ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Practice guidelines recommend nonpharmacologic and nonopioid therapies as first-line pain treatment for acute pain. However, little is known about their utilization generally and among individuals with opioid use disorder (OUD) for whom opioid and other pharmacologic therapies carry greater risk of harm. OBJECTIVE: To determine the association between a pre-existing OUD diagnosis and treatment of acute low back pain (aLBP). DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study using 2016-2019 Medicare data. PARTICIPANTS: Fee-for-service Medicare beneficiaries with a new episode of aLBP. MAIN MEASURES: The main independent variable was OUD diagnosis measured prior to the first LBP claim (i.e., index date). Using multivariable logistic regressions, we assessed the following outcomes measured within 30 days of the index date: (1) nonpharmacologic therapies (physical therapy and/or chiropractic care), and (2) prescription opioids. Among opioid recipients, we further assessed opioid dose and co-prescription of gabapentin. Analyses were conducted overall and stratified by receipt of physical therapy, chiropractic care, opioid fills, or gabapentin fills during the 6 months before the index date. KEY RESULTS: We identified 1,263,188 beneficiaries with aLBP, of whom 3.0% had OUD. Two-thirds (65.8%) did not receive pain treatments of interest at baseline. Overall, nonpharmacologic therapy receipt was less prevalent and opioid and nonopioid pharmacologic therapies were more common among beneficiaries with OUD than those without OUD. Beneficiaries with OUD had lower odds of receiving nonpharmacologic therapies (aOR = 0.62, 99%CI = 0.58-0.65) and higher odds of prescription opioid receipt (aOR = 2.24, 99%CI = 2.17-2.32). OUD also was significantly associated with increased odds of opioid doses ≥ 90 morphine milligram equivalents/day (aOR = 2.43, 99%CI = 2.30-2.56) and co-prescription of gabapentin (aOR = 1.15, 99%CI = 1.09-1.22). Similar associations were observed in stratified groups though magnitudes differed. CONCLUSIONS: Medicare beneficiaries with aLBP and OUD underutilized nonpharmacologic pain therapies and commonly received opioids at high doses and with gabapentin. Complementing the promulgation of practice guidelines with implementation science could improve the uptake of evidence-based nonpharmacologic therapies for aLBP.
Subject(s)
Analgesics, Opioid , Low Back Pain , Medicare , Opioid-Related Disorders , Pain Management , Humans , Retrospective Studies , Male , Female , United States/epidemiology , Low Back Pain/therapy , Low Back Pain/diagnosis , Low Back Pain/drug therapy , Low Back Pain/epidemiology , Aged , Analgesics, Opioid/therapeutic use , Opioid-Related Disorders/therapy , Opioid-Related Disorders/diagnosis , Opioid-Related Disorders/epidemiology , Pain Management/methods , Aged, 80 and over , Acute Pain/therapy , Acute Pain/drug therapy , Acute Pain/diagnosis , Cohort Studies , Gabapentin/therapeutic useABSTRACT
Importance: Skilled nursing facilities (SNFs) are being referred more individuals with opioid use disorder (OUD), even when their medical needs are not directly associated with OUD. Objective: To characterize factors that influence SNF admission for individuals with OUD and identify strategies for providing medications for OUD (MOUD) in SNFs. Design, Setting, and Participants: In this semistructured qualitative study, interviews were conducted with SNF administrators from 27 SNFs in Rhode Island from November 5, 2021, to April 27, 2022. Data analysis occurred from August 22, 2022, to May 31, 2023. Main Outcomes and Measures: Themes and subthemes on administrator perspectives on admissions and care for people with OUD in SNFs. Audio interviews were transcribed, coded, and analyzed using codebook thematic analysis and guided by community-engaged and participatory research principles. Results: The study included 29 participants representing 27 SNFs in Rhode Island. Participant roles were administrators (17 participants [59%]), directors of nursing (6 participants [21%]), directors of admissions (5 participants [17%]), and unit managers (1 participant [3%]). Participants described active substance use, Medicaid insurance, housing instability, and younger age as potential barriers to SNF admission for individuals with OUD. The lack of formal guidelines for OUD management, staff shortages, facility liability, state regulations, and skills and training deficits among staff were cited among challenges of effectively meeting the needs of residents with OUD. Many participants reported inadequate institutional capacity as a source of negative outcomes for people with OUD yet expressed their concerns by characterizing individuals with OUD as potentially violent, nonadherent, or likely to bring undesirable elements into facilities. Participants also shared strategies they used to better serve residents with OUD, including providing transportation to support group meetings in the community, delivery in advance of resident arrival of predosed methadone, and telemedicine through the state's hotline to prescribe buprenorphine. Conclusions and Relevance: In this qualitative study of administrator perspectives about admissions and care for individuals with OUD in SNFs, gaps in institutional capacity overlapped with stigmatizing beliefs about OUD; such beliefs perpetuate discrimination of individuals with OUD. Adequate SNF funding and staffing combined with OUD-specific interventions (eg, antistigma training, community partnerships for MOUD and recovery support) could incentivize SNFs to serve individuals with OUD and facilitate OUD care consistent with practice guidelines.
Subject(s)
Buprenorphine , Opioid-Related Disorders , United States , Humans , Skilled Nursing Facilities , Hospitalization , Opioid-Related Disorders/epidemiology , MethadoneABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: To investigate disparities in admissions to highly rated skilled nursing facilities (SNFs) between Medicare beneficiaries with and without opioid use disorder (OUD). DESIGN: Nationwide, retrospective observational cohort. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Medicare Fee-for-Service beneficiaries aged ≥18 years admitted to SNFs following hospitalization during 2016-2020 (n = 30,922 with OUD and n = 137,454 without OUD). METHODS: Data used were 100% Medicare inpatient claims, nursing home administrative databases, and Nursing Home Compare. We identified hospitalized patients with and without OUD and matched them on age, sex, Part D low-income subsidy (LIS), and residential county. We compared the overall and component (quality, staffing, and health inspections) star ratings of SNFs that beneficiaries entered. Beneficiary-level regression models were conducted adjusting for race and ethnicity, Medicare-Medicaid dual status, comorbidity score, hospital length of stay, and state and year fixed effects. RESULTS: The overall study sample had a mean (SD) age of 71.4 (11.4) years, 63.9% were female, and 57.4% had LIS. Among beneficiaries with OUD, 50.3% entered SNFs with above-average (4 or 5) overall rating compared with 51.3% among those without OUD. Distributions of above-average ratings among beneficiaries with and without OUD were as follows: 63.9% vs 62.2% for quality, 32.8% vs 34.9% for health inspections, and 46.2% vs 45.0% for staffing, respectively. Adjusted regression models indicated that beneficiaries with OUD were less likely to be admitted to facilities with above-average overall (OR 0.90, 95% CI 0.87-0.92), health inspection (OR 0.90, 95% CI 0.88-0.92), and staffing (OR 0.91, 95% CI 0.89-0.94) ratings compared with beneficiaries without OUD, whereas quality (OR 0.98, 95% CI 0.94-1.01) ratings did not differ. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: Despite mixed results on component ratings, our findings suggest a concerning disparity in the overall quality of SNFs admitting Medicare beneficiaries with OUD. Enhancing equitable access to high-quality SNF care for individuals with OUD is imperative amid rising demand and legal protections under the American Disabilities Act.