Rural-urban prescribing patterns by primary care and behavioral health providers in older adults with serious mental illness.

BACKGROUND: Older adults with serious mental illness (SMI) often have multiple comorbidities and complex medication schedules. Shortages of behavioral health specialists (BHSs), especially in rural areas, frequently make primary care providers (PCPs) the only clinician managing this complex population. The aim of this study was to describe rural/urban psychiatric medication prescribing in older adults with SMI by PCPs and BHSs, and by clinician type. METHODS: This retrospective descriptive analysis used 2018 Medicare data to identify individuals with a bipolar, major depression, schizophrenia, or psychosis diagnosis and examined medication claims for antianxiety, antidepressants, antipsychotics, hypnotics, and anticonvulsants. Descriptive statistics summarized percentage of medications provided by PCPs and BHSs stratified by rural and urban areas and by drug class. Additional analyses compared psychiatric prescribing patterns by physicians, advanced practice registered nurses (APRNs), and physician assistants (PAs). RESULTS: In urban areas, PCPs prescribed at least 50% of each psychiatric medication class, except antipsychotics, which was 45.2%. BHSs prescribed 40.7% of antipsychotics and less than 25% of all other classes. In rural areas, percentages of psychiatric medications from PCPs were over 70% for each medication class, except antipsychotics, which was 60.1%. Primary care physicians provided most psychiatric medications, between 36%-57% in urban areas and 47%-65% in rural areas. Primary care APRNs provided up to 13% of prescriptions in rural areas, which was more than the amount prescribed by BHS physicians, expect for antipsychotics. Psychiatric mental health APRNs provided up to 7.5% of antipsychotics in rural areas, but their prescribing contribution among other classes ranged between 1.1%-3.6%. PAs provided 2.5%-3.4% of medications in urban areas and this increased to 3.9%-5.1% in rural areas. CONCLUSIONS: Results highlight the extensive roles of PCPs, including APRNs, in managing psychiatric medications for older adults with SMI.

Opioid use disorder Cascade of care framework design: A roadmap.

Unintentional overdose deaths, most involving opioids, have eclipsed all other causes of US deaths for individuals less than 50 years of age. An estimated 2.4 to 5 million individuals have opioid use disorder (OUD) yet a minority receive treatment in a given year. Medications for OUD (MOUD) are the gold standard treatment for OUD however early dropout remains a major challenge for improving clinical outcomes. A Cascade of Care (CoC) framework, first popularized as a public health accountability strategy to stem the spread of HIV, has been adapted specifically for OUD. The CoC framework has been promoted by the NIH and several states and jurisdictions for organizing quality improvement efforts through clinical, policy, and administrative levers to improve OUD treatment initiation and retention. This roadmap details CoC design domains based on available data and potential linkages as individual state agencies and health systems typically rely on limited datasets subject to diverse legal and regulatory requirements constraining options for evaluations. Both graphical decision trees and catalogued studies are provided to help guide efforts by state agencies and health systems to improve data collection and monitoring efforts under the OUD CoC framework.

Projected Spending on Psychotropic Medications 2013-2020.

Spending on psychotropic medications has grown rapidly in recent decades. Using national data on drug expenditures, patent expirations, future drug development and expert interviews, we project that spending will grow more slowly over the period 2012-2020. The average annual increase is projected to be just 3.0 % per year, continuing the steady deceleration in recent years. The main drivers of this expected deceleration include slower development of new drugs, upcoming patent expirations which will lower prices, and payers' growing ability to manage utilization and promote generic use. The slowdown will relieve some cost pressures on payers, particularly Medicare and Medicaid.

Prescriber response to unsolicited prescription drug monitoring program reports in Massachusetts.

