Benjamin C Sun1, Nicoleta Lupulescu-Mann2, Christina J Charlesworth2, Hyunjee Kim2, Daniel M Hartung3, Richard A Deyo4, K John McConnell1,2. 1. Center for Policy Research-Emergency Medicine, Department of Emergency Medicine, Oregon Health and Science University, Portland, OR. 2. Center for Health Systems Effectiveness, Oregon Health and Science University, Portland, OR. 3. College of Pharmacy, Oregon State University/Oregon Health and Science University, Portland, OR. 4. Department of Family Medicine, Department of Medicine, Department of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, and Oregon Institute of Occupational Health Sciences, Oregon Health and Science University, Portland, OR.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Washington State mandated seven hospital "best practices" in July 2012, several of which may affect emergency department (ED) opioid prescribing and provide a policy template for addressing the opioid prescription epidemic. We tested the hypothesis that the mandates would reduce opioid dispensing after an ED visit. We further assessed for a selective effect in patients with prior risky or chronic opioid use. METHODS: We performed a retrospective, observational analysis of ED visits by Medicaid fee-for-service beneficiaries in Washington State, between July 1, 2011, and June 30, 2013. We used an interrupted time-series design to control for temporal trends and patient characteristics. The primary outcome was any opioid dispensing within 3 days after an ED visit. The secondary outcome was total morphine milligram equivalents (MMEs) dispensed within 3 days. RESULTS: We analyzed 266,614 ED visits. Mandates were associated with a small reduction in opioid dispensing after an ED visit (-1.5%, 95% confidence interval [CI] = -2.8% to -0.15%). The mandates were associated with decreased opioid dispensing in 42,496 ED visits by patients with prior risky opioid use behavior (-4.7%, 95% CI = -7.1% to -2.3%) and in 20,238 visits by patients with chronic opioid use (-3.6%, 95% CI = -5.6% to -1.7%). Mandates were not associated with reductions in MMEs per dispense in the overall cohort or in either subgroup. CONCLUSIONS: Washington State best practice mandates were associated with small but nonselective reductions in opioid prescribing rates. States should focus on alternative policies to further reduce opioid dispensing in subgroups of high-risk and chronic users.
OBJECTIVE: Washington State mandated seven hospital "best practices" in July 2012, several of which may affect emergency department (ED) opioid prescribing and provide a policy template for addressing the opioid prescription epidemic. We tested the hypothesis that the mandates would reduce opioid dispensing after an ED visit. We further assessed for a selective effect in patients with prior risky or chronic opioid use. METHODS: We performed a retrospective, observational analysis of ED visits by Medicaid fee-for-service beneficiaries in Washington State, between July 1, 2011, and June 30, 2013. We used an interrupted time-series design to control for temporal trends and patient characteristics. The primary outcome was any opioid dispensing within 3 days after an ED visit. The secondary outcome was total morphine milligram equivalents (MMEs) dispensed within 3 days. RESULTS: We analyzed 266,614 ED visits. Mandates were associated with a small reduction in opioid dispensing after an ED visit (-1.5%, 95% confidence interval [CI] = -2.8% to -0.15%). The mandates were associated with decreased opioid dispensing in 42,496 ED visits by patients with prior risky opioid use behavior (-4.7%, 95% CI = -7.1% to -2.3%) and in 20,238 visits by patients with chronic opioid use (-3.6%, 95% CI = -5.6% to -1.7%). Mandates were not associated with reductions in MMEs per dispense in the overall cohort or in either subgroup. CONCLUSIONS: Washington State best practice mandates were associated with small but nonselective reductions in opioid prescribing rates. States should focus on alternative policies to further reduce opioid dispensing in subgroups of high-risk and chronic users.
Authors: Nathaniel Katz; Lee Panas; Meelee Kim; Adele D Audet; Arnold Bilansky; John Eadie; Peter Kreiner; Florence C Paillard; Cindy Thomas; Grant Carrow Journal: Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf Date: 2010-02 Impact factor: 2.890
Authors: Scott G Weiner; Christopher A Griggs; Breanne K Langlois; Patricia M Mitchell; Kerrie P Nelson; Franklin D Friedman; James A Feldman Journal: J Emerg Med Date: 2015-01-28 Impact factor: 1.484
Authors: Jane A Gwira Baumblatt; Caleb Wiedeman; John R Dunn; William Schaffner; Leonard J Paulozzi; Timothy F Jones Journal: JAMA Intern Med Date: 2014-05 Impact factor: 21.873
Authors: Margaret B Greenwood-Ericksen; Sabrina J Poon; Lewis S Nelson; Scott G Weiner; Jeremiah D Schuur Journal: Ann Emerg Med Date: 2015-11-25 Impact factor: 5.721
Authors: Zachary F Meisel; Nicoleta Lupulescu-Mann; Christina J Charlesworth; Hyunjee Kim; Benjamin C Sun Journal: Ann Emerg Med Date: 2019-06-20 Impact factor: 5.721
Authors: Enihomo Obadan-Udoh; Nicoleta Lupulescu-Mann; Christina J Charlesworth; Ulrike Muench; Matthew Jura; Hyunjee Kim; Eli Schwarz; Elizabeth Mertz; Benjamin C Sun Journal: J Am Dent Assoc Date: 2019-04 Impact factor: 3.634
Authors: Amber K Sabbatini; K John McConnell; Canada Parrish; Bianca K Frogner; Ashok Reddy; Douglas F Zatzick; William Kreuter; Anirban Basu Journal: Health Serv Res Date: 2022-03-13 Impact factor: 3.734
Authors: Benjamin C Sun; Christina J Charlesworth; Nicoleta Lupulescu-Mann; Jenny I Young; Hyunjee Kim; Daniel M Hartung; Richard A Deyo; K John McConnell Journal: Ann Emerg Med Date: 2017-12-13 Impact factor: 5.721
Authors: Benjamin C Sun; Nicoleta Lupulescu-Mann; Christina J Charlesworth; Hyunjee Kim; Daniel M Hartung; Richard A Deyo; K John McConnell Journal: J Subst Abuse Treat Date: 2018-08-17
Authors: Mark Trentalange; Tessa Runels; Andrew Bean; Robert D Kerns; Matthew J Bair; Abraham A Brody; Cynthia A Brandt; Ula Hwang Journal: Pain Date: 2019-06 Impact factor: 7.926
Authors: Tamara M Haegerich; Christopher M Jones; Pierre-Olivier Cote; Amber Robinson; Lindsey Ross Journal: Drug Alcohol Depend Date: 2019-09-19 Impact factor: 4.852