Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 20 de 69
Filtrar
2.
Reg Anesth Pain Med ; 47(8): 475-483, 2022 Aug.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35697386

RESUMO

INTRODUCTION: In patients undergoing surgical procedures, transitions in opioid prescribing occur across multiple providers during the months before and after surgery. These transitions often result in high-risk and uncoordinated prescribing practices, especially for surgical patients with prior opioid exposure. However, perspectives of relevant providers about screening and care coordination to address these risks are unknown. METHODS: We conducted qualitative interviews with 24 surgery, primary care, and anesthesia providers in Michigan regarding behaviors and attitudes about screening surgical patients to inform perioperative opioid prescribing in relation to transitions of care. We used an interpretive description framework to topically code interview transcripts and synthesize underlying themes in analytical memos. RESULTS: Providers believed that coordinated, multidisciplinary approaches to identify patients at risk of poor pain and opioid-related outcomes could improve transitions of care for surgical opioid prescribing. Anesthesia and primary care providers saw value in knowing patients' preoperative risk related to opioid use, while surgeons' perceptions varied widely. Across specialties, most providers favored a screening tool if coupled with actionable recommendations, sufficient resources, and facilitated coordination between specialties. Providers identified a lack of pain specialists and a dearth of actionable guidelines to direct interventions for patients at high opioid-related risk as major limitations to the value of patient screening. DISCUSSION: These findings provide context to address risk from prescription opioids in surgical transitions of care, which should include identifying high-risk patients, implementing a coordinated plan, and emphasizing actionable recommendations.


Assuntos
Analgésicos Opioides , Transtornos Relacionados ao Uso de Opioides , Analgésicos Opioides/efeitos adversos , Prescrições de Medicamentos , Humanos , Transtornos Relacionados ao Uso de Opioides/prevenção & controle , Dor Pós-Operatória/diagnóstico , Dor Pós-Operatória/tratamento farmacológico , Dor Pós-Operatória/prevenção & controle , Padrões de Prática Médica
3.
Am Surg ; : 31348221111519, 2022 Jun 28.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35762831

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Driving physician behavior change has been an elusive goal for quality improvement efforts aimed at reducing low-value care. We proposed the use of "nudge" interventions at the surgeon level in order to reduce post-surgical opioid overprescribing in accordance with consensus guidelines. METHODS: We used 2017 Medicare data to identify outlier surgeons. A peer data benchmarking report that showed each surgeon the average number of opioid tablets they prescribed for an open inguinal hernia repair procedure from January 1, 2017 to December 31, 2017. We conducted a 1:1 randomized controlled trial providing outlier surgeons a report of their opioid prescribing patterns for a standard operation compared to the national average and prescribing guidelines. RESULTS: There were 489 surgeons randomized to the intervention, of which 180 (36.8%) had data in the post-intervention period. Data was available for 87 surgeons in the intervention group and 93 surgeons in the control group. 97.7% of surgeons in the intervention group reduced their opioid prescribing pattern compared to 95.7% in the control group. Surgeons who received the data benchmarking report intervention prescribed 14.3% less opioids than surgeons in the control group (10.54 (SD 5.34) vs. 12.30 (SD 6.02), P = .04). The intervention was associated with a 1.83 lower mean number of opioid tablets prescribed per patient in the multivariable linear regression model after controlling for other factors (Intervention group vs. control group 95% CI [-3.61, -.04], P = .04). DISCUSSION: The implementation of a peer data benchmarking intervention can drive physician behavior change towards high-value care.

