Assessing coprescription of opioids with central nervous system depressants for nonmalignant chronic musculoskeletal pain management in the outpatient setting.

OBJECTIVES: To determine annual prescribing trends of opioids and coprescription of central nervous system (CNS) depressants in nonmalignant chronic musculoskeletal pain from the National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey (NAMCS). To determine patient and provider characteristics associated with coprescription opioids and CNS depressants. DESIGN: The cross-sectional study analyzed NAMCS data from 2014 to 2016. Pain medications and CNS depressants were determined using Multum drug classification categories. All 30 medication entries were scanned in order to capture the maximum number of entries compared to previous studies. Multivariate logistic regressions were used to determine characteristics associated with opioid and CNS depressant coprescribing. PARTICIPANTS: Adults (18 years and older) with nonmalignant chronic musculoskeletal pain diagnosis based on ICD-9 codes were identified as the reason for visit. RESULTS: A total of 47,973,413 weighted visits with nonmalignant chronic musculoskeletal pain were reported in the US ambulatory setting from 2014 to 2016. Amongst these patients, 31 percent were on opioids, of which 26 percent were also prescribed benzodiazepines, 8 percent NBSH, and 22 percent gabapentinoids. The annual prescribing rate of opioids decreased significantly in 2016 compared to 2014 (OR: 0.63, 95 percent CI: 0.43-0.94). Polypharmacy and tobacco use were associated with higher odds of having opioids and concurrent opioid with CNS depressants. CONCLUSION: Our study results are in agreement with previous studies that found a steady decline in opioid prescribing even with the inclusion of all 30 medications in our study. Likewise, as previous studies have found, certain patient characteristics continue to be significant for receiving opioid and CNS depressant prescriptions.

Cost of Traditional Herbal Medicines for Noncommunicable Diseases in Rural and Urban Communities in South Africa.

OBJECTIVES: This study assessed traditional herbal medicine (THM) and conventional medicine (CM) utilization among participants with noncommunicable disease in South Africa. METHODS: A cross-sectional study of the Prospective Urban and Rural Epidemiological study collected data through face-to-face interviews using structured questionnaires in 2014. Descriptive, bivariate, and multivariate logistic regression were used to determine the effect of sociodemographic and economic factors on THM and CM use. All statistical analyses were conducted using the statistical computing and graphics language "R." RESULTS: Of the total 417 randomly selected participants in this study, 85% were females, 95% with no health insurance, and 81% with monthly incomes of <2000 rand (R) ($137 equivalent) per month. Moreover, 73% spend 5% of their income on THM, and 10% say they are willing to pay >R500 per year on THM to feel better. Age was significantly associated with different spending patterns after controlling for other demographic factors, given that older adults were 82% (odds ratio 0.18; 95% confidence interval 0.02-0.93) less likely to pay >R100 for THM whereas younger adults were 59% (odds ratio 0.41; 95% confidence interval 0.17-0.97) less likely to pay for CM. CONCLUSIONS: The cost of using THM and CM largely differed by age. The economic insight into this study reveals individuals more willing to pay for THM to payors, which can ultimately clue payors into areas for medication optimization from potential drug-drug interactions and adverse events and, therefore, reduce healthcare costs.

Health Literacy Impact on National Healthcare Utilization and Expenditure.

BACKGROUND: Health literacy presents an enormous challenge in the delivery of effective healthcare and quality outcomes. We evaluated the impact of low health literacy (LHL) on healthcare utilization and healthcare expenditure. METHODS: Database analysis used Medical Expenditure Panel Survey (MEPS) from 2005-2008 which provides nationally representative estimates of healthcare utilization and expenditure. Health literacy scores (HLSs) were calculated based on a validated, predictive model and were scored according to the National Assessment of Adult Literacy (NAAL). HLS ranged from 0-500. Health literacy level (HLL) and categorized in 2 groups: Below basic or basic (HLS <226) and above basic (HLS ≥226). Healthcare utilization expressed as a physician, nonphysician, or emergency room (ER) visits and healthcare spending. Expenditures were adjusted to 2010 rates using the Consumer Price Index (CPI). A P value of 0.05 or less was the criterion for statistical significance in all analyses. Multivariate regression models assessed the impact of the predicted HLLs on outpatient healthcare utilization and expenditures. All analyses were performed with SAS and STATA® 11.0 statistical software. RESULTS: The study evaluated 22 599 samples representing 503 374 648 weighted individuals nationally from 2005-2008. The cohort had an average age of 49 years and included more females (57%). Caucasian were the predominant racial ethnic group (83%) and 37% of the cohort were from the South region of the United States of America. The proportion of the cohort with basic or below basic health literacy was 22.4%. Annual predicted values of physician visits, nonphysician visits, and ER visits were 6.6, 4.8, and 0.2, respectively, for basic or below basic compared to 4.4, 2.6, and 0.1 for above basic. Predicted values of office and ER visits expenditures were $1284 and $151, respectively, for basic or below basic and $719 and $100 for above basic (P < .05). The extrapolated national estimates show that the annual costs for prescription alone for adults with LHL possibly associated with basic and below basic health literacy could potentially reach about $172 billion. CONCLUSION: Health literacy is inversely associated with healthcare utilization and expenditure. Individuals with below basic or basic HLL have greater healthcare utilization and expendituresspending more on prescriptions compared to individuals with above basic HLL. Public health strategies promoting appropriate education among individuals with LHL may help to improve health outcomes and reduce unnecessary healthcare visits and costs.

