Prescribing Benzodiazepines and Opioids and Clinical Characteristics Associated With 30-Day Hospital Return in Patients Aged ≥75 Years: Secondary Data Analysis.

PURPOSE: The current study compared prevalence of opioid or benzodiazepine (BZD) prescription and co-prescription of opioids and BZD at discharge and return to a community hospital within 30 days, as well as identified clinical characteristics associated with hospital return in patients aged ≥75 years. METHOD: A secondary analysis of a database created during implementation of the Safe Transitions for At Risk Patients program at a 400-bed community teaching hospital in south Florida was conducted. Multivariable logistic regression analyses were performed to identify significant demographic and clinical characteristics associated with return to the hospital within 30 days of discharge. RESULTS: A total of 24,262 participants (52.6% women) with a mean age of 85.3 (SD = 6.42) years were included. More than 20% in each central nervous system prescription group (i.e., opioids only, BZD only, opioids and BZD) returned to the hospital within 30 days of discharge. Demographic and chronic conditions (e.g., congestive heart failure, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, diabetes) and poly-pharmacy were significant factors of a 30-day return to the hospital. CONCLUSION: Findings highlight the importance of hospital nurses' role in identifying high-risk patients, educating patients and caregivers, monitoring them closely, communicating with primary care physicians and specialists, and conducting intensive follow up via telephone to avoid 30-day rehospitalization. [Journal of Gerontological Nursing, 50(4), 25-33.].

Opioid utilization after orthopaedic trauma hospitalization among Medicaid-insured adults.

Opioids are vital to pain management and sedation after trauma-related hospitalization. However, there are many confounding clinical, social, and environmental factors that exacerbate pain, post-injury care needs, and receipt of opioid prescriptions following orthopaedic trauma. This retrospective study sought to characterize differences in opioid prescribing and dosing in a national Medicaid eligible sample from 2010-2018. The study population included adults, discharged after orthopaedic trauma hospitalization, and receiving an opioid prescription within 30 days of discharge. Patients were identified using the International Classification of Diseases (ICD-9; ICD-10) codes for inpatient diagnosis and procedure. Filled opioid prescriptions were identified from National Drug Codes and converted to morphine milligram equivalents (MME). Opioid receipt and dosage (e.g., morphine milligram equivalents [MME]) were examined as the main outcomes using regressions and analyzed by year, sex, race/ethnicity, residence rurality-urbanicity, and geographic region. The study population consisted of 86,091 injured Medicaid-enrolled adults; 35.3% received an opioid prescription within 30 days of discharge. Male patients (OR = 1.12, 95% CI: 1.07-1.18) and those between 31-50 years of age (OR = 1.15, 95% CI: 1.08-1.22) were found to have increased odds ratio of receiving an opioid within 30 days of discharge, compared to female and younger patients, respectively. Patients with disabilities (OR = 0.75, 95% CI: 0.71-0.80), prolonged hospitalizations, and both Black (OR = 0.87, 95% CI: 0.83-0.92) and Hispanic patients (OR = 0.72, 95% CI: 0.66-0.77), relative to white patients, had lower odds ratio of receiving an opioid prescription following trauma. Additionally, Black and Hispanic patients received lower prescription doses compared to white patients. Individuals hospitalized in the Southeastern United States and those between the ages of 51-65 age group were found to be prescribed lower average daily MME. There were significant variations in opioid prescribing practices by race, sex, and region. National guidelines for use of opioids and other pain management interventions in adults after trauma hospitalization may help limit practice variation and reduce implicit bias and potential harms in outpatient opioid usage.

Understanding antibiotic knowledge, attitudes, and practices: a cross-sectional study in physicians from a Colombian region, 2023.

