Can policy affect initiation of addictive substance use? Evidence from opioid prescribing

Opioid Prescribing Patterns After Imposition of Setting-Specific Limits on Prescription Duration

Importance

Despite their widespread adoption across the US, policies imposing one-size-fits-all limits on the duration of prescriptions for opioids have shown modest and mixed implications for prescribing.

Objective

To assess whether a prescription duration limit policy tailored to different clinical settings was associated with shorter opioid prescription lengths.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This cross-sectional study examined changes in opioid prescribing patterns for opioid-naive Medicaid enrollees aged 12 to 64 years before and after implementation of a statewide prescription duration limit policy in West Virginia in June 2018. Patients with cancer or Medicare coverage were excluded. The policy assigned a 7-day duration limit to opioid prescriptions for adults treated in outpatient hospital- or office-based practices, a 4-day limit for adults treated in emergency departments, and a 3-day limit for pediatric patients younger than 18 years regardless of clinical setting. Data were examined from January 1, 2017, through September 30, 2019, and data were analyzed from June 12 to October 30, 2023.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Whether a patient's initial opioid prescription was longer in days than the June 2018 policy limit for a given care setting before and after policy implementation. Interrupted time series models were used to calculate the association between the policy's implementation and outcomes.

Results

The analytic sample included 44 703 Medicaid enrollees (27 957 patients [62.5%] before policy implementation and 16 746 patients [37.5%] after policy implementation; mean [SD] age, 33.9 [13.4] years; 27 461 females [61.4%]). Among adults treated in outpatient hospital- or office-based settings, the duration limit policy was associated with a decrease of 8.83 (95% CI, -10.43 to -7.23) percentage points (P < .001), or a 56.8% relative reduction, in the proportion of prescriptions exceeding the 7-day limit. In the emergency department setting, the policy was associated with a decrease of 7.03 (95% CI, -10.38 to -3.68) percentage points (P < .001), a 37.5% relative reduction, in the proportion of prescriptions exceeding the 4-day limit. The proportion of pediatric opioid prescriptions longer than the 3-day limit decreased by 12.80 (95% CI, -17.31 to -8.37) percentage points (P < .001), a 26.5% relative reduction, after the policy's implementation.

Conclusions and Relevance

Results of this cross-sectional study suggest that opioid prescription duration limits tailored to different clinical settings are associated with reduced length of prescriptions for opioid-naive patients. Additional research is needed to evaluate whether these limits are associated with reductions in the incidence of opioid use disorder or with unintended consequences, such as shifts to illicit opioids.

Adherence to Opioid Prescribing Guidelines in a Statewide Surgical Quality Improvement Collaborative

INTRODUCTION

The opioid crisis is an ongoing crisis in the United States. Postoperative patients who receive opioid prescriptions have a 3%-7% risk of developing a chronic opioid abuse problem. This study aims to describe on-target opioid prescribing and use of multimodal pain management strategies 2 y after the implementation of a multicomponent quality improvement initiative across our statewide collaborative.

METHODS

From July 2020 to September 2021, we prospectively collected data on opioid-prescribing and multimodal strategies for 10 targeted procedures in general, gynecologic, and orthopedic surgery at three hospitals. Prescribing was on-target if a patient was prescribed ≤50 daily morphine milligram equivalents. Multimodal strategies were defined as two or more nonopioid adjuncts used within 48 h of surgery.

RESULTS

One thousand and eleven targeted procedures were performed with prescription data available for 993 cases. The on-target prescribing rate was 79.6% (n = 790), with general surgery 92.5% (n = 285), gynecology 84.9% (n = 331), and orthopedic surgery 59.0% (n = 174). Patients who received multimodal pain approaches were associated with interventions such as patient education, transversus abdominus plane block, and prescriptions for nonopioid analgesics at discharge. There was no evidence to support a difference in the use of multimodal pain control approaches between patients whose opioid prescribing was on-target or not (73.8% versus 77.3%, P = 0.30). At the first postoperative visit, data on continued opioid use were missing in 57.3% of patients, number of pills used was missing in 93.8%, and adequate pain control was missing in 52.8%.

