection of effective prevention interventions that can address the ongoing opioid overdose epidemic in the United States.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review of publications reporting on rigorous evaluations of systems-level interventions to address provider and patient/public behavior and prevent prescription and illicit opioid overdose. A total of 251 studies were reviewed. Interventions studied included 1) state legislation and regulation, 2) prescription drug monitoring programs (PDMPs), 3) insurance strategies, 4) clinical guideline implementation, 5) provider education, 6) health system interventions, 7) naloxone education and distribution, 8) safe storage and disposal, 9) public education, 10) community coalitions, and 11) interventions employing public safety and public health collaborations.

RESULTS

The quality of evidence supporting selected interventions was low to moderate. Interventions with the strongest evidence include PDMP and pain clinic legislation, insurance strategies, motivational interviewing in clinical settings, feedback to providers on opioid prescribing behavior, intensive school and family-based programs, and patient education in the clinical setting.

CONCLUSIONS

Although evidence is growing, further high-quality research is needed. Investigators should aim to identify strategies that can prevent overdose, as well as influence public, patient, and provider behavior. Identifying which strategies are most effective at addressing prescription compared to illicit opioid misuse and overdose could be fruitful, as well as investigating synergistic effects and unintended consequences.

Unsolicited Reporting to Prescribers of Opioid Analgesics by a State Prescription Drug Monitoring Program: An Observational Study with Matched Comparison Group

Objective

State prescription drug monitoring programs (PDMPs) can help detect individuals with multiple provider episodes (MPEs; also referred to as doctor/pharmacy shopping), an indicator of prescription drug abuse and/or diversion. Although unsolicited reporting by PDMPs to prescribers of opioid analgesics is thought to be an important practice in reducing MPEs and the potential harm associated with them, evidence of its effectiveness is mixed. This exploratory research evaluates the impact of unsolicited reports sent by Massachusetts' PDMP to the prescribers of persons with MPEs.

Methods

Individuals with MPEs were identified from PDMP records between January 2010 and July 2011 as individuals having Schedule II prescriptions (at least one prescription being an opioid) from four or more distinct prescribers and four or more distinct pharmacies within six months. Based on available MA-PDMP resources, an unsolicited report containing the patient's 12-month prescription history was sent to prescribers of a subset of patients who met the MPE threshold; a comparison group closely matched on demographics and baseline prescription history, whose prescribers were not sent a report, was generated using propensity score matching. The prescription history of each group was examined for 12 months before and after the intervention.

Results

There were eighty-four patients (intervention group) whose prescribers received an unsolicited report and 504 matched patients (comparison group) whose prescribers were not sent a report. Regression analyses indicated significantly greater decreases in the number of Schedule II opioid prescriptions (P < 0.01), number of prescribers visited (P < 0.01), number of pharmacies used (P < 0.01), dosage units (P < 0.01), total days' supply (P < 0.01), total morphine milligram equivalents (MME; P < 0.01), and average daily MME (P < 0.05) for the intervention group relative to the comparison group. A post hoc analysis suggested that the observed intervention effects were greater for individuals with an average daily dose of less than 100 MMEs.

Conclusions

This study suggests that PDMP unsolicited reporting to prescribers can help reduce risk measures in patients' prescription histories, which may improve health outcomes for patients receiving opioid analgesics from multiple providers.

Effect of Controlled Substance Use Management on Prescribing Patterns and Health Outcomes Among High-Risk Users

BACKGROUND

The misuse of prescription drugs is a serious public health problem. Although controlled substance (CS) prescribing, in particular, opioid analgesics, has recently declined, the volume of prescriptions in 2015 was still 3 times higher than in 1999. To curb the high volume of CS prescribing, a national health plan has implemented a controlled substance utilization management (CSUM) program, a prescriber-focused educational intervention regarding patients at risk for CS misuse.

OBJECTIVE

To characterize the effect of the CSUM program on CS prescribing volumes, number of prescribers and other health outcomes (opioid overdoses, all-cause emergency department visits, and all-cause hospitalizations).