BACKGROUND: Antibiotic resistance has been identified as a global health threat. Knowledge, attitudes, and inappropriate prescription practices of antibiotics by physicians play a crucial role in this problem. In Colombia, research addressing this issue is scarce. METHODS: A cross-sectional study involving 258 physicians was conducted. A scale with questions on sociodemographic aspects, level of education, satisfaction with antibiotic education received, and knowledge, attitudes, and practices was administered. The scale was designed for each item to be analyzed individually or as a total score ranging from 0 to 100 (0 being the lowest and 100 the highest). RESULTS: 31.5% of physicians rated the education received on antibiotics as fair to poor. The knowledge score was 80.1 (IQR 70.5-87.5); however, 25.2% agreed to some extent that amoxicillin is useful in treating most respiratory infections, and 15% agreed that antibiotics are effective in treating upper respiratory infections. Attitudes scored 80.2 (IQR 75.0-86.5), with 99% stating that bacterial resistance is a public health problem in Colombia, but only 56.9% considering it a problem affecting their daily practice. Practices scored 75.5 (IQR 68.8-81.2), and 71.7% affirmed that if they refuse to prescribe antibiotics to a patient who does not need them, the patient can easily obtain them from another physician. General practitioners were found to have lower scores in all three indices evaluated. CONCLUSION: The study reveals enduring misconceptions and concerning practices in antibiotic prescription, particularly among general practitioners. Enhancing knowledge necessitates the implementation of continuous medical education programs that focus on updated antibiotic guidelines, and resistance patterns. Fostering positive attitudes requires a culture of trust and collaboration among healthcare professionals. Practical enhancements can be realized through the establishment of evidence-based prescribing guidelines and the integration of regular feedback mechanisms. Moreover, advocating for the inclusion of antimicrobial stewardship principles in medical curricula is crucial, emphasizing the significance of responsible antibiotic use early in medical education.

Patterns of Care for Medicare Beneficiaries With Metastatic Prostate Cancer.

INTRODUCTION: Therapeutic options for men with metastatic prostate cancer have increased in the past decade. We studied recent treatment patterns for men with metastatic prostate cancer and how treatment patterns have changed over time. METHODS: Using the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results‒Medicare database, we identified fee-for-service Medicare beneficiaries who either were diagnosed with metastatic prostate cancer or developed metastases following diagnosis, as indicated by the presence of claims with diagnoses codes for metastatic disease, between 2007 and 2017. We evaluated treatment patterns using claims. RESULTS: We identified 29,800 men with metastatic disease, of whom 4721 (18.8%) had metastatic disease at their initial diagnosis. The mean age was 77 years, and 77.9% of patients were non-Hispanic White. The proportion receiving antineoplastic agents within 3 years of the index date increased over time (from 9.7% in 2007 to 25.9% in 2017; P < .001). Opioid use within 3 years of prostate cancer diagnosis was stable during 2007 to 2013 (around 73%) but decreased through 2017 to 65.5% (P < .001). Patients diagnosed during 2015 to 2017 had longer median survival (32.6 months) compared to those diagnosed during 2007 to 2010 (26.6 months; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Most metastatic prostate cancer patients do not receive life-prolonging antineoplastic therapies. Improved adoption of effective cancer therapies when appropriate may increase length and quality of survival among metastatic prostate cancer patients.

Prescription opioid dispensing patterns among patients with schizophrenia or bipolar disorder.