CONCLUSIONS

On-target prescribing and multimodal strategies are common but vary by specialty. Additionally, postoperative pain control and opioid use are often not documented. To better match prescribing to patient needs, understanding patient-level and specialty-level opioid use is important.

Association between prescription drug monitoring programs use mandates and prescription stimulants received by Medicaid enrollees

INTRODUCTION

Prescription drug monitoring program (PDMP) use mandates are an important policy tool to curb nonmedical opioid use. However, data are scarce about their efficacy on other commonly used prescription drugs such as stimulants.

METHODS

We used 2010-2020 state-level secondary data from Medicaid State Drug Utilisation Data and quasi-experimental difference-in-differences research design to estimate the association between PDMP use mandates and population-adjusted stimulants (amphetamines and methylphenidate) prescribing outcomes: (i) number of prescriptions filled; and (ii) total amount reimbursed in US dollars. To account for heterogeneity in mandates across US states, two policy variables were considered: limited and expansive. Limited PDMP use mandates require prescribers or dispensers to check the PDMP only when prescribing/dispensing opioids or benzodiazepines, while expansive PDMP use mandates are non-specific to opioids/benzodiazepines and require prescribers or dispensers to check the PDMP when prescribing/dispensing targeted controlled substances in Drug Enforcement Agency Schedule II-V. The sample included 49 US states and the District of Columbia. Nevada was excluded since it implemented the PDMP mandate before the period of analysis.

RESULTS

The state-wide implementation of the PDMP use mandate, either limited or expansive, was not associated with the number of prescriptions filled or the total amount reimbursed in US dollars for stimulants among Medicaid enrollees.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION

There was no evidence for the associations between PDMP use mandates and stimulant prescribing among Medicaid enrollees. Future works are encouraged to replicate the study in other populations and with longer post-period analysis when the impact of the mandates might be more successfully materialised.

Dose Changes for Long-term Opioid Patients Following a State Opioid Prescribing Policy

BACKGROUND

In 2018, Nevada implemented opioid prescribing legislation (AB474) to support the uptake of CDC pain care guidelines. We studied the law's association with doses over threshold levels of morphine milligram equivalents (MMEs) and with time to dose increases and decreases, among long-term opioid patients.

METHODS

A difference-in-difference study examined dosing changes across opioid prescription episodes (ie, prescriptions within 30 day and within the same dosing threshold). Patients with at least 120 days supply over 6 months in Nevada and Colorado Medicaid pharmacy claims were included. Using a logistic regression model, we compare the predicted probabilities that opioid episodes exceeded 50 MME before and after implementation of the law, in both states. Adjusted hazard ratios (aHR) from a gap time survival model estimated time to escalate above 50 MME among low-dose episodes (<50 MME), and time to de-escalate below 50 MME among high-dose episodes (≥50 MME).

RESULTS

Among 453,577 episodes (74,292 patients), the Nevada law was associated with a 2.9% reduction in prescriptions over 50 MME (95% CI: -3.5, -2.3) compared with Colorado. While the law was also associated with slower escalation (Nevada: aHR = 0.75; 95% CI: 0.72, 0.77, Colorado: aHR = 1.04; 95% CI: 1.01, 1.06), it was also associated with slower de-escalation (Nevada: aHR = 0.87; 95% CI: 0.84, 0.89, Colorado: aHR = 0.97; 95% CI: 0.96, 0.99).

CONCLUSIONS

Slower dose escalations, rather than faster dose de-escalation, likely explain post-law reductions in doses over 50 MME. Slower dose de-escalations may be due to longer days supply post-policy.

Competitive effects of federal and state opioid restrictions: Evidence from the controlled substance laws

A significant concern in the policy landscape of the U.S. opioid crisis is whether supply-side controls can reduce opioid prescribing without harmful substitution. We consider an unstudied policy: the federal Controlled Substance Act (CSA) restrictions placed in August 2014 on tramadol, the second most popular opioid medication. This was followed seven weeks later by CSA restrictions for hydrocodone combination products, the leading opioids on the market. Using regression discontinuity design (RDD) models, based on the timing of the (up-)scheduling changes, to explore spillover effects, we find that tightening prescribing restrictions on one opioid reduces its use, but increases prescribing of close competitors, leading to no reduction in total opioid prescriptions.This suggests that supply restrictions are not effective in reducing opioid prescribing the presence of close substitutes that remain unrestricted.

