Mukaila A Raji1,2, Yong-Fang Kuo1,2,3,4, Deepak Adhikari4, Jacques Baillargeon2,3,4, James S Goodwin1,2,3. 1. Department of Internal Medicine and Sealy Center on Aging, University of Texas Medical Branch, Galveston, TX, 77555-0177, USA. 2. Department of Preventive Medicine and Community Health, University of Texas Medical Branch, Galveston, TX, 77555-1148, USA. 3. Institute for Translational Science, University of Texas Medical Branch, Galveston, TX, 77555-0342, USA. 4. Office of Biostatistics, University of Texas Medical Branch, Galveston, TX, 77555-1148, USA.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To examine differences in opioid prescribing by patient characteristics and variation in hydrocodone combination product (HCP) prescribing attributed to states, before and after the 2014 Drug Enforcement Administration's reclassification of HCP from schedule III to the more restrictive schedule II. METHODS: We used 2013 to 2015 data for 9 202 958 patients aged 18 to 64 from a large nationally representative commercial health insurance program to assess the temporal trends in the monthly rate of opioid prescribing. RESULTS: HCP prescribing decreased by 26% from June 2013 to June 2015; the rate of prescriptions for any opioid decreased by 11%. Prescribing of non-hydrocodone schedule III opioids increased slightly while prescribing of non-hydrocodone schedule II opioids and tramadol was stable. Absolute decreases in HCP prescribing rates were larger in patients being treated for cancer (-2.26% vs -0.7% for non-cancer patients, P < 0.0001) and in those with high comorbidities (-2.13% vs -0.55% for those with no comorbidity, P < 0.0001). Differences in the absolute and relative changes in HCP prescribing rates among states were large; for example, a relative decrease of 46.7% in Texas and a 12.7% increase in South Dakota. The variation in HCP prescribing attributable to the state of residence increased from 6.6% in 2013 to 8.7% in 2015. CONCLUSIONS: The 2014 federal policy was associated with a decrease in rates of HCP and total opioid prescribing. The large decrease in the rates of HCP prescribing for patients with actively treated cancer may represent an unintended consequence.
PURPOSE: To examine differences in opioid prescribing by patient characteristics and variation in hydrocodone combination product (HCP) prescribing attributed to states, before and after the 2014 Drug Enforcement Administration's reclassification of HCP from schedule III to the more restrictive schedule II. METHODS: We used 2013 to 2015 data for 9 202 958 patients aged 18 to 64 from a large nationally representative commercial health insurance program to assess the temporal trends in the monthly rate of opioid prescribing. RESULTS:HCP prescribing decreased by 26% from June 2013 to June 2015; the rate of prescriptions for any opioid decreased by 11%. Prescribing of non-hydrocodone schedule III opioids increased slightly while prescribing of non-hydrocodone schedule II opioids and tramadol was stable. Absolute decreases in HCP prescribing rates were larger in patients being treated for cancer (-2.26% vs -0.7% for non-cancerpatients, P < 0.0001) and in those with high comorbidities (-2.13% vs -0.55% for those with no comorbidity, P < 0.0001). Differences in the absolute and relative changes in HCP prescribing rates among states were large; for example, a relative decrease of 46.7% in Texas and a 12.7% increase in South Dakota. The variation in HCP prescribing attributable to the state of residence increased from 6.6% in 2013 to 8.7% in 2015. CONCLUSIONS: The 2014 federal policy was associated with a decrease in rates of HCP and total opioid prescribing. The large decrease in the rates of HCP prescribing for patients with actively treated cancer may represent an unintended consequence.
Authors: Jacques Baillargeon; Randall J Urban; Kenneth J Ottenbacher; Karen S Pierson; James S Goodwin Journal: JAMA Intern Med Date: 2013-08-12 Impact factor: 21.873
Authors: T O'Brien; L L Christrup; A M Drewes; M T Fallon; H G Kress; H J McQuay; G Mikus; B J Morlion; J Perez-Cajaraville; E Pogatzki-Zahn; G Varrassi; J C D Wells Journal: Eur J Pain Date: 2017-01 Impact factor: 3.931
Authors: Yong-Fang Kuo; Mukaila A Raji; Victor Liaw; Jacques Baillargeon; James S Goodwin Journal: J Am Geriatr Soc Date: 2018-04-14 Impact factor: 5.562
Authors: Mark D Neuman; Sean Hennessy; Dylan S Small; Craig Newcomb; Lakisha Gaskins; Colleen M Brensinger; Duminda N Wijeysundera; Brian T Bateman; Hannah Wunsch Journal: Anesthesiology Date: 2020-05 Impact factor: 7.892
Authors: Jacob N Hunnicutt; Jonggyu Baek; Matthew Alcusky; Anne L Hume; Shao-Hsien Liu; Christine M Ulbricht; Jennifer Tjia; Kate L Lapane Journal: Med Care Date: 2018-10 Impact factor: 2.983
Authors: Megan S Schuler; Sara E Heins; Rosanna Smart; Beth Ann Griffin; David Powell; Elizabeth A Stuart; Bryce Pardo; Sierra Smucker; Stephen W Patrick; Rosalie Liccardo Pacula; Bradley D Stein Journal: Drug Alcohol Depend Date: 2020-06-27 Impact factor: 4.492