Search

Key Points: Question: Is cost sharing associated with nondispensing of naloxone prescriptions (abandonment)? Findings: This cross-sectional analysis of 2020-2021 data from a national pharmacy transactions database used a regression discontinuity approach to evaluate the association between cost sharing and abandonment, exploiting the fact that deductibles typically reset at the beginning of the year in commercial insurance plans and in Medicare plans. The findings suggest a decision by commercial and Medicare plans to increase naloxone cost sharing by $10 would be associated with a 3.1- and 2.3-percentage-point increase in the probability of abandonment, respectively. Meaning: Cost sharing may be a barrier to dispensing of naloxone prescriptions in commercially insured and Medicare patients. Importance: Increasing access to naloxone (an opioid antagonist that can reverse overdose) could slow the US opioid epidemic. Prior studies suggest cost sharing may be a barrier to dispensing of naloxone prescriptions, but these studies were limited by their cross-sectional designs and use of databases that do not capture prescriptions that are not filled (abandoned). Objective: To evaluate the association between cost sharing and naloxone prescription abandonment (nondispensing of naloxone prescriptions). Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional, regression discontinuity analysis exploited the fact that deductibles typically reset at the beginning of the year in commercial and Medicare plans. The included data were derived from the 2020-2021 IQVIA Formulary Impact Analyzer (a pharmacy transactions database that represents 63% of prescriptions at US pharmacies). The analysis included claims for naloxone nasal spray among commercially insured patients and Medicare patients that occurred during the 60 days before January 1, 2021, through 59 days after January 1, 2021. Exposure: Cost sharing, which is defined as the amount patients would have to pay to fill prescriptions. Main Outcomes and Measures: Local linear regression models were used to assess for abrupt changes in cost sharing and the probability of prescription abandonment on January 1, 2021. To estimate the association between cost sharing and prescription abandonment, a fuzzy regression discontinuity analysis was conducted. Results: These analyses included naloxone claims for 71 306 commercially insured patients and 101 706 Medicare patients (40 019 [56.1%] and 61 410 [60.4%], respectively, were female). The commercially insured patients and Medicare patients accounted for 73 311 and 106 076 naloxone claims, respectively. On January 1, 2021, the mean cost sharing per claim increased by $15.0 (95% CI, $13.8-$16.2) for commercially insured patients and increased by $12.3 (95% CI, $10.9-$13.6) for Medicare patients and the probability of abandonment increased by 4.7 (95% CI, 3.2-6.2) percentage points and 2.8 (95% CI, 1.6-4.1) percentage points, respectively. The results from the fuzzy regression discontinuity analysis suggest a decision by commercial and Medicare plans to increase naloxone cost sharing by $10 would be associated with percentage-point increases of 3.1 (95% CI, 2.2-4.1) and 2.3 (95% CI, 1.4-3.2), respectively, in the probability of abandonment. Conclusions: The elimination of cost sharing might be associated with increased naloxone dispensing to commercially insured and Medicare patients. This study evaluates the association between cost sharing and naloxone prescription abandonment (nondispensing of naloxone prescriptions) in commercial insurance and Medicare plans. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: Stigma and lack of knowledge are barriers to clinicians when caring for individuals with opioid use disorder (OUD). In 2018, only about 15 out of 180 American medical schools had comprehensive addiction programs. The AAMC reports that institutions are increasingly incorporating competencies to address the OUD and opioid epidemic. There have been few evaluated curriculums focused on reducing stigmatizing attitudes. This study evaluated whether a 4-hour case-based curriculum focused on improving stigmatizing attitudes toward patients with OUD could reduce medical student perceptions around viewing addiction as a punitive condition and other substitution-based misconceptions around opioid agonist-based medication. Methods: Medical students completed a 4-hour curricular workshop which included learning objectives focusing on barriers to healthcare/stigmatizing attitudes, effective behavioral therapy options, and appropriate use of opioid medications. We measured changes in knowledge and attitudes using validated scales on stigma. Non-parametric repeated measure tests determined statistically significant differences between pre and post assessments between OUD related perceptions and a control condition (diabetes). Results: Of 135 eligible participants, 99 (76%) students completed both pre- and post-surveys. Mean scores across knowledge questions improved (60%-81%, P <.001) and stigmatizing attitudes regarding perceived violence of people with OUD decreased (2.04-1.82, P =.016). There was significant