METHODS

The CSUM program identified patients who received ≥10 CS prescriptions within any 3-month window for noncancer pain as being high risk for CS misuse and mailed patient medication profiles to their CS prescribers. This retrospective study was conducted on patients whose prescribers were contacted by the CSUM program from January 2014 to December 2015. The reference group included patients with carved-out pharmacy benefits who were 1:1 propensity score matched to the program group. CS prescribing volumes, number of CS prescribers, and other health care utilization measures were assessed in the 6-month pre-intervention (baseline) period and 6-month post-intervention (follow-up) period using difference-in-difference (DID) analysis.

RESULTS

After matching, each group had 17,295 patients, and there were no differences in baseline demographic and clinical characteristics. During the follow-up period, the CSUM group had 1.1 fewer prescriptions for CS (mean difference [MD] within group -3.2 vs. -2.1 prescriptions), 21 fewer days of supply (MD -27 vs. -6 days), and 0.2 fewer number of CS prescribers (MD -0.8 vs. -0.6 prescribers) per patient when compared with the reference group; all P values were < 0.001. The reductions in CS prescribing volumes and number of prescribers within the CSUM group were mainly driven by opioid analgesics, with minimal differences in benzodiazepines and stimulants between the 2 groups. The CSUM program had no significant effect on the opioid dosage strength but was associated with a lower rate of all-cause emergency department visits.

CONCLUSIONS

The CSUM program had a moderate positive effect on reducing CS prescribing volumes and number of CS prescribers compared with a reference group. Beside the focus on patients who have already received 10+ CS prescriptions, there remains a need for more intensive approaches for accelerating targeted declines in CS in general and opioids in particular.

DISCLOSURES

Funding for this study was provided by Anthem, which had no role in study design, data interpretation, manuscript development, or the decision to publish. Chen, Ma, Barron, DeVries, and Agiro are employees of HealthCore, a wholly owned subsidiary of Anthem. Horn is an employee of Anthem.

Trends in Opioid Prescribing Among Hemodialysis Patients, 2007-2014

BACKGROUND

Hemodialysis (HD) patients frequently experience pain. Previous studies of HD patients suggest increased opioid prescribing through 2010. It remains unclear if this trend continued after 2010 or declined with national trends.

METHODS

Longitudinal cohort study of 484,745 HD patients in the United States Renal Data System/Medicare data. We used Poisson/negative binomial regression to estimate annual incidence rates of opioid prescribing between 2007 and 2014. We compared prescribing rates with the general US population using IQVIA's National Prescription Audit data. Outcomes included the following: percent of HD patients receiving an opioid prescription, rate of opioid prescriptions, quantity, days supply, morphine milligram equivalents (MME) dispensed per 100 person-days, and prescriptions per person.

RESULTS

In 2007, 62.4% of HD patients received an opioid prescription. This increased to 63.2% in 2010 then declined to 53.7% by 2014. Opioid quantity peaked in 2011 at 73.5 pills per 100 person-days and declined to 62.6 pills per 100 person-days in 2014. MME peaked between 2010 and 2012 then declined through 2014. In 2014, MME rates were 1.8-fold higher among non-Hispanic patients and 1.6-fold higher among low-income patients. HD patients received 3.2-fold more opioid prescriptions per person compared to the general US population and were primarily prescribed oxycodone and hydrocodone. Between 2012 and 2014, HD patients experienced greater declines in opioid prescriptions per person (18.2%) compared to the general US population (7.1%).

CONCLUSION

Opioid prescribing among HD patients declined between 2012 and 2014. However, HD patients continue receiving substantially more opioids than the general US population.

Toward safer prescribing: evaluation of a prospective drug utilization review system on inappropriate prescriptions, prescribing patterns, and adverse drug events and related health expenditure in South Korea

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to evaluate the effect of the prospective drug utilization review (DUR) system introduced in Korea in December 2010 as a real-time method to improve patient safety, in terms of changes in prescribing practices, adverse drug events (ADEs), and ADE-related healthcare expenditure, using non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and their common ADEs as a guide.

STUDY DESIGN

We used an interrupted time-series study design using generalized estimating equations to evaluate changes in prescription rate and ADE-related healthcare expenditure. Cox regression analysis was used to evaluate the probability of NSAID-associated ADEs.

