Differences in medicaid expansion effects on buprenorphine treatment utilization by county rurality and income: A pharmacy data claims analysis from 2009-2018.

Background: Although use of buprenorphine for treating opioid use disorder increased over the past decade, buprenorphine utilization remains limited in lower-income and rural areas. We examine how the Affordable Care Act Medicaid expansion influenced buprenorphine initiation rates by county income and evaluate how associations differ by county rural-urban status. Methods: This study used nationwide 2009-2018 IQVIA retail pharmacy data and a comparative interrupted time series framework-a hybrid framework combining regression discontinuity and difference-in-difference approaches. We used piecewise linear estimation to quantify changes in buprenorphine initiation rates before and after Medicaid expansion. Results: The sample included observations from 376,704 county-months. We identified 5,227,340 new buprenorphine treatment episodes, with an average of 9.2 new buprenorphine episodes per month per 100,000 county residents. Among urban counties, those with the lowest median incomes experienced significantly larger increases in buprenorphine initiation rates associated with Medicaid expansion than counties with higher median incomes (5-year rates difference est=3525.3, se=1695.3, p = 0.04). However, among rural counties, there was no significant association between buprenorphine initiation rates and county median income after Medicaid expansion (5-year rates difference est=979.0, se=915.8, p = 0.29). Conclusions: Medicaid expansion was associated with a reduction in income-related buprenorphine disparities in urban counties, but not in rural counties. To achieve more equitable buprenorphine access, future policies should target low-income rural areas.

State Policy and the Breadth of Buprenorphine-Prescriber Networks in Medicaid Managed Care.

Provider networks in Medicaid Managed Care (MMC) play a crucial role in ensuring access to buprenorphine, a highly effective treatment for opioid use disorder. Using a difference-in-differences approach that compares network breadth across provider specialties and market segments within the same state, we investigated the association between three Medicaid policies and the breadth of MMC networks for buprenorphine prescribers: Medicaid expansion, substance use disorder (SUD) network adequacy criteria, and SUD carveouts. We found that both Medicaid expansion and SUD network adequacy criteria were associated with substantially increased breadth in buprenorphine-prescriber networks in MMC. In both cases, we found that the associations were largely driven by increases in the network breadth of primary care physician prescribers. Our findings suggest that Medicaid expansion and SUD network adequacy criteria may be effective strategies at states' disposal to improve access to buprenorphine.

Buprenorphine Treatment Episodes During the First Year of COVID: a Retrospective Examination of Treatment Initiation and Retention.

BACKGROUND: During the COVID pandemic, overall buprenorphine treatment appeared to remain relatively stable, despite some studies suggesting a decrease in patients starting buprenorphine. There is a paucity of empirical information regarding patterns of buprenorphine treatment during the pandemic. OBJECTIVE: To better understand the patterns of buprenorphine episodes during the pandemic and how those patterns compared to pre-pandemic patterns. DESIGN: Pharmacy claims representing approximately 92% of all prescriptions filled at retail pharmacies in all 50 US states and the District of Columbia. PARTICIPANTS: Individuals filling buprenorphine prescriptions indicated for treatment of opioid use disorder. MAIN MEASURES: The number of active, starting, and ending buprenorphine treatment episodes March 13 to December 1, 2020, and the expected number of such episodes in 2020 based on the growth in treatment episodes from March 13 to December 1, 2019. KEY RESULTS: The observed number of active buprenorphine episodes in December 2020 was comparable to the expected number, but new treatment episodes starting between March 13 and December 1, 2020, were 17.2% fewer than expected based on the 2019 experience. Similarly, the number of episodes that ended between March 13 and December 1, 2020, was 16.0% fewer than expected. Decreases from expected episode starts and ends occurred throughout the period but were greatest in the 2 months after the declaration of the public health emergency. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Beneath the apparent stability of buprenorphine patient numbers during the pandemic, the flow of individuals receiving buprenorphine treatment changed substantially. Our findings shed light on how policy changes meant to support buprenorphine prescribing influenced prescribing dynamics during that period, suggesting that while policy efforts may have been successful in maintaining existing patients in treatment, that success did not extend to individuals not yet in treatment.

Buprenorphine treatment episode duration, dosage, and concurrent prescribing of benzodiazepines and opioid analgesics: The effects of Medicaid prior authorization policies.