Cost of pain medication to treat adult patients with nonmalignant chronic pain in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Nonmalignant chronic pain (NMCP) is a public health concern. Among primary care appointments, 22% focus on pain management. The American Academy of Pain Medicine guidelines for NMCP recommend combination medication therapy (including analgesics, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs [NSAIDs], opioids, antidepressants, and anticonvulsants) as a key component to effective treatment for many chronic pain diagnoses. However, there has been little evidence outlining the costs of pain medications in adult patients with NMCP in the United States, an area that necessitates further consideration as the nation moves toward value-based benefit design. OBJECTIVES: To estimate the cost of pain medication attributable to treating adult patients with NMCP in the United States and to analyze the trend of outpatient pain visits. METHODS: This cross-sectional study used the National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey (NAMCS) data from 2000-2007. The Division of Health Care Statistics, National Center for Health Statistics, and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention conducted the survey. The study included patients aged ≥18 years with chronic pain diagnoses (identified by the ICD-9-CM codes: primary, secondary, and tertiary). Patients prescribed at least 1 pain medication were included in the cost analysis. Pain-related prescription medications prescribed during ambulatory care visits were retrieved by using NAMCS drug codes/National Drug Code numbers. National pain prescription frequencies (weighted) were obtained from NAMCS data, using the statistical software STATA. We created pain therapy categories (drug classes) for cost analysis based on national pain guidelines. Drug classes used in this analysis were opioids/opioid-like agents, analgesics/NSAIDs, tricyclic antidepressants, selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, antirheumatics/immunologics, muscle relaxants, topical products, and corticosteroids. We calculated average prices based on the 3 lowest average wholesale prices reported in the Red Book 2009 for maximum recommended daily dose. Total pain medication costs were calculated in 2009 and 2013 dollar values. The study analyzed NMCP-related outpatient visit trends and used time series analysis to forecast visits using U.S. population data and statistics. RESULTS: The total costs of prescription medications prescribed for pain were $17.8 billion annually in the United States. Cost estimates were captured based on a total of 690,205,290 (~690 million) weighted outpatient visits made for chronic pain from 2000 to 2007 in the United States. Of those patients, 99% received a medication that could be used for NMCP. Among the patients, 29% reported taking ≥5 medications. A linear trend of pain visits is visible, reporting change (from 11% to 14%) from 2000 to 2007 in the United States. All agents except opioids/opioid-like agents and analgesics/NSAIDs were further categorized as adjuvant therapy to create 3 major drug class categories. The largest 3 categories of pain therapy for the United States (annually) were analgesics/NSAIDs ($1.9 billion), opioids ($3.6 billion), and adjuvants ($12.3 billion). Despite having the highest prescription frequency nationally, analgesics/NSAIDS accounted for about 11% of the overall pain medication costs. This study found that adjuvant therapy accounted for 69% of the total pain medication costs. Among adjuvants, 33.5% of the cost was contributed by antirheumatics/immunologics. Other adjuvants included muscle relaxants (4.4%), topical products (8.6%), and corticosteroids (9.4%). CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrated national prescribing costs and use within various drug categories of pain medications in a large outpatient population over an 8-year period in the United States. Policymakers, stakeholders, and health plan decision makers may consider this cost analysis, since they need to know how drug costs are being allocated. Moreover, information about costs and use of pain medications is valuable for the practitioner making individual patient care decisions, as well as for those who make population based decisions. This study reported an increasing trend of outpatient pain visits in the United States. Therefore, policymakers and health plan decision makers may expect a growing number of pain-related outpatient visits in coming years and allocate resources accordingly to meet the need.