The effects of becoming a physician on prescription drug use and mental health treatment

There is evidence that physicians disproportionately suffer from substance use disorder and mental health problems. It is not clear, however, whether these phenomena are causal. We use data on Dutch medical school applicants to examine the effects of becoming a physician on prescription drug use and the receipt of treatment from a mental health facility. Leveraging variation from lottery outcomes that determine admission into medical schools, we find that becoming a physician increases the use of antidepressants, anxiolytics, opioids, and sedatives. Increases in the use of antidepressants, anxiolytics, and sedatives are larger among female physicians than among their male counterparts.

Prescription drug monitoring programs use mandates and prescription stimulant and depressant quantities

BACKGROUND

While the mandate to check patients' prescription history in Prescription Drug Monitoring Program (PDMP) database before prescribing/dispensing controlled drugs has been shown to be an important tool to curb opioid abuse, less is known about whether the mandate can reduce the misuse of other commonly abused prescription drugs. We examined whether PDMP use mandates were associated with changes in prescription stimulant and depressant quantities.

METHODS

Using data from Automated Reports and Consolidate Ordering System (ARCOS), we employed difference-in-differences design to estimate the association between PDMP use mandates and prescription stimulant and depressant quantities in 50 U.S. states and the District of Columbia from 2006 to 2020. Limited PDMP use mandate was specific only to opioids or benzodiazepines. Expansive PDMP use mandate was non-specific to opioid or benzodiazepine and required prescribers/dispensers to check PDMP when prescribing/dispensing targeted controlled substances in Schedule II-V. The main outcomes were population-adjusted prescription stimulant (amphetamine, methylphenidate, lisdexamfetamine) and depressant (amobarbital, butalbital, pentobarbital, secobarbital) quantities in grams.

RESULTS

There was no evidence that limited PDMP use mandate was associated with a reduction in the prescription stimulant and depressant quantities. However, expansive PDMP use mandate that was non-specific to opioid or benzodiazepine and required prescribers/dispensers to check PDMP when prescribing/dispensing targeted controlled substances in Schedule II-V was associated with 6.2% (95% CI: -10.06%, -2.08%) decline in prescription amphetamine quantity.

CONCLUSION

Expansive PDMP use mandate was associated with a decline in prescription amphetamine quantity. Limited PDMP use mandate did not appear to change prescription stimulant and depressant quantities.

Association of a State Prescribing Limits Policy with Opioid Prescribing and Long-term Use: an Interrupted Time Series Analysis

BACKGROUND

Prescription opioids were a major initial driver of the opioid crisis. States have attempted to reduce overprescribing by enacting policies that limit opioid prescriptions, but the impacts of such policies on new prescribing and subsequent transitions to long-term use are not fully understood.

OBJECTIVE

To examine the association of implementation of a state prescribing limits policy with opioid prescribing and transitions to long-term opioid use.

DESIGN

Interrupted time series analyses assessing trends in new opioid prescriptions and long-term use before and after policy implementation.

PATIENTS

A total of 130,591 New Jersey Medicaid enrollees ages 18-64 who received an initial opioid prescription from January 2014 to December 2019.

INTERVENTIONS

New Jersey's opioid prescribing limit policy implemented in March 2017.

MAIN MEASURES

Total new opioid prescriptions, percentage of new prescriptions with >5 days' supply, and transition to long-term opioid use, defined as having opioid supply on day 90 after the initial prescription.

KEY RESULTS

Policy implementation was associated with a significant monthly increase in new opioid prescriptions of 0.86 per 10,000 enrollees, halving the pre-policy decline in the prescribing rate. Among new opioid prescriptions, the percentage with >5 days' supply decreased by about 1 percentage point (-0.76 percentage points, 95% CI -0.89, -0.62) following policy implementation. However, policy implementation was associated with a significant monthly increase in the rate of initial prescriptions with supply on day 90 (9.95 per 10,000 new prescriptions, 95% CI 4.80, 15.11) that reversed the downward pre-implementation trend.