BACKGROUND: Buprenorphine is an effective medication for the treatment of opioid use disorder (OUD), but the association between prior authorization policies and quality of care for individuals receiving buprenorphine treatment is not well-understood. METHODS: Using 2006-2013 Medicaid Analytic eXtract (MAX) data from 34 states and the District of Columbia, we identified 294,031 episodes of buprenorphine treatment for OUD among individuals aged 14-64 years. We estimated generalized difference-in-differences models to examine the association between buprenorphine prior authorization policies and changes in buprenorphine treatment quality along four dimensions: (1) duration of at least 180 days, (2) dosage of at least 8 milligrams, and concurrent prescribing of (3) opioid analgesics and (4) benzodiazepines. RESULTS: Buprenorphine prior authorization policies were associated with an 11-percentage point reduction (p < 0.01) in the likelihood of episodes with a duration of at least 180 days in the first four years after policy implementation. The policy was not associated with changes in effective dosage or concurrent prescribing of opioid analgesics or benzodiazepines. CONCLUSIONS: Buprenorphine prior authorization policies were associated with a sizeable and significant reduction in episodes of at least 180 days duration, underscoring the importance of identifying and removing barriers to effective and appropriate OUD care.

Differences in buprenorphine treatment quality across physician provider specialties.

BACKGROUND: The number and types of clinicians prescribing buprenorphine treatment for opioid use disorder (OUD) have increased over the past two decades, but there is little information on how potential indicators of quality of care to patients receiving buprenorphine vary by provider specialty. METHODS: We used the Medicaid Analytic eXtract from 2009 to 2014 to identify buprenorphine treatment episodes. We assigned physician specialties to episodes based on whether an episode had at least one outpatient claim linked to specialists in addiction, behavioral health, opioid treatment program (OTP), pain, or primary care provider (PCP). We then used logistic regressions to estimate the association of linked physician specialty and achievement of the following process of care measures: at least 180-day duration, no co-occurring opioid analgesics, no co-occurring benzodiazepines, infectious disease screening, liver function test, drug and toxicology screenings, evaluation and management visits, and counseling. RESULTS: Episodes linked to PCPs had significantly lower odds of achieving 180-day duration, an absence of opioid analgesics, an absence of benzodiazepines, drug and toxicology screenings, and counseling compared to addiction, behavioral health, and/or OTPs. Episodes linked to PCPs had significantly higher odds of undergoing infectious disease screenings, liver function tests, and evaluation and management visits compared to all specialty categories. CONCLUSIONS: Episodes were more likely to achieve process of care measures related to the specialties of their physicians, but no specialty consistently demonstrated better performance compared to PCPs. Our findings highlight the need for models that can better integrate physical and behavioral health services for OUD treatment.

State Policies and Buprenorphine Prescribing by Nurse Practitioners and Physician Assistants.

Nurse practitioner (NP) and physician assistant (PA) prescribing can increase access to buprenorphine treatment for opioid use disorder. In this cross-sectional study, we used deidentified claims from approximately 90% of U.S. retail pharmacies (2017-2018) to examine the association of state policies with the odds of receiving buprenorphine treatment from an NP/PA versus a physician, overall and stratified by urban/rural status. From 2017 to 2018, the percentage of buprenorphine treatment episodes prescribed by NPs/PAs varied widely across states, from 0.4% in Alabama to 57.2% in Montana. Policies associated with greater odds of buprenorphine treatment from an NP/PA included full scope of practice (SOP) for NPs, full SOP for PAs, Medicaid pay parity for NPs (reimbursement at 100% of the fee-for-service physician rate), and Medicaid expansion. Although most findings with respect to policies were similar in urban and rural settings, the association of Medicaid expansion with NP/PA buprenorphine treatment was driven by rural counties.

Sociodemographic differences in quality of treatment to Medicaid enrollees receiving buprenorphine.

