Distribution of Abatement Funds Arising From US Opioid Litigation.

This Viewpoint discusses the settlement agreements reached against several major pharmaceutical distributors resulting from the US opioid epidemic and how those funds will be distributed amongst the states.

Effect of reductions in opioid prescribing on opioid use disorder and fatal overdose in the United States: a dynamic Markov model.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Despite prescribing declines between 2011 and 2019, opioid morbidity and mortality in the United States continued to rise during this period. We estimated the relationship between opioid prescribing, opioid use disorder (OUD) and fatal opioid overdose in the United States. DESIGN: Dynamic Markov model. SETTING: United States, using data from the National Survey on Drug Use and Health, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey and National Epidemiologic Survey on Alcohol and Related Conditions III. PARTICIPANTS: Simulated US individuals 12+ years of age from the general population or with prescription opioid medical use, prescription opioid non-medical use, illicit opioid (e.g. heroin, illicit fentanyl) use, prescription OUD, illicit OUD with a history of prior prescription opioid non-medical use or non-fatal or fatal opioid overdose. MEASUREMENTS: Active OUD cases and fatal prescription opioid overdoses. FINDINGS: Between 2010 and 2019, opioid prescribing declined 42.5%. Although fatal opioid overdoses increased by 103.2%, these reductions in opioid prescribing averted an estimated 9600 [95% uncertainty interval (UI) = 7205, 15 478] deaths starting in 2011 relative to continued prescribing at 2010 levels-and are projected to avert another 50 918 (95% UI = 38 829, 79 795) overdose deaths between 2020 and 2029. The median time from initial opioid prescription to fatal opioid overdose was 5.2 years. Of the 2.4 million (95% UI = 2.2 million, 2.7 million) individuals in the United States with estimated active OUD in 2019, 65% (95% UI = 59%, 71%) were attributable to initial opioid use occurring prior to 2011, whereas 14% (95% UI = 12%, 17%) were attributable to initial opioid use occurring between 2017 and 2019. The impact, by 2029, of additional reductions in prescribing initiated in 2020 would be more than three times greater than that of similar reductions initiated in 2025. CONCLUSIONS: Observed reductions in opioid prescribing volume in the United States from 2010 to 2019 appear to have saved approximately 9600 lives by 2019 and are anticipated to avert more than 50 000 fatal overdoses by 2029.

Modeling Mitigation Strategies to Reduce Opioid-Related Morbidity and Mortality in the US.

Importance: The US opioid epidemic is complex and dynamic, yet relatively little is known regarding its likely future impact and the potential mitigating impact of interventions to address it. Objective: To estimate the future burden of the opioid epidemic and the potential of interventions to address the burden. Design, Setting, and Participants: A decision analytic dynamic Markov model was calibrated using 2010-2018 data from the National Survey on Drug Use and Health, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, the US Census, and National Epidemiologic Survey on Alcohol and Related Conditions-III. Data on individuals 12 years or older from the US general population or with prescription opioid medical use; prescription opioid nonmedical use; heroin use; prescription, heroin, or combined prescription and heroin opioid use disorder (OUD); 1 of 7 treatment categories; or nonfatal or fatal overdose were examined. The model was designed to project fatal opioid overdoses between 2020 and 2029. Exposures: The model projected prescribing reductions (5% annually), naloxone distribution (assumed 5% reduction in case-fatality), and treatment expansion (assumed 35% increase in uptake annually for 4 years and 50% relapse reduction), with each compared vs status quo. Main Outcomes and Measures: Projected 10-year overdose deaths and prevalence of OUD. Results: Under status quo, 484 429 (95% confidence band, 390 543-576 631) individuals were projected to experience fatal opioid overdose between 2020 and 2029. Projected decreases in deaths were 0.3% with prescribing reductions, 15.4% with naloxone distribution, and 25.3% with treatment expansion; when combined, these interventions were associated with 179 151 fewer overdose deaths (37.0%) over 10 years. Interventions had a smaller association with the prevalence of OUD; for example, the combined intervention was estimated to reduce OUD prevalence by 27.5%, from 2.47 million in 2019 to 1.79 million in 2029. Model projections were most sensitive to assumptions regarding future rates of fatal and nonfatal overdose. Conclusions and Relevance: The findings of this study suggest that the opioid epidemic is likely to continue to cause tens of thousands of deaths annually over the next decade. Aggressive deployment of evidence-based interventions may reduce deaths by at least a third but will likely have less impact for the number of people with OUD.

Use and Content of Primary Care Office-Based vs Telemedicine Care Visits During the COVID-19 Pandemic in the US.