PURPOSE: To describe prescriber response to unsolicited patient reports from the Massachusetts prescription drug monitoring program (PDMP). METHODS: Prescribers were surveyed upon receipt of unsolicited reports of their patients' prescription history and three months later. We assessed prescribers' awareness of other prescribers listed in the report, their clinical assessment of medical necessity of all prescribed medications, actions taken by prescribers after receiving the report, and usefulness of the report. RESULTS: Of the 333 respondents to the initial survey, only 28 (8.4%) were aware of most, all, or nearly all other prescribers. A total of 146 (43.8%) reported having sufficient knowledge to determine whether the prescriptions were medically necessary, of whom 102 (69.6%) felt the prescriptions were unwarranted. Of the 163 respondents to the follow-up survey, 31.3% added the report to the patient's file, 22.7% discussed the report with other prescribers on the report, 21.5% took no action, and 6% discussed the report with the patient (representing two-thirds of respondents who saw the patient after receiving the report). Most respondents felt that the report was useful for their practice and easy to understand. CONCLUSIONS: Unsolicited reporting of PDMP data has the potential to improve clinical practice by alerting providers about patients with multiple prescribers and potentially medically unnecessary prescriptions.

Expanding access to medication treatment for opioid use disorders: Findings from the Washington State hub and spoke effort.

BACKGROUND: Opioid use disorder (OUD) is a leading cause of preventable death and injury nationwide. Efforts to increase the use of medication for opioid use disorder (MOUD) are needed. In 2017, Washington State implemented a Hub and Spoke (HS) model of care with the primary goal of expanding access to MOUD. We examined changes in MOUD utilization among Washington State Medicaid beneficiaries before and after HS implementation. METHODS: We used Medicaid claims data to examine longitudinal changes in MOUD use for beneficiaries with OUD. We conducted a comparative interrupted time series analysis to examine the association between HS policy implementation and rates of MOUD utilization, overall and by type of medication. RESULTS: Between 2016 and 2019, a period of increasing OUD prevalence, rates of MOUD utilization among Washington Medicaid beneficiaries increased overall from 39.7 to 50.5. Following HS implementation, rates of MOUD use grew at a significantly greater rate in the HS cohort than in the non-HS cohort (ß=0.54, SE=0.02, p< 0.0001, 95% CI 0.49, 0.59). Analyses by medication type show that this rate increase was primarily due to buprenorphine use (ß= 0.61, SE= 0.02, p< 0.0001, 95% CI 0.57, 0.65). CONCLUSION: Improved systems of care are needed to make MOUD accessible to all patients in need. The Washington HS model is one strategy that may facilitate and expand MOUD use, particularly buprenorphine. Over the study period, Washington State saw increased use of buprenorphine, which was an emphasis of their HS model.

Medicaid managed care restrictions on medications for the treatment of opioid use disorder.

OBJECTIVE: To examine whether Medicaid managed care plan (MCP) utilization management policies for buprenorphine-naloxone and injectable naltrexone are related to key state Medicaid program policy decisions. DATA SOURCES AND STUDY SETTING: We abstracted data on state Medicaid regulatory and policy information from publicly available sources and publicly available insurance benefit documentation from all 241 Medicaid MCPs operating in 2021. STUDY DESIGN: In this cross-sectional study, we used bivariate and multivariate analyses to examine whether Medicaid MCP prior authorization and quantity limits on receipt of buprenorphine and injectable naltrexone were associated with key state Medicaid choices to leverage federal funds to expand coverage and eligibility (Medicaid expansion, 1115 waivers) and to regulate Medicaid MCPs (uniform preferred drug lists, medical loss ratio remittance). Models were adjusted for MCP characteristics, including profit status, behavioral health contracting arrangement, National Committee for Quality Assurance accreditation, size, market share, and state opioid overdose death rates. Average marginal effects (AME) were reported. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Utilization management was common among MCPs, and restrictions were more commonly applied to buprenorphine than injectable naltrexone, despite its higher cost. States that required MCPs to comply with utilization management policies stipulated in a uniform preferred drug list were more likely to require prior authorization for buprenorphine (AME: 0.29, 95% CI: 0.15-0.42) and injectable naltrexone (AME: 0.25, 95% CI: 0.12-0.38). MCPs in states that required plans to pay back earnings above a certain threshold were less likely to require prior authorization for buprenorphine (AME: -0.30, 95% CI: -0.43 to -0.18). CONCLUSIONS: Restrictions on medications for opioid use disorder are widespread among MCPs and vary by medication. State Medicaid regulatory and policy characteristics were strongly linked to MCPs' utilization management approaches. State Medicaid policy and contracting approaches may be levers to eliminate utilization management restrictions on medications for opioid use disorder.

