An Exploratory Analysis of Differential Prescribing of High-Risk Opioids by Insurance Type Among Patients Seen by the Same Clinician.

BACKGROUND: Insurance status may influence quality of opioid analgesic (OA) prescribing among patients seen by the same clinician. OBJECTIVE: To explore how high-risk OA prescribing varies by payer type among patients seeing the same prescriber and identify clinician characteristics associated with variable prescribing DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study using the 2016-2018 IQVIA Real World Data - Longitudinal Prescription PARTICIPANTS: New OA treatment episodes for individuals ≥ 12 years, categorized by payer and prescriber. We created three dyads: prescribers with ≥ 10 commercial insurance episodes and ≥ 10 Medicaid episodes; ≥ 10 commercial insurance episodes and ≥ 10 self-pay episodes; and ≥ 10 Medicaid episodes and ≥ 10 self-pay episodes. MAIN OUTCOME(S) AND MEASURE(S): Rates of high-risk episodes (initial opioid episodes with > 7-days' supply or prescriptions with a morphine milliequivalent daily dose >90) and odds of being an unbalanced prescriber (prescribers with significantly higher percentage of high-risk episodes paid by one payer vs. the other payer) KEY RESULTS: There were 88,352 prescribers in the Medicaid/self-pay dyad, 172,392 in the Medicaid/commercial dyad, and 122,748 in the self-pay/commercial dyad. In the Medicaid/self-pay and the commercial-self-pay dyads, self-pay episodes had higher high-risk episode rates than Medicaid (16.1% and 18.4%) or commercial (22.7% vs. 22.4%). In the Medicaid/commercial dyad, Medicaid had higher high-risk episode rates (21.1% vs. 20.4%). The proportion of unbalanced prescribers was 11-12% across dyads. In adjusted analyses, surgeons and pain specialists were more likely to be unbalanced prescribers than adult primary care physicians (PCPs) in the Medicaid/self-paydyad (aOR 1.2, 95% CI 1.16-1.34 and aOR 1.2, 95% CI 1.03-1.34). For Medicaid/commercial and self-pay/commercial dyads, surgeons had lower odds of being unbalanced compared to PCPs (aOR 0.6, 95% CI 0.57-0.66 and aOR 0.6, 95% CI 0.61-0.68). CONCLUSIONS: Clinicians prescribe high-risk OAs differently based on insurance type. The relationship between insurance and opioid prescribing quality goes beyond where patients receive care.

Buprenorphine Treatment Episodes During the First Year of COVID: a Retrospective Examination of Treatment Initiation and Retention.

BACKGROUND: During the COVID pandemic, overall buprenorphine treatment appeared to remain relatively stable, despite some studies suggesting a decrease in patients starting buprenorphine. There is a paucity of empirical information regarding patterns of buprenorphine treatment during the pandemic. OBJECTIVE: To better understand the patterns of buprenorphine episodes during the pandemic and how those patterns compared to pre-pandemic patterns. DESIGN: Pharmacy claims representing approximately 92% of all prescriptions filled at retail pharmacies in all 50 US states and the District of Columbia. PARTICIPANTS: Individuals filling buprenorphine prescriptions indicated for treatment of opioid use disorder. MAIN MEASURES: The number of active, starting, and ending buprenorphine treatment episodes March 13 to December 1, 2020, and the expected number of such episodes in 2020 based on the growth in treatment episodes from March 13 to December 1, 2019. KEY RESULTS: The observed number of active buprenorphine episodes in December 2020 was comparable to the expected number, but new treatment episodes starting between March 13 and December 1, 2020, were 17.2% fewer than expected based on the 2019 experience. Similarly, the number of episodes that ended between March 13 and December 1, 2020, was 16.0% fewer than expected. Decreases from expected episode starts and ends occurred throughout the period but were greatest in the 2 months after the declaration of the public health emergency. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Beneath the apparent stability of buprenorphine patient numbers during the pandemic, the flow of individuals receiving buprenorphine treatment changed substantially. Our findings shed light on how policy changes meant to support buprenorphine prescribing influenced prescribing dynamics during that period, suggesting that while policy efforts may have been successful in maintaining existing patients in treatment, that success did not extend to individuals not yet in treatment.