4.
J Hosp Med ; 2022 May 27.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35621024

RESUMO

Opioid and benzodiazepine prescribing after COVID-19 hospitalization is not well understood. We aimed to characterize opioid and benzodiazepine prescribing among naïve patients hospitalized for COVID and to identify the risk factors associated with a new prescription at discharge. In this retrospective study of patients across 39 Michigan hospitals from March to November 2020, we identified 857 opioid- and benzodiazepine-naïve patients admitted with COVID-19 not requiring mechanical ventilation. Of these, 22% received opioids, 13% received benzodiazepines, and 6% received both during the hospitalization. At discharge, 8% received an opioid prescription, and 3% received a benzodiazepine prescription. After multivariable adjustment, receipt of an opioid or benzodiazepine prescription at discharge was associated with the length of inpatient opioid or benzodiazepine exposure. These findings suggest that hospitalization represents a risk of opioid or benzodiazepine initiation among naïve patients, and judicious prescribing should be considered to prevent opioid-related harms.

6.
Ann Intern Med ; 175(5): 617-627, 2022 05.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35286141

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: There is concern that state laws to curb opioid prescribing may adversely affect patients with chronic noncancer pain, but the laws' effects are unclear because of challenges in disentangling multiple laws implemented around the same time. OBJECTIVE: To study the association between state opioid prescribing cap laws, pill mill laws, and mandatory prescription drug monitoring program query or enrollment laws and trends in opioid and guideline-concordant nonopioid pain treatment among commercially insured adults, including a subgroup with chronic noncancer pain conditions. DESIGN: Thirteen treatment states that implemented a single law of interest in a 4-year period and unique groups of control states for each treatment state were identified. Augmented synthetic control analyses were used to estimate the association between each state law and outcomes. SETTING: United States, 2008 to 2019. PATIENTS: 7 694 514 commercially insured adults aged 18 years or older, including 1 976 355 diagnosed with arthritis, low back pain, headache, fibromyalgia, and/or neuropathic pain. MEASUREMENTS: Proportion of patients receiving any opioid prescription or guideline-concordant nonopioid pain treatment per month, and mean days' supply and morphine milligram equivalents (MME) of prescribed opioids per day, per patient, per month. RESULTS: Laws were associated with small-in-magnitude and non-statistically significant changes in outcomes, although CIs around some estimates were wide. For adults overall and those with chronic noncancer pain, the 13 state laws were each associated with a change of less than 1 percentage point in the proportion of patients receiving any opioid prescription and a change of less than 2 percentage points in the proportion receiving any guideline-concordant nonopioid treatment, per month. The laws were associated with a change of less than 1 in days' supply of opioid prescriptions and a change of less than 4 in average monthly MME per day per patient prescribed opioids. LIMITATIONS: Results may not be generalizable to non-commercially insured populations and were imprecise for some estimates. Use of claims data precluded assessment of the clinical appropriateness of pain treatments. CONCLUSION: This study did not identify changes in opioid prescribing or nonopioid pain treatment attributable to state laws. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: National Institute on Drug Abuse.


Assuntos
Analgésicos não Narcóticos , Dor Crônica , Programas de Monitoramento de Prescrição de Medicamentos , Adulto , Analgésicos não Narcóticos/uso terapêutico , Analgésicos Opioides/uso terapêutico , Dor Crônica/tratamento farmacológico , Prescrições de Medicamentos , Humanos , Manejo da Dor , Padrões de Prática Médica , Estados Unidos
7.
Reg Anesth Pain Med ; 47(6): 346-352, 2022 06.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35241626