Quality of Opioid Use Disorder Treatment for Persons With and Without Disabling Conditions.

Importance: Adverse outcomes associated with opioid use disorder (OUD) are disproportionately high among people with disabilities (PWD) compared with those without disability. A gap remains in understanding the quality of OUD treatment for people with physical, sensory, cognitive, and developmental disabilities, specifically regarding medications for OUD (MOUD), a foundation of treatment. Objective: To examine the use and quality of OUD treatment in adults with diagnosed disabling conditions, compared with adults without these diagnoses. Design, Setting, and Participants: This case-control study used Washington State Medicaid data from 2016 to 2019 (for use) and 2017 to 2018 (for continuity). Data were obtained for outpatient, residential, and inpatient settings with Medicaid claims. Participants included Washington State full-benefit Medicaid enrollees aged 18 to 64 years, continuously eligible for 12 months, with OUD during the study years and not enrolled in Medicare. Data analysis was performed from January to September 2022. Exposures: Disability status, including physical (spinal cord injury or mobility impairment), sensory (visual or hearing impairments), developmental (intellectual or developmental disability or autism), and cognitive (traumatic brain injury) disabilities. Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcomes were National Quality Forum-endorsed quality measures: (1) use of MOUD (buprenorphine, methadone, or naltrexone) during each study year and (2) 6-month continuity of treatment (for those taking MOUD). Results: A total of 84 728 Washington Medicaid enrollees had claims evidence of OUD, representing 159 591 person-years (84 762 person-years [53.1%] for female participants, 116 145 person-years [72.8%] for non-Hispanic White participants, and 100 970 person-years [63.3%] for participants aged 18-39 years); 15.5% of the population (24 743 person-years) had evidence of a physical, sensory, developmental, or cognitive disability. PWD were 40% less likely than those without a disability to receive any MOUD (adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 0.60; 95% CI, 0.58-0.61; P < .001). This was true for each disability type, with variations. Individuals with a developmental disability were least likely to use MOUD (AOR, 0.50; 95% CI, 0.46-0.55; P < .001). Of those using MOUD, PWD were 13% less likely than people without disability to continue MOUD for 6 months (adjusted OR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.82-0.93; P < .001). Conclusions and Relevance: In this case-control study of a Medicaid population, treatment differences were found between PWD and people without these disabilities; these differences cannot be explained clinically and highlight inequities in treatment. Policies and interventions to increase MOUD access are critical to reducing morbidity and mortality among PWD. Potential solutions include improved enforcement of the Americans with Disabilities Act, workforce best practice training, and addressing stigma, accessibility, and the need for accommodations to improve OUD treatment for PWD.

State alignment with federal regulations in 2022 to relax buprenorphine 30-patient waiver requirements.

Background: In 2021, the Department of Health and Human Services released guidelines allowing waiver-eligible providers seeking to treat up to 30 patients to be exempt from waiver training (WT) and the counseling and other ancillary services (CAS) attestation. This study evaluates if states and the District of Columbia had more restrictive policies preventing adoption of the 2021 federal guidelines. Methods: First, the Westlaw database was searched for buprenorphine regulations. Second, state medical, osteopathic, physician assistant, nursing boards, and single state agencies (SSA) were surveyed to assess for the WT and CAS requirements and if they were discussing the 2021 guidelines. Results were recorded and compared by state and waiver-eligible provider types. Results: The Westlaw search revealed seven states with regulations requiring the WT and ten states requiring CAS. Survey results showed ten state boards/SSAs required WT for at least one waiver-eligible practitioner type and eleven state boards/SSAs required CAS. In some states, the WT and CAS requirements only applied in special circumstances. Eleven states had discrepancies between the Westlaw and survey results among three waiver-eligible provider types. Conclusions: Despite the 2021 federal change intended to increase access to buprenorphine, several states had regulations and/or provider boards and SSAs that were not supportive. Now, the Mainstreaming Addiction Treatment (MAT) Act of 2022 eliminated the federal x-waiver requirement to prescribe buprenorphine. However, these states may continue to have barriers to treatment access despite the MAT Act. Strategies to engage states with these restrictive policies are needed to improve buprenorphine treatment capacity.