Individual and Community Factors Associated with Naloxone Co-prescribing Among Long-term Opioid Patients: a Retrospective Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Naloxone co-prescribing to individuals at increased opioid overdose risk is a key component of opioid overdose prevention efforts. OBJECTIVE: Examine naloxone co-prescribing in the general population and assess how co-prescribing varies by individual and community characteristics. DESIGN: Retrospective cross-sectional study. We conducted a multivariable logistic regression of 2017-2018 de-identified pharmacy claims representing 90% of all prescriptions filled at retail pharmacies in 50 states and the District of Columbia. PATIENTS: Individuals with opioid analgesic treatment episodes > 90 days MAIN MEASURES: Outcome was co-prescribed naloxone. Predictor variables included insurance type, primary prescriber specialty, receipt of concomitant benzodiazepines, high-dose opioid episode, county urbanicity, fatal overdose rates, poverty rates, and primary care health professional shortage areas. KEY RESULTS: Naloxone co-prescribing occurred in 2.3% of long-term opioid therapy episodes. Medicaid (aOR 1.87, 95%CI 1.84 to 1.90) and Medicare (aOR 1.48, 95%CI 1.46 to 1.51) episodes had higher odds of naloxone co-prescribing than commercial insurance episodes, while cash pay (aOR 0.77, 95%CI 0.74 to 0.80) and other insurance episodes (aOR 0.81, 95%CI 0.79 to 0.83) had lower odds. Odds of naloxone co-prescribing were higher among high-dose opioid episodes (aOR 3.19, 95%CI 3.15 to 3.23), when concomitant benzodiazepines were prescribed (aOR 1.12, 95%CI 1.10 to 1.14), and in counties with higher fatal overdose rates. CONCLUSION: Co-prescription of naloxone represents a tangible clinical action that can be taken to help prevent opioid overdose deaths. However, despite recommendations to co-prescribe naloxone to patients at increased risk for opioid overdose, we found that co-prescribing rates remain low overall. States, insurers, and health systems should consider implementing strategies to facilitate increased co-prescribing of naloxone to at-risk individuals.

Changes in Nursing Home Use Following Medicaid-Supported Expanded Access to Home- and Community-Based Services for Older Adults With Dementia.

Importance: New York State's Medicaid managed long-term care (MLTC) program expanded access to home- and community-based services, providing an alternative to nursing home care for people with dementia. Between 2012 and 2015, the state implemented mandatory MLTC for dual Medicare and Medicaid enrollees requiring more than 120 days of community-based long-term care. Objective: To evaluate changes in nursing home use among older adults with dementia following MLTC implementation. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study used longitudinal data from January 1, 2011, to December 31, 2019, from the Minimum Data Set and Medicare administrative data. The study sample included New York State Medicare beneficiaries 65 years and older with dementia. New York City residents were excluded due to insufficient pre-study period data. Data were analyzed from January 1, 2011, to December 31, 2019. Exposure: Mandatory MLTC enrollment. Main Outcomes and Measures: Longitudinal models were used to evaluate changes in annual days of nursing home use following the staggered implementation of MLTC across 13 regions of the state. Two models were estimated: (1) a logistic regression model for any nursing home use in a given year and (2) a linear regression model of total nursing home days, conditional on any nursing home use. Models included annual event-time indicators specified as years until or since MLTC implementation. To capture MLTC effects for dual enrollees relative to non-dual Medicare enrollees, models included interaction terms for dual enrollment and event-time indicators. Results: This sample included 463 947 Medicare beneficiaries with dementia who lived in New York State between 2011 and 2019 (50.2% younger than 85 years; 64.4% women). Implementation of MLTC was associated with lower odds of nursing home use among dual enrollees, ranging from 8% lower odds 2 years post implementation (adjusted odds ratio, 0.92 [95% CI, 0.86-0.98]) to 24% lower odds 6 years post implementation (adjusted odds ratio, 0.76 [95% CI, 0.69-0.84]). Compared with a scenario of no MLTC, MLTC implementation was associated with an 8% reduction in annual days of nursing home use between 2013 and 2019 (mean, -5.6 [95% CI, -6.1 to -5.1] days per year). Conclusions and Relevance: The findings of this cohort study suggest that implementation of mandatory MLTC in New York State was associated with less nursing home use among dual enrollees with dementia and that MLTC may help prevent or delay nursing home placement among older adults with dementia.

