Buprenorphine use and courses of care for opioid use disorder treatment within the Veterans Health Administration.

BACKGROUND: Retention of patients in buprenorphine medication treatment for opioid use disorder (B-MOUD) reduces harms associated with opioid use disorder (OUD). We sought to characterize the patients receiving B-MOUD and courses of B-MOUD in a large healthcare system. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective, open cohort study of patients with OUD who either did or did not receive B-MOUD courses within the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) from January 2006 through July 2019, using VHA clinical data. We compared patients receiving or not receiving B-MOUD, characterized B-MOUD courses (e.g., length and doses), and examined persistence, across patient characteristics, over time. We used analyses for normally or non-normally distributed continuous variables, categorical data, and persistence over time (Kaplan-Meier persistence curves). RESULTS: We identified 255,726 Veterans with OUD; 40,431 (15.8%) had received 63,929 B-MOUD courses. Compared to patients with OUD without B-MOUD, patients with B-MOUD were younger, more often of white race, and had more co-morbidities. The frequency of new B-MOUD starts and prevalent B-MOUD patients ranged from 1550 and 1989 in 2007 to 8146 and 16,505 in 2018, respectively. The median duration of B-MOUD was 157 (IQR: 37-537) days for all courses and 33.8% patients had more than one course. The average proportion days covered was 90% (SD: 0.15), and the average prescribed daily dose was 13.44 (SD: 6.5). CONCLUSIONS: Within a VHA B-MOUD cohort, courses increased more than 10-fold from 2006 to 2016 with nearly half of patients experiencing multiple courses. Patient demographics seem to dictate the length of courses.

Variation in Clinical Characteristics and Longitudinal Outcomes in Individuals with Opioid Use Disorder Diagnosis Codes.

BACKGROUND: Patterns of opioid use vary, including prescribed use without aberrancy, limited aberrant use, and potential opioid use disorder (OUD). In clinical practice, similar opioid-related International Classification of Disease (ICD) codes are applied across this spectrum, limiting understanding of how groups vary by sociodemographic factors, comorbidities, and long-term risks. OBJECTIVE: (1) Examine how Veterans assigned opioid abuse/dependence ICD codes vary at diagnosis and with respect to long-term risks. (2) Determine whether those with limited aberrant use share more similarities to likely OUD vs those using opioids as prescribed. DESIGN: Longitudinal observational cohort study. PARTICIPANTS: National sample of Veterans categorized as having (1) likely OUD, (2) limited aberrant opioid use, or (3) prescribed, non-aberrant use based upon enhanced medical chart review. MAIN MEASURES: Comparison of sociodemographic and clinical factors at diagnosis and rates of age-adjusted mortality, non-fatal opioid overdose, and hospitalization after diagnosis. An exploratory machine learning analysis investigated how closely those with limited aberrant use resembled those with likely OUD. KEY RESULTS: Veterans (n = 483) were categorized as likely OUD (62.1%), limited aberrant use (17.8%), and prescribed, non-aberrant use (20.1%). Age, proportion experiencing homelessness, chronic pain, anxiety disorders, and non-opioid substance use disorders differed by group. All-cause mortality was high (44.2 per 1000 person-years (95% CI 33.9, 56.7)). Hospitalization rates per 1000 person-years were highest in the likely OUD group (831.5 (95% CI 771.0, 895.5)), compared to limited aberrant use (739.8 (95% CI 637.1, 854.4)) and prescribed, non-aberrant use (411.9 (95% CI 342.6, 490.4). The exploratory analysis reclassified 29.1% of those with limited aberrant use as having likely OUD with high confidence. CONCLUSIONS: Veterans assigned opioid abuse/dependence ICD codes are heterogeneous and face variable long-term risks. Limited aberrant use confers increased risk compared to no aberrant use, and some may already have OUD. Findings warrant future investigation of this understudied population.

Impacts of an Opioid Safety Initiative on US Veterans Undergoing Cancer Treatment.

