Search

Importance: Mental health disorders are prevalent yet undertreated health conditions in the US. Given perceptions about the potential effect of cannabis on individuals with mental health disorders, there is a need to understand the association of cannabis laws with psychotropic use., Objective: To investigate the association of medical and recreational cannabis laws and dispensary openings with the dispensing of psychotropic medications used to treat mental health disorders in the US., Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study of 10 013 948 commercially insured patients used a synthetic control method to examine the association of cannabis policies with prescribing. Data on all patients dispensed prescriptions for each of the 5 classes of psychotropic medications from January 1, 2007, to December 31, 2020, were extracted from Optum's deidentified Clinformatics Data Mart Database. Statistical analysis was performed from September 2022 to November 2023., Exposures: The 4 exposure variables measured were whether medical or recreational cannabis laws were in effect and whether medical or recreational cannabis dispensaries were open in each state and calendar quarter., Main Outcome and Measures: One measure of the extensive margins of dispensing and 2 measures of the intensive margins of dispensing were constructed for 5 medication classes (benzodiazepines, antidepressants, antipsychotics, barbiturates, and sleep medications)., Results: The primary sample (the benzodiazepine sample) included 3 848 721 patients (mean [SD] age, 46.1 [11.4] years; 65.4% women; 53.7% aged 35-54 years). Medical cannabis laws were associated with a 12.4% reduction in the benzodiazepine fill rate (average treatment effect on the treated [ATT], -27.4; 95% CI, -14.7 to 12.0; P = .001), recreational cannabis laws were associated with a 15.2% reduction in the fill rate (ATT, -32.5; 95% CI, -24.4 to 20.1; P = .02), and medical cannabis laws were associated with a 1.3% reduction in the mean number of benzodiazepine fills per patient (ATT, -0.02; 95% CI, -0.02 to 0.02; P = .04). Medical dispensaries were associated with a 3.9% reduction in mean days' supply per benzodiazepine fill (ATT, -1.7; 95% CI, -0.8 to 0.6; P = .001), while recreational dispensaries were associated with a 6.2% reduction (ATT, -2.4; 95% CI, -1.0 to 0.9; P < .001). Medical cannabis laws were associated with a 3.8% increase in antidepressant fills (ATT, 27.2; 95% CI, -33.5 to 26.9; P = .048), and medical dispensaries were associated with an 8.8% increase (ATT, 50.7; 95% CI, -32.3 to 28.4; P = .004). The mean number of antipsychotic medication fills per patient increased by 2.5% (ATT, 0.06; 95% CI, -0.04 to 0.05; P = .02) after medical cannabis laws and by 2.5% (ATT, 0.06; 95% CI, -0.04 to 0.04; P = .02) after medical dispensary openings. Findings for the other drug classes showed substantial heterogeneity by state and direction of association., Conclusions and Relevance: This cross-sectional study of commercially insured patients suggests that there may have been meaningful heterogeneous associations between cannabis policy and state and between cannabis policy and drug class (eg, decreases in dispensing of benzodiazepines but increases in dispensing of antidepressants and antipsychotics). This finding suggests additional clinical research is needed to understand the association between cannabis use and mental health. The results have implications for patient substance use and mental health-related outcomes.

Importance: A significant proportion of Medicare beneficiaries have a diagnosed opioid use disorder (OUD). Methadone and buprenorphine are both effective medications for the treatment of OUD (MOUDs); however, Medicare did not cover methadone until 2020., Objective: To examine trends in methadone and buprenorphine dispensing among Medicare Advantage (MA) enrollees after 2 policy changes in 2020 related to methadone access., Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional analysis of temporal trends in methadone and buprenorphine treatment dispensing assessed MA beneficiary claims from January 1, 2019, through March 31, 2022, captured by Optum's Clinformatics Data Mart. Of 9 870 791 MA enrollees included in the database, 39 252 had at least 1 claim for methadone, buprenorphine, or both during the study period. All available MA enrollees were included. Subanalyses by age and dual eligibility for Medicare and Medicaid status were conducted., Exposures: Study exposures were (1) the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) Medicare bundled payment reimbursement policy for OUD treatment and (2) the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Administration and CMS Medicare policies designed to facilitate access to treatment for OUD, specifically during the COVID-19 pandemic., Main Outcomes and Measures: Study outcomes were trends in methadone and buprenorphine dispensing by beneficiary characteristics. National methadone and buprenorphine dispensing rates were calculated as claims-based dispensing rates per 1000 MA enrollees., Results: Among the 39 252 MA enrollees with at least 1 MOUD dispensing claim (mean age, 58.6 [95% CI, 58.57-58.62] years; 45.9% female), 195 196 methadone claims and 540 564 buprenorphine pharmacy claims were identified, for a total of 735 760 dispensing claims. The methadone dispensing rate for MA enrollees was 0 in 2019 because the policy did not allow any payment until 2020. Claims rates per 1000 MA enrollees were low initially, increasing from 0.98 in the first quarter of 2020 to 4.71 in the first quarter of 2022. Increases were primarily associated with dually eligible beneficiaries and beneficiaries younger than 65 years. National buprenorphine dispensing rates were 4.64 per 1000 enrollees in quarter 1 of 2019, increasing to 7.45 per 1000 enrollees in quarter 1 of 2022., Conclusions and Relevance: This cross-sectional study found that methadone dispensing increased among Medicare beneficiaries after the policy changes. Rates of buprenorphine dispensing did not provide evidence that beneficiaries substituted buprenorphine for methadone. The 2 new CMS policies represent an important first step in increasing access to MOUD treatment for Medicare beneficiaries.