Background: Buprenorphine is a key medication to treat opioid use disorder, but little is known about how treatment quality varies across sociodemographic groups. Objective: We examined measures of treatment quality and explored variation by sociodemographic factors. Methods: We used Medicaid MAX data from 50 states from 2006 to 2014 to identify buprenorphine treatment episodes (N = 317,494). We used multivariable logistic regression to examine the quality of buprenorphine treatment along four dimensions: (1) sufficient duration, (2) effective dosage, and concurrent prescribing of (3) opioid analgesics and (4) benzodiazepines. We explored how quality varied by race/ethnicity, age, sex, and urbanicity. Results: In adjusted models, compared to non-Hispanic White individuals, non-Hispanic Black and Hispanic individuals had lower odds of receiving effective dosage (aORs = 0.79 and 0.89, respectively) and sufficient duration (aORs = 0.64 and 0.71, respectively), and lower odds of concurrent prescribing of opioid analgesics (aORs = 0.86 and 0.85, respectively) and benzodiazepines (aORs = 0.51 and 0.59, respectively). Older individuals had higher odds of sufficient duration (aORs from 1.21-1.33), but also had higher odds of concurrent opioid analgesics prescribing (aORs from 1.29-1.56) and benzodiazepines (aORs from 1.44-1.99). Females had higher odds of sufficient duration (aOR = 1.12), but lower odds of effective dosage (aOR = 0.77) and higher odds of concurrent prescribing of opioid analgesics (aOR = 1.25) and benzodiazepines (aOR = 1.16). Compared to individuals living in metropolitan areas, individuals living in non-metropolitan areas had higher odds of sufficient duration (aORs = 1.11 and 1.24) and effective dosage (aORs = 1.06 and 1.33), and lower odds of concurrent prescribing (aORs from 0.81-0.98). Conclusions: Black and Hispanic individuals were less likely to receive effective buprenorphine dosage and sufficient duration. Quality results were mixed for older and female individuals; although these individuals were more likely to receive treatment of sufficient duration, they were also more likely to be concurrently prescribed potentially contraindicated medications, and females were less likely to receive effective dosage. Findings raise concerns about adequacy of care for minority and other at-risk populations.

Subsequent Buprenorphine Treatment Following Emergency Physician Buprenorphine Prescription Fills: A National Assessment 2019 to 2020.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: Buprenorphine treatment for opioid use disorder provided in the emergency department with subsequent buprenorphine treatment by community prescribers is associated with improved outcomes, but the frequency with which this occurs is unknown. We examined the rates of subsequent buprenorphine treatment for buprenorphine-naïve individuals filling buprenorphine prescriptions from emergency physicians and initiated buprenorphine treatment and how such rates varied before and during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. METHODS: Using pharmacy claims capturing an estimated 92% of prescriptions filled at US retail pharmacies, we identified buprenorphine prescriptions filled between February 1, 2019, and November 30, 2020, written by emergency physicians. In this observational study, we calculated the rate at which patients subsequently filled buprenorphine prescriptions from other nonemergency clinicians, the frequency with which subsequent filled prescriptions were from different types of prescribers, and the changes in the rates of subsequent prescriptions following the declaration of the COVID-19 public health emergency. RESULTS: We identified 22,846 prescriptions written by emergency physicians and filled by buprenorphine-naïve patients. They were most commonly paid for by Medicaid and were in metropolitan counties; 28.5% of patients subsequently filled buprenorphine prescriptions written by other clinicians. Adult primary care physicians and advanced practice providers (eg, physician assistants and nurse practitioners) were responsible for most of the subsequent prescriptions. The rates of subsequent prescriptions were 3.5% lower after the COVID-19 public health emergency declaration. CONCLUSION: The majority of patients filling buprenorphine prescriptions written by emergency physicians do not subsequently fill prescriptions written by other clinicians, and the rates of subsequent prescriptions were lower after the declaration of the COVID-19 public health emergency. These findings highlight the need for a system of care that improves buprenorphine treatment continuity of care for patients with opioid use disorder from emergency settings to community treatment providers.

Medicaid Payment and Fluoride Varnish Application During Pediatric Medical Visits.

All Medicaid programs pay for fluoride varnish applications during medical visits for infants and toddlers, but receipt of care varies considerably across states. Using 2006-2014 Medicaid data from 22 states, this study examined the association between Medicaid payment and receipt of fluoride varnish during pediatric medical visits. Among 3,393,638 medical visits, fewer than one in 10 visits included fluoride varnish. Higher Medicaid payment was positively associated with receipt of fluoride varnish during pediatric medical visits. As policymakers consider strategies for increasing young children's access to preventive oral health services, as well as consider strategies for balancing budgets, attention should be paid to the effects of provider payment on access to pediatric oral health services.

The effect of state policies on rates of high-risk prescribing of an initial opioid analgesic.