BACKGROUND: There is limited research on how the opioid epidemic and consequent risk reduction policies have affected pain management among cancer patients. The purpose of this study was to analyze how the Opioid Safety Initiative (OSI) implemented at the Veterans Health Administration affected opioid prescribing patterns and opioid-related toxicity. METHODS: We performed an interrupted time series analysis of 42 064 opioid-naïve patients treated at the Veterans Health Administration for prostate, lung, breast, and colorectal cancer from 2011 to 2016. Segmented regression was used to evaluate the impact of the OSI on the incidence of any new opioid prescriptions, high-risk prescriptions, persistent use, and pain-related emergency department (ED) visits. We compared the cumulative incidence of adverse opioid events including an opioid-related admission or diagnosis of misuse before and after the OSI. All statistical tests were 2-sided. RESULTS: The incidence of new opioid prescriptions was 26.7% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 25.0% to 28.4%) in 2011 and increased to 50.6% (95% CI = 48.3% to 53.0%) by 2013 before OSI implementation (monthly rate of change: +3.3%, 95% CI = 1.3% to 4.2%, P < .001). After the OSI, there was a decrease in the monthly rate of change for new prescriptions (-3.4%, 95% CI = -3.9 to -2.9%, P < .001). The implementation of the OSI was associated with a decrease in the monthly rate of change of concomitant benzodiazepines and opioid prescriptions (-2.5%, 95% CI = -3.2% to -1.8%, P < .001), no statistically significant change in high-dose opioids (-1.2%, 95% CI = -3.2% to 0.9%, P = .26), a decrease in persistent opioid use (-5.7%, 95% CI = -6.8% to -4.7%, P < .001), and an increase in pain-related ED visits (+3.0%, 95% CI = 1.0% to 5.0%, P = .003). The OSI was associated with a decreased incidence of opioid-related admissions (3-year cumulative incidence: 0.9% [95% CI = 0.7% to 1.0%] vs 0.5% [95% CI = 0.4% to 0.6%], P < .001) and no statistically significant change in the incidence of opioid misuse (3-year cumulative incidence: 1.2% [95% CI = 1.0% to 1.3%] vs 1.2% [95% CI = 1.1% to 1.4%], P = .77). CONCLUSIONS: The OSI was associated with a relative decline in the rate of new, persistent, and certain high-risk opioid prescribing as well as a slight increase in the rate of pain-related ED visits. Further research on patient-centered outcomes is required to optimize opioid prescribing policies for patients with cancer.

Longitudinal within- and between-person associations of substance use, social influences, and loneliness among adolescents and emerging adults who use drugs.

Loneliness is a public health problem causing morbidity and mortality. Individuals with substance use problems are often lonelier than the general population. We evaluate the longitudinal associations between social influences, substance use, and loneliness among adolescents and young adults recruited from an urban Emergency Department (ED). We use secondary data from a natural history study of N=599 youth (ages 14-24) who used drugs at baseline and completed biannual assessments for 24 months; 58% presented to the ED for an assault-related injury and a comparison group comprised 42% presenting for other reasons. Measures assessed cannabis use, alcohol use, and loneliness. Using GEE models, we evaluated the relationships between social influences (peers, parents), substance use, and loneliness via longitudinal data, de-coupling within- and between-person effects. Men reported lower loneliness over time. At the between-person level, individuals with greater alcohol and cannabis use severity and negative peer influences had greater loneliness; positive parental influences were associated with less loneliness. At the within-person level, greater alcohol use severity, negative peer influences, and parental substance use corresponded to increases in loneliness; positive parental influences corresponded to decreases in loneliness. Youth with more severe alcohol and cannabis use had greater loneliness over time. Within individuals, peer and parental social influences were particularly salient markers of loneliness. An ED visit provides an opportunity for linkage to personalized, supportive interventions to curtail negative outcomes of substance use and loneliness.