BACKGROUND: Patients with schizophrenia (SZ) or bipolar disorder (BD) may have increased risk of complications from prescribed opioids, including opioid-induced respiratory depression. We compared prescription opioid pain medication dispensing for patients with SZ or BD versus controls over 5 years to assess dispensing trends. METHODS: This retrospective, observational study analysed US claims data from the IBM® MarketScan® Commercial and Multi-State Medicaid databases for individuals aged 18-64 years with prevalent SZ or BD for years 2015-2019 compared with age- and sex-matched controls. Baseline characteristics, comorbidities, and medication use were assessed. Proportions of individuals dispensed prescription opioids chronically (ie, ≥70 days over a 90-day period or ≥ 6 prescriptions annually) or nonchronically (≥1 prescription, chronic definition not met) were assessed. RESULTS: In 2019, the Commercial and Medicaid databases contained records for 4773 and 30,179 patients with SZ and 52,780 and 63,455 patients with BD, respectively. Patients with SZ or BD had a higher prevalence of comorbidities, including pain, versus controls in each analysis year. From 2015 to 2019, among commercially insured patients with SZ, chronic opioid-dispensing proportions decreased from 6.1% (controls: 2.7%) to 2.3% (controls: 1.2%) and, for patients with BD, from 11.4% (controls: 2.7%) to 6.4% (controls: 1.6%). Chronic opioid dispensing declined in Medicaid-covered patients with SZ from 15.0% (controls: 14.7%) to 6.7% (controls: 6.0%) and, for patients with BD, from 27.4% (controls: 12.0%) to 12.4% (controls: 4.7%). Among commercially insured patients with SZ, nonchronic opioid dispensing decreased from 15.5% (controls: 16.4%) to 10.7% (controls: 11.0%) and, for patients with BD, from 26.1% (controls: 17.5%) to 20.0% (controls: 12.2%). In Medicaid-covered patients with SZ, nonchronic opioid dispensing declined from 22.5% (controls: 24.4%) to 15.1% (controls: 12.7%) and, for patients with BD, from 32.3% (controls: 25.9%) to 24.6% (controls: 13.6%). CONCLUSIONS: The proportions of individuals dispensed chronic or nonchronic opioid medications each year were similar between commercially and Medicaid-insured patients with SZ versus controls and were higher for patients with BD versus controls. From 2015 to 2019, the proportions of individuals who were dispensed prescription opioids chronically or nonchronically decreased for patients with SZ or BD and controls.

National Trends and Predictors of Opioid Administration in Patients Presenting With Abdominal Pain to the Emergency Department (2010-2018).

Given the current opioid crisis, in this study, we assess the national trend and factors associated with opioid administration for patients presenting to the emergency department with abdominal pain. This is a retrospective cross-sectional study conducted using the National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Care Survey from 2010 to 2018. Weighted multiple logistic regression was applied to assess the independent factors associated with opioid administration in the emergency department. Trends of opioid administration were evaluated using the linear trend analysis. There were an estimated total of 100,925,982 emergency department visits for abdominal pain. Overall, opioid was administered in 16.8% of visits. Age less than 25 years was associated with lower odds of receiving opioids. Patients living in the Northeast had the lower odds of receiving opioids (odds ratio [OR] = 0.82, p = .006) than patients living in the Midwest. Patients in the West had the highest odds of receiving opioids (OR = 1.16, p = .01). Non-Hispanic White patients had higher odds of opioid administration (OR = 1.29, p < .001). Trend analysis demonstrated a statistically significant reduction in opioid administration. From 2010 to 2018, opioid administration has approximately decreased in half. Living in the West and the non-Hispanic White racial group were the significant factors associated with a higher risk of opioid administration.

County-level factors associated with a mismatch between opioid overdose mortality and availability of opioid treatment facilities.

BACKGROUND: Opioid overdose deaths in the United States remain a major public health crisis. Little is known about counties with high rates of opioid overdose mortality but low availability of opioid use disorder (OUD) treatment facilities. We sought to identify characteristics of United States (US) counties with high rates of opioid overdose mortality and low rates of opioid treatment facilities. METHODS: Rates of overdose mortality from 3,130 US counties were compared with availability of opioid treatment facilities that prescribed or allowed medications for OUD (MOUD), from 2018-2019. The outcome variable, "risk-availability mismatch" county, was a binary indicator of a high rate (above national average) of opioid overdose mortality with a low (below national average) rate of opioid treatment facilities. Covariates of interest included county-level sociodemographics and rates of insurance, unemployment, educational attainment, poverty, urbanicity, opioid prescribing, depression, heart disease, Gini index, and Theil index. Multilevel logistic regression, accounting for the clustering of counties within states, was used to determine associations with being a "risk-availability mismatch" county. RESULTS: Of 3,130 counties, 1,203 (38.4%) had high rates of opioid overdose mortality. A total of 1,098 counties (35.1%) lacked a publicly-available opioid treatment facility in 2019. In the adjusted model, counties with an additional 1% of: white residents (odds ratio, OR, 1.02; 95% CI, 1.01-1.03), unemployment (OR, 1.11; 95% CI, 1.05-1.19), and residents without insurance (OR, 1.04; 95% CI, 1.01-1.08) had increased odds of being a mismatch county. Counties that were metropolitan (versus non-metropolitan) had an increased odds of being a mismatch county (OR, 1.85; 95% CI, 1.45-2.38). CONCLUSION: Assessing mismatch between treatment availability and need provides useful information to characterize counties that require greater public health investment. Interventions to reduce overdose mortality are unlikely to be effective if they do not take into account diverse upstream factors, including sociodemographics, disease burden, and geographic context of communities.