Commentary: Moving Toward Clear, Evidence-based, and Effective State Policies for Addiction Medicine.

State policies play a critical role in determining health care delivery, health equity, and health outcomes, but vary widely in scope, target, restrictiveness, and goals. Understanding how such policies impact health care is critical to development of evidence-based policies, but difficult in the absence of organized and standardized approaches to analysis. Development of themes and frameworks for analysis, and identification of policies supported by evidence, are important steps in moving toward more rational and aligned policies. Buprenorphine treatment for opioid use disorder provides a good example and methodological foundation. At the same time, state policies are promulgated within a larger policy, treatment, and socio-economic environment, and these influences must be considered as well.

Emergency department interventions for opioid use disorder: A synthesis of emerging models.

INTRODUCTION: Opioid overdose deaths are increasing, and improving access to evidence-based treatment is necessary. Emergency department (ED) initiation of treatment for opioid use disorder (OUD) via medications and referral to treatment is one approach that leverages a critical health care entry point for individuals with OUD. Efforts to engage patients in treatment through the ED are growing, but systematic analysis of program features as implemented and challenges across different models remains limited. Lessons from early adopter programs may benefit clinicians and others looking to offer ED-initiated treatment for OUD. METHODS: We conducted case studies of five ED-based efforts to address OUD across the United States, selected for diversity in structure, approach, and geography. We conducted telephone interviews with 37 individuals (ED physicians, ED nurses, navigators, hospital administrators, community providers, and state policymakers) affiliated with the five programs. Interviews were transcribed, coded, and analyzed using a framework analysis approach, identifying relevant lessons for replication. RESULTS: These five programs (an academic medical center, two large urban hospitals, a rural community hospital, and a community-based program) successfully implemented ED-initiated MOUD. Often a champion with knowledge of OUD treatment and a reliable connection with outpatient treatment began the program. The approach to patient identification varied from universal screening to relying on patient self-identification. Substance use treatment navigators provide crucial services but can be difficult to pay for within current reimbursement frameworks. Barriers to implementation include lack of knowledge about treatment options and effectiveness, stigma, community treatment capacity limits, and health insurance and reimbursement policies. Facilitators of success include taking a patient-centered, low-barrier approach, having a passionate champion, a strong structure with health system support, and a relationship with community partners. Metrics for success vary across programs. Some programs are expanding to include treating the use of other substances such as alcohol and stimulants. CONCLUSION: ED-initiated MOUD is feasible across different settings. Research and real world efforts need to promote programs that include OUD treatment as standard in ED treatment.

Improving Interorganizational Coordination Between Primary Care and Oncology: Adapting a Chronic Care Management Model for Patients With Cancer.

The objective of this study was to explore the implementation of a payment and delivery system innovation to improve coordination and communication between primary care and oncology. We employed a qualitative case study approach, conducting interviews (n = 18), and reviewing archival materials. Chronic care coordinators and the cancer center social worker acted as boundary spanners. The chronic care coordinator role built on medical home infrastructure, applying the chronic care model to cancer care. Coordination from primary care to oncology became more routinized, with information sharing prompted by specific events. These new boundary spanner roles enabled greater coordination around uncertain and interdependent tasks. Recommendations for scaling up include the following: establish systematic approaches to learning from implementation, leverage existing capacity for scalability, and attend to the content and purpose of information sharing.