Preoperative Opioid Use and Readmissions Following Surgery.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the association between preoperative opioid exposure and readmissions following common surgery. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Preoperative opioid use is common, but its effect on opioid-related, pain-related, respiratory-related, and all-cause readmissions following surgery is unknown. METHODS: We analyzed claims data from a 20% national Medicare sample of patients ages ≥ 65 with Medicare Part D claims undergoing surgery between January 1, 2009 and November 30, 2016. We grouped patients by the dose, duration, recency, and continuity of preoperative opioid prescription fills. We used logistic regression to examine the association between prior opioid exposure and 30-day readmissions, adjusted for patient risk factors and procedure type. RESULTS: Of 373,991 patients, 168,579 (45%) filled a preoperative opioid prescription within 12 months of surgery, ranging from minimal to chronic high use. Preoperative opioid exposure was associated with higher rate of opioid-related readmissions, compared with naive patients [low: aOR=1.63, 95% CI=1.26-2.12; high: aOR=3.70, 95% CI=2.71-5.04]. Preoperative opioid exposure was also associated with higher risk of pain-related readmissions [low: aOR=1.27, 95% CI=1.23-1.32; high: aOR=1.62, 95% CI=1.53-1.71] and respiratory-related readmissions [low: aOR=1.10, 95% CI=1.05-1.16; high: aOR=1.44, 95% CI=1.34-1.55]. Low, moderate, and high chronic preoperative opioid exposures were predictive of all-cause readmissions (low: OR 1.09, 95% CI: 1.06-1.12); high: OR 1.23, 95% CI: 1.18-1.29). CONCLUSIONS: Higher levels of preoperative opioid exposure are associated with increased risk of readmissions after surgery. These findings emphasize the importance of screening patients for preoperative opioid exposure and creating risk mitigation strategies for patients.

Comparing telemedicine to in-person buprenorphine treatment in U.S. veterans with opioid use disorder.

BACKGROUND: Telemedicine-delivered buprenorphine (tele-buprenorphine) can potentially increase access to buprenorphine for patients with opioid use disorder (OUD), especially during the COVID-19 pandemic, but we know little about use in clinical care. METHODS: This study was a retrospective national cohort study of veterans diagnosed with opioid use disorder (OUD) receiving buprenorphine treatment from the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) in fiscal years 2012-2019. The study examined trends in use of tele-buprenorphine and compared demographic and clinical characteristics in patients who received tele-buprenorphine versus those who received in-person treatment only. RESULTS: Utilization of tele-buprenorphine increased from 2.29% of buprenorphine patients in FY2012 (n = 187) to 7.96% (n = 1352) in FY2019 in VHA veterans nationally. Compared to patients receiving only in-person care, tele-buprenorphine patients were less likely to be male (AOR = 0.85, 95% CI: 0.73-0.98) or Black (AOR = 0.54, 95% CI: 0.45-0.65). Tele-buprenorphine patients were more likely to be treated in community-based outpatient clinics rather than large medical centers (AOR = 2.91, 95% CI: 2.67-3.17) and to live in rural areas (AOR = 2.12, 95% CI:1.92-2.35). The median days supplied of buprenorphine treatment was 722 (interquartile range: 322-1459) among the tele-buprenorphine patients compared to 295 (interquartile range: 67-854) among patients who received treatment in-person. CONCLUSIONS: Use of telemedicine to deliver buprenorphine treatment in VHA increased 3.5-fold between 2012 and 2019, though overall use remained low prior to COVID-19. Tele-buprenorphine is a promising modality especially when treatment access is limited. However, we must continue to understand how practitioners and patient are using telemedicine and how these patients' outcomes compare to those using in-person care.

Alcohol-involved overdose deaths in US veterans.