improvement in mean scores for OUD-related opinions including desire to work with and effectively treat patients with OUD (3.58-3.88, P <.001) while no significant concurrent change was observed in mean opinion scores of a non-OUD comparator, diabetes (3.88-3.97, P =.201). Conclusions: Results indicate that the workshop was associated with measurable changes in knowledge and attitudinal forms of OUD stigma. With recent policy changes eliminating the X-waiver, healthcare institutions are eager to design curriculum around OUD management and treatment. This study provides a blueprint for an effective curriculum that improves clinician knowledge and reduces stigmatizing attitudes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Despite being one of the most common medical complaints, chronic pain is difficult to manage due to ineffective communication between providers and patients and time restraints during appointments. Patient-centered questionnaires have the potential to optimize communication by assessing a patient's pain history, prior treatments, and associated comorbidities to develop an effective treatment plan. This study aimed to analyze the feasibility and acceptability of a pre-visit clinical questionnaire aimed at improving communication and pain care. Patients and Methods: The "Pain Profile" questionnaire was piloted across two specialty pain clinics in a large academic medical center. Patient and provider surveys were conducted with patients who completed the Pain Profile questionnaire and providers who use it in practice. Surveys consisted of multiple-choice and open-ended questions regarding the helpfulness, usability, and implementation of the questionnaire. Descriptive analyses of patient and provider surveys were conducted. Qualitative data were analyzed using matrix framework-based coding. Results: A total of 171 patients and 32 clinical providers completed the feasibility and acceptability surveys. 77% of patients (N= 131) found the Pain Profile helpful in communicating their pain experiences and 69% of providers (N= 22) found it helpful in guiding clinical decisions. The section that assessed the impact of pain was rated most helpful by patients (4/5) while the open-ended section asking patients to describe their pain history was rated least helpful by patients and providers (3.7/5 and 4.1/5, respectively). Both patients and providers provided suggestions to future iterations of the Pain Profile, including the addition of opioid risk and mental health screening tools. Conclusion: The Pain Profile questionnaire was feasible and acceptable in a pilot study at a large academic site. Future testing in a large-scale, fully powered trial is needed to assess the effectiveness of the Pain Profile in optimizing communication and pain management. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To determine the effect of prescription opioid use in the year before surgery on opioid consumption after surgery.Background: Recently developed postoperative opioid prescribing guidelines rely on data from opioid-naïve patients. However, opioid use in the USA is common, and the impact of prior opioid exposure on the consumption of opioids after surgery is unclear.Methods: Population-based cohort study of 26,001 adults 18 years of age and older who underwent one of nine elective general or gynecologic surgical procedures between January 1, 2017 and October 31, 2019, with prospectively collected patient-reported data from the Michigan Surgical Quality Collaborative (MSQC) linked to state prescription drug monitoring program at 70 MSQC-participating hospitals on 30-day patient-reported opioid consumption in oral morphine equivalents (OME) (primary outcome).Results: Compared with opioid-naïve participants, opioid-exposed participants (26% of sample) consumed more prescription opioids after surgery (adjusted OME difference 12, 95% CI 10 to 14). Greater opioid exposure was associated with higher postoperative consumption in a dose-dependent manner, with chronic users reporting the greatest consumption (additional OMEs 32, 95% CI 21 to 42). However, for eight of nine procedures, 90% of opioid-exposed participants consumed ≤150 OMEs. Among those receiving perioperative prescriptions, opioid-exposed participants had higher likelihood of refill (adjusted OR 4.7, 95% CI 4.4 to 5.1), number of refills (adjusted incidence rate ratio 4.0, 95% CI 3.7 to 4.3), and average refill amount (adjusted OME difference 333, 95% CI 292 to 374)).Conclusions: Preoperative opioid use is associated with small increases in patient-reported opioid consumption after surgery for most patients, though greater differences exist for patients with chronic use. For most patients with preoperative opioid exposure, existing guidelines may meet their postoperative needs. However, guidelines may need tailoring for patients with chronic use, and providers should anticipate a higher likelihood of postoperative refills for all opioid-exposed patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study uses data from an all-payer database of prescriptions dispensed in US retail pharmacies to assess trends in buprenorphine initiation and retention during 2016-2022. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective Most studies on preoperative opioid use only describe whether or not patients use opioids without characterizing reasons for use. Knowing why patients use opioids can help inform perioperative opioid management. The objective of this study was to explore pain specific reasons for preoperative opioid use prior to total hip and knee arthroplasty (THA and TKA) and their association with persistent use. Methods This is a prospective study of 197 patients undergoing THA (n = 99) or TKA (n = 98) enrolled in the Analgesic Outcomes Study between December 2015 and November 2018. All participants reported preoperative opioid use. Results Reasons for preoperative opioid use were categorized as surgical site pain only (81 [41.1%]); pain in other body areas only (22 [11.2%]); and combined pain (94 [47.7%]). Compared to patients taking opioids for surgical site pain, those with combined reasons for use had 1.24 (P  = .40) and 2.28 (P  = .16) greater odds of persistent use at 3 and 6 months postoperatively, adjusting for relevant covariates. Conclusions This study provides novel insights into the heterogeneity of reasons for presurgical opioid use in patients undergoing a THA or TKA. One key take away is that not all preoperative opioid use is the same and many patients are taking opioids preoperatively for more than just pain at the surgical site. Combined reasons for use was associated with long-term use, suggesting nonsurgical pain, in part, drives persistent opioid use after surgery. Future directions in perioperative care should focus on pain and non-pain reasons for presurgical opioid use to create tailored postoperative opioid weaning plans. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Many primary care clinics are resistant to accept new patients taking prescription opioids for chronic pain. It is unclear how much of this practice is specific to individuals who may be perceived to have aberrant opioid use. This study sought to determine whether clinics are more or less willing to accept and prescribe opioids to patients depending on whether their history is more or less suggestive of aberrant opioid use by conducting an audit survey of primary care clinics in 9 states from May to July 2019. Simulated patients taking opioids for chronic pain called each clinic twice, giving one of 2 scenarios for needing a new provider: their previous physician had either (1) retired or (2) stopped prescribing opioids for unspecified reasons. Clinic willingness to continue prescribing opioids and accept the patient for general primary care were assessed. Of 452 clinics responding to both scenarios (904 calls), 193 (43%) said their providers would not prescribe opioids in either scenario, 146 (32%) said their providers might prescribe in both, and 113 (25%) responded differently to each scenario. Clinics responding differently had greater odds (odds ratio = 1.83 confidence interval [1.23-2.76]) of willingness to prescribe when the previous doctor retired than when the doctor had stopped prescribing. These findings suggest that primary care access is limited for patients taking opioids for chronic pain, and differentially further reduced for patients whose histories are suggestive of aberrant use. This denial of care could lead to unintended harms such as worsened pain or conversion to illicit substances. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Patients on long-term opioid therapy (LTOT) for pain have difficulty accessing primary care clinicians who are willing to prescribe opioids or provide multimodal pain treatment. Recent treatment guidelines and statewide policies aimed at reducing inappropriate prescribing may exacerbate these access issues, but further research is needed on this issue. This study aimed to understand barriers to primary care access and multimodal treatment for chronic pain from the perspective of multiple stakeholders. Methods: Qualitative, semi-structured phone interviews were conducted with adult patients with chronic pain, primary care clinicians, and clinic office staff in Michigan. Interview questions covered stakeholder experiences with prescription opioids, opioid-related policies, and access to care for chronic pain. Interviews were coded using inductive and deductive methods for thematic analysis. Results: A total of 25 interviews were conducted (15 patients, 7 primary care clinicians, and 3 office staff). Barriers to treatment access were attributed to six themes: (1) reduced clinic willingness to manage prescribed opioids for new patients; (2) lack of time and reimbursement for quality opioid-related care; (3) paucity of multimodal care and coordination between providers; (4) fear of liability and use of new guidelines to justify not prescribing opioids; (5) delayed prescription receipt due to prior authorization and pharmacy issues; and (6) poor availability of effective non-opioid treatments. Conclusion: Issues of policy, logistics, and clinic-level resources converge to disrupt treatment access for patients with chronic pain, as many clinics both do not offer multimodal pain care