Cost sharing for breast cancer hormone therapy: How do dual eligible patients' copayment impact adherence.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the different levels of copayment assistance and treatment adherence among Medicare and Medicaid dual eligible beneficiaries with breast cancer in the U.S. RESEARCH DESIGN: Propensity Score methodology was adopted to minimize potential selection bias from the nonrandom allocation of the treatment group (i.e., full Medicaid beneficiaries) and control group (i.e., Medicare Savings Programs [MSPs] beneficiaries). Longitudinal hierarchical model and Cox proportional-hazard model were adopted to examine patients' adherence over their full five-year course of adjuvant hormone therapy. RESULTS: Our study cohort consisted of 1,133 dual eligible beneficiaries diagnosed with hormone receptor-positive early stage breast cancer in years 2007 -mid 2009. About 80.5% of them received MSPs benefits, while the rest received full Medicaid benefits. On average for a standardized 30-day hormone therapy medication, full Medicaid beneficiaries spent $0.5-$2.0 and MSP beneficiaries spent $1.4-$4.8 in copayment. After adjusting for other factors, this copayment reduction wasn't associated with a significantly better adherence. However, when the catastrophic coverage threshold was reached (copayments reduced to zero), significant improvement in adherence was found in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: Our study found that small amount of cost-sharing reduction did not affect Medicare and Medicaid dual eligible patients' medication treatment adherence, however, the elimination of cost-sharing (even a minimal amount) was associated with improved adherence. Future legislative and advocacy efforts should be paid on eliminating cost sharing for dual eligibles, and possibly even a broader group of financially vulnerable patients.

Emergency department-based efforts to offer medication treatment for opioid use disorder: What can we learn from current approaches?

BACKGROUND: The opioid epidemic remains a public health crisis and most people with opioid use disorder (OUD) do not receive effective treatment. The emergency department (ED) can be a critical entry point for treatment. EDs are developing and implementing ED-based efforts to address OUD to improve access to OUD treatment. This study's objective is to identify features of ED-based OUD treatment programs that relate to program implementation, effectiveness, and sustainability. METHODS: We obtained data through literature review and semistructured interviews with ED physicians and leaders. The study analyzed these data to develop a framework of key components of ED-based efforts and highlight barriers and facilitators to implementation and program effectiveness. RESULTS: We identify five key features of ED-based opioid treatment programs that vary across programs and may influence effectiveness and impact: patient identification methods; treatment approaches; program structure; relationship with community partners; and financing and sustainability. Successful implementation of ED-based OUD treatment includes having a champion, a reliable referral network, and systematic tracking and reporting of data for monitoring and feedback. CONCLUSION: Going forward, attention to these features may help to improve effectiveness. As researchers conduct studies of ED-based care models, they should assess the impact of variation in key features to improve program effectiveness.

The Impact of Tai Chi Exercise on Health Care Utilization and Imputed Cost in Residents of Low-Income Senior Housing.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: This study was designed to test the impact of Tai Chi (TC) on healthcare utilization and cost in older adults living in low-income senior housing. We hypothesized that TC would improve overall health enough to reduce the use of emergency department (ED) and inpatient services. DESIGN: Cluster randomized controlled trial with randomization at the housing site level. SETTING: Greater Boston, Massachusetts. PARTICIPANTS: The study includes 6 sites with 75 individuals in the TC treatment condition and 6 sites with 67 individuals in the health education control condition. INTERVENTION: Members of the treatment group received up to a year-long intervention with twice weekly, in-person TC exercise sessions along with video-directed exercises that could be done independently at home. The comparison group received monthly, in-person healthy aging education classes (HE). Study recruitment took place between August, 2015 and October, 2017. Key outcomes included acute care utilization (inpatient stays, observation stays and emergency department visits). In addition, the cost of utilization was estimated using the age, sex and race adjusted allowed amount from Medicare claims for a geographically similar population aged ≥ 65. RESULTS: The results suggested a possible reduction in the rate of ED visits in the TC group vs. controls (rate ratio = 0.476, p-value = 0.06), but no findings achieved statistical significance. Adjusted estimates of imputed costs of ED and hospital care were similar between TC and HE, averaging approximately $3,000 in each group. CONCLUSION: ED utilization tended to be lower over 6 to 12 months of TC exercises compared to HE in older adults living in low-income housing, although estimated costs of care were similar.