BACKGROUND: Alcohol-involved overdose deaths are increasing and often occur with other substances but have been minimally studied compared to other causes of overdose. METHODS: We used national Veterans Health Administration (VHA) records linked to National Death Index data from 2012 to 2018 to examine trends in alcohol-related overdose mortality. Patient characteristics and treatment receipt were compared across categories of alcohol overdose deaths (alcohol-only, alcohol+opioids which may include additional substances, and alcohol+other substances without opioids). RESULTS: From 2012-2018, 2421 Veterans died from an alcohol-involved overdose (alcohol-only: 868, alcohol+opioids: 1269, alcohol+other substances: 284). The alcohol-involved overdose rate increased 57% during this period. Compared to those who died of an alcohol-only overdose, Veterans who died from alcohol+opioids and alcohol+other substances were more likely Black or Hispanic, and to have an opioid use disorder, but less likely to live in rural areas or to be diagnosed with alcohol use disorder (AUD). Only 32.5% of those who died from alcohol-involved overdose received treatment in a substance use disorder clinic in the year preceding death, compared to 65.1% seen in mental health and 85.7% in primary care. Only 9.5% of Veterans who died from alcohol overdose received medication treatment for AUD and 24.8% received psychotherapy for AUD in the year preceding death. CONCLUSIONS: Alcohol overdose is increasing primarily related to overdoses involving opioids and other substances. Most patients did not receive any effective medication or psychotherapy treatments for AUD, suggesting further need to identify those at risk and to target treatment for this vulnerable group in healthcare settings.

Beliefs About Perioperative Opioid and Alcohol Use among Elective Surgical Patients Who Report Unhealthy Drinking: A Qualitative Study.

OBJECTIVES: Elective surgical patients with unhealthy alcohol use have unique pain management needs and addiction risk factors that are relevant to surgical preparation and recovery. This descriptive qualitative study sought to better understand patients' beliefs and behaviors related to opioid use, alcohol use, and pain management in the perioperative context. DESIGN: We conducted individual semi-structured interviews between July 2017 and March 2018. SETTING: A large Midwestern academic health system. SUBJECTS: Participants were elective surgical patients meeting unhealthy alcohol use criteria, recruited from the health system's preoperative anesthesia clinic. METHOD: Semistructured interview guides explored beliefs and behaviors relating to alcohol and opioid use, health status, and surgical care. Interview recordings were transcribed and coded for thematic analysis. RESULTS: Among 20 elective surgical patients (25% female), we identified three key themes regarding alcohol use, opioid use, and their co-use before and after surgery. First, desires and intentions to use opioids for postoperative pain management varied widely, even before opioids were prescribed. Second, some participants described alcohol as a preferred pain management strategy. Third, participants held a range of beliefs about the risks and benefits of alcohol and opioid co-use. CONCLUSIONS: Appropriate assessment of beliefs and intentions regarding opioid and alcohol use could help identify patients most vulnerable to new opioid problems and unhealthy alcohol use in the context of perioperative surgical pain. These findings have important implications for perioperative pain management.

Identifying individuals with opioid use disorder: Validity of International Classification of Diseases diagnostic codes for opioid use, dependence and abuse.

BACKGROUND: Policy evaluations and health system interventions often utilize International Classification of Diseases (ICD) codes of opioid use, dependence, and abuse to identify individuals with opioid use disorder (OUD) and assess receipt of evidence-based treatments. However, ICD codes may not map directly onto the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorder (DSM-5) OUD criteria. This study investigates the positive predictive value of ICD codes in identifying patients with OUD. METHODS: We conducted a clinical chart review on a national sample of 520 Veterans assigned ICD-9 or ICD-10 codes for opioid use, dependence, or abuse from 2012 to 2017. We extracted evidence of DSM-5 OUD criteria and opioid misuse from clinical documentation in the month preceding and three months following initial ICD code listing, and categorized patients into: 1) high likelihood of OUD, 2) limited aberrant opioid use, 3) prescribed opioid use without evidence of aberrant use, and 4) insufficient information. Positive predictive value was calculated as the percentage of individuals with these ICD codes meeting high likelihood of OUD criteria upon chart review. RESULTS: Only 57.7 % of patients were categorized as high likelihood of OUD; 16.5 % were categorized as limited aberrant opioid use, 18.9 % prescribed opioid use without evidence of aberrant use, and 6.9 % insufficient information. CONCLUSIONS: Patients assigned ICD codes for opioid use, dependence, or abuse often lack documentation of meeting OUD criteria. Many receive long-term opioid therapy for chronic pain without evidence of misuse. Robust methods of identifying individuals with OUD are crucial to improving access to clinically appropriate treatment.