RESUMO

OBJECTIVE: To determine the effect of prescription opioid use in the year before surgery on opioid consumption after surgery. BACKGROUND: Recently developed postoperative opioid prescribing guidelines rely on data from opioid-naïve patients. However, opioid use in the USA is common, and the impact of prior opioid exposure on the consumption of opioids after surgery is unclear. METHODS: Population-based cohort study of 26,001 adults 18 years of age and older who underwent one of nine elective general or gynecologic surgical procedures between January 1, 2017 and October 31, 2019, with prospectively collected patient-reported data from the Michigan Surgical Quality Collaborative (MSQC) linked to state prescription drug monitoring program at 70 MSQC-participating hospitals on 30-day patient-reported opioid consumption in oral morphine equivalents (OME) (primary outcome). RESULTS: Compared with opioid-naïve participants, opioid-exposed participants (26% of sample) consumed more prescription opioids after surgery (adjusted OME difference 12, 95% CI 10 to 14). Greater opioid exposure was associated with higher postoperative consumption in a dose-dependent manner, with chronic users reporting the greatest consumption (additional OMEs 32, 95% CI 21 to 42). However, for eight of nine procedures, 90% of opioid-exposed participants consumed ≤150 OMEs. Among those receiving perioperative prescriptions, opioid-exposed participants had higher likelihood of refill (adjusted OR 4.7, 95% CI 4.4 to 5.1), number of refills (adjusted incidence rate ratio 4.0, 95% CI 3.7 to 4.3), and average refill amount (adjusted OME difference 333, 95% CI 292 to 374)). CONCLUSIONS: Preoperative opioid use is associated with small increases in patient-reported opioid consumption after surgery for most patients, though greater differences exist for patients with chronic use. For most patients with preoperative opioid exposure, existing guidelines may meet their postoperative needs. However, guidelines may need tailoring for patients with chronic use, and providers should anticipate a higher likelihood of postoperative refills for all opioid-exposed patients.


Assuntos
Analgésicos Opioides , Transtornos Relacionados ao Uso de Opioides , Adolescente , Adulto , Analgésicos Opioides/efeitos adversos , Estudos de Coortes , Prescrições de Medicamentos , Feminino , Humanos , Transtornos Relacionados ao Uso de Opioides/diagnóstico , Transtornos Relacionados ao Uso de Opioides/epidemiologia , Dor Pós-Operatória/induzido quimicamente , Dor Pós-Operatória/diagnóstico , Dor Pós-Operatória/prevenção & controle , Padrões de Prática Médica , Estudos Retrospectivos
8.
Trials ; 23(1): 195, 2022 Mar 04.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35246214

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Clinical trials face major barriers such as under-enrollment and selective enrollment, which threaten study completion and undermine validity and generalizability. Thus, we conducted a prospective preference assessment (PPA) prior to commencing the Comparison of Analgesic Regimen Effectiveness and Safety in Surgery (CARES) trial-a randomized controlled study comparing the outcomes of managing acute postoperative pain between opioid-sparing and opioid-based therapies. This PPA aimed to (1) determine the patients' willingness to participate in the CARES trial, (2) identify the areas for improvement, and (3) assess the differences between willing and unwilling patients. METHODS: Patients undergoing elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy were recruited between August 2019 and February 2020 from two academic hospitals. A survey was administered to each patient consisting of (1) a vignette describing the trial, (2) an assessment of the patients' understanding of the trial, (3) open-ended questions assessing the attitudes towards the trial, and (4) patient-completed questionnaires. Data were analyzed qualitatively with thematic analysis and quantitatively with the Wilcoxon signed-rank and chi-square tests. RESULTS: Forty-two patients were enrolled and grouped based on the 6-point Likert scale into willing (4-6, 71%) and not willing (1-3, 29%) to participate in the CARES trial. There were no significant differences with respect to all variables: age, education, sex, visible minority status, previous research, previous surgery, regular use of pain medications, surgical concerns, previous discussions on pain management, significant pain within the past 3 months, and significant use of pain medication within the past month. Factors that motivated participation were contributing to scientific research (45%), altruism (29%), and improving personal pain (24%). Common discouraging factors were negative perceptions of opioids (29%), side effects (21%), being blinded to the study medication (21%), and poor pain management (19%). CONCLUSIONS: This PPA revealed that two key discouraging factors for patients were being blinded to the type of pain medication being taken and the potential for poor pain management as a consequence of participation. Modifications to improve patient acceptance of the CARES trial include ensuring sufficient rescue medicine and follow-up visits consistent with current standards of care for all patients, as well as patient education surrounding safe administration and side effects of the study medications.