Objective: Because individuals with a history of depression who are receiving opioids are at higher risk for adverse events, the authors examined whether antidepressant treatment reduces risk for overdose and self-harm among individuals with a history of depression who receive opioids., Methods: Commercial insurance claims of individuals with a history of depression receiving opioids from 2007 to 2017 were used to quantify the association between antidepressant fills and adverse events among individuals after initiation of opioid treatment; the authors accounted for selection into treatment and used discrete-time, proportional hazards survival models., Results: Among 283,374 adults with a history of depression treatment, 8,203 experienced 47,486 adverse events from 2007 to 2017 in the 12 months after initiation of opioid treatment. Approximately half (N=144,052, 50.8%) filled an antidepressant prescription at least once in the 12 months after the opioid episode began. Individuals receiving antidepressants for at least 6 weeks had a reduced risk for any adverse event (adjusted odds ratio [AOR]=0.79, 95% confidence interval [CI]=0.65-0.97) as well as a reduced risk for opioid overdoses (AOR=0.78, 95% CI=0.64-0.96), overdoses from nonopioid controlled substances (AOR=0.76, 95% CI=0.62-0.94), overdoses from other substances (AOR=0.79, 95% CI=0.65-0.97), and other self-harm events (AOR=0.82, 95% CI=0.67-1.00)., Conclusions: Individuals with a history of depression who received opioid analgesics had a significantly lower risk for overdose and self-harm after they had been taking antidepressants for at least 6 weeks. Universal screening for mood disorders among individuals receiving opioids, and promptly providing evidence-based depression treatment when appropriate, may reduce adverse events.

Objective: To assess the relationship between county-level eviction rates and drug and alcohol mortality rates., Data Sources: Eviction rates from 2003 to 2016 provided by the Princeton University Eviction Lab were merged with Multiple Cause-of-Death Mortality Files and aggregated to the county-year level., Study Design: All opioid (prescription and heroin), cocaine, psychostimulant, benzodiazepine, antidepressant, and alcohol poisoning-related deaths per 100 000 people, eviction rates, and socioeconomic indicators were merged at the county-year level from 2003 to 2016. We estimated a series of mortality rate models with county and year fixed effects and used a control function (2SRI) method to adjust for the endogeneity of eviction rates., Data Collection/extraction Methods: We matched retrospectively collected datasets., Principal Findings: Higher levels of eviction rates were consistently associated with higher rates of mortality across six of nine substance categories studied when all counties were combined. Subanalysis by USDA population density measures indicated this positive association was almost entirely driven by urban counties; few systematic associations between the eviction rate levels and mortality were observed for suburban or rural counties., Conclusions: Risk of eviction appears to exacerbate the current "deaths of despair" crisis associated with substance use. Proposed changes to Housing and Urban Development policy that are expected to substantially increase the risk of eviction may worsen an already-acute mortality crisis., (© Health Research and Educational Trust.)

Objective: To identify geographic disparities in access to opioid use disorder (OUD) treatment medications and county demographic and economic characteristics associated with access to buprenorphine and oral naltrexone prescribers in Medicare Part D., Data Sources/study Setting: We utilized data from the Medicare Part D Prescription Drug Event Standard Analytic File (2010-2015)., Study Design/data Collection: We used logistic regression to examine county-level access to OUD medication prescribers., Principal Findings: There was a 5.6 percentage point increase in counties with access to an OUD prescriber over the study period. However, in 2015, 60 percent of US counties lacked access to a Medicare Part D buprenorphine prescriber and over 75 percent lacked access to an oral naltrexone prescriber. Increased access to OUD prescribers was largely concentrated in urban counties. Results of logistic regression indicate regional differences and potential racial disparities in access to OUD prescribers., Conclusions: To improve access to buprenorphine and naltrexone treatment for Medicare Part D enrollees, CMS may consider implementing educational and training initiatives focused on OUD treatment, offering training to obtain a buprenorphine waiver at no cost to providers, and sending targeted information to providers in low OUD treatment capacity areas., (© Health Research and Educational Trust.)