CONCLUSIONS

The New Jersey policy was associated with a reduction in initial prescriptions with >5 days' supply, but not with an overall decline in new opioid prescriptions or in the rate at which initial prescriptions led to long-term use. Given their only modest benefits, policymakers and clinicians should carefully weigh potential unintended consequences of strict prescribing limits.

Narrative minireview of the spatial epidemiology of substance use disorder in the United States: Who is at risk and where?

Drug overdose is the leading cause of death by injury in the United States. The incidence of substance use disorder (SUD) in the United States has increased steadily over the past two decades, becoming a major public health problem for the country. The drivers of the SUD epidemic in the United States have changed over time, characterized by an initial heroin outbreak between 1970 and 1999, followed by a painkiller outbreak, and finally by an ongoing synthetic opioid outbreak. The nature and sources of these abused substances reveal striking differences in the socioeconomic and behavioral factors that shape the drug epidemic. Moreover, the geospatial distribution of the SUD epidemic is not homogeneous. The United States has specific locations where vulnerable communities at high risk of SUD are concentrated, reaffirming the multifactorial socioeconomic nature of this epidemic. A better understanding of the SUD epidemic under a spatial epidemiology framework is necessary to determine the factors that have shaped its spread and how these patterns can be used to predict new outbreaks and create effective mitigation policies. This narrative minireview summarizes the current records of the spatial distribution of the SUD epidemic in the United States across different periods, revealing some spatiotemporal patterns that have preceded the occurrence of outbreaks. By analyzing the epidemic of SUD-related deaths, we also describe the epidemic behavior in areas with high incidence of cases. Finally, we describe public health interventions that can be effective for demographic groups, and we discuss future challenges in the study and control of the SUD epidemic in the country.

Recreational cannabis and opioid distribution

Twenty-one U.S. states have passed recreational cannabis laws as of November 2022. Cannabis may be a substitute for prescription opioids in the treatment of chronic pain. Previous studies have assessed recreational cannabis laws' effects on opioid prescriptions financed by specific private or public payers or dispensed to a unique endpoint. Our study adds to the literature in three important ways: by (1) examining these laws' impacts on prescription opioid dispensing across all payers and endpoints, (2) adjusting for important opioid-related policies such as opioid prescribing limits, and (3) modeling opioids separately by type. We implement two-way fixed-effects regressions and leverage variation from eleven U.S. states that adopted a recreational cannabis law (RCL) between 2010 and 2019. We find that RCLs lead to a reduction in codeine dispensed at retail pharmacies. Among prescription opioids, codeine is particularly likely to be used non-medically. Thus, the finding that RCLs appear to reduce codeine dispensing is potentially promising from a public health perspective.

Mandatory prescription drug monitoring programs and overlapping prescriptions of opioids and benzodiazepines: Evidence from Kentucky

BACKGROUND

In response to the opioid epidemic, many states implemented mandates requiring providers to check prescription drug monitoring programs (PDMPs) before prescribing opioids. We examine how overlapping benzodiazepine and opioid prescriptions changed after Kentucky implemented a PDMP mandate in July 2012.

METHODS

We conducted an interrupted time series analysis using monthly data from Kentucky's PDMP from 2010 to 2016. Separate analyses were conducted for overlapping prescriptions from a single provider or multiple providers, and by sex and age group. We also conducted an individual-level longitudinal analysis that compared changes in utilization patterns after the mandate went into effect to changes in earlier periods during which the mandate was not in effect.

RESULTS

Kentucky's PDMP mandate was associated with an immediate 7.5 % decline in the rate of overlapping benzodiazepine and opioid prescriptions and a significant change in the trend from increasing to decreasing. Approximately half of the immediate effect in level terms was explained by decreases in overlapping prescriptions written by a single provider. Our longitudinal analysis suggests that over one year the mandate reduced initiation of overlapping prescriptions by 29.3 % and reduced continuation of overlapping prescriptions by 9.4 %. The effects of the policy were largest for women and men aged 36-50.