Addressing Workforce Needs for Medication Treatment of Opioid Use Disorder.

: Medication treatment of opioid use disorder (OUD) is recognized as an effective evidence-based treatment. It has been underused, in part due to challenges in recruiting and retaining a provider workforce that is able to prescribe and manage patients treated with OUD medications. A national goal should be: anyone with an OUD must have adequate access to a range of medications for treatment and support, provided in high-quality settings, and all programs receiving public or private funding should be so equipped. To accomplish this, it is important to understand what recruitment efforts are most successful, and what implementation strategies and service models are most effective. Building an adequate OUD treatment workforce, however, will require a system with adequate program resources and incentives, clinician and patient education to reduce stigma, limited regulatory burden, and adequate reimbursement and support high-quality services.

Predictors of Postdeployment Prescription Opioid Receipt and Long-term Prescription Opioid Utilization Among Army Active Duty Soldiers.

Introduction: Little is known about long-term prescription opioid utilization in the Military Health System. The objectives of this study were to examine predictors of any prescription opioid receipt, and predictors of long-term opioid utilization among active duty soldiers in the year following deployment. Materials and Methods: The analytic sample consisted of Army active duty soldiers returning from deployment to Operation Enduring Freedom, Operation Iraqi Freedom, or Operation New Dawn in fiscal years 2008-2014 (N = 540,738). The Heckman probit procedure was used to jointly examine predictors of any opioid prescription receipt and long-term opioid utilization (i.e., an episode of 90 days or longer where days-supply covered at least two-thirds of days) in the postdeployment year. Predictors were based on diagnoses and characteristics of opioid prescriptions. Results: More than one-third of soldiers (34.8%, n = 188,211) had opioid receipt, and among those soldiers, 3.3% had long-term opioid utilization (or 1.1% of the cohort, n = 6,188). The largest magnitude predictors of long-term opioid utilization were receiving a long-acting opioid within the first 30 days of the episode, diagnoses of chronic pain (no specified source), back/neck pain, or peripheral/central nervous system pain, and severe pain score in vital records. Conclusions: Soldiers returning from deployment were more likely to receive an opioid prescription than the overall active duty population, and 1.1% initiated a long-term opioid episode. We report a declining rate of opioid receipt and long-term opioid utilization among Army members from fiscal years 2008-2014. This study demonstrates that the most important predictors of opioid receipt were not demographic factors, but generally clinical indicators of acute pain or physical trauma.

Update on prescription monitoring in clinical practice: a survey study of prescription monitoring program administrators.

OBJECTIVE: Prescription drug abuse and undertreatment of pain are public health priorities in the United States. Few options to manage these problems are balanced, in simultaneously supporting pain relief and deterring prescription drug abuse. Prescription monitoring programs (PMPs) potentially offer a balanced approach; however, the medical/scientific communities are not well informed about their current status and potential risks/benefits. The purpose of this study was to provide a benchmark of the current status of PMPs for healthcare providers upon which to engage PMP administrators. DESIGN: A Web survey of current PMP directors with a telephone follow-up conducted in June-July 2006 regarding goals, data captured, data sharing procedures, healthcare provider training, and evaluation efforts. RESULTS: Eighteen of 23 states with operating PMPs at that time participated. Eleven programs allowed physician access to PMP data. Data were delivered by mail (N = 6), fax (N = 8), e-mail (N = 1), and Websites (N = 8). Eight programs provided data to providers within 1 hour. Three states have developed provider PMP usage guidelines. Eight states developed or are developing educational programs. Two states completed or are conducting evaluations of the public health impact of PMP implementation. Five states have begun utilizing PMP data as an epidemiological tool. CONCLUSIONS: Initial public safety orientation of PMPs is evolving to include improving public health and patient care. Beginning with efforts to engage healthcare providers through data sharing and education, and progressively including program evaluation on public health and patient care, our results suggest a rapid movement in the direction of utilization of PMPs to improve health care.