Importance: Little is known about the association between the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic and the level and content of primary care delivery in the US. Objective: To quantify national changes in the volume, type, and content of primary care delivered during the COVID-19 pandemic, especially with regard to office-based vs telemedicine encounters. Design, Setting, and Participants: Analysis of serial cross-sectional data from the IQVIA National Disease and Therapeutic Index, a 2-stage, stratified nationally representative audit of outpatient care in the US from the first calendar quarter (Q1) of 2018 to the second calendar quarter (Q2) of 2020. Main Outcomes and Measures: Visit type (office-based or telemedicine), overall and stratified by patient population and geographic region; assessment of blood pressure or cholesterol measurement; and initiation or continuation of prescription medications. Results: In the 8 calendar quarters between January 1, 2018, and December 31, 2019, between 122.4 million (95% CI, 117.3-127.5 million) and 130.3 million (95% CI, 124.7-135.9 million) quarterly primary care visits occurred in the US (mean, 125.8 million; 95% CI, 121.7-129.9 million), most of which were office-based (92.9%). In 2020, the total number of encounters decreased to 117.9 million (95% CI, 112.6-123.2 million) in Q1 and 99.3 million (95% CI, 94.9-103.8 million) in Q2, a decrease of 21.4% (27.0 million visits) from the average of Q2 levels during 2018 and 2019. Office-based visits decreased 50.2% (59.1 million visits) in Q2 of 2020 compared with Q2 2018-2019, while telemedicine visits increased from 1.1% of total Q2 2018-2019 visits (1.4 million quarterly visits) to 4.1% in Q1 of 2020 (4.8 million visits) and 35.3% in Q2 of 2020 (35.0 million visits). Decreases occurred in blood pressure level assessment (50.1% decrease, 44.4 million visits) and cholesterol level assessment (36.9% decrease, 10.2 million visits) in Q2 of 2020 compared with Q2 2018-2019 levels, and assessment was less common during telemedicine than during office-based visits (9.6% vs 69.7% for blood pressure; P < .001; 13.5% vs 21.6% for cholesterol; P < .001). New medication visits in Q2 of 2020 decreased by 26.0% (14.1 million visits) from Q2 2018-2019 levels. Telemedicine adoption occurred at similar rates among White individuals and Black individuals (19.3% vs 20.5% of patient visits, respectively, in Q1/Q2 of 2020), varied by region (low of 15.1% of visits [East North Central region], high of 26.8% of visits [Pacific region]), and was not correlated with regional COVID-19 burden. Conclusions and Relevance: The COVID-19 pandemic has been associated with changes in the structure of primary care delivery, with the content of telemedicine visits differing from that of office-based encounters.

Disparities in mortality among adults with and without diabetes by sex and race.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to examine whether the reduction in the mortality gap between individuals with and without diabetes varies by sex and race/ethnicity. METHODS: We analyzed data in adults from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) 1999-2010 and their linked mortality data through 2015. Cox proportional hazards models were used to examine the risk of all-cause and cause-specific mortality among participants with diabetes as compared to those without diabetes by sex and race/ethnicity in 1999-2004 and 2005-2010. RESULTS: The risk of all-cause mortality was significantly higher in women with diabetes compared to those without diabetes in both study periods (HR 1.6, 95% CI: 1.2, 2.2; HR 1.5, 95% CI: 1.1, 2.0). Among men, the risk of all-cause mortality was significantly higher in men with compared to men without diabetes in 1999-2004 but not in 2005-2010. There was no significant association between diabetes and CVD mortality among men in 2005-2010, while the association was significant among women in both study periods (HR 2.5, 95% CI: 1.6, 3.7; HR 2.8, 95% CI: 1.3, 5.9). The association between diabetes and all-cause mortality was similar across racial/ethnic groups in 1999-2004, but was significantly higher among non-Hispanic blacks and Mexican Americans in 2005-2010. CONCLUSIONS: Progress in reducing mortality among individuals with diabetes has been more significant among men and non-Hispanic whites. Sex and racial/ethnic disparities in mortality among individuals with diabetes still persist.

Impact of the implementation of a nurse-managed outpatient parenteral antibiotic therapy (OPAT) system in Baltimore: a case study demonstrating cost savings and reduction in re-admission rates.

Objectives: Evidence supports the safety and effectiveness of outpatient parenteral antibiotic therapy (OPAT). A registered nurse (RN)-managed multidisciplinary team OPAT model was implemented at our hospital. We evaluated the impact of the new OPAT model on readmissions during OPAT and other core OPAT processes. Methods: All potential OPAT cases from 1 November 2013 to 31 June 2017 discharged from the Johns Hopkins Bayview Medical Center were followed up in a retrospective cohort study. Relevant clinical and patient characteristics were collected for the first OPAT course per patient. The primary outcome was all-cause readmission to any facility part of the Johns Hopkins Health System within 30 days of OPAT discharge. Proportions of OPAT patients readmitted before and after the implementation of the new OPAT model were compared. A log-binomial regression was used to compare the risk of readmission, adjusted for age, sex, race/ethnicity, site of OPAT care, opioid dependence and OPAT treatment duration. Results: Five hundred and seventeen OPAT patients were included in the analysis; 51.1% were discharged after the implementation of the new OPAT model. Readmission rates decreased from 20.2% to 13.3% following the RN-managed OPAT programme (P = 0.04). The results of the adjusted model indicated that nurse management was associated with a 39% reduction in the risk of readmission (adjusted relative risk 0.61; 95% CI 0.41-0.91; P = 0.01). Our financial evaluation estimated that the reduction in readmissions achieved by the RN-managed model saved the hospital $649 416 over 15 months. Conclusions: The RN-managed OPAT programme was associated with a significant reduction in readmissions.