CONCLUSIONS

Though not the main rationale for the policy, Kentucky's PDMP mandate reduced overlapping prescriptions of benzodiazepines and opioids. Further efforts to reduce overlapping prescriptions should consider the effects on populations such as women over 50, who have high rates of overlapping prescriptions.

State prescribing cap laws' association with opioid analgesic prescribing and opioid overdose

INTRODUCTION

In response to the role of opioid prescribing in the U.S. opioid crisis, states have enacted laws intended to curb high risk opioid prescribing practices. This study assessed the effects of state prescribing cap laws that limit the dose and/or duration of dispensed opioid prescriptions on opioid prescribing patterns and opioid overdose.

METHODS

We identified 1,414,908 adults from a large U.S. administrative insurance claims database. Treatment states included 32 states that implemented a prescribing cap law between 2017 and 2019. Comparison states included 16 states and DC without a prescribing cap law by 2019. A difference-in-differences approach with staggered policy adoption was used to assess effects of these laws on opioid analgesic prescribing and opioid overdose.

RESULTS

State opioid prescribing cap laws were not associated with changes in the proportion of people receiving opioid analgesic prescriptions, the dose or duration of opioid prescriptions, or opioid overdose. States with laws that imposed days' supply limits only versus days' supply and dosage limits, as well as with specific law provisions also showed no association with opioid prescribing or opioid overdose outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

State opioid prescribing cap laws did not appear to impact outcomes related to opioid analgesic prescribing or opioid overdose. These findings are potentially due to the limited scope of these laws, which often apply only to a subset of opioid prescriptions and include professional judgment exemptions.

How access to addictive drugs affects the supply of substance abuse treatment: Evidence from Medicare Part D

This paper documents how substance abuse treatment (SAT) providers and services respond to increases in population-level opioid addiction. I do this by exploiting the implementation of Medicare Part D as an exogenous increase in the availability of prescription opioids. Starting in 2006, states with higher shares of the population eligible for Medicare Part D experienced increases in residential and hospital inpatient SAT facilities, beds dedicated to SAT, and SAT facilities offering medication-assisted treatment, relative to states with lower shares. These results suggest that the supply of SAT in the United States is capable of responding significantly to changes in demand.

Opioid prescribing restrictions and opioid use among the Louisiana Medicaid population

BACKGROUND

Most states in the U.S. have enacted prescription opioid quantity limits to curb long-term opioid dependency. While several studies of these policies find reductions in subsequent prescriptions, others find mixed results in reducing overall opioid prescriptions and prescription length. Our objective was to examine three opioid restriction policies implemented in Louisiana Medicaid: (1) a 15-day quantity limit for opioid-naïve acute pain patients, (2) a subsequent further reduction to a 7-day quantity limit and a Morphine Milligram Equivalent Dosing (MME) limit of 120mg per day, and (3) a final reduction in daily MMEs to 90mg per day.

METHODS

Using interrupted time series (ITS) models with Medicaid pharmacy claims data, we estimated changes in trends of opioid prescription fills associated with opioid restriction policies in Louisiana Medicaid. Outcomes of interest included average opioid prescription length, average MMEs per day, and the likelihood that an opioid-naïve beneficiary who received their first opioid prescription filled a second prescription within 30 or 60 days of their initial fill.

RESULTS

15-day and 7-day opioid prescription quantity limits were associated with a 0.720 and a 0.401 day reduction in average opioid prescription lengths. 7-day limits were associated with a 2.7 and a 3.0 percentage point reduction in the likelihood of a second opioid prescription fill within 30 or 60 days of the initial fill. The 120mg per day MME limit was associated with a 0.80 MMEs per day reduction in average daily MMEs. Further restricting daily MMEs to 90mg per day had no statistically significant association with average daily MMEs.

CONCLUSION

These findings suggest that efforts to limit opioid exposure through the implementation of prescription quantity limits and MME restrictions in Louisiana's Medicaid program were successful and are likely to be associated with a reduction in future opioid dependency among the state's Medicaid population.

