Leading a Horse to Water: Facilitating Registration and Use of a Prescription Drug Monitoring Program.

OBJECTIVES: Prescription Drug Monitoring Programs (PDMPs) can help inform patient management, coordinate care, and identify drug safety risks, abuse, or diversion. However, many clinicians are not registered to use these systems, and use may be suboptimal. We sought to describe outreach efforts in 1 state (Oregon); quantify uptake of system use; identify barriers; and identify potential system improvements. METHODS: Program reports of outreach efforts and operational metrics provided rates of registration and use. A statewide survey identified perceived barriers and potential improvements from users and nonusers of the system. RESULTS: Even with extensive registration efforts, <25% of clinicians and pharmacists acquired PDMP accounts over 2 years of operation. Rapid increases in registration and use in 2013 corresponded to new requirements among large pharmacy chains that pharmacists register for and use the PDMP. Among surveyed PDMP nonusers, nearly half were unaware that they could register. Among users and nonusers, over two thirds indicated that time constraints were a major barrier and over half thought that inability to delegate access was a major barrier. Desired improvements included linking state systems, faster entry of pharmacy data, and use of unique patient identifiers. Users also wanted better insurance coverage for mental health and addiction referrals. DISCUSSION: Increasing registration and use of PDMPs remains important. Clinician feedback indicates that program enhancements and health care system changes would facilitate using and responding to PDMP information. It appears premature to judge the efficacy of PDMPs until best practices for their use are identified and impacts are assessed.

How clinicians use prescription drug monitoring programs: a qualitative inquiry.

OBJECTIVES: Prescription drug monitoring programs (PDMPs) are now active in most states to assist clinicians in identifying potential controlled drug misuse, diversion, or excessive prescribing. Little is still known about the ways in which they are incorporated into workflow and clinical decision making, what barriers continue to exist, and how clinicians are sharing PDMP results with their patients. DESIGN: Qualitative data were collected through online focus groups and telephone interviews. SETTING: Clinicians from pain management, emergency and family medicine, psychiatry/behavioral health, rehabilitation medicine, internal medicine and dentistry participated. PATIENTS: Thirty-five clinicians from nine states participated. METHODS: We conducted two online focus groups and seven telephone interviews. A multidisciplinary team then used a grounded theory approach coupled with an immersion-crystallization strategy for identifying key themes in the resulting transcripts. RESULTS: Some participants, mainly from pain clinics, reported checking the PDMP with every patient, every time. Others checked only for new patients, for new opioid prescriptions, or for patients for whom they suspected abuse. Participants described varied approaches to sharing PDMP information with patients, including openly discussing potential addiction or safety concerns, avoiding discussion altogether, and approaching discussion confrontationally. Participants described patient anger or denial as a common response and noted the role of patient satisfaction surveys as an influence on prescribing. CONCLUSION: Routines for accessing PDMP data and how clinicians respond to it vary widely. As PDMP use becomes more widespread, it will be important to understand what approaches are most effective for identifying and addressing unsafe medication use.

Who uses a prescription drug monitoring program and how? Insights from a statewide survey of Oregon clinicians.

UNLABELLED: Prescription drug monitoring programs (PDMPs) are relatively new but potentially useful tools to enhance prudent prescribing of controlled substances. However, little is known about the types of clinicians who make the most use of PDMPs, how these programs are incorporated into clinicians' work flow, or how clinicians and patients respond to the information. We therefore surveyed a random sample of Oregon providers, with 1,065 respondents. Clinicians in emergency medicine, primary care, and pain and addiction specialties were the largest number of registrants, but many frequent prescribers of controlled substances were not registered to use the PDMP. Among users, 95% reported accessing the PDMP when they suspected a patient of abuse or diversion, but fewer than half would check it for every new patient or every time they prescribe a controlled drug. Nearly all PDMP users reported that they discuss worrisome PDMP data with patients; 54% reported making mental health or substance abuse referrals, and 36% reported sometimes discharging patients from the practice. Clinicians reported frequent patient denial or anger and only occasional requests for help with drug dependence. More research is needed to optimize how clinicians use PDMPs across settings and how clinicians and patients respond to the data. PERSPECTIVE: This study examined differences between PDMP users and nonusers and how clinicians in various specialties use PDMPs in practice. A better understanding of effective PDMP use will facilitate access to treatment for patients with pain while curbing the prescription drug epidemic and may ultimately reduce abuse, misuse, and overdose death.

Measures such as interstate cooperation would improve the efficacy of programs to track controlled drug prescriptions.

In response to increasing abuse of prescription drugs, forty-four states have implemented--and five more states will soon adopt--monitoring programs to track prescriptions of controlled medications. Although these programs were originally designed to help law enforcement officials and regulatory agencies spot possible illegal activity, health care providers have begun to use data from them to help improve patient safety and quality of care. For this article we reviewed government documents, expert white papers, articles from the peer-reviewed medical literature, and reports of the experiences of local health officials. We found some evidence that prescription drug monitoring programs are a benefit to both law enforcement and health care delivery. However, the programs have strengths and weaknesses, and their overall impact on drug abuse and illegal activity remains unclear. We believe that improving the efficacy of prescription drug monitoring programs will require such changes as more standardization and interstate cooperation, better training of providers, more secure funding, and further evaluation.