Survey on the current usage of ultrasound-guided procedures in Korean Medicine Clinics and Hospitals.

Ultrasound-guidance is applied during the administration of Korean medicine (KM) interventions to improve the safety and effectiveness of the interventions. Although many case series and reports on the use of ultrasound-guided KM interventions have been reported, no study has investigated the current use of ultrasound-guidance in clinical practice by doctors of Korean medicine (KMDs). An online survey was conducted with questions examining the status of ultrasound-guidance usage among KMDs practicing in various KM clinical settings. Survey responses from 335 KMDs were collected. Ultrasound started to be widely used in the clinical practice of KM since 2022. The primary objective of using ultrasound-guidance was "To improve the accuracy and efficacy" by 54.6%. Ultrasound-guidance was most frequently applied for shoulder joint diseases, and pharmacopuncture was the most frequently used intervention (76.1% and 90.4%, respectively). The respondents reported that effectiveness could be enhanced the most in nerve entrapment syndromes and especially when used in shoulder joints. Over 90% of KMDs responded that the safety and efficacy of treatment, specialty, and patients' satisfaction were improved after adopting ultrasound-guidance. Moreover, 94.9% of KMDs agreed with the necessity for reimbursement of ultrasound-guidance in KM under national health insurance coverage. Most KMDs responded that they had positive perceptions regarding the clinical use of ultrasound-guidance in KM in terms of treatment effects, safety, and patient satisfaction, and the need for national health insurance coverage of the service. Our findings may provide practice-based evidence for conducting clinical studies.

[Reassessment of practice of Chinese surgeons since introduction of the watch and wait strategy after neoadjuvant therapy for rectal cancer].