"The DEA would come in and destroy you": a qualitative study of fear and unintended consequences among opioid prescribers in WV

Background

West Virginia has one of the highest rates of opioid overdose related deaths and is known as the epicenter of the opioid crisis in the United States. In an effort to reduce opioid-related harms, SB 273 was signed in 2018, and aimed to restrict opioid prescribing in West Virginia. SB 273 was enacted during a time when physician arrests and convictions had been increasing for years and were becoming more prevalent and more publicized. This study aims to better understand the impact of the legislation on patients and providers.

Methods

Twenty semi-structured interviews were conducted with opioid-prescribing primary care physicians and specialists practicing throughout West Virginia.

Results

Four themes emerged, 1. Fear of disciplinary action, 2. Exacerbation of opioid prescribing fear due to restrictive legislation, 3. Care shifts and treatment gaps, and 4. Conversion to illicit substances. The clinicians recognized the harms of inappropriate prescribing and how this could affect their patients. Decreases in opioid prescribing were already occurring prior to the law implementation. Disciplinary actions against opioid prescribers resulted in prescriber fear, which was then exacerbated by SB 273 and contributed to shifts in care that led to forced tapering and opioid under-prescribing. Providers felt that taking on patients who legitimately required opioids could jeopardize their career.

Conclusion

A holistic and patient-centered approach should be taken by legislative and disciplinary bodies to ensure patients are not abandoned when disciplinary actions are taken against prescribers or new legislation is passed.

Opioid and non-opioid analgesic prescribing before and after the CDC's 2016 opioid guideline

The U.S. has addressed the opioid crisis using a two-front approach: state regulations limiting opioid prescriptions for acute pain patients, and voluntary federal CDC guidelines on shifting chronic pain patients to lower opioid doses and non-opioids. No opioid policy research to date has accounted for this two-pronged approach in their research design. We develop a theory of physician prescribing behavior under this two-pronged incentive structure. Using the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey, we empirically corroborate the theory: regulations and guidelines have the intended effects of reducing opioid prescriptions for acute and chronic pain, respectively, as well as the predicted unintended effects-income effects cause regulations on acute pain treatment to increase chronic pain opioid prescriptions and the chronic pain treatment guidelines spillover to reduce opioids for acute pain. Moreover, we find that the guidelines worked as intended in terms of the reduced usage, with chronic pain patients shifting to non-opioids and also tapering opioid doses. For those who discontinued opioids under regulations and guidelines, we find no harm in terms of increased work limitations due to pain a year after discontinuing opioids. Finally, we observe an unexplained dichotomy-regulations reduce opioid use by causing fewer new starts, whereas guidelines reduce opioid use by discontinuing current users, with no impact on new starts.

Opioid overdose survivors: Medications for opioid use disorder and risk of repeat overdose in Medicaid patients

BACKGROUND

Patients with medically-treated opioid overdose are at high risk for subsequent adverse outcomes, including repeat overdose. Understanding factors associated with repeat overdose can aid in optimizing post-overdose interventions.

METHODS

We conducted a longitudinal, retrospective cohort study using NJ Medicaid data from 2014 to 2019. Medicaid beneficiaries aged 12-64 with an index opioid overdose from 2015 to 2018 were followed for one year for subsequent overdose. Exposures included patient demographics; co-occurring medical, mental health, and substance use disorders; service and medication use in the 180 days preceding the index overdose; and MOUD following index overdose.

RESULTS

Of 4898 individuals meeting inclusion criteria, 19.6% had repeat opioid overdoses within one year. Index overdoses involving heroin/synthetic opioids were associated with higher repeat overdose risk than those involving prescription/other opioids only (HR = 1.44, 95% CI = 1.22-1.71). Risk was higher for males and those with baseline opioid use disorder diagnosis or ED visits. Only 21.7% received MOUD at any point in the year following overdose. MOUD was associated with a large decrease in repeat overdose risk among those with index overdose involving heroin/synthetic opioids (HR = 0.30, 95% CI = 0.20-0.46). Among those receiving MOUD at any point in follow-up, 10.5% (112/1065) experienced repeat overdose versus 22.1% (848/3833) for those without MOUD.