Quality of Outpatient Depression Treatment in Patients With Comorbid Substance Use Disorder.

OBJECTIVE: Clinical practice guidelines recommend concurrent treatment of co-occurring depression and substance use disorders; however, the degree to which patients with substance use disorders receive guideline-concordant treatment for depression is unknown. The authors investigated the provision of guideline-concordant depression treatment to patients with and without substance use disorders in a large integrated health care system. METHODS: In a retrospective cohort study of 53,034 patients diagnosed with a depressive disorder in fiscal year 2017 in the U.S. Veterans Health Administration, the authors assessed the association of comorbid substance use disorders with guideline-concordant depression treatment, including both medication and psychotherapy, while adjusting for patient demographic and clinical characteristics. RESULTS: Guideline-concordant depression treatment was lower across metrics for patients with co-occurring depression and substance use disorders compared to those without substance use disorders. Consistent findings emerged in covariate-adjusted models of antidepressant treatment, such that patients with substance use disorders had 21% lower odds of guideline-concordant acute treatment (adjusted odds ratio=0.79, 95% CI=0.73, 0.84) and 26% lower odds of continuation of treatment (adjusted odds ratio=0.74, 95% CI=0.69, 0.79). With regard to psychotherapy, patients with co-occurring depression and substance use disorders had 13% lower odds (adjusted odds ratio=0.87, 95% CI=0.82, 0.91) of adequate acute-phase treatment and 19% lower odds (adjusted odds ratio=0.81; 95% CI=0.73, 0.89) of psychotherapy continuation. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the availability of effective treatments for depression, patients with co-occurring substance use disorders are less likely to receive guideline-concordant depression treatment. Efforts to improve the provision of care to those with co-occurring substance use disorders should focus on clinician-based interventions and use of integrated care models to improve the quality of depression treatment.

Polysubstance use and association with opioid use disorder treatment in the US Veterans Health Administration.

AIMS: To understand the role of comorbid substance use disorders (SUDs), or polysubstance use, in the treatment of opioid use disorder (OUD), this study compared patients with OUD only to those with additional SUDs and examined association with OUD treatment receipt. DESIGN, SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Retrospective national cohort study of Veterans diagnosed with OUD (n = 65 741) receiving care from the US Veterans Health Administration (VHA) in fiscal year (FY) 2017. MEASUREMENTS: Patient characteristics were compared among those diagnosed with OUD only versus those with one other SUD (OUD + 1 SUD) and with multiple SUDs (OUD + ≥ 2 SUDs). The study examined the relationship between comorbid SUDs and receipt of buprenorphine, methadone and SUD outpatient treatment during 1-year follow-up, adjusting for patient demographic characteristics and clinical conditions. FINDINGS: Among the 65 741 Veterans with OUD in FY 2017, 41.2% had OUD only, 22.9% had OUD + 1 SUD and 35.9% had OUD + ≥ 2 SUDs. Common comorbid SUDs included alcohol use disorder (41.3%), cocaine/stimulant use disorder (30.0%) and cannabis use disorder (22.4%). Adjusting for patient characteristics, patients with OUD + 1 SUD [adjusted odds ratio (aOR) = 0.87, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.82-0.93] and patients with OUD +≥ 2 SUDs (aOR = 0.65, 95% CI = 0.61-0.69) had lower odds of receiving buprenorphine compared with OUD only patients. There were also lower odds of receiving methadone for patients with OUD + 1 SUD (aOR = 0.91, 95% CI = 0.86-0.97)and for those with OUD + ≥2 SUDs (aOR = 0.79, 95% CI = 0.74-0.84). Patients with OUD + 1 SUD (aOR = 1.85, 95% CI = 1.77-1.93) and patients with OUD + ≥2 SUDs (aOR = 3.25, 95% CI = 3.103.41) were much more likely to have a SUD clinic visit. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of Veterans in the US Veterans Health Administration diagnosed with opioid use disorder appeared to have at least one comorbid substance use disorder and many have multiple substance use disorders. Despite the higher likelihood of a substance use disorder clinic visit, having a non-opioid substance use disorder is associated with lower likelihood of buprenorphine treatment, suggesting the importance of addressing polysubstance use within efforts to expand treatment for opioid use disorder.

