RESUMO
External validity is an important part of epidemiologic research. To validly estimate effects in specific external target populations using a chosen effect measure (ie, "transport"), some methods require that one account for all effect measure modifiers (EMMs). However, little is known about how including other variables that are not EMMs (ie, non-EMMs) in adjustment sets affects estimates. Using simulations, we evaluated how inclusion of non-EMMs affected estimation of the transported risk difference (RD) by assessing the impacts of covariates that (1) differ (or not) between the trial and the target, (2) are associated with the outcome (or not), and (3) modify the RD (or not). We assessed variation and bias when covariates with each possible combination of these factors were used to transport RDs using outcome modeling or inverse odds weighting. Inclusion of variables that differed in distribution between the populations but were non-EMMs reduced precision, regardless of whether they were associated with the outcome. However, non-EMMs associated with selection did not amplify bias resulting from omission of necessary EMMs. Including all variables associated with the outcome may result in unnecessarily imprecise estimates when estimating treatment effects in external target populations.
Assuntos
Viés , Humanos , Simulação por ComputadorRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Incarceration is associated with negative impacts on mental health. Probation, a form of community supervision, has been lauded as an alternative. However, the effect of probation versus incarceration on mental health is unclear. Our objective was to estimate the impact on mental health of reducing sentencing severity at individuals' first adult criminal-legal encounter. METHODS: We used the US National Longitudinal Survey on Youth 1997, a nationally representative dataset of youth followed into their mid-thirties. Restricting to those with an adult encounter (arrest, charge alone or no sentence, probation, incarceration), we used parametric g-computation to estimate the difference in mental health at age 30 (Mental Health Inventory-5) if (1) everyone who received incarceration for their first encounter had received probation and (2) everyone who received probation had received no sentence. RESULTS: Among 1835 individuals with adult encounters, 19% were non-Hispanic Black and 65% were non-Hispanic White. Median age at first encounter was 20. Under hypothetical interventions to reduce sentencing, we did not see better mental health overall (Intervention 1, incarceration to probation: RD = -0.01; CI = -0.02, 0.01; Intervention 2, probation to no sentence: RD = 0.00; CI = -0.01, 0.01) or when stratified by race. CONCLUSION: Among those with criminal-legal encounters, hypothetical interventions to reduce sentencing, including incremental sentencing reductions, were not associated with improved mental health. Future work should consider the effects of preventing individuals' first criminal-legal encounter.
Assuntos
Jurisprudência , Saúde Mental , Prisioneiros , Adolescente , Adulto , Humanos , Etnicidade , Estudos Longitudinais , Brancos , Negro ou Afro-Americano , Adulto Jovem , Prisioneiros/psicologiaRESUMO
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Extended release buprenorphine injection (INJ-BUP) has been available in the United States since 2018. INJ-BUP has the potential to positively impact opioid use disorder (OUD) treatment outcomes by providing additional treatment options . As one of the largest payers of OUD treatment in the US, Medicaid coverage is important for access and uptake of INJ-BUP. Uptake of INJ-BUP among Medicaid beneficiaries has not been described since 2019 and variation in uptake by state has not previously been explored. We aimed to measure prescribing of INJ-BUP for Medicaid beneficiaries since 2018, nationwide and by state. METHODS: We analyzed State Drug Utilization Data from 2017 to 2022 and calculated the number of prescription fills for INJ-BUP and oral buprenorphine paid by Medicaid. To compare across states, we calculated the number of prescription fills per 100 Medicaid beneficiaries treated for OUD using data from Transformed Medicaid Statistical Information System Substance Use Disorder (T-MSIS SUD) Data Books. Data sources are publicly available. RESULTS: The number of prescription fills for INJ-BUP paid by Medicaid increased from 4322 (0.1% of all buprenorphine prescription fills) in 2018 to 186 861 (2.0%) in 2022. Each year the increase in fills exceeded the prior year change, indicating accelerating uptake. There was notable variability across states. CONCLUSIONS: The number of extended release buprenorphine injection prescriptions among US Medicaid beneficiaries treated for opioid use disorder increased from over 4000 prescriptions in 2018 to over 185 000 in 2022 but uptake is much less than observed in other countries over shorter time periods.
RESUMO
M-estimation is a statistical procedure that is particularly advantageous for some comon epidemiological analyses, including approaches to estimate an adjusted marginal risk contrast (i.e. inverse probability weighting and g-computation) and data fusion. In such settings, maximum likelihood variance estimates are not consistent. Thus, epidemiologists often resort to bootstrap to estimate the variance. In contrast, M-estimation allows for consistent variance estimates in these settings without requiring the computational complexity of the bootstrap. In this paper, we introduce M-estimation and provide four illustrative examples of implementation along with software code in multiple languages. M-estimation is a flexible and computationally efficient estimation procedure that is a powerful addition to the epidemiologist's toolbox.