Assuntos
Analgésicos Opioides , Dor Pós-Operatória , Analgésicos Opioides/efeitos adversos , Procedimentos Cirúrgicos Eletivos , Humanos , Manejo da Dor/métodos , Dor Pós-Operatória/diagnóstico , Dor Pós-Operatória/tratamento farmacológico , Dor Pós-Operatória/etiologia , Estudos Prospectivos
9.
Am J Obstet Gynecol ; 227(1): 68.e1-68.e24, 2022 Jul.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35248573

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Despite substantial reductions in the past decade, prescription opioids continue to cause widespread morbidity and mortality in the United States. Little is known regarding patterns and predictors of opioid use among women undergoing benign hysterectomy. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to identify the incidence and predictors of new persistent opioid use after benign hysterectomy among opioid-naïve women from a set of demographic, operative, and opioid prescription characteristics of patients. STUDY DESIGN: In this retrospective cohort study, we identified women undergoing benign hysterectomy from 2011 to 2016 using a validated national insurance claims database (IBM MarketScan Commercial Database). After excluding women with prevalent opioid use (from 365 to 31 days preoperatively), we identified patients who received a perioperative opioid prescription (30 days before to 14 days after hysterectomy) and evaluated them for new persistent opioid use, defined as at least 1 prescription from 15 to 90 days and at least 1 prescription from 91 to 365 days postoperatively. Multivariate logistic regression was used to examine demographic, clinical, operative, and opioid prescription-related factors associated with new persistent use. International Classification of Diseases, Ninth and Tenth Revisions, and Clinical Classification Software codes were used to identify hysterectomies, preoperative pain and psychiatric diagnoses, surgical indications, and surgical complications included as covariates. RESULTS: We identified 114,260 women who underwent benign hysterectomy and were not prevalent opioid users, of which 93,906 (82.2%) received at least 1 perioperative opioid prescription. Of 93,906 women, 4334 (4.6%) developed new persistent opioid use. Logistic regression demonstrated that new persistent use odds is significantly increased by younger age (18-34 years; adjusted odds ratio, 1.97; 95% confidence interval, 1.69-2.30), southern geographic location (adjusted odds ratio, 2.03; 95% confidence interval, 1.79-2.27), preoperative psychiatric and pain disorders (anxiety: adjusted odds ratio, 1.20 [95% confidence interval, 1.09-1.33]; arthritis: adjusted odds ratio, 1.30 [95% confidence interval, 1.21-1.40]), >1 perioperative prescription (adjusted odds ratio, 1.53; 95% confidence interval, 1.24-1.88), mood disorder medication use (adjusted odds ratio, 1.51; 95% confidence interval, 1.40-1.64), tobacco smoking (adjusted odds ratio, 1.65; 95% confidence interval, 1.45-1.89), and surgical complications (adjusted odds ratio, 1.84; 95% confidence interval, 1.69-2.00). Although statistically nonsignificant, total morphine milligram equivalent of ≥300 in the first perioperative prescription increased persistent use likelihood by 9% (95% confidence interval, 1.01-1.17). Dispensing of a first perioperative prescription before the surgery, as opposed to after, increased new persistent use odds by 61% (95% confidence interval, 1.50-1.72). Each additional perioperative day covered by a prescription increased the likelihood of persistent use by 2% (95% confidence interval, 1.02-1.03). In contrast, minimally invasive hysterectomy (laparoscopic: adjusted odds ratio, 0.89 [95% confidence interval, 0.71-0.88]; vaginal: adjusted odds ratio, 0.82 [95% confidence interval, 0.72-0.93]) and a more recent surgery year (2016 vs reference 2011: adjusted odds ratio 0.58; 95% confidence interval, 0.51-0.65) significantly decreased its likelihood. CONCLUSION: New persistent opioid use after hysterectomy was associated with several patient, operative, and opioid prescription-related factors. Considering these factors may be beneficial in counseling patients and shared decision-making about perioperative prescription to decrease the risk of persistent opioid use.

