Susan L Calcaterra1, Maria Butler, Katie Olson, Joshua Blum. 1. From the Division of General Internal Medicine, University of Colorado, Aurora, CO (SLC); Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment, Prevention Services Division, Denver, CO (MB, KO); and Ambulatory Care Services, Denver Health and Hospital Authority, Denver, CO (JB).
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Despite inconclusive evidence that prescription drug monitoring programs (PDMP) reduce opioid-related mortality, guidelines recommend PDMP review with opioid prescribing. Some reported barriers to use include time-consuming processes to obtain data and workflow disruptions. METHODS: We provided access to a PMDP-electronic health record (EHR) integrated program to 123 clinicians in one healthcare system. Remaining clinicians within the healthcare system and metropolitan area did not receive PDMP-EHR integration program access. We identified changes in opioid prescribing by linking prescription data available in the state PMDP database to individual clinicians. The primary outcome was change in receipt of high dose opioid prescriptions (>90 mg morphine equivalents) by Colorado residents before and after program integration. Secondary outcomes included changes in long-acting opioid receipt and overlapping opioid and benzodiazepine prescription days. Next, we surveyed clinicians to assess their perspectives on PDMP data acquisition before and after PDMP-EHR integration program access. RESULTS: High-dose opioid receipt decreased significantly across all 3 clinician groups [PDMP-EHR integration program access (27.6%, to 6.9%, P < 0.001); no program access in the same healthcare system (4.8% to 2.9%, P < 0.001), and no program access across the metropolitan area (13.5% to 6.1%, P < 0.001)]. Clinicians reported improved access to PDMP data using the PDMP-EHR integrated program compared to the state PDMP website (98.6%). CONCLUSIONS: Further study of PDMP-EHR integration programs on patient and clinician outcomes may illuminate the role of this technology in public health and in clinical practice.
INTRODUCTION: Despite inconclusive evidence that prescription drug monitoring programs (PDMP) reduce opioid-related mortality, guidelines recommend PDMP review with opioid prescribing. Some reported barriers to use include time-consuming processes to obtain data and workflow disruptions. METHODS: We provided access to a PMDP-electronic health record (EHR) integrated program to 123 clinicians in one healthcare system. Remaining clinicians within the healthcare system and metropolitan area did not receive PDMP-EHR integration program access. We identified changes in opioid prescribing by linking prescription data available in the state PMDP database to individual clinicians. The primary outcome was change in receipt of high dose opioid prescriptions (>90 mg morphine equivalents) by Colorado residents before and after program integration. Secondary outcomes included changes in long-acting opioid receipt and overlapping opioid and benzodiazepine prescription days. Next, we surveyed clinicians to assess their perspectives on PDMP data acquisition before and after PDMP-EHR integration program access. RESULTS: High-dose opioid receipt decreased significantly across all 3 clinician groups [PDMP-EHR integration program access (27.6%, to 6.9%, P < 0.001); no program access in the same healthcare system (4.8% to 2.9%, P < 0.001), and no program access across the metropolitan area (13.5% to 6.1%, P < 0.001)]. Clinicians reported improved access to PDMP data using the PDMP-EHR integrated program compared to the state PDMP website (98.6%). CONCLUSIONS: Further study of PDMP-EHR integration programs on patient and clinician outcomes may illuminate the role of this technology in public health and in clinical practice.
Authors: Shane R Mueller; Stephen Koester; Jason M Glanz; Edward M Gardner; Ingrid A Binswanger Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2016-10-31 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Paul A Harris; Robert Taylor; Brenda L Minor; Veida Elliott; Michelle Fernandez; Lindsay O'Neal; Laura McLeod; Giovanni Delacqua; Francesco Delacqua; Jacqueline Kirby; Stephany N Duda Journal: J Biomed Inform Date: 2019-05-09 Impact factor: 6.317
Authors: Alvaro Castillo-Carniglia; William R Ponicki; Andrew Gaidus; Paul J Gruenewald; Brandon D L Marshall; David S Fink; Silvia S Martins; Ariadne Rivera-Aguirre; Garen J Wintemute; Magdalena Cerdá Journal: Epidemiology Date: 2019-03 Impact factor: 4.822
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: Ellen Meara; Jill R Horwitz; Wilson Powell; Lynn McClelland; Weiping Zhou; A James O'Malley; Nancy E Morden Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2016-06-22 Impact factor: 91.245