A Research Agenda for Advancing Strategies to Improve Opioid Safety: Findings from a VHA State of the Art Conference.

US military Veterans have been disproportionately impacted by the US opioid overdose crisis. In the fall of 2019, the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) convened a state-of-the-art (SOTA) conference to develop research priorities for advancing the science and clinical practice of opioid safety, including both use of opioid analgesics and managing opioid use disorder. We present the methods and consensus recommendations from the SOTA. A core group of researchers and VA clinical stakeholders defined three areas of focus for the SOTA: managing opioid use disorder, long-term opioid therapy for pain including consideration for opioid tapering, and treatment of co-occurring pain and substance use disorders. The SOTA participants divided into three workgroups and identified key questions and seminal studies related to those three areas of focus. The strongest recommendations included testing implementation strategies in the VHA for expanding access to medication treatment for opioid use disorder, testing collaborative tapering programs for patients prescribed long-term opioids, and larger trials of behavioral and exercise/movement interventions for pain among patients with substance use disorders.

Opioid Prescribing After Opioid-related Inpatient Hospitalizations by Diagnosis: A Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Any opioid-related hospitalization is an indicator of opioid-related harm and should ideally trigger carefully monitored decreases in opioid prescribing after inpatient stays in many, if not most, cases. However, past studies on opioid prescribing after hospitalizations have largely been limited to overdose related visits. It is unclear whether prescribing is different for other opioid-related indications such as opioid dependence and abuse and how that may compare with hospitalizations for overdose. OBJECTIVE: To examine opioid-prescribing patterns before and after opioid-related hospitalizations for all opioid-related indications, not limited to overdose. RESEARCH DESIGN: Retrospective cohort analysis of Veterans Health Administration (VHA) administrative claims from 2011 to 2014. SUBJECTS: VHA patients who were hospitalized between fiscal years 2011 and 2014 and had at least 1 prescription opioid medication filled through the VHA pharmacy before their hospitalization. MEASURES: Opioid dispensing trajectories after hospitalization by opioid-related indication (ie, opioid dependence and/or abuse vs. overdose) compared with prescribing patterns for non-opioid-related hospitalizations. RESULTS: Overall, opioid dosage dropped significantly (66% for dependence/abuse, 42% for overdose, and 3% for nonopioid diagnoses; P<0.001) across all 3 categories when comparing dose 57-63 days after admission to 57-63 days before hospitalization. However, 47% of the patients remained on the same dose or increased their opioid dose at 60 days after an opioid-related hospitalization. After adjusting for covariates, patients with a primary diagnosis of dependence/abuse had higher odds of having their dose discontinued compared with those with overdose: odds ratio (OR) 2.17 (1.19-3.96). Patients with admissions for opioid dependence and/or abuse had a statistically significant higher prevalence of depression, posttraumatic stress disorder, anxiety, and substance use disorders compared with those with an opioid overdose hospitalization. CONCLUSIONS: Opioid prescribing and patient risk factors before and after opioid-related hospitalizations vary by indication for hospitalization. To reduce costs and morbidity associated with opioid-related hospitalizations, opioid deintensification efforts need to be tailored to indication for hospitalization.

Benzodiazepine Use and Misuse Among Adults in the United States.