Differences in medicaid expansion effects on buprenorphine treatment utilization by county rurality and income: A pharmacy data claims analysis from 2009-2018.

Background: Although use of buprenorphine for treating opioid use disorder increased over the past decade, buprenorphine utilization remains limited in lower-income and rural areas. We examine how the Affordable Care Act Medicaid expansion influenced buprenorphine initiation rates by county income and evaluate how associations differ by county rural-urban status. Methods: This study used nationwide 2009-2018 IQVIA retail pharmacy data and a comparative interrupted time series framework-a hybrid framework combining regression discontinuity and difference-in-difference approaches. We used piecewise linear estimation to quantify changes in buprenorphine initiation rates before and after Medicaid expansion. Results: The sample included observations from 376,704 county-months. We identified 5,227,340 new buprenorphine treatment episodes, with an average of 9.2 new buprenorphine episodes per month per 100,000 county residents. Among urban counties, those with the lowest median incomes experienced significantly larger increases in buprenorphine initiation rates associated with Medicaid expansion than counties with higher median incomes (5-year rates difference est=3525.3, se=1695.3, p = 0.04). However, among rural counties, there was no significant association between buprenorphine initiation rates and county median income after Medicaid expansion (5-year rates difference est=979.0, se=915.8, p = 0.29). Conclusions: Medicaid expansion was associated with a reduction in income-related buprenorphine disparities in urban counties, but not in rural counties. To achieve more equitable buprenorphine access, future policies should target low-income rural areas.

Association of Selected State Policies and Requirements for Buprenorphine Treatment With Per Capita Months of Treatment.

Importance: Expanding the use of buprenorphine for treating opioid use disorder is a critical component of the US response to the opioid crisis, but few studies have examined how state policies are associated with buprenorphine dispensing. Objective: To examine the association of 6 selected state policies with the rate of individuals receiving buprenorphine per 1000 county residents. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study used 2006 to 2018 US retail pharmacy claims data for individuals dispensed buprenorphine formulations indicated for treating opioid use disorder. Exposures: State implementation of policies requiring additional education for buprenorphine prescribers beyond waiver training, continuing medical education related to substance misuse and addiction, Medicaid coverage of buprenorphine, Medicaid expansion, mandatory prescriber use of prescription drug monitoring programs, and pain management clinic laws were examined. Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcome was buprenorphine treatment months per 1000 county residents as measured using multivariable longitudinal models. Statistical analyses were conducted from September 1, 2021, through April 30, 2022, with revised analyses conducted through February 28, 2023. Results: The mean (SD) number of months of buprenorphine treatment per 1000 persons nationally increased steadily from 1.47 (0.04) in 2006 to 22.80 (0.55) in 2018. Requiring that buprenorphine prescribers receive additional education beyond that required to obtain the federal X-waiver was associated with significant increases in the number of months of buprenorphine treatment per 1000 population in the 5 years following implementation of the requirement (from 8.51 [95% CI, 2.36-14.64] months in year 1 to 14.43 [95% CI, 2.61-26.26] months in year 5). Requiring continuing medical education for physician licensure related to substance misuse or addiction was associated with significant increases in buprenorphine treatment per 1000 population in each of the 5 years following policy implementation (from 7.01 [95% CI, 3.17-10.86] months in the first year to 11.43 [95% CI, 0.61-22.25] months in the fifth year). None of the other policies examined was associated with a significant change in buprenorphine months of treatment per 1000 county residents. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cross-sectional study of US pharmacy claims, state-mandated educational requirements beyond the initial training required to prescribe buprenorphine were associated with increased buprenorphine use over time. The findings suggest requiring education for buprenorphine prescribers and training in substance use disorder treatment for all controlled substance prescribers as an actionable proposal for increasing buprenorphine use, ultimately serving more patients. No single policy lever can ensure adequate buprenorphine supply; however, policy maker attention to the benefits of enhancing clinician education and knowledge may help to expand buprenorphine access.