Objective: To investigate perspectives and changes in treatment selection by Chinese surgeons since introduction of the watch-and-wait approach after neoadjuvant therapy for rectal cancer. Methods: A cross-sectional survey was conducted using a questionnaire distributed through the "Wenjuanxing" online survey platform. The survey focused on the recognition and practices of Chinese surgeons regarding the strategy of watch-and-wait after neoadjuvant therapy for rectal cancer and was disseminated within the China Watch-and-Wait Database (CWWD) WeChat group. This group targets surgeons of deputy chief physician level and above in surgical, radiotherapy, or internal medicine departments of nationally accredited tumor-specialist or comprehensive hospitals (at provincial or municipal levels) who are involved in colorectal cancer diagnosis and treatment. From 13 to 16 December 2023, 321 questionnaires were sent with questionnaire links in the CWWD WeChat group. The questionnaires comprised 32 questions encompassing: (1) basic physician characteristics (including surgical volume); (2) assessment methods and criteria for clinical complete response (cCR); (3) patients eligible for watch-and-wait; (4) neoadjuvant therapies and other measures for achieving cCR; (5) willingness to implement watch-and-wait and factors influencing that willingness; (6) risks and monitoring of watch-and-wait; (7) subsequent treatment and follow-up post watch-and-wait; (8) suggestions for development of the CWWD. Descriptive statistics were employed for data analysis, with intergroup comparisons conducted using the χ2 or Fisher's exact probability tests. Results: The response rate was 31.5%, comprising 101 responses from the 321 individuals in the WeChat group. Respondents comprised 101 physicians from 70 centers across 23 provinces, municipalities, and autonomous regions nationwide, 85.1% (86/101) of whom represented provincial tertiary hospitals. Among the respondents, 87.1% (88/101) had implemented the watch-and-wait strategy. The approval rate (65.6%, 21/32) and proportion of patients often informed (68.8%, 22/32) were both significantly higher for doctors in oncology hospitals than for those in general hospitals (27.7%, 18/65; 32.4%, 22/68) (χ2=12.83, P<0.001; χ2=11.70, P=0.001, respectively). The most used methods for diagnosing cCR were digital rectal examination (90.1%, 91/101), colonoscopy (91.1%, 92/101), and rectal T2-weighted magnetic resonance imaging (86.1%, 87/101). Criteria used to identify cCR comprised absence of a palpable mass on digital rectal examination (87.1%, 88/101), flat white scars or new capillaries on colonoscopy (77.2%, 78/101), absence of evident tumor signals on rectal T2-weighted sequences or T2WI low signals or signals equivalent to the intestinal wall (83.2%, 84/101), and absence of tumor hyperintensity on diffusion-weighted imaging with no corresponding hypointensity on apparent diffusion coefficient maps (66.3%, 67/101). As for selection of neoadjuvant regimen and assessment of cCR, 57.4% (58/101) of physicians preferred a long course of radiotherapy with or without induction and/or consolidation capecitabine + oxaliplatin, whereas 25.7% (26/101) preferred immunotherapy in combination with chemotherapy and concurrent radiotherapy. Most (96.0%, 97/101) physicians believed that the primary lesion should be assessed ≤12 weeks after completion of radiotherapy. Patients were frequently informed about the possibility of achieving cCR after neoadjuvant therapy and the strategy of watch-and-wait by 43.6% (44/101) of the responding physicians and 38.6% (39/101) preferred watch-and-wait for patients who achieved cCR or near cCR after neoadjuvant therapy for rectal cancer. Capability for multiple follow-up evaluations (70.3%, 71/101) was a crucial factor influencing physicians' choice of watch-and-wait after cCR. The proportion who patients who did not achieve cCR and underwent surgical treatment was lower in provincial tertiary hospitals (74.2%, 23/31) than in provincial general hospitals (94.5%, 52/55) and municipal hospitals (12/15); these differences are statistically significant (χ2=7.43, P=0.020). The difference between local recurrence and local regrowth was understood by 88.1% (89/101) of respondents and 87.2% (88/101) agreed with monitoring every 3 months for 5 years. An increase in local excision or puncture rates to reduce organ resections in patients with pCR was proposed by 64.4% (65/101) of respondents. Conclusion: Compared with the results of a previous survey, Chinese surgeons' awareness of the watch-and-wait concept has improved significantly. Oncologists in oncology hospitals are more aware of the concept of watch-and-wait.

Provider Perceptions of an Electronic Health Record Prostate Cancer Screening Tool.

OBJECTIVES: We conducted a focus group to assess the attitudes of primary care physicians (PCPs) toward prostate-specific antigen (PSA)-screening algorithms, perceptions of using decision support tools, and features that would make such tools feasible to implement. METHODS: A multidisciplinary team (primary care, urology, behavioral sciences, bioinformatics) developed the decision support tool that was presented to a focus group of 10 PCPs who also filled out a survey. Notes and audio-recorded transcripts were analyzed using Thematic Content Analysis. RESULTS: The survey showed that PCPs followed different guidelines. In total, 7/10 PCPs agreed that engaging in shared decision-making about PSA screening was burdensome. The majority (9/10) had never used a decision aid for PSA screening. Although 70% of PCPs felt confident about their ability to discuss PSA screening, 90% still felt a need for a provider-facing platform to assist in these discussions. Three major themes emerged: (1) confirmatory reactions regarding the importance, innovation, and unmet need for a decision support tool embedded in the electronic health record; (2) issues around implementation and application of the tool in clinic workflow and PCPs' own clinical bias; and (3) attitudes/reflections regarding discrepant recommendations from various guideline groups that cause confusion. CONCLUSION: There was overwhelmingly positive support for the need for a provider-facing decision support tool to assist with PSA-screening decisions in the primary care setting. PCPs appreciated that the tool would allow flexibility for clinical judgment and documentation of shared decision-making. Incorporation of suggestions from this focus group into a second version of the tool will be used in subsequent pilot testing.