10.
Ann Surg ; 2022 Jan 21.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35129474

RESUMO

OBJECTIVE: Evaluate the association between postoperative opioid prescribing and new persistent opioid use. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Opioid-naïve patients who develop new persistent opioid use after surgery are at increased risk of opioid-related morbidity and mortality. However, the extent to which postoperative opioid prescribing is associated with persistent postoperative opioid use is unclear. METHODS: Retrospective study of opioid-naïve adults undergoing surgery in Michigan from 1/1/2017-10/31/2019. Postoperative opioid prescriptions were identified using a statewide clinical registry and prescription fills were identified using Michigan's prescription drug monitoring program. The primary outcome was new persistent opioid use, defined as filling at least one opioid prescription between post-discharge days 4-90 and filling at least one opioid prescription between post-discharge days 91-180. RESULTS: 37,654 patients underwent surgery with a mean age of 52.2 (16.7) years and 20,923 (55.6%) female patients. 31,920 (84.8%) patients were prescribed opioids at discharge. 622 (1.7%) patients developed new persistent opioid use after surgery. Being prescribed an opioid at discharge was not associated with new persistent opioid use (aOR 0.88 [95% CI 0.71-1.09]). However, among patients prescribed an opioid, patients prescribed the second largest (12 [IQR 3] pills) and largest (20 [IQR 7] pills) quartiles of prescription size had higher odds of new persistent opioid use compared to patients prescribed the smallest quartile (7 [IQR 1] pills) of prescription size (aOR 1.39 [95% CI 1.04-1.86]) and aOR 1.97 [95% CI 1.44-2.70], respectively). CONCLUSIONS: In a cohort of opioid-naïve patients undergoing common surgical procedures, the risk of new persistent opioid use increased with the size of the prescription. This suggests that while opioid prescriptions in and of themselves may not place patients at risk of long-term opioid use, excessive prescribing does. Consequently, these findings support ongoing efforts to mitigate excessive opioid prescribing after surgery to reduce opioid-related harms.

14.
Ann Surg ; 2021 Jun 04.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34091508

RESUMO

OBJECTIVE: To compare outcomes after surgery between patients who were not prescribed opioids and patients who were prescribed opioids. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Postoperative opioid prescriptions carry significant risks. Understanding outcomes among patients who receive no opioids after surgery may inform efforts to reduce these risks. METHODS: We performed a retrospective study of adult patients who underwent surgery between January 1, 2019 and October 31, 2019. The primary outcome was the composite incidence of an emergency department visit, readmission, or reoperation within 30 days of surgery. Secondary outcomes were postoperative pain, satisfaction, quality of life, and regret collected via postoperative survey. A multilevel, mixed-effects logistic regression was performed to evaluate differences between groups. RESULTS: In a cohort of 22,345 patients, mean age (standard deviation) was 52.1 (16.5) years and 13,269 (59.4%) patients were female. About 3175 (14.2%) patients were not prescribed opioids, of whom 422 (13.3%) met the composite adverse event endpoint compared to 2255 (11.8%) of patients not prescribed opioids (P = 0.015). Patients not prescribed opioids had a similar probability of adverse events {11.7% [95% confidence interval (CI) 10.2%-13.2%] vs 11.9% (95% CI 10.6%-13.3%]}. Among 12,872 survey respondents, patients who were not prescribed an opioid had a similar rate of high satisfaction [81.7% (95% CI 77.3%-86.1%) vs 81.7% (95% CI 77.7%-85.7%)] and no regret [(93.0% (95% CI 90.8%-95.2%) vs 92.6% (95% CI 90.4%-94.7%)]. CONCLUSIONS: Patients who were not prescribed opioids after surgery had similar clinical and patient-reported outcomes as patients who were prescribed opioids. This suggests that minimizing opioids as part of routine postoperative care is unlikely to adversely affect patients.

