Factors associated with the use of the prescription monitoring program by prescribers and pharmacists in Texas

Characterising incident opioid use among incident users of prescription sedative hypnotics: A national cohort study

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate co-prescribing of sedatives hypnotics and opioids.

DESIGN

Retrospective study evaluating the association of patient characteristics and comorbidities with coprescribing.

SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

Using the national Merative MarketScan Database between 2005 and 2018, we identified patients who received an incident sedative prescription with or without subsequent, incident opioid prescriptions within a year of the sedative prescription in the USA.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Coprescription of sedative-hypnotics and opioids.

RESULTS

A total of 2 632 622 patients (mean (SD) age, 43.2 (12.34) years; 1 297 356 (62.5%) female) received incident prescriptions for sedatives over the course of the study period. The largest proportion of sedative prescribing included benzodiazepines (71.1%); however, z-drugs (19.9%) and barbiturates (9%) were also common. About 557 845 (21.2%) patients with incident sedatives also received incident opioid prescriptions. About 59.2% of these coprescribed patients received opioids coprescription on the same day. Multivariate logistic regression findings showed that individuals with a comorbidity index score of 1, 2 or ≥3 (aOR 1.19 (95% CI 1.17 to 1.21), 1.17 (95% C 1.14 to 1.19) and 1.25 (95% C 1.2 to 1.31)) and substance use disorder (1.21 (95% C 1.19 to 1.23)) were more likely to be coprescribed opioids and sedatives. The likelihood of receiving both opioid and sedative prescriptions was lower for female patients (aOR 0.93; 95% CI 0.92 to 0.94), and those receiving a barbiturate (aOR 0.3; 95% CI 0.29 to 0.31) or z-drugs (aOR 0.67; 95% CI 0.66 to 0.68) prescriptions at the index date.

CONCLUSIONS

Coprescription of sedatives with opioids was associated with the presence of comorbidities and substance use disorder, gender and types of sedatives prescribed at the index date. Additionally, more than half of the coprescribing occurred on the same day which warrants further evaluation of current prescribing and dispensing best practice guidelines.

Physician perspective on the implementation of risk mitigation strategies when prescribing opioid medications: a qualitative analysis

OBJECTIVE

To understand the physician perspective on the barriers and facilitators of implementing nine different opioid risk mitigation strategies (RMS) when prescribing opioid medications.

METHODS

We created and dispersed a cross-sectional online survey through the Qualtrics© data collection platform among a nationwide sample of physicians licensed to practice medicine in the United States who have prescribed an opioid medication within the past year. The responses were analyzed using a deductive thematic analysis approach based on the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) to ensure a holistic approach to identifying the barriers and facilitators for each RMS assessed. In concordance with this method, the themes and codes for the thematic analysis were defined prior to the analysis. The five domains within the CFIR were used as themes and the 39 nested constructs were treated as the codes. Two members of the research team independently coded the transcripts and discussed points of disagreement until consensus was reached. All analyses were conducted in ATLAS.ti© V7.

RESULTS

The completion rate for this survey was 85.1% with 273 participant responses eligible for analysis. Intercoder reliability was calculated to be 82%. Deductive thematic analysis yielded 2,077 descriptions of factors affecting implementation of the nine RMS. The most salient code across all RMS was Knowledge and Beliefs about the Intervention, which refers to individuals' attitudes towards and value placed on the intervention. Patient Needs and Resources, a code referring to the extent to which patient needs are known and prioritized by the organization, also emerged as a salient code. The physicians agreed that the patient perspective on the issue is vital to the uptake of each of the RMS.

CONCLUSIONS

This deductive thematic analysis identified key points for actionable intervention across the nine RMS assessed and established the importance of patient concordance with physicians when deciding on a course of treatment.

Mapping the research addressing prescription drug monitoring programs: A scoping review

ISSUES

Prescription drug monitoring programs are a harm minimisation intervention and clinical decision support tool that address the public health concern surrounding prescription drug misuse. Given the large number of studies published to date and the ongoing implementation of these programs, it is important to map the literature and identify areas for further research to improve practice.

APPROACH

A scoping review was undertaken to identify the research on prescription drug monitoring programs published between January 2015 and April 2021.

KEY FINDINGS

A total of 153 citations were included in this scoping review. The majority of the studies originated from the USA and were quantitative. Results on program effectiveness are mixed and mainly examine their association with opioid-related outcomes. Unintended consequences are revealed in the literature and this review also highlights barriers to program use.

IMPLICATIONS

Overall, findings are mixed despite the large number of studies published to date. Mapping the literature identifies priority areas for further research that can advise policymakers and clinicians on practice improvement.

CONCLUSION

Results on prescription drug monitoring program effectiveness are mixed and mainly examine their association with opioid-related outcomes. This review highlights barriers to prescription drug monitoring program effectiveness related to program use and system integration. Further research is needed in these areas to improve prescription drug monitoring program use and patient outcomes.