Reduction of Long-Term Opioid Prescribing for Back Pain in Community Health Centers After a Medicaid Policy Change

Adaptive Approaches to Physical Pain Treatment Modalities During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Qualitative Analysis

Background and Purpose: Despite the lack of proven efficacy, opioids historically have been used for the treatment of noncancer back pain. A variety of other effective therapeutic options for pain management are becoming more available over time. In 2016, Oregon implemented a unique and novel policy to improve evidence-based back pain care and promote safer and more effective opioid prescribing through the state's Medicaid program, the Oregon Health Plan. This article examines the ways providers adapted to providing care for patients with back pain in the context of COVID-19 and to better understand the challenges faced by and adaptations made by providers. Methods: We conducted focus groups with clinicians and physical pain treatment modality practitioners (PPTMPs). In total, 129 providers participated in one of six focus groups, including 74 clinicians (54%) and 55 PPTMPs (42%). Reflexive thematic analysis was used to construct themes or units of meaning across data. Results: Focus groups revealed concerns about PPE shortages, telemedicine challenges, communication barriers, and profession-specific responses to COVID-19, which hindered patient care and referrals. Focus groups also highlighted some advantages related to increased insight into patients' lives, which enhanced treatment. Care during COVID-19 has resulted in continued patient interest in telehealth and telemedicine. Conclusion: Optimizing use of these technologies for health conditions, such as back pain, adds to treatment options for patients and gives providers a more holistic understanding of patients' lives, the challenges they may face, and how that impacts their treatment.

"It Has Improved My Practice to Be Able to Offer Alternative Treatments": A Longitudinal Qualitative Study of Oregon Medicaid Back Pain Providers

Introduction: This study aimed to understand health care providers' experiences implementing the Oregon Back Pain Policy (OBPP) over time. The Medicaid OBPP expanded coverage of evidence-based nonpharmacological therapy (NPT) for back pain and restricted access to opioid therapy and interventional approaches. Methods: The study included six online, asynchronous focus groups with providers in February 2020 (Time 1) and August 2022 (Time 2). Analysis was conducted with a longitudinal, recurrent cross-sectional approach. Analysis occurred in three stages: (1) An immersion/crystallization approach was used to analyze Time 1 focus group data, (2) reflexive thematic analysis was used to analyze Time 2 data, and (3) longitudinal analysis was used to integrate the findings across time points. Results: At Time 1, 48 clinicians and 44 NPT providers participated in the study. Time 2 included 63 clinicians and 59 NPT providers. The longitudinal analysis of the focus group data resulted in four themes: (1) general awareness of the policy, (2) providers support the policy and perceive a benefit to their patients, (3) barriers to NPT accessibility, and (4) barriers to referring patients to NPT. Conclusion: The goal of the OBPP was to improve back pain care for Oregon Medicaid members by increasing access to evidence-based NPT and decreasing reliance on opioid medications. This study revealed that, although clinicians and NPT providers supported the policy, they faced persistent implementation challenges related to referrals, prior authorizations, coverage limitations, low reimbursement rates, and a reduced workforce for NPT providers. In some cases, implementation barriers were removed during the COVID-19 pandemic, but other challenges were more prominent during the pandemic.

Outcomes After a Statewide Policy to Improve Evidence-Based Treatment of Back Pain Among Medicaid Enrollees in Oregon

BACKGROUND

A novel Oregon Medicaid policy guiding back pain management combined opioid restrictions with emphasis on non-opioid and non-pharmacologic therapies.

OBJECTIVE

To examine the effect of the policy on prescribing, health outcomes, and health service utilization.

DESIGN

Using Medicaid enrollment, medical and prescription claims, prescription drug monitoring program, and vital statistics files, we analyzed the policy's association with selected outcomes using interrupted time series models.

SUBJECTS

Adult Medicaid patients with back pain enrolled between 2014 and 2018.

INTERVENTION

The Oregon Medicaid back pain policy.

MAIN MEASURES

Opioid and non-opioid medication prescribing, procedural care, substance use and mental health conditions, and outpatient and inpatient healthcare utilization.

KEY RESULTS

The policy was associated with decreases in the percentage of Medicaid enrollees with back pain receiving any opioids (- 2.68 percentage points [95% CI - 3.14, - 2.23] level, - 1.01 pp [95% CI - 1.1, - 0.92] slope), days of short-acting opioid use (- 0.4 days [95% CI - 0.53, - 0.26] slope), receipt of more than 7 days of short-acting opioids (- 2.36 pp [95% CI - 2.76, - 1.95] level, - 0.91 pp [95% CI - 1, - 0.83] slope), chronic opioid use (- 1.27 pp [95% CI - 1.59, - 0.94] level, - 0.46 [95% CI - 0.53, - 0.39 slope), and spinal surgeries and procedures. Among secondary outcomes, we found no increase in opioid overdose and a small, statistically significant trend decrease in opioid use disorders. There were small increases in non-opioid substance use and mental health diagnoses and visits but no increase in self-harm.

CONCLUSIONS

A state Medicaid policy emphasizing evidence-based back pain management was associated with decreases in opioid prescribing, spinal surgeries, and opioid use disorder trends, but also short-term increases in mental health encounters and an increase in non-opioid substance use disorder trends. Such policies may help reinforce evidence-based care, but must be designed with consideration of potential harms.