OBJECTIVE: Goals were to determine the prevalence of benzodiazepine use (as prescribed and misuse), characterize misuse, and examine variation by age. METHODS: A cross-sectional analysis was conducted of 2015 and 2016 National Survey on Drug Use and Health data limited to adults ≥18 (N=86,186) and data from those respondents reporting benzodiazepine use (N=10,290). Measurements included past-year prescription benzodiazepine use and misuse ("any way a doctor did not direct"), substance use disorders, mental illness, and demographic characteristics. Misuse was compared between younger (18-49) and older (≥50) adults. RESULTS: A total of 30.6 million adults (12.6%) reported past-year benzodiazepine use-25.3 million (10.4%) as prescribed and 5.3 million (2.2%) misuse. Misuse accounted for 17.2% of overall use. Adults ages 50-64 had the highest prescribed use (12.9%). Those ages 18-25 had the highest misuse (5.2%), and those ages ≥65 had the lowest (.6%). Misuse and abuse of or dependence on prescription opioids or stimulants were strongly associated with benzodiazepine misuse. Benzodiazepine misuse without a prescription was the most common type of misuse, and a friend or relative was the most common source. Adults ages ≥50 were more likely than younger adults to use a benzodiazepine more often than prescribed and to use a benzodiazepine to help with sleep. CONCLUSIONS: Benzodiazepine use among U.S. adults was higher than previously reported, and misuse accounted for nearly 20% of use overall. Use by adults ages 50-64 now exceeds use by those ages ≥65. Patients also prescribed stimulants or opioids should be monitored for benzodiazepine misuse. Improved access to behavioral interventions for sleep or anxiety may reduce some misuse.

County and Physician Variation in Benzodiazepine Prescribing to Medicare Beneficiaries by Primary Care Physicians in the USA.

BACKGROUND: Physicians widely prescribe benzodiazepines (BZD) despite well-recognized harms. OBJECTIVE: To determine county and provider characteristics that predict high-intensity BZD prescribing by primary care physicians (PCPs) to Medicare beneficiaries. DESIGN: Cross-sectional analysis of the 2015 Medicare Part D Public Use Files (PUF). SUBJECTS: n = 122,054 PCPs who prescribed 37.3 billion medication days. MAIN MEASURES: Primary outcome was intensity of BZD prescribing (days prescribed/total medication days) at the county- and physician levels. PCP and county characteristics were derived from the Part D PUF, Area Health Resources Files, and County Health Rankings. Logistic regression determined the characteristics associated with high-intensity (top quartile) BZD prescribing. KEY RESULTS: Beneficiaries were prescribed over 1.2 billion days of BZD in 2015, accounting for 2.3% of all medication days prescribed in Part D. Top quartile counties had 3.1 times higher BZD prescribing than the lowest (3.4% vs. 1.1%; F = 3293.8, df = 3, p < 0.001). Adjusting for county-level demographics and health care system characteristics (including supply of mental health providers), counties with more adults with at least some college had lower odds of high-intensity prescribing (per 5% increase, adjusted odds ratio [AOR] 0.80, 99% confidence interval (CI) 0.73-0.87, p < 0.001), as did higher income counties (per US$1000 increase, AOR 0.93, CI 0.91-0.95, p < 0.001). Top quartile PCPs prescribed at 6.5 times the rate of the bottom (3.9% vs. 0.6%; F = 63,910.2, df = 3, p < 0.001). High-intensity opioid prescribing (AOR 4.18, CI 3.90-4.48, p < 0.001) was the characteristic most strongly associated with BZD prescribing. CONCLUSIONS: BZD prescribing appears to vary across counties and providers and is related to non-patient characteristics. Further work is needed to understand how such non-clinical factors drive variation.