Assuntos
Epidemiologistas , Idioma , Humanos , Probabilidade , Software , Modelos Estatísticos , Simulação por ComputadorRESUMO
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Extended-release naltrexone (XR-NTX) and sublingual buprenorphine (SL-BUP) are both approved for opioid use disorder (OUD) treatment in any medical setting. We aimed to compare the real-world effectiveness of XR-NTX and SL-BUP. DESIGN AND SETTING: This was an observational active comparator, new user cohort study of Medicaid claims records for patients in New Jersey and California, USA, 2016-19. PARTICIPANTS/CASES: The participants were adult Medicaid patients aged 18-64 years who initiated XR-NTX or SL-BUP for maintenance treatment of OUD and did not use medications for OUD in the 90 days before initiation. Our cohort included 1755 XR-NTX and 9886 SL-BUP patients. MEASUREMENTS: We examined two outcomes up to 180 days after medication initiation: (1) composite of medication discontinuation and death and (2) composite of overdose and death. FINDINGS: In adjusted analyses, treatment with XR-NTX was more likely to result in discontinuation or death by the end of follow-up than treatment with SL-BUP: cumulative risk 75.9% [95% confidence interval (CI) = 73.9%, 77.9%] versus 62.2% (95% CI = 61.2%, 63.2%), respectively (risk difference = 13.7 percentage points, 95% CI = 11.4, 16.0). There was minimal difference in the cumulative risk of overdose or death by the end of follow-up: XR-NTX 3.9% (95% CI = 3.0%, 4.8%) versus SL-BUP 3.3% (95% CI = 2.9%, 3.7%); risk difference = 0.5 percentage points, 95% CI = -0.4, 1.5. Results were consistent across sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSIONS: Medicaid patients in California and New Jersey, USA, receiving treatment for opioid use disorder stayed in treatment longer on sublingual buprenorphine than on extended-release naltrexone, but the risk of overdose was similar. Most patients in this study discontinued medication within 6 months, regardless of which medication was initiated.
RESUMO
Aims: To compare the real-world effectiveness of extended release naltrexone (XR-NTX) and sublingual buprenorphine (SL-BUP) for the treatment of opioid use disorder (OUD). Design: An observational active comparator, new user cohort study. Setting: Medicaid claims records for patients in New Jersey and California, 2016-2019. Participants/Cases: Adult Medicaid patients aged 18-64 years who initiated XR-NTX or SL-BUP for maintenance treatment of OUD and did not use medications for OUD in the 90-days before initiation. Comparators: New initiation with XR-NTX versus SL-BUP for the treatment of OUD. Measurements: We examined two outcomes up to 180 days after medication initiation, 1) composite of medication discontinuation and death, and 2) composite of overdose and death. Findings: Our cohort included 1,755 XR-NTX and 9,886 SL-BUP patients. In adjusted analyses, treatment with XR-NTX was more likely to result in discontinuation or death by the end of follow-up than treatment with SL-BUP: cumulative risk 76% (95% confidence interval [CI] 75%, 78%) versus 62% (95% CI 61%, 63%), respectively (risk difference 14 percentage points, 95% CI 13, 16). There was minimal difference in the cumulative risk of overdose or death by the end of follow-up: XR-NTX 3.8% (95% CI 2.9%, 4.7%) versus SL-BUP 3.3% (95% 2.9%, 3.7%); risk difference 0.5 percentage points, 95%CI -0.5, 1.5. Results were consistent across sensitivity analyses. Conclusions: Longer medication retention is important because risks of negative outcomes are elevated after discontinuation. Our results support selection of SL-BUP over XR-NTX. However, most patients discontinued medication by 6 months indicating that more effective tools are needed to improve medication retention, particularly after initiation with XR-NTX, and to identify which patients do best on which medication.
RESUMO
INTRODUCTION: People with chronic pain are at increased risk of opioid misuse. Less is known about the unique risk conferred by each pain management treatment, as treatments are typically implemented together, confounding their independent effects. This study estimated the extent to which pain management treatments were associated with risk of opioid use disorder (OUD) for those with chronic pain, controlling for baseline demographic and clinical confounding variables and holding other pain management treatments at their observed levels. METHODS: Data were analyzed in 2024 from 2 chronic pain subgroups within a cohort of non-pregnant Medicaid patients aged 35-64 years, 2016-2019, from 25 states: those with (1) chronic pain and physical disability (CPPD) (N=6,133) or (2) chronic pain without disability (CP) (N=67,438). Nine pain management treatments were considered: prescription opioid (1) dose and (2) duration; (3) number of opioid prescribers; opioid co-prescription with (4) benzo- diazepines, (5) muscle relaxants, and (6) gabapentinoids; (7) nonopioid pain prescription, (8) physical therapy, and (9) other pain treatment modality. The outcome was OUD risk. RESULTS: Having opioids co-prescribed with gabapentin or benzodiazepine was statistically significantly associated with a 37-45% increased OUD risk for the CP subgroup. Opioid dose and duration also were significantly associated with increased OUD risk in this subgroup. Physical therapy was significantly associated with an 18% decreased risk of OUD in the CP subgroup. DISCUSSION: Coprescription of opioids with either gabapentin or benzodiazepines may substantially increase OUD risk. More positively, physical therapy may be a relatively accessible and safe pain management strategy.