CONCLUSIONS

Repeat overdose was common among individuals with medically-treated opioid overdose. Risk factors for repeat overdose varied by type of opioid involved in index overdose, with differential implications for intervention. MOUD following index opioid overdose involving heroin/synthetic opioids was associated with reduced repeat overdose risk.

The effect of state policies on rates of high-risk prescribing of an initial opioid analgesic

BACKGROUND

Multiple state policies, such as prescription drug monitoring programs (PDMPs) and duration limits, have been implemented to decrease high-risk opioid prescribing. Studies demonstrate that many policies decrease certain opioid prescribing behaviors, but few examine their intended effects on the targeted high-risk prescribing practices, nor disentangle the effects of concurrent state or federal policies likely to influence those practices.

METHODS

Forty-one million initial prescriptions for new opioid episodes from 2007 to 2018 were identified using national pharmacy claims. We identified high-risk initial prescriptions, defined as >7 days' supply, average daily MME >90, or concurrent with benzodiazepines and estimated three multivariable logistic regression models to assess the association between policies and outcomes controlling for patient, prescriber, and county characteristics.

RESULTS

Initial prescriptions for >7 days declined from 23.8% in 2007 to 14.9% in 2018, associated with mandatory and interoperable PDMPs and prescription duration limits but not other policies examined. Initial prescriptions with daily MME > 90 declined from 13.2% to 1.9%, associated with pain management clinic laws but not consistently with other policies. Initial prescriptions concurrent with benzodiazepines declined only modestly from 6.9% to 6.5%, associated with pain management clinic laws but not other policies examined.

CONCLUSIONS

The opioid policy environment has changed rapidly with a range of different policies being implemented addressing high-risk prescribing. PDMP laws mandating prescriber use and pain clinic laws both appear efficacious but decrease different types of high-risk opioid prescribing. New policies should be considered in light of the prevalence of the problem being addressed.

Defining "Doctor shopping" with Dispensing Data: A Scoping Review

BACKGROUND

"Doctor shopping" typically refers to patients that seek controlled substance prescriptions from multiple providers with the presumed intent to obtain these medications for non-medical use and/or diversion. The purpose of this scoping review is to document and examine the criteria used to identify "doctor shopping" from dispensing data in the United States.

METHODS

A scoping review was conducted on "doctor shopping" or analogous terminology from January 1, 2000 through December 31, 2020 using the Web of Science Core Collection (7 citation indices). Our search was limited to U.S. only, English-language, peer-reviewed and U.S. federal government studies. Studies without explicit "doctor shopping" criteria were excluded. Key components of these criteria included the number of prescribers and dispensers, dispensing period, and drug class (e.g., opioids).

RESULTS

Of 9,845 records identified, 95 articles met the inclusion criteria and our pool of studies ranged from years 2003 to 2020. The most common threshold-based or count definition was [≥4 Prescribers (P) AND ≥4 Dispensers (D)] (n = 12). Thirty-three studies used a 365-day detection window. Opioids alone were studied most commonly (n = 69), followed by benzodiazepines and stimulants (n = 5 and n = 2, respectively). Only 39 (41%) studies provided specific drug lists with active ingredients.

CONCLUSION

Relatively simple P × D criteria for identifying "doctor shopping" are still the dominant paradigm with the need for on-going validation. The value of P × D criteria may change through time with more diverse methods applied to dispensing data emerging.

Can electronic prescribing mandates reduce opioid-related overdoses?

As the opioid crisis has escalated, states have enacted numerous policies targeting opioid access and monitoring possible misuse. Recently, the majority of states have passed electronic prescribing mandates for controlled substances. These mandates require that controlled substances be prescribed electronically directly to the pharmacy. The electronic system maintains a rich patient history that prescribers will observe when issuing a prescription while also reducing opportunities for fraud. The first enforced mandate was implemented in New York in March 2016; thus empirical evidence about the effects of such mandates is limited. We study how adoption of the New York e-prescribing mandate affected opioid supply and opioid-related overdoses. We estimate that the mandate reduced the rate of overdoses involving natural and semi-synthetic opioids by 22 %. We find little evidence of any corresponding changes in overdose rates involving illicit opioids.