Applying American Society of Addiction Medicine Performance Measures in Commercial Health Insurance and Services Data.

OBJECTIVES: ASAM's Standards of Care for the Addiction Specialist established appropriate care for the treatment of substance use disorders. ASAM identified three high priority performance measures for specification and testing for feasibility in various systems using administrative claims: use of pharmacotherapy for alcohol use disorder (AUD); use of pharmacotherapy for opioid use disorder (OUD); and continuity of care after withdrawal management services. This study adds to the initial testing of these measures in the Veteran's Health Administration (VHA) by testing the feasibility of specifications in commercial insurance data (Cigna). METHODS: Using 2014 and 2015 administrative data, the proportion of individuals with an AUD or OUD diagnosis each year who filled prescriptions or were dispensed appropriate FDA-approved pharmacotherapy. For withdrawal management follow up, the proportion with an outpatient encounter within seven days was calculated. The sensitivity of specifications was also tested. RESULTS: Rates of pharmacotherapy for AUD ranged from 6.2% to 7.6% (depending on year and specification details), and rates for OUD pharmacotherapy were 25.0% to 29.7%. Seven-day follow up rate after withdrawal management in an outpatient setting was 20.5%, and an additional 39.7% in an inpatient or residential setting. CONCLUSIONS: Application of ASAM specifications is feasible in commercial administrative data. Because of varying system needs and payment practices across health systems, measures may require adjustment for different settings. Moving forward, important focus will be on the continued refinement of these measures with the new ICD-10 coding systems, new formulations of current medications, and new payment approaches such as bundled payment.

Differences in prescription drug use in HMO and self-insured health plans.

Using pharmacy benefits manager claims data, this study analyzed how cost-management techniques including cost sharing affected enrollees in health maintenance organizations (HMOs) versus employer-sponsored fee-for-service plans. Because HMOs bear the risk of pharmaceutical costs and influence the prescribing practices of the physicians in their network, we expected different patterns of prescription use, such as proportionately more generic medications in HMOs. Also, because HMO physicians are likely to prescribe relatively more drugs for high-severity conditions, HMO enrollee demand should be less price sensitive. The impact of cost sharing was found to be significantly less for HMOs. A 5-dollar increase in copayments decreased expenditures by 16 percent in fee-for-service plans but only by 1 percent in HMOs. Furthermore, when cost sharing was set at zero, HMO plans were found to have significantly fewer and cheaper medications, resulting in lower per-enrollee medication expenditures.

Prescribing patterns of buprenorphine waivered physicians.

BACKGROUND: DATA 2000 enabled physicians with approved training to be waivered to prescribe buprenorphine for the treatment of opioid use disorders (OUD) for a limited number of patients. A rule change in 2016 increased the patient limit for certain buprenorphine waivered physicians from 100 to 275. This study examines the prescribing patterns of buprenorphine prescribers by waiver limit status (30- or 100-patient limit). METHODS: Prescription Monitoring Program (PMP) data from Ohio, California, and Maine were used to identify prescriptions for buprenorphine for OUD from January 2010 to April 2015. Analysis of prescribing patterns by prescriber waiver status included monthly patient censuses and treatment episode duration by state, year, and the frequency with which prescribers were near their respective patient limits. RESULTS: In the three states, 8638 physicians initiated 468,148 buprenorphine episodes. The adjusted mean monthly patient census was 42.9 for 100-patient waivered prescribers, 13.6 patients for 30-patient waivered prescribers, and 7.6 patients for prescribers unassociated with a waiver. Half (48.5%) of episodes were associated with 100-patient waivered prescribers, 26.9% with 30-patient waivered prescribers, and 24.4% with non-waivered prescribers. 30-patient waivered physicians were more likely to have no buprenorphine treatment episodes in a given month than 100-patient waivered prescribers. CONCLUSIONS: Most buprenorphine prescribers practice well under their current patient limit and have numerous months with no patient episodes. For the few high prescribers, increasing the maximum patient limit beyond 100 has the potential to improve access but alone may not have widespread impact unless integrated into complementary approaches toward increasing prescriber capacity.