BACKGROUND: Multiple state policies, such as prescription drug monitoring programs (PDMPs) and duration limits, have been implemented to decrease high-risk opioid prescribing. Studies demonstrate that many policies decrease certain opioid prescribing behaviors, but few examine their intended effects on the targeted high-risk prescribing practices, nor disentangle the effects of concurrent state or federal policies likely to influence those practices. METHODS: Forty-one million initial prescriptions for new opioid episodes from 2007 to 2018 were identified using national pharmacy claims. We identified high-risk initial prescriptions, defined as >7 days' supply, average daily MME >90, or concurrent with benzodiazepines and estimated three multivariable logistic regression models to assess the association between policies and outcomes controlling for patient, prescriber, and county characteristics. RESULTS: Initial prescriptions for >7 days declined from 23.8% in 2007 to 14.9% in 2018, associated with mandatory and interoperable PDMPs and prescription duration limits but not other policies examined. Initial prescriptions with daily MME > 90 declined from 13.2% to 1.9%, associated with pain management clinic laws but not consistently with other policies. Initial prescriptions concurrent with benzodiazepines declined only modestly from 6.9% to 6.5%, associated with pain management clinic laws but not other policies examined. CONCLUSIONS: The opioid policy environment has changed rapidly with a range of different policies being implemented addressing high-risk prescribing. PDMP laws mandating prescriber use and pain clinic laws both appear efficacious but decrease different types of high-risk opioid prescribing. New policies should be considered in light of the prevalence of the problem being addressed.

Rapid Discontinuation of Chronic, High-Dose Opioid Treatment for Pain: Prevalence and Associated Factors.

PURPOSE: To examine the prevalence of rapid discontinuation of chronic, high-dose opioid analgesic treatment, and identify associated patient, clinician, and community factors. METHODS: Using 2017-2018 retail pharmacy claims data from IQVIA, we identified chronic, high-dose opioid analgesic treatment episodes discontinued during these years and determined the percent of episodes meeting criteria for rapid discontinuation. We used multivariable logistic regression to estimate the probability of rapid discontinuation, conditional on having a discontinued chronic, high-dose opioid treatment episode, as a function of patient, provider, and county characteristics. RESULTS: We identified 810,120 new, chronic, high-dose opioid treatment episodes discontinued in 2017 or 2018, of which 72.0% (n=583,415) were rapidly discontinued. Rapid discontinuation was significantly more likely among Medicare (aOR 1.14, 95% CI 1.12 to 1.15) and Medicaid enrollees (aOR 1.03, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.05) compared to the commercially insured; in counties with higher fatal overdose rates (aOR 1.03, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.04) compared to counties with the lowest fatal overdose rates; and in counties with a higher percentage of non-white residents (aOR 1.21 for counties in the highest quartile relative to the lowest, 95% CI 1.19 to 1.24). Likelihood of rapid discontinuation also varied by prescriber specialty. CONCLUSIONS: Most chronic, high-dose opioid treatment episodes that ended in 2017 or 2018 were discontinued more rapidly than recommended by clinical guidelines, raising concerns about adverse patient outcomes. Our findings highlight the need to understand what drives discontinuation and to inform safer opioid tapering and discontinuation practices.

Primary and Behavioral Health Care Integration Program: Impacts on Health Care Utilization, Cost, and Quality.

This article describes an extension of the RAND Corporation's evaluation of the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration's Primary and Behavioral Health Care Integration (PBHCI) grants program. PBHCI grants are designed to improve the overall wellness and physical health status of people with serious mental illness or co-occurring substance use disorders by supporting the integration of primary care and preventive PH services into community behavioral health centers where individuals already receive care. From 2010 to 2013, RAND conducted a program evaluation of PBHCI, describing the structure, process, and outcomes for the first three cohorts of grantee programs (awarded in 2009 and 2010). The current study extends previous work by investigating the impact of PBHCI on consumers' health care utilization, total costs of care to Medicaid, and quality of care in three states. The evidence suggests that PBHCI was successful in reducing frequent use of emergency room and inpatient services for physical health conditions, reducing costs of care, and improving follow-up after hospitalization for a mental illness. However, PBHCI evidence does not suggest that PBHCI had a consistent effect on quality of preventive care and health monitoring for chronic physical conditions. These findings can guide the design of future cohorts of PBHCI clinics to build on the strengths with respect to shifting emergency department and inpatient care to less costly and more effective settings and address the continuing challenge of integrating care between specialty behavioral health providers and general medical care providers.

Advanced cognitive impairment among older nursing home residents.