15.
Pain Med ; 22(4): 961-969, 2021 04 20.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33576394

RESUMO

OBJECTIVE: To determine how passively providing informational handouts and/or drug disposal kits affects rates of leftover prescription opioid disposal. DESIGN: A multi-arm parallel-group randomized controlled trial with masked outcome assessment and computer-guided randomization. SETTING: Johns Hopkins Health System outpatient pharmacies. SUBJECTS: Individuals who filled ≥1 short-term prescription for an immediate-release opioid for themselves or a family member. METHODS: In June 2019, 499 individuals were randomized to receive an informational handout detailing U.S. Food and Drug Administration-recommended ways to properly dispose of leftover opioids (n = 188), the informational handout and a drug disposal kit with instructions on its use (n = 170), or no intervention (n = 141) at prescription pickup. Subjects were subsequently contacted by telephone, and outcomes were assessed by a standardized survey. The primary outcome was the use of a safe opioid disposal method. RESULTS: By 6 weeks after prescription pickup, 227 eligible individuals reported they had stopped taking prescription opioids to treat pain and had leftover medication. No difference in safe disposal was observed between the non-intervention group (10% [6/63]) and the group that received disposal kits (14% [10/73]) (risk ratio = 1.44; 95% confidence interval: 0.55 to 3.74) or the group that received a fact sheet (11% [10/91]) (risk ratio = 1.15; 95% confidence interval: 0.44 to 3.01). CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that passive provision of a drug disposal kit at prescription pickup did not increase rates of leftover opioid disposal when compared with provision of a fact sheet alone or no intervention. Active interventions may deserve further investigation.


Assuntos
Analgésicos Opioides , Preparações Farmacêuticas , Analgésicos Opioides/uso terapêutico , Prescrições de Medicamentos , Família , Humanos , Inquéritos e Questionários
16.
Implement Sci ; 16(1): 2, 2021 01 07.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33413454

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Thirty-three US states and Washington, D.C., have enacted medical cannabis laws allowing patients with chronic non-cancer pain to use cannabis, when recommended by a physician, to manage their condition. However, clinical guidelines do not recommend cannabis for treatment of chronic non-cancer pain due to limited and mixed evidence of effectiveness. How state medical cannabis laws affect delivery of evidence-based treatment for chronic non-cancer pain is unclear. These laws could lead to substitution of cannabis in place of clinical guideline-discordant opioid prescribing, reducing risk of opioid use disorder and overdose. Conversely, state medical cannabis laws could lead to substitution of cannabis in place of guideline-concordant treatments such as topical analgesics or physical therapy. This protocol describes a mixed-methods study examining the implementation and effects of state medical cannabis laws on treatment of chronic non-cancer pain. A key contribution of the study is the examination of how variation in state medical cannabis laws' policy implementation rules affects receipt of chronic non-cancer pain treatments. METHODS: The study uses a concurrent-embedded design. The primary quantitative component of the study employs a difference-in-differences design using a policy trial emulation approach. Quantitative analyses will evaluate state medical cannabis laws' effects on treatment for chronic non-cancer pain as well as on receipt of treatment for opioid use disorder, opioid overdose, cannabis use disorder, and cannabis poisoning among people with chronic non-cancer pain. Secondary qualitative and survey methods will be used to characterize implementation of state medical cannabis laws through interviews with state leaders and representative surveys of physicians who treat, and patients who experience, chronic non-cancer pain in states with medical cannabis laws. DISCUSSION: This study will examine the effects of medical cannabis laws on patients' receipt of guideline-concordant non-opioid, non-cannabis treatments for chronic non-cancer pain and generate new evidence on the effects of state medical cannabis laws on adverse opioid outcomes. Results will inform the dynamic policy environment in which numerous states consider, enact, and/or amend medical cannabis laws each year.


