Opioid-Prescribing Metrics in Washington State: Trends and Challenges

Managing an epidemic within a pandemic: orthopedic opioid prescribing trends during COVID-19

INTRODUCTION

In response to the opioid epidemic, a multitude of policy and clinical-guideline based interventions were launched to combat physician overprescribing. However, the sudden rise of the Covid-19 pandemic disrupted all aspects of healthcare delivery. The purpose of this study was to evaluate how opioid prescribing patterns changed during the Covid-19 pandemic within a large multispecialty orthopedic practice.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A retrospective review of 1,048,559 patient encounters from January 1, 2015 to December 31, 2022 at a single orthopedic practice was performed. Primary outcomes were the percent of encounters with opioids prescribed and total morphine milligram equivalents (MMEs) per opioid prescription. Differences in outcomes were assessed by calendar year. Encounters were then divided into two groups: pre-Covid (1/1/2019-2/29/2020) and Covid (3/1/2020-12/31/2022). Univariate analyses were used to evaluate differences in diagnoses and outcomes between periods. Multivariate analysis was performed to assess changes in outcomes during Covid after controlling for differences in diagnoses. Statistical significance was assessed at p < 0.05.

RESULTS

The percentage of encounters with opioids prescribed decreased from a high of 4.0% in 2015 to a low of 1.6% in 2021 and 2022 (p < 0.001). MMEs per prescription decreased from 283.6 ± 213.2 in 2015 to a low of 138.6 ± 100.4 in 2019 (p < 0.001). After adjusting for diagnoses, no significant differences in either opioid prescribing rates (post-COVID OR = 0.997, p = 0.893) or MMEs (post-COVID β = 2.726, p = 0.206) were observed between the pre- and post-COVID periods.

CONCLUSION

During the Covid-19 pandemic opioid prescribing levels remained below historical averages. While continued efforts are needed to minimize opioid overprescribing, it appears that the significant progress made toward this goal was not lost during the pandemic era.

Majority of men with premature ejaculation do not receive pharmacotherapy

Premature ejaculation is the most common male sexual dysfunction, with therapies including selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, clomipramine, topical anesthetics, dapoxetine and tramadol. However, it is currently unknown how many men are receiving pharmacotherapy for premature ejaculation. Using the TriNetX Research network, a large multicenter database containing over 75 million patient records from hospitals across the United States, we evaluated prescribing patterns for treatment of premature ejaculation and assessed variations in prescription patterns among patients from 2015-2021. In addition, we examined if the prescription patterns for tramadol changed with the establishment of Prescription Drug Monitoring Programs. We found that most men (51.7%) were not receiving any pharmacotherapy for premature ejaculation. However, men with mental health disorders, were more likely (56.0%), to have been treated than those without (44.4%). On further analysis, men with mental health diagnoses were significantly more likely to be treated with Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitors (45.0 vs 32.2%) and Tramadol (5.1% vs 3.5%). While the pharmacotherapy for premature ejaculation has been well researched, our findings revealed that most patients diagnosed with premature ejaculation do not receive pharmacotherapy and that patients are more likely to be prescribed premature ejaculation medications if they have a pre-existing mental health diagnosis.

Changing patterns of opioid initiation for pain management in Ontario, Canada: A population-based cross-sectional study

INTRODUCTION

The recent publication of a national guideline and quality standards in Canada have provided clinicians with new, evidence-based recommendations on safe, appropriate opioid use. We sought to characterize how well opioid initiation practices aligned with these recommendations before and following their release.

METHODS

We conducted a population-based study among people initiating opioids prior to the release of national guidelines (April 2015-March 2016; fiscal year [FY] 2015) and in the most recent year available (January-December 2019) in Ontario, Canada. We used linked administrative claims data to ascertain the apparent indication for opioid therapy, and characterized the initial daily dose (milligrams morphine or equivalent; MME) and prescription duration for each indication.

RESULTS

In FY2015, 653,885 individuals commenced opioids, compared to 571,652 in 2019. Over time, there were small overall reductions in the prevalence of initial daily doses exceeding 50MME (23.9% vs. 20.1%) and durations exceeding 7 days (17.4% vs. 14.8%); but the magnitude of the reductions varied widely by indication. The prevalence of high dose (>50MME) initial prescriptions reduced significantly across all indications, with the exception of dentist-prescribed opioids (13.6% vs. 12.1% above 50MME). In contrast, there was little change in initial durations exceeding 7 days across most indications, with the exception of some surgical indications (e.g. common excision; 9.3% vs. 6.2%) and among those in palliative care (35.2% vs. 29.2%).

CONCLUSION

Despite some modest reductions in initiation of high dose and long duration prescription opioids between 2015 and 2019, clinical practice is highly variable, with opioid prescribing practices influenced by clinical indication. These findings may help identify medical specialties well-suited to targeted interventions to promote safer opioid prescribing.

Changes in early high-risk opioid prescribing practices after policy interventions in Washington State

OBJECTIVE

To test associations between several opioid prescribing policy interventions and changes in early (acute/subacute) high-risk opioid prescribing practices.

DATA SOURCES

Population-based workers' compensation pharmacy billing and claims data, Washington State Department of Labor and Industries (January 2008-June 2015).

STUDY DESIGN

We used interrupted time series analysis to test associations between three policy intervention timepoints and monthly proportions of population-based measures of high-risk, low-risk, and any workers' compensation-related opioid prescribing. We also tested associations between the policy intervention timepoints and five high-risk opioid prescribing indicators among workers prescribed any opioids within 3 months after injury: (a) >7 cumulative (not necessarily consecutive) days' supply of opioids during the acute phase, (b) high-dose opioids, (c) concurrent sedatives, (d) chronic opioids, and (e) a composite high-risk opioid prescribing indicator.

PRINCIPAL FINDINGS

Within 3 months after injury, 9 percent of workers were exposed to high-risk and 12 percent to low-risk workers' compensation-related opioid prescribing; 79 percent filled no workers' compensation-related opioid prescription. Among workers prescribed any early (acute/subacute) opioids, the indicator for >7 days' supply of opioids during the acute phase was present for 30 percent, high-dose opioids for 18 percent, concurrent sedatives for 3 percent, and chronic opioids for 2 percent. Beyond a general shift toward more infrequent and lower-risk workers' compensation-related opioid prescribing, each policy intervention timepoint was significantly associated with reductions in specific acute/subacute high-risk opioid prescribing indicators; each of the four specific high-risk opioid prescribing indicators had significant reductions associated with at least one policy.

CONCLUSIONS

Several state-level opioid prescribing policies were significantly associated with safer workers' compensation-related opioid prescribing practices during the first 3 months after injury (acute/subacute phase), which should in turn reduce transition to chronic opioids and associated negative health outcomes.