BACKGROUND: Though work has been done studying nursing home (NH) residents with either advanced Alzheimer's disease (AD) or Alzheimer's disease related dementia (ADRD), none have distinguished between them; even though their clinical features affecting survival are different. In this study, we compared mortality risk factors and survival between NH residents with advanced AD and those with advanced ADRD. METHODS: This is a retrospective observational study, in which we examined a sample of 34,493 U.S. NH residents aged 65 and over in the Minimum Data Set (2011-2013). Incident assessment of advanced disease was defined as the first MDS assessment with severe cognitive impairment (Cognitive Functional Score equals to 4) and diagnoses of AD or ADRD. Demographics, functional limitations, and comorbidities were evaluated as mortality risk factors using Cox models. Survival was characterized with Kaplan-Maier functions. RESULTS: Of those with advanced cognitive impairment, 35 % had AD and 65 % ADRD. At the incident assessment of advanced disease, those with AD had better health compared to those with ADRD. Mortality risk factors were similar between groups (shortness of breath, difficulties eating, substantial weight-loss, diabetes mellitus, heart failure, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and pneumonia; all p < 0.01). However, stroke and difficulty with transfer (for women) were significant mortality risk factors only for those with advanced AD. Urinary tract infection, and hypertension (for women) only were mortality risk factors for those with advanced ADRD. Median survival was significantly shorter for the advanced ADRD group (194 days) compared to the advanced AD group (300 days). CONCLUSIONS: There were distinct mortality and survival patterns of NH residents with advanced AD and ADRD. This may help with care planning decisions regarding therapeutic and palliative care.

Trends in visits to substance use disorder treatment facilities in 2020.

OBJECTIVE: To describe weekly changes in the number of substance use disorder treatment (SUDT) facility visits in 2020 compared to 2019 using cell phone location data. METHODS: We calculated the percentage weekly change in visits to SUDT facilities from the week of January 5 through the week of October 11, 2020, relative to the week of January 6 through the week of October 13, 2019. We stratified facilities by county COVID-19 incidence per 10,000 residents in each week and by 2018 fatal drug overdose rate. Finally, we conducted a multivariable linear regression analysis examining percent change in visits per week as a function of county-level COVID-19 tercile, a series of calendar month indicators, and the interaction of county-level COVID-19 tercile and month. We repeated the regression analysis replacing COVID-19 tercile with overdose tercile. RESULTS: Beginning the eleventh week of 2020, the number of visits to SUDT facilities declined substantially, reaching a nadir of 48% of 2019 visits in early July. In contrast to January, there were significantly fewer visits in 2020 compared to 2019 in all subsequent months (p < 0.01 in all months). Multivariable regression results found that facilities in the tercile of counties experiencing the most COVID-19 cases had a significantly greater reduction in the number of SUDT visits in 2020 for the months of June through August than facilities in counties with the fewest COVID-19 rates (p < 0.05). The study found no statistically significant difference in the change in the number of visits by facilities in counties with historically different overdose rates. DISCUSSION: Our findings support the hypothesis that a reduction has occurred in the average weekly number of visits to SUDT facilities. The size of the effect differs based on the number of COVID-19 cases but not on historical overdose rate.

Individual and Community Factors Associated with Naloxone Co-prescribing Among Long-term Opioid Patients: a Retrospective Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Naloxone co-prescribing to individuals at increased opioid overdose risk is a key component of opioid overdose prevention efforts. OBJECTIVE: Examine naloxone co-prescribing in the general population and assess how co-prescribing varies by individual and community characteristics. DESIGN: Retrospective cross-sectional study. We conducted a multivariable logistic regression of 2017-2018 de-identified pharmacy claims representing 90% of all prescriptions filled at retail pharmacies in 50 states and the District of Columbia. PATIENTS: Individuals with opioid analgesic treatment episodes > 90 days MAIN MEASURES: Outcome was co-prescribed naloxone. Predictor variables included insurance type, primary prescriber specialty, receipt of concomitant benzodiazepines, high-dose opioid episode, county urbanicity, fatal overdose rates, poverty rates, and primary care health professional shortage areas. KEY RESULTS: Naloxone co-prescribing occurred in 2.3% of long-term opioid therapy episodes. Medicaid (aOR 1.87, 95%CI 1.84 to 1.90) and Medicare (aOR 1.48, 95%CI 1.46 to 1.51) episodes had higher odds of naloxone co-prescribing than commercial insurance episodes, while cash pay (aOR 0.77, 95%CI 0.74 to 0.80) and other insurance episodes (aOR 0.81, 95%CI 0.79 to 0.83) had lower odds. Odds of naloxone co-prescribing were higher among high-dose opioid episodes (aOR 3.19, 95%CI 3.15 to 3.23), when concomitant benzodiazepines were prescribed (aOR 1.12, 95%CI 1.10 to 1.14), and in counties with higher fatal overdose rates. CONCLUSION: Co-prescription of naloxone represents a tangible clinical action that can be taken to help prevent opioid overdose deaths. However, despite recommendations to co-prescribe naloxone to patients at increased risk for opioid overdose, we found that co-prescribing rates remain low overall. States, insurers, and health systems should consider implementing strategies to facilitate increased co-prescribing of naloxone to at-risk individuals.