Psychiatry and Pain Management: at the Intersection of Chronic Pain and Mental Health.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Chronic pain impacts millions of people in the USA. At the heart of the problem of chronic pain remains the complex psychosocial aspects associated with living with chronic pain. Given the overlap between chronic pain and mental health, a promising treatment approach is to improve how we integrate psychiatry into pain management. RECENT FINDINGS: Treatment of chronic pain and comorbid mental health issues requires a multidisciplinary approach. Advancements in how pain is understood, especially centralized pain, have helped inform both pharmacological and behavioral interventions for pain. Given the growing concerns about the opioid epidemic and the lack of data supporting the use of opioids for long-term pain management, new treatment approaches are needed. Psychiatrist may be uniquely suited to help address comorbid mental health disorders and addiction in the context of chronic pain management. Addressing the psychiatric needs of chronic pain patients remains challenging and there is much room to improve how we address the complex issues associated with living with chronic pain. We believe psychiatrists are an important piece of the pain management puzzle.

Opioid Overdose-the Surgeon's Role.

: With increased focus on the potential harms of surgical opioid prescribing, surgeons should be cognizant of the risk of opioid-related adverse events in their patients, including overdose. Risk factors for overdose may be more prevalent than surgeons think, and include high current opioid use, previous or existing substance use disorder, history of overdose, or certain medical comorbidities. The first step to protecting surgical patients from opioid overdose is adequate screening for risk factors; appropriate patient counseling and prudent prescribing practices can then help protect at-risk patients.

Discrepancies Between Perceived Benefit of Opioids and Self-Reported Patient Outcomes.

Objective: There is little empirical evidence supporting the long-term use of opioid therapy for chronic pain, suggesting the need to reevaluate the role of opioids in chronic pain management. Few studies have considered opioid use and opioid cessation from the perspective of the patient. Methods: This prospective structured interview study included 150 new patients seeking treatment for chronic pain at an outpatient tertiary care pain clinic. Results: Of the 150 patients, 56% (N = 84) reported current opioid use. Opioids users reported higher pain severity (t(137) = -3.75, P < 0.001), worse physical functioning (t(136) = -3.82, P < 0.001), and more symptoms of depression (t(136) = -1.98, P = 0.050) than nonusers. Among opioid users, 45.6% reported high pain (>7), 60.8% reported low functioning (>7), and 71.4% reported less than a 30% reduction in pain severity since starting opioids, suggesting that many patients are unlikely to be receiving adequate benefit. Overall, 66.3% of current opioid users reported moderate to high opioid-related difficulties on the prescribed opioids difficulties scale, and patients with depression were more likely to report greater difficulties. There was no association between helpfulness of opioids over the past month and opioid-related difficulties (r(75) = -0.07, P = 0.559), current pain severity (r(72)=0.05, P = 0.705), or current pain interference (r(72) = 0.20, P = 0.095). Conclusions: Despite clinical indicators that question the benefit, patients may continue to report that their opioids are helpful. Such discrepancies in patients' perceptions will likely pose significant barriers for implementing opioid cessation guidelines in clinical practice.

Recent cannabis use among Veterans in the United States: Results from a national sample.

BACKGROUND: Compared to civilians, little is known about cannabis use among Veterans in the general United States (US) population. This study aimed to examine the prevalence and correlates of recent medical and non-medical cannabis use among this important US sub-population. METHOD: Data came from the 2014 National Survey on Drug Use and Health. Bivariate and multivariable analyses were conducted that were weighted to account for the complex survey design. RESULTS: Approximately 9% of Veterans in the US reported past year cannabis use. Older, and female, Veterans had lower odds of past year cannabis use. Veterans who were unmarried, out of the work force, had greater functioning disability, nicotine dependence, heavy episodic alcohol use, alcohol use disorder, and drug use had greater odds of past year cannabis use. In states where medical cannabis was legal in 2014, approximately 41% of Veterans who used cannabis in the past year used medically. Those who used medically were older and less likely to engage in recent heavy episodic drinking or to meet criteria for alcohol abuse/dependence, compared to Veterans using non-medically. CONCLUSION: Compared to non-Veterans in the US general population, recent cannabis use was similar or slightly lower among Veterans. However, among those with past year use, the proportion of those using medically was more than double that of the general population. Because only non-medical cannabis use was associated with higher rates of heavy episodic alcohol use and alcohol use disorder, it may be important to address problematic alcohol consumption among this high-risk group.