and are unwilling to prescribe LTOT. The resulting conceptual model can inform the development of policy interventions to help mitigate these access barriers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose Clinical pharmacists in primary care clinics can potentially help manage chronic pain and opioid prescriptions by providing services similar to those provided within their scope of practice to patients with diabetes and hypertension. We evaluated the feasibility and acceptability of a pharmacist-physician collaborative care model for patients with chronic pain. Methods The program consisted of an in-person pharmacist consultation and optional follow-up visits over 4 months in 2 primary care practices. Eligible patients had chronic pain and a long-term prescription for opioids or buprenorphine or were referred by their primary care physician (PCP). Pharmacist recommendations were communicated to PCPs via the electronic medical record (EMR) and direct communication. Mixed-methods evaluation included baseline and follow-up surveys with patients, EMR review of opioid-related clinical encounters, and provider interviews. Results Between January and October 2018, 47 of the 182 eligible patients enrolled, with 46 completing all follow-up; 43 patients (91%) had received opioids over the past 6 months. The pharmacist recommended adding or switching to a nonopioid pain medication for 30 patients, switching to buprenorphine for pain and complex persistent opioid dependence for 20 patients, and tapering opioids for 3 patients. All physicians found the intervention acceptable but wanted more guidance on prescribing buprenorphine for pain. Most patients found the intervention helpful, but some reported a lack of physician follow-up on recommended changes. Conclusion The study demonstrated that comanagement of patients with chronic pain is feasible and acceptable. Policy changes to increase pharmacists' authority to prescribe may increase physician willingness and confidence to carry out opioid tapers and prescribe buprenorphine for pain. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Increasing access to healthy foods and beverages in disadvantaged communities is a public health priority due to alarmingly high rates of obesity. The Virtual Supermarket Program (VSP) is a Baltimore City Health Department program that uses online grocery ordering to deliver food to low-income neighborhoods. This study evaluates stakeholder preferences and barriers of program implementation.Methods: This study assessed the feasibility, sustainability and efficacy of the VSP by surveying 93 customers and interviewing 14 programmatic stakeholders who had recently used the VSP or been involved with program design and implementation.Results: We identified the following themes: The VSP addressed transportation barriers and food availability. The VSP impacted customers and the city by including improving food purchasing behavior, creating a food justice "brand for the city", and fostering a sense of community. Customers appreciated using Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) benefits to pay for groceries, but policy changes are needed allow online processing of SNAP benefits.Conclusions: This evaluation summarizes lessons learned and serves as a guide to other public health leaders interested in developing similar programs. Provisions in the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Farm Bill 2014 allow for select grocers to pilot online transactions with SNAP benefits. If these pilots are efficacious, the VSP model could be easily disseminated. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Primary care-based models for Medication-Assisted Treatment (MAT) have been shown to reduce mortality for Opioid Use Disorder (OUD) and have equivalent efficacy to MAT in specialty substance treatment facilities. Objective: The objective of this study is to systematically analyze current evidence-based, primary care OUD MAT interventions and identify program structures and processes associated with improved patient outcomes in order to guide future policy and implementation in primary care settings. Data sources: PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, and PsychInfo. Methods: We included randomized controlled or quasi experimental trials and observational studies evaluating OUD treatment in primary care settings treating adult patient populations and assessed structural domains using an established systems engineering framework. Results: We included 35 interventions (10 RCTs and 25 quasi-experimental interventions) that all tested MAT, buprenorphine or methadone, in primary care settings across 8 countries. Most included interventions used joint multi-disciplinary (specialty addiction services combined with primary care) and coordinated care by physician and non-physician provider delivery models to provide MAT. Despite large variability in reported patient outcomes, processes, and tasks/tools used, similar key design factors arose among successful programs including integrated clinical teams with support staff who were often advanced practice clinicians (nurses and pharmacists) as clinical care managers, incorporating patient “agreements,” and using home inductions to make treatment more convenient for patients and providers. Conclusions: The findings suggest that multidisciplinary and coordinated care delivery models are an effective strategy to implement OUD treatment and increase MAT access in primary care, but research directly comparing specific structures and processes of care models is still needed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study reports the seeming disparity in access to buprenorphine prescriptions among racial/ethnic minorities and individuals with lower income. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A personal narrative is presented which explores the author's experience of administering buprenorphine to a patient named Gary as part of a detoxification program.

Objectives. To examine national trends in the use of various pharmacological pain medication classes by race/ethnicity among the US pain population. Methods. We used data from the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey to conduct a nationally representative, serial cross-sectional study of the noninstitutionalized US adult population from 2000 to 2015. We identified adults with moderate or severe self-reported pain and excluded individuals with cancer.We used complex survey design to provide national estimates of the percentage of adults with noncancer pain who received prescription pain medications among 4 groups: non-Hispanic White, non- Hispanic Black, Hispanic or Latino, and other. Results.The age- and gender-adjusted percentage of prescription opioid use increased across all groups, with the greatest increase among non-Hispanic White individuals. By 2015, the percentage of non-Hispanic Black adults using opioids approximated that of non-Hispanic White adults—in 2015, approximately 23% of adults in these 2 groups used opioids. Conclusions. To our knowledge, this is the first evidence of a narrowing divide in opioid prescribing by race. However, in the context of the national epidemic of opioid-related addiction and mortality, opioid-related risks do not appear commensurate with the purported benefits. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Insomnia is of major public health importance. While cognitive behavioral therapy is beneficial, in-person treatment is often unavailable. We assessed the effectiveness of internet-delivered cognitive behavioral therapy for insomnia. Objectives: The primary objectives were to determine whether online cognitive behavioral therapy for insomnia could improve sleep efficiency and reduce the severity of insomnia in adults. Secondary outcomes included sleep quality, total sleep time, time in bed, sleep onset latency, wake time after sleep onset, and number of nocturnal awakenings. Data Sources: We searched PubMed/MEDLINE, the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, PsycInfo, Cochrane Library, Embase, and the Web of Science for randomized trials. Methods: Studies were eligible if they were randomized controlled trials in adults that reported application of cognitive behavioral therapy for insomnia via internet delivery. Mean differences in improvement in sleep measures were calculated using the Hartung-Knapp-Sidik-Jonkman method for random effects meta-analysis. Results: We found 15 trials, all utilizing a pretest-posttest randomized control group design. Sleep efficiency was 72% at baseline and improved by 7.2% (95% CI: 5.1%, 9.3%; p<0.001) with internet-delivered cognitive behavioral therapy versus control. Internet-delivered cognitive behavioral therapy resulted in a decrease in the insomnia severity index by 4.3 points (95% CI: -7.1, -1.5; p = 0.017) compared to control. Total sleep time averaged 5.7 hours at baseline and increased by 20 minutes with internet-delivered therapy versus control (95% CI: 9, 31; p = 0.004). The severity of depression decreased by 2.3 points (95% CI: -2.9, -1.7; p = 0.013) in individuals who received internet-delivered cognitive behavioral therapy compared to control. Improvements in sleep efficiency, the insomnia severity index and depression scores with internet-delivered cognitive behavioral therapy were maintained from 4 to 48 weeks after post-treatment assessment. There were no statistically significant differences between sleep efficiency, total sleep time, and insomnia severity index for internet-delivered versus in-person therapy with a trained therapist. Conclusion: In conclusion, internet-delivered cognitive behavioral therapy is effective in improving sleep in adults with insomnia. Efforts should be made to educate the public and expand access to this therapy. Registration Number, Prospero: CRD42015017622 [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The authors reflects on the practices and risks of opioid tapering when treating pain in patients. Topics include the opioid-related overdose death, the use of opioid in treating patients with chronic backpain and hip or knee osteoarthritis, the adverse effects of opioid like high risks of suicidal ideation and completed suicide, and a study on whether opioid tapering is linked to adverse outcomes.