Does Integration of Palliative Care and Infection Management Reduce Hospital Transfers among Nursing Home Residents?

Background: An estimated 50% of nursing home (NH) residents experience hospital transfers in their last year of life, often due to infections. Hospital transfers due to infection are often of little clinical benefit to residents with advanced illness, for whom aggressive treatments are often ineffective and inconsistent with goals of care. Integration of palliative care and infection management (i.e., merging the goals of palliative care and infection management at end of life) may reduce hospital transfers for residents with advanced illness. Objectives: Evaluate the association between integration and (1) all-cause hospital transfers and (2) hospital transfers due to infection. Design: Cross-sectional observational study. Setting/Subjects: 143,223 U.S. NH residents, including 42,761 residents in the advanced stages of dementia, congestive heart failure (CHF), and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Measurement: Cross-sectional, nationally representative NH survey data (2017-2018) were combined with resident data from the Minimum Data Set 3.0 and Medicare inpatient data (2016-2017). NH surveys measured integration of palliative care and infection management using an index of 0-100. Logistic regression models were used to estimate the relationships between integration intensity (i.e., the degree to which NHs follow best practices for integration) and all-cause hospital transfer and transfer due to infection. Results: Among residents with advanced dementia, integration intensity was inversely associated with all-cause hospital transfer and transfer due to infection (p < 0.001). Among residents with advanced COPD, integration intensity was inversely associated with all-cause hospital transfer (p < 0.05) but not transfers due to infection. Among residents with advanced CHF, integration intensity was not associated with either outcome. Conclusions: NH policies aimed to promote integration of palliative care and infection management may reduce burdensome hospital transfers for residents with advanced dementia. For residents with advanced CHF and COPD, alternative strategies may be needed to promote best practices for infection management at end of life.

Patient, prescriber, and Community factors associated with filled naloxone prescriptions among patients receiving buprenorphine 2017-18.

BACKGROUND: Prescribing naloxone to patients at increased opioid overdose risk is a key component of opioid overdose prevention efforts, but little is known about naloxone fills among patients receiving buprenorphine for opioid use disorder, one such high risk group. METHODS: This retrospective cross-sectional study used de-identified pharmacy claims representing 90% of all prescriptions filled at retail pharmacies in 50 states and the District of Columbia. We performed a multivariable logistic regression to examine filled naloxone prescriptions among patients receiving buprenorphine treatment and assessed how filled naloxone prescriptions vary by patient, prescriber, and community characteristics. RESULTS: Filled naloxone prescriptions occurred among 4.5% of buprenorphine treatment episodes. Episodes paid through Medicaid (aOR 2.40, 95%CI 2.33-2.47) and Medicare (aOR 1.53, 95%CI 1.46-1.60) had higher odds of filled naloxone prescriptions than commercial insurance episodes. Compared to episodes where the primary prescriber was an adult primary care physician, odds of filling a naloxone prescription were higher among episodes prescribed by addiction specialists (aOR 1.30, 95% CI 1.24-1.37) and physician assistants/nurse practitioners (aOR 1.57, 95% CI 1.53-1.61). CONCLUSIONS: Prescribing naloxone to patients receiving buprenorphine represents a tangible clinical action that can be taken to help prevent opioid overdose deaths. However, despite recommendations to co-prescribe naloxone to patients at increased risk for opioid overdose, rates of filling naloxone prescriptions remain low among patients dispensed buprenorphine. States, insurers, and health systems should consider implementing strategies to facilitate increased co-prescribing of naloxone to at-risk individuals.