New opioid prescription claims and their clinical indications: results from health administrative data in Quebec, Canada, over 14 years.

OBJECTIVES: Describe new opioid prescription claims, their clinical indications and annual trends among opioid naïve adults covered by the Quebec's public drug insurance plan (QPDIP) for the fiscal years 2006/2007-2019/2020. DESIGN AND SETTING: A retrospective observational study was conducted using data collected between 2006/2007 and 2019/2020 within the Quebec Integrated Chronic Disease Surveillance System, a linkage administrative data. PARTICIPANTS: A cohort of opioid naïve adults and new opioid users was created for each study year (median number=2 263 380 and 168 183, respectively, over study period). INTERVENTION: No. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE AND ANALYSES: A new opioid prescription was defined as the first opioid prescription claimed by an opioid naïve adult during a given fiscal year. The annual incidence proportion for each year was then calculated and standardised for age. A hierarchical algorithm was built to identify the most likely clinical indication for this prescription. Descriptive and trend analyses were performed. RESULTS: There was a 1.7% decrease of age-standardised annual incidence proportion during the study period, from 7.5% in 2006/2007 to 5.8% in 2019/2020. The decrease was highest after 2016/2017, reaching 5.5% annual percentage change. Median daily dose and days' supply decreased from 27 to 25 morphine milligram equivalent/day and from 5 to 4 days between 2006/2007 and 2019/2020, respectively. Between 2006/2007 and 2019/2020, these prescriptions' most likely clinical indications increased for cancer pain from 34% to 48%, for surgical pain from 31% to 36% and for dental pain from 9% to 11%. Inversely, the musculoskeletal pain decreased from 13% to 2%. There was good consistency between the clinical indications identified by the algorithm and prescriber's specialty or user's characteristics. CONCLUSIONS: New opioid prescription claims (incidence, dose and days' supply) decreased slightly over the last 14 years among QPDIP enrollees, especially after 2016/2017. Non-surgical and non-cancer pain became less common as their clinical indication.

Improving appropriate use of intravenous albumin: results of a single-centre audit and multifaceted intervention.

BACKGROUND: Intravenous albumin has limited indications supported by randomised controlled trials, yet it is often prescribed for indications not supported by evidence. AIM: To reduce unnecessary transfusion of albumin. INTERVENTIONS: Under the leadership of a multidisciplinary quality improvement team, evidence-based recommendations were disseminated in tandem with a new electronic order set, an educational strategy, qualitative interviews with prescribers and a return policy change to reduce wastage. IMPLEMENTATION AND EVALUATION: Interventions were introduced in a staggered fashion. The primary outcome, appropriate use of albumin, was monitored and quantified using pre-intervention and post-intervention audits. Process measures included statistical process run charts of monthly usage of 5% and 25% albumin and wastage. Data on length of stay (hospital and intensive care), new inpatient starts on kidney replacement and mortality were collected as balancing measures. RESULTS: Appropriate albumin usage based on indication increased from 30% to 50% (p<0.0001). There was significantly less overall albumin usage in the post-intervention period compared with the pre-intervention period (negative coefficient, p<0.0001), driven by a major reduction in the utilisation of the 5% formulation (p<0.0001). Overall albumin usage was significantly lower in the post-intervention period, decreasing from 800 to 450 vials per month. The intervention resulted in significantly less wastage (negative coefficient, p=0.017). Mortality, length of stay and new starts on kidney replacement therapy remained constant throughout the study period. CONCLUSION: Improved prescribing of albumin was achieved with a multifaceted approach. Substantial and sustained reductions in usage were achieved without negatively impacting patient-important outcomes. The estimated annual savings for the purchase cost of albumin was CAN $300 000. We provide a structured process for other organisations to optimise their use of albumin.