Beetham and colleagues reported a "secret shopper" study that describes barriers patients face when seeking clinicians who provide buprenorphine treatment for opioid use disorders. The editorialists believe that the most pressing challenge is connecting patients to willing prescribers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Policy evaluations and health system interventions often utilize International Classification of Diseases (ICD) codes of opioid use, dependence, and abuse to identify individuals with opioid use disorder (OUD) and assess receipt of evidence-based treatments. However, ICD codes may not map directly onto the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorder (DSM-5) OUD criteria. This study investigates the positive predictive value of ICD codes in identifying patients with OUD.Methods: We conducted a clinical chart review on a national sample of 520 Veterans assigned ICD-9 or ICD-10 codes for opioid use, dependence, or abuse from 2012 to 2017. We extracted evidence of DSM-5 OUD criteria and opioid misuse from clinical documentation in the month preceding and three months following initial ICD code listing, and categorized patients into: 1) high likelihood of OUD, 2) limited aberrant opioid use, 3) prescribed opioid use without evidence of aberrant use, and 4) insufficient information. Positive predictive value was calculated as the percentage of individuals with these ICD codes meeting high likelihood of OUD criteria upon chart review.Results: Only 57.7 % of patients were categorized as high likelihood of OUD; 16.5 % were categorized as limited aberrant opioid use, 18.9 % prescribed opioid use without evidence of aberrant use, and 6.9 % insufficient information.Conclusions: Patients assigned ICD codes for opioid use, dependence, or abuse often lack documentation of meeting OUD criteria. Many receive long-term opioid therapy for chronic pain without evidence of misuse. Robust methods of identifying individuals with OUD are crucial to improving access to clinically appropriate treatment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Since 2010, heroin-related overdoses have risen sharply, coinciding with policies to restrict access to prescription opioids. It is unknown if patients tapered or discontinued off prescription opioids transitioned to riskier heroin use. This study examined opioid prescribing, including long-term opioid therapy (LTOT) and discontinuation, prior to heroin overdose.Methods: We used retrospective longitudinal data from a national claims database to identify adults with an emergency or inpatient claim for heroin overdose between January 2010 and June 2017. Receipt of opioid prescription, LTOT episodes, and discontinuation of LTOT were measured for the period of one year prior to heroin overdose.Results: We identified 3183 individuals (53.2% age 18-25; 70.0% male) with a heroin overdose (incidence rate 4.20 per 100k person years). Nearly half (42.3%) received an opioid prescription in the prior 12 months, and 10.9% had an active opioid prescription in the week prior to overdose. LTOT at any time in the 12 months prior to overdose was uncommon (12.8%) among those with heroin overdoses, especially among individuals 18-25 years old (3.5%, P < 0.001). LTOT discontinuation prior to overdose was also relatively uncommon, experienced by 6.7% of individuals aged 46 and over and 2.5% of individuals aged 18-25 years (P < 0.001).Conclusions: Prior to heroin overdose, prescription opioid use was common, but LTOT discontinuation was uncommon and observed primarily in older individuals with the lowest heroin overdose rates. Further study is needed to determine if these prescribing patterns are associated with increased heroin overdose. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]