Laura C Frizzell1, Mike Vuolo2, Brian C Kelly3. 1. The Ohio State University, Department of Sociology, 238 Townshend Hall, 1885 Neil Avenue Mall, Columbus, OH, 43210, USA. Electronic address: Frizzell.31@osu.edu. 2. The Ohio State University, Department of Sociology, 238 Townshend Hall, 1885 Neil Avenue Mall, Columbus, OH, 43210, USA. Electronic address: vuolo.2@osu.edu. 3. Purdue University, Department of Sociology, 700 W. State St., West Lafayette, IN, 47907, USA. Electronic address: bckelly@purdue.edu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The U.S. has seen an unprecedented rise in opioid-related morbidity and mortality, and states have passed numerous laws in response. Researchers have not comprehensively established the effectiveness of pain management clinic regulations to reduce opioid prescribing using national data. METHODS: We combine a policy dataset from the Prescription Drug Abuse Policy System with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention county-level opioid prescribing data, as well as with numerous government datasets for county- and state- level covariates. We predict retail opioid prescriptions dispensed per 100 people using county fixed-effects models with a state-level cluster correction. Our key predictors of interest are the presence of any state-level pain management clinic law and eight specific subcomponents of the law. RESULTS: Pain management clinic laws demonstrate consistent, negative effects on prescribing rates. Controlling for county characteristics, state spending, and the broader policy context, states with pain management clinic laws had, on average, 5.78 fewer opioid prescriptions per 100 people than states without such laws (p < .05). Five specific subcomponents demonstrate efficacy in reducing prescribing rates: certification requirements (B = -6.02, p < .05), medical directors (B = -6.14, p < .05), dispenser and dispensing amount restrictions (B = -8.60, p < .01; B = -15.51, p < .001), and explicit penalties for noncompliance (B = -6.02, p < .05). Three subcomponents had no effect: prescription quantity restrictions and requirements to register with or review prescription drug monitoring programs. CONCLUSIONS: Implementation of pain management clinic laws reduced county-level opioid prescribing. States should review specific components to determine which forms of law are most efficacious.
BACKGROUND: The U.S. has seen an unprecedented rise in opioid-related morbidity and mortality, and states have passed numerous laws in response. Researchers have not comprehensively established the effectiveness of pain management clinic regulations to reduce opioid prescribing using national data. METHODS: We combine a policy dataset from the Prescription Drug Abuse Policy System with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention county-level opioid prescribing data, as well as with numerous government datasets for county- and state- level covariates. We predict retail opioid prescriptions dispensed per 100 people using county fixed-effects models with a state-level cluster correction. Our key predictors of interest are the presence of any state-level pain management clinic law and eight specific subcomponents of the law. RESULTS:Pain management clinic laws demonstrate consistent, negative effects on prescribing rates. Controlling for county characteristics, state spending, and the broader policy context, states with pain management clinic laws had, on average, 5.78 fewer opioid prescriptions per 100 people than states without such laws (p < .05). Five specific subcomponents demonstrate efficacy in reducing prescribing rates: certification requirements (B = -6.02, p < .05), medical directors (B = -6.14, p < .05), dispenser and dispensing amount restrictions (B = -8.60, p < .01; B = -15.51, p < .001), and explicit penalties for noncompliance (B = -6.02, p < .05). Three subcomponents had no effect: prescription quantity restrictions and requirements to register with or review prescription drug monitoring programs. CONCLUSIONS: Implementation of pain management clinic laws reduced county-level opioid prescribing. States should review specific components to determine which forms of law are most efficacious.
Authors: Richard C Dart; Hilary L Surratt; Theodore J Cicero; Mark W Parrino; S Geoff Severtson; Becki Bucher-Bartelson; Jody L Green Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2015-01-15 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Hsien-Yen Chang; Tatyana Lyapustina; Lainie Rutkow; Matthew Daubresse; Matt Richey; Mark Faul; Elizabeth A Stuart; G Caleb Alexander Journal: Drug Alcohol Depend Date: 2016-06-02 Impact factor: 4.492
Authors: Kevin E Vowles; Mindy L McEntee; Peter Siyahhan Julnes; Tessa Frohe; John P Ney; David N van der Goes Journal: Pain Date: 2015-04 Impact factor: 6.961
Authors: Barbara Andraka-Christou; Joshua B Rager; Brittany Brown-Podgorski; Ross D Silverman; Dennis P Watson Journal: Subst Abuse Treat Prev Policy Date: 2018-05-22
Authors: Bradley D Stein; Flora Sheng; Erin A Taylor; Andrew W Dick; Mark Sorbero; Rosalie Liccardo Pacula Journal: Drug Alcohol Depend Date: 2021-12-28 Impact factor: 4.492
Authors: Magdalena Cerdá; Katherine Wheeler-Martin; Emilie Bruzelius; William Ponicki; Paul Gruenewald; Christine Mauro; Stephen Crystal; Corey S Davis; Katherine Keyes; Deborah Hasin; Kara E Rudolph; Silvia S Martins Journal: Am J Epidemiol Date: 2021-12-01 Impact factor: 5.363