Does psychological distress predict risk of orthopaedic surgery and postoperative opioid prescribing in patients with hip pain? A retrospective study.

BACKGROUND: Clinicians and public health professionals have allocated resources to curb opioid over-prescription and address psychological needs among patients with musculoskeletal pain. However, associations between psychological distress, risk of surgery, and opioid prescribing among those with hip pathologies remain unclear. METHODS: Using a retrospective cohort study design, we identified patients that were evaluated for hip pain from January 13, 2020 to October 27, 2021. Patients' surgical histories and postoperative opioid prescriptions were extracted via chart review. Risk of hip surgery within one year of evaluation was analyzed using multivariable logistic regression. Multivariable linear regression was employed to predict average morphine milligram equivalents (MME) per day of opioid prescriptions within the first 30 days after surgery. Candidate predictors included age, gender, race, ethnicity, employment, insurance type, hip function and quality of life on the International Hip Outcome Tool (iHOT-12), and psychological distress phenotype using the OSPRO Yellow Flag (OSPRO-YF) Assessment Tool. RESULTS: Of the 672 patients, n = 350 (52.1%) underwent orthopaedic surgery for hip pain. In multivariable analysis, younger patients, those with TRICARE/other government insurance, and those with a high psychological distress phenotype had higher odds of surgery. After adding iHOT-12 scores, younger patients and lower iHOT-12 scores were associated with higher odds of surgery, while Black/African American patients had lower odds of surgery. In multivariable analysis of average MME, patients with periacetabular osteotomy (PAO) received opioid prescriptions with significantly higher average MME than those with other procedures, and surgery type was the only significant predictor. Post-hoc analysis excluding PAO found higher average MME for patients undergoing hip arthroscopy (compared to arthroplasty or other non-PAO procedures) and significantly lower average MME for patients with public insurance (Medicare/Medicaid) compared to those with private insurance. Among those only undergoing arthroscopy, older age and having public insurance were associated with opioid prescriptions with lower average MME. Neither iHOT-12 scores nor OSPRO-YF phenotype assignment were significant predictors of postoperative mean MME. CONCLUSIONS: Psychological distress characteristics are modifiable targets for rehabilitation programs, but their use as prognostic factors for risk of orthopaedic surgery and opioid prescribing in patients with hip pain appears limited when considered alongside other commonly collected clinical information such as age, insurance, type of surgery pursued, and iHOT-12 scores.

Barriers and facilitators for family physicians prescribing opioid agonist therapy in Saskatchewan.

OBJECTIVE: To explore barriers and facilitators for family physicians in Saskatchewan prescribing opioid agonist therapy (OAT). DESIGN: Self-administered postal survey. SETTING: Family medicine practices in Saskatchewan. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 218 Saskatchewan family physicians who were not authorized to prescribe OAT as of June 2022. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Descriptive and inferential statistics of physicians' self-reported barriers to and facilitators of prescribing OAT for opioid use disorder (OUD). RESULTS: Most respondents (84.8%) had some comfort with diagnosing OUD. However, more than half (58.3%) did not feel confident or knowledgeable about prescribing OAT. Barriers to OAT prescribing included lack of time, incomplete training requirements, lack of interest, insufficient funding or support, feeling overwhelmed, and perceiving that OAT does not work and thus is not necessary. Physicians working in core neighbourhoods and those receiving fee-for-service compensation reported the least available time to prescribe OAT. Conversely, physicians working in interdisciplinary team settings had increased time for OAT prescribing compared with physicians in other settings. Having a close personal relationship with someone with OUD was correlated with increased comfort in diagnosing OUD as well as with knowledge about and confidence in prescribing OAT. Themes identified as facilitators to increasing OAT prescribing included the addition of resources and supports, increased training, more awareness about OUD and OAT, enhanced compensation, and altered prescribing regulations. CONCLUSION: Despite the presence of several real and perceived barriers limiting OAT prescribing by Saskatchewan family physicians, there are family physicians interested in providing this therapy. Increased clinical resources and support, including increased interdisciplinary practice, are actionable steps that should be considered by policy decision makers to address this issue. Additionally, increased OUD and OAT education, which includes the perspectives of those with lived experience of OUD, would help address physician confidence, knowledge, and awareness in this area.