The effect of state policies on rates of high-risk prescribing of an initial opioid analgesic.

BACKGROUND: Multiple state policies, such as prescription drug monitoring programs (PDMPs) and duration limits, have been implemented to decrease high-risk opioid prescribing. Studies demonstrate that many policies decrease certain opioid prescribing behaviors, but few examine their intended effects on the targeted high-risk prescribing practices, nor disentangle the effects of concurrent state or federal policies likely to influence those practices. METHODS: Forty-one million initial prescriptions for new opioid episodes from 2007 to 2018 were identified using national pharmacy claims. We identified high-risk initial prescriptions, defined as >7 days' supply, average daily MME >90, or concurrent with benzodiazepines and estimated three multivariable logistic regression models to assess the association between policies and outcomes controlling for patient, prescriber, and county characteristics. RESULTS: Initial prescriptions for >7 days declined from 23.8% in 2007 to 14.9% in 2018, associated with mandatory and interoperable PDMPs and prescription duration limits but not other policies examined. Initial prescriptions with daily MME > 90 declined from 13.2% to 1.9%, associated with pain management clinic laws but not consistently with other policies. Initial prescriptions concurrent with benzodiazepines declined only modestly from 6.9% to 6.5%, associated with pain management clinic laws but not other policies examined. CONCLUSIONS: The opioid policy environment has changed rapidly with a range of different policies being implemented addressing high-risk prescribing. PDMP laws mandating prescriber use and pain clinic laws both appear efficacious but decrease different types of high-risk opioid prescribing. New policies should be considered in light of the prevalence of the problem being addressed.

Patient, prescriber, and Community factors associated with filled naloxone prescriptions among patients receiving buprenorphine 2017-18.

BACKGROUND: Prescribing naloxone to patients at increased opioid overdose risk is a key component of opioid overdose prevention efforts, but little is known about naloxone fills among patients receiving buprenorphine for opioid use disorder, one such high risk group. METHODS: This retrospective cross-sectional study used de-identified pharmacy claims representing 90% of all prescriptions filled at retail pharmacies in 50 states and the District of Columbia. We performed a multivariable logistic regression to examine filled naloxone prescriptions among patients receiving buprenorphine treatment and assessed how filled naloxone prescriptions vary by patient, prescriber, and community characteristics. RESULTS: Filled naloxone prescriptions occurred among 4.5% of buprenorphine treatment episodes. Episodes paid through Medicaid (aOR 2.40, 95%CI 2.33-2.47) and Medicare (aOR 1.53, 95%CI 1.46-1.60) had higher odds of filled naloxone prescriptions than commercial insurance episodes. Compared to episodes where the primary prescriber was an adult primary care physician, odds of filling a naloxone prescription were higher among episodes prescribed by addiction specialists (aOR 1.30, 95% CI 1.24-1.37) and physician assistants/nurse practitioners (aOR 1.57, 95% CI 1.53-1.61). CONCLUSIONS: Prescribing naloxone to patients receiving buprenorphine represents a tangible clinical action that can be taken to help prevent opioid overdose deaths. However, despite recommendations to co-prescribe naloxone to patients at increased risk for opioid overdose, rates of filling naloxone prescriptions remain low among patients dispensed buprenorphine. States, insurers, and health systems should consider implementing strategies to facilitate increased co-prescribing of naloxone to at-risk individuals.

Trends in the Concurrent Prescription of Opioids and Gabapentin in the US, 2006 to 2018.

This cohort study examines trends in concurrent gabapentin and opioid prescribing in the US, overall and by prescriber, patient, and county characteristics, between 2006 and 2018.