A cross-sectional survey exploring clinician perceptions of a novel Medicaid back pain policy

OBJECTIVES

Oregon Medicaid (Oregon Health Plan, or OHP) implemented an innovative policy in 2016 that increased coverage of evidence-based non-pharmacologic therapies (NPT, including physical therapy, massage, chiropractic, and acupuncture) while restricting opioids, epidural steroid injections, and surgeries. The objective of this study was to compare the perspectives of clinicians who see back pain patients and can prescribe pharmacologic therapies and/or refer to NPTs and clinicians who directly provide NPT therapies affected by the policy.

METHODS

A cross-sectional online survey was administered to Oregon prescribing clinicians and NPT clinicians between December 2019 and February 2020. The survey was completed by 107 prescribing clinicians and 83 NPT clinicians.

RESULTS

Prescribing clinicians and NPT clinicians had only moderate levels of familiarity with core elements of the policy. Prescribing clinicians had higher levels of frustration caring for OHP patients with back pain than NPT clinicians (83 vs. 34%, p<0.001) and were less confident in their ability to provide effective care (73 vs. 85%, p = .025). Eighty-six percent of prescribing clinicians and 83% of NPT clinicians thought active NPT treatments were effective; 74 and 70% thought passive NPT treatments were effective. Forty percent of prescribing clinicians and 25% of NPT clinicians (p<0.001) thought medically-light therapies were effective, while 29% of prescribing clinicians and 10% of NPT clinicians thought medically-intensive treatments were effective (p=0.001). Prescribing clinicians thought increased access to NPTs improved outcomes, while opinions were less consistent on the impact of restricting opioid prescribing.

CONCLUSIONS

Prescribing clinicians and NPT clinicians had varying perspectives of a Medicaid coverage policy to increase evidence-based back pain care. Understanding these perspectives is important for contextualizing policy effectiveness.

Implications of missingness in self-reported data for estimating racial and ethnic disparities in Medicaid quality measures

OBJECTIVE

To assess the feasibility and implications of imputing race and ethnicity for quality and utilization measurement in Medicaid.

DATA SOURCES AND STUDY SETTING

2017 Oregon Medicaid claims from the Oregon Health Authority and electronic health records (EHR) from OCHIN, a clinical data research network, were used.

STUDY DESIGN

We cross-sectionally assessed Hispanic-White, Black-White, and Asian-White disparities in 22 quality and utilization measures, comparing self-reported race and ethnicity to imputed values from the Bayesian Improved Surname Geocoding (BISG) algorithm.

DATA COLLECTION

Race and ethnicity were obtained from self-reported data and imputed using BISG.

PRINCIPAL FINDINGS

42.5%/4.9% of claims/EHR were missing self-reported data; BISG estimates were available for >99% of each and had good concordance (0.87-0.95) with Asian, Black, Hispanic, and White self-report. All estimated racial and ethnic disparities were statistically similar in self-reported and imputed EHR-based measures. However, within claims, BISG estimates and incomplete self-reported data yielded substantially different disparities in almost half of the measures, with BISG-based Black-White disparities generally larger than self-reported race and ethnicity data.

CONCLUSIONS

BISG imputation methods are feasible for Medicaid claims data and reduced missingness to <1%. Disparities may be larger than what is estimated using self-reported data with high rates of missingness.

Trends in the Use of Opioids vs Nonpharmacologic Treatments in Adults With Pain, 2011-2019

IMPORTANCE

Chronic pain prevalence among US adults increased between 2010 and 2019. Yet little is known about trends in the use of prescription opioids and nonpharmacologic alternatives in treating pain.

OBJECTIVES

To compare annual trends in the use of prescription opioids, nonpharmacologic alternatives, both treatments, and neither treatment; compare estimates for the annual use of acupuncture, chiropractic care, massage therapy, occupational therapy, and physical therapy; and estimate the association between calendar year and pain treatment based on the severity of pain interference.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

A serial cross-sectional analysis was conducted using the nationally representative Medical Expenditure Panel Survey to estimate the use of outpatient services by cancer-free adults with chronic or surgical pain between calendar years 2011 and 2019. Data analysis was performed from December 29, 2021, to August 5, 2022.

EXPOSURES

Calendar year (2011-2019) was the primary exposure.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The association between calendar year and mutually exclusive pain treatments (opioid vs nonpharmacologic vs both vs neither treatment) was examined. A secondary outcome was the prevalence of nonpharmacologic treatments (acupuncture, chiropractic care, massage therapy, occupational therapy, and physical therapy). All analyses were stratified by pain type.

RESULTS

Among the unweighted 46 420 respondents, 9643 (20.4% weighted) received surgery and 36 777 (79.6% weighted) did not. Weighted percentages indicated that 41.7% of the respondents were aged 45 to 64 years and 55.0% were women. There were significant trends in the use of pain treatments after adjusting for demographic factors, socioeconomic status, health conditions, and pain severity. For example, exclusive use of nonpharmacologic treatments increased in 2019 for both cohorts (chronic pain: adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 2.72; 95% CI, 2.30-3.21; surgical pain: aOR, 1.53; 95% CI, 1.13-2.08) compared with 2011. The use of neither treatment decreased in 2019 for both cohorts (chronic pain: aOR, 0.43; 95% CI, 0.37-0.49; surgical pain: aOR, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.46-0.75) compared with 2011. Among nonpharmacologic treatments, chiropractors and physical therapists were the most common licensed healthcare professionals.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Among cancer-free adults with pain, the annual prevalence of nonpharmacologic pain treatments increased and the prevalent use of neither opioids nor nonpharmacologic therapy decreased for both chronic and surgical pain cohorts. These findings suggest that, although access to outpatient nonpharmacologic treatments is increasing, more severe pain interference may inhibit this access.