Assuntos
Cannabis , Dor Crônica , Maconha Medicinal , Analgésicos Opioides , Dor Crônica/tratamento farmacológico , Humanos , Maconha Medicinal/uso terapêutico , Padrões de Prática Médica
17.
Global Spine J ; 11(1): 108-115, 2021 Jan.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32875850

RESUMO

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective review of an administrative database. OBJECTIVES: The aim of our study was to investigate the distribution of spending for the entire episode of care among nonelderly, commercially insured patients undergoing elective, inpatient anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) surgeries for degenerative cervical pathology. METHODS: Using a private insurance claims database, we identified patients who underwent single-level, inpatient ACDF for degenerative spinal disease. Patients were selected using a combination of Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) and International Classification of Diseases (ICD) codes. Entire episode of care was defined as 6-months before (preoperative) to 6 months after (postoperative) the surgical admission. RESULTS: In our cohort containing 33 209 patients, perioperative median spending per patient (MSPP) within the year encompassing surgery totaled $37 020 (interquartile range [IQR] $28 363-$49 206), with preoperative, surgical admission, and postoperative spending accounting for 9.8%, 80.7%, and 9.5% of total spending, respectively. Preoperatively, MSPP was $3109 (IQR $1806-$5215), 48% of patients underwent physical therapy, and 31% underwent injections in the 6 months period prior to surgery. Postoperatively, MSPP was $1416 (IQR $398-$3962), and unplanned hospital readmission (6% incidence) accounted for 33% of the overall postoperative spending. Discharge to a nonhome discharge disposition was associated with higher postoperative spending ($14 216) compared with patients discharged home ($1468) and home with home care ($2903), P < .001. CONCLUSION: Understanding the elements and distribution of perioperative spending for the episode of care in patients undergoing ACDF surgery for degenerative conditions is important for health care planning and resource allocation.

18.
Curr Addict Rep ; 8(4): 538-545, 2021 Dec.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35668861

RESUMO

Purpose of Review: This review summarizes studies examining impacts of medical and recreational cannabis laws on opioid prescribing, opioid use, opioid use disorder, opioid-related service utilization, and opioid-involved mortality. We also discuss research challenges and recommendations for future work. Recent Findings: Twenty-one U.S. based studies published between 2014-2021 that assessed state cannabis laws' association with opioid-related outcomes were reviewed. Study results were largely inconclusive. We identified six challenges of existing work: 1) inability to directly measure cannabis/opioid substitution; 2) use of general population samples and lack of individual-level longitudinal studies; 3) challenges disentangling effects of cannabis laws from other state laws; 4) methodological challenges with staggered policy implementation; 5) limited consideration of cannabis law provisions; 6) lack of triangulation across data sources. Summary: While existing research suggests the potential for cannabis laws to reduce high-risk opioid prescribing and other opioid-related adverse outcomes, studies should be interpreted in light of limitations.

20.
Drug Alcohol Depend ; 213: 108107, 2020 Jun 11.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32554171

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: In response to the role overprescribing has played in the U.S. opioid crisis, in the past decade states have enacted four main types of laws to curb opioid prescribing: mandatory prescription drug monitoring program (PDMP) enrollment laws requiring clinicians to register with a PDMP; mandatory PDMP query laws requiring clinicians to check a PDMP prior to prescribing opioids; pill mill laws regulating pain management clinics; and opioid prescribing cap laws limiting the dose/duration of opioid prescriptions. While 47 states now have one or more of these laws in place, little is known about implementation and enforcement strategies, facilitators, and barriers. METHODS: From November 2017 to February 2019, we interviewed 114 professionals involved in state opioid prescribing law implementation and enforcement in 20 states and identified common themes. RESULTS: Implementation efforts focused on awareness campaigns and targeted training of key front-line implementers. Enforcement strategies included active, complaint-based, and automated strategies. Collaboration across agencies and stakeholders, particularly health agencies and law enforcement, was identified as an important facilitator of implementation and enforcement. Two key interrelated barriers were identified: the complexity of state opioid prescribing laws in terms of which providers, patients, and prescriptions they applied to, and IT infrastructure. CONCLUSION: Despite differing approaches, our findings suggest similar barriers to implementation and enforcement across state opioid prescribing laws. Strategies are needed to ease implementation and enforcement of laws that apply only to specific sub-sets of providers, patients, or prescriptions and address issues of access and data utilization of the PDMP.

SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA
...