Psychotropic Medication Prescribing for Children and Adolescents After the Onset of the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Importance: Numerous studies have provided evidence for the negative associations of the COVID-19 pandemic with mental health, but data on the use of psychotropic medication in children and adolescents after the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic are lacking. Objective: To assess the rates and trends of psychotropic medication prescribing before and over the 2 years after the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic in children and adolescents in France. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study used nationwide interrupted time-series analysis of outpatient drug dispensing data from the IQVIA X-ponent database. All 8 839 143 psychotropic medication prescriptions dispensed to children (6 to 11 years of age) and adolescents (12 to 17 years of age) between January 2016 and May 2022 in France were retrieved and analyzed. Exposure: Onset of COVID-19 pandemic. Main outcomes and Measures: Monthly rates of psychotropic medication prescriptions per 1000 children and adolescents were analyzed using a quasi-Poisson regression before and after the pandemic onset (March 2020), and percentage changes in rates and trends were assessed. After the pandemic onset, rate ratios (RRs) were calculated between estimated and expected monthly prescription rates. Analyses were stratified by psychotropic medication class (antipsychotic, anxiolytic, hypnotic and sedative, antidepressant, and psychostimulant) and age group (children, adolescents). Results: In total, 8 839 143 psychotropic medication prescriptions were analyzed, 5 884 819 [66.6%] for adolescents and 2 954 324 [33.4%] for children. In January 2016, the estimated rate of monthly psychotropic medication prescriptions was 9.9 per 1000 children and adolescents, with the prepandemic rate increasing by 0.4% per month (95% CI, 0.3%-0.4%). In March 2020, the monthly prescription rate dropped by 11.5% (95% CI, -17.7% to -4.9%). During the 2 years following the pandemic onset, the trend changed significantly, and the prescription rate increased by 1.3% per month (95% CI, 1.2%-1.5%), reaching 16.1 per 1000 children and adolescents in May 2022. Monthly rates of psychotropic medication prescriptions exceeded the expected rates by 11% (RR, 1.11 [95% CI, 1.08-1.14]). Increases in prescribing trends were observed for all psychotropic medication classes after the pandemic onset but were substantial for anxiolytics, hypnotics and sedatives, and antidepressants. Prescription rates rose above those expected for all psychotropic medication classes except psychostimulants (RR, 1.12 [95% CI, 1.09-1.15] in adolescents and 1.06 [95% CI, 1.05-1.07] in children for antipsychotics; RR, 1.30 [95% CI, 1.25-1.35] in adolescents and 1.11 [95% CI, 1.09-1.12] in children for anxiolytics; RR, 2.50 [95% CI, 2.23-2.77] in adolescents and 1.40 [95% CI, 1.30-1.50] in children for hypnotics and sedatives; RR, 1.38 [95% CI, 1.29-1.47] in adolescents and 1.23 [95% CI, 1.20-1.25] in children for antidepressants; and RR, 0.97 [95% CI, 0.95-0.98] in adolescents and 1.02 [95% CI, 1.00-1.04] in children for psychostimulants). Changes were more pronounced among adolescents than children. Conclusions and Relevance: These findings suggest that prescribing of psychotropic medications for children and adolescents in France significantly and persistently increased after the COVID-19 pandemic onset. Future research should identify underlying determinants to improve psychological trajectories in young people.