METHODS

A total of 154,585 outpatients with musculoskeletal or connective tissue disorders, without pre-existing gastric bleeding or ulcers were included in this study. The primary outcome was the level and trend change in prescription rate, drug-drug interactions, coprescribed gastro-protective drugs, and defined daily dose (DDD) of NSAIDs. The secondary outcome was the probability of ADEs and changes in ADE-related healthcare expenditure.

RESULTS

There was a significant trend change after introducing the DUR system in terms of drug-drug interactions (-3.6%) and coprescribed gastro-protective drugs (+0.6%). The mean DDD of NSAIDs increased by 0.2. The probability of ADEs decreased overall (-1.7%) and in the high-risk group (age ≥65 years; -9.6%); however, only the latter was significant. There was no significant trend or level change in ADE-related health expenditure.

CONCLUSIONS

The introduction of the DUR system was associated with more efficient prescribing, including a reduction in drug-drug interactions and an increase in the use of gastro-protective drugs. The system had a positive effect on patient outcome but was not associated with reduced ADE-related costs. Further studies are needed to evaluate the long-term effects of the DUR system in Korea.

Effects of a prior authorization policy for extended-release/long-acting opioids on utilization and outcomes in a state Medicaid program

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

In response to the opioid overdose epidemic, US state Medicaid programs have adopted restrictive policies for opioid analgesics, yet effects on prescribing patterns and health outcomes are uncertain. This study aimed to examine effects of a prior authorization policy for extended-release/long-acting (ER/LA) opioids on opioid use in the Oklahoma, USA state Medicaid program.

DESIGN

Retrospective difference-in-differences design study comparing changes in opioid use in Oklahoma Medicaid to control (Oregon Medicaid).

SETTING

Oklahoma and Oregon, USA.

PARTICIPANTS

Medicaid beneficiaries in the Oklahoma and Oregon fee-for-service Medicaid programs between July 2007 and June 2009 (33 724 in Oklahoma and 13 520 in Oregon) MEASUREMENTS: The primary outcome was incident opioid-naive ER/LA opioid use. Secondary outcomes included other opioid and non-opioid pain medication use. We also examined indicators of high-risk prescribing (e.g. high-dosage opioid use) and opioid-related hospitalizations or emergency department (ED) visits.

FINDINGS

The prior authorization policy was associated with a 0.7 percentage point reduction in the likelihood of incident opioid-naive ER/LA opioid use [95% confidence interval (CI) = -1.16 to -0.33 percentage points; 70% pre-policy mean reduction, a 1.4 percentage point decrease in likelihood of any new ER/LA opioid prescriptions (95% CI = -2.1 to -0.7 percentage points; 33% pre-policy mean reduction) and a decline of 0.16 in total ER/LA opioid prescriptions per enrollee (PPE) (95% CI = -0.29 to -0.04 PPE)]. There was a significant increase in the number of short-acting opioids filled after the policy (0.36; 95% CI = 0.22-0.50 PPE), increases in likelihood of having overlapping opioids and benzodiazepines, but significant reductions in likelihood of having overlapping opioids. No significant changes in opioid-related hospitalizations or ED visits were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

In Oklahoma, USA's July 2008 prior authorization policy for extended-release/long-acting opioids appears to have reduced the number of opioid-naive patients initiating extended-release/long-acting opioid use by more than half, but may also have increased short-acting opioid prescriptions by 7%.

Association of a Controlled Substance Scoring Algorithm with Health Care Costs and Hospitalizations: A Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

Patients often misuse a combination of prescription drugs including opioids; however, the relationship between a controlled substance (CS) score and health outcomes is unknown.

OBJECTIVE

To examine the association between a CS scoring algorithm and health care use, specifically total cost of care, hospitalizations, and emergency room (ER) visits.

METHODS

This analysis was a retrospective cohort study using administrative claims data from a large U.S. health insurer. Included in the analysis were 999,852 members with a minimum CS score of 2.5 in the fourth quarter (4Q) of 2012, who were continuously enrolled from January 1, 2012, to December 31, 2013, and who were aged 18 years or older. A CS score was calculated using 4Q 2012 (3 months) prescription claims data and divided into 3 components: (1) number of CS claims, (2) number of unique pharmacies and unique prescribers, and (3) evidence of increasing CS use. The primary outcomes were total cost of care (pharmacy and medical costs), all-cause hospitalizations, and ER visits in 2013. We also quantified what a 1-point change in CS score meant for the primary outcomes.

RESULTS

47% of members had a CS score of 2.5, indicating a single CS claim, and 51% of members had a score between 3 and less than 12. The remaining 2% (20,858 members) had a score of 12 or more. There was a statistically significant and consistently increasing association between the 4Q 2012 CS score and hospitalizations, ER visits, and total costs of care in 2013. A 1-point change in CS score was associated with a $1,488 change in total cost of care, 0.9% change in the hospitalization rate, and 1.5% change in the ER visit rate.

CONCLUSIONS

There is a linear association between increasing CS score and negative health outcomes. Insurers should consider interventions to lower member CS scores.

DISCLOSURES

This study was funded internally by Prime Therapeutics. Starner, Qiu, and Gleason are employees of Prime Therapeutics, a pharmacy benefits management company. Karaca-Mandic is an employee of the University of Minnesota and did not receive any compensation related to this work. The results of this study were presented as a poster at the Academy of Managed Care Pharmacy's 27th Annual Meeting and Expo; San Diego, California; April 7-10, 2015. Study concept and design were contributed by Starner, Gleason, and Qiu. Qiu took the lead in data collection, assisted by Starner and Gleason. Data interpretation was performed by all the authors. Starner primarily wrote and revised the manuscript, along with the other authors.

The effect of an abuse-deterrent opioid formulation (OxyContin) on opioid abuse-related outcomes in the postmarketing setting

An extended‐release opioid analgesic (OxyContin, OC) was reformulated with abuse‐deterrent properties to deter abuse. This report examines changes in abuse through oral and nonoral routes, doctor‐shopping, and fatalities in 10 studies 3.5 years after reformulation. Changes in OC abuse from 1 year before to 3 years after OC reformulation were calculated, adjusted for prescription changes. Abuse of OC decreased 48% in national poison center surveillance systems, decreased 32% in a national drug treatment system, and decreased 27% among individuals prescribed OC in claims databases. Doctor‐shopping for OC decreased 50%. Overdose fatalities reported to the manufacturer decreased 65%. Abuse of other opioids without abuse‐deterrent properties decreased 2 years later than OC and with less magnitude, suggesting OC decreases were not due to broader opioid interventions. Consistent with the formulation, decreases were larger for nonoral than oral abuse. Abuse‐deterrent opioids may mitigate abuse and overdose risks among chronic pain patients.

What we know, and don't know, about the impact of state policy and systems-level interventions on prescription drug overdose

BACKGROUND

Drug overdose deaths have been rising since the early 1990s and is the leading cause of injury death in the United States. Overdose from prescription opioids constitutes a large proportion of this burden. State policy and systems-level interventions have the potential to impact prescription drug misuse and overdose.

METHODS

We searched the literature to identify evaluations of state policy or systems-level interventions using non-comparative, cross-sectional, before-after, time series, cohort, or comparison group designs or randomized/non-randomized trials. Eligible studies examined intervention effects on provider behavior, patient behavior, and health outcomes.

RESULTS

Overall study quality is low, with a limited number of time-series or experimental designs. Knowledge and prescribing practices were measured more often than health outcomes (e.g., overdoses). Limitations include lack of baseline data and comparison groups, inadequate statistical testing, small sample sizes, self-reported outcomes, and short-term follow-up. Strategies that reduce inappropriate prescribing and use of multiple providers and focus on overdose response, such as prescription drug monitoring programs, insurer strategies, pain clinic legislation, clinical guidelines, and naloxone distribution programs, are promising. Evidence of improved health outcomes, particularly from safe storage and disposal strategies and patient education, is weak.

CONCLUSIONS

While important efforts are underway to affect prescriber and patient behavior, data on state policy and systems-level interventions are limited and inconsistent. Improving the evidence base is a critical need so states, regulatory agencies, and organizations can make informed choices about policies and practices that will improve prescribing and use, while protecting patient health.