Eric C Sun1, Chris A Rishel, Jennifer F Waljee, Chad M Brummett, Anupam B Jena. 1. Department of Anesthesiology, Perioperative and Pain Medicine, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA Department of Surgery, University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor, MI Department of Anesthesiology, University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor, MI Department of Health Care Policy, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA; and Department of Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA; and National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge, MA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To examine whether laws limiting opioid prescribing have been associated with reductions in the incidence of persistent postoperative opioid use. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: In an effort to address the opioid epidemic, 26 states (as of 2018) have passed laws limiting opioid prescribing for acute pain. However, it is unknown whether these laws have achieved their reduced the risk of persistent postoperative opioid use. METHODS: We identified 957,639 privately insured patients undergoing one of 10 procedures between January 1, 2004 and September 30, 2018. We then estimated the association between persistent postoperative opioid use, defined as having filled ≥10 prescriptions or ≥120 days supply of opioids during postoperative days 91-365, and whether opioid prescribing limits were in effect on the day of surgery. States were classified as having: no limits, a limit of ≤7 days supply, or a limit of >7 days supply. The regression models adjusted for observable confounders such as patient comorbidities and also utilized a difference-in-differences approach, which relied on variation in state laws over time, to further minimize confounding. RESULTS: The adjusted incidence of persistent postoperative opioid use was 3.5% (95%CI 3.3%-3.7%) for patients facing a limit of ≤7 days supply, compared with 3.3% (95%CI 3.3%-3.3%) for patients facing no prescribing limits (p=0.13 for difference compared to no prescribing limits) and 3.4%, (95%CI 3.2%-3.6%) for patients facing a limit of >7 days supply (p=0.43 for difference compared to no prescribing limits). CONCLUSIONS: Laws limiting opioid prescriptions were not associated with subsequent reductions in persistent postoperative opioid use.
OBJECTIVE: To examine whether laws limiting opioid prescribing have been associated with reductions in the incidence of persistent postoperative opioid use. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: In an effort to address the opioid epidemic, 26 states (as of 2018) have passed laws limiting opioid prescribing for acute pain. However, it is unknown whether these laws have achieved their reduced the risk of persistent postoperative opioid use. METHODS: We identified 957,639 privately insured patients undergoing one of 10 procedures between January 1, 2004 and September 30, 2018. We then estimated the association between persistent postoperative opioid use, defined as having filled ≥10 prescriptions or ≥120 days supply of opioids during postoperative days 91-365, and whether opioid prescribing limits were in effect on the day of surgery. States were classified as having: no limits, a limit of ≤7 days supply, or a limit of >7 days supply. The regression models adjusted for observable confounders such as patient comorbidities and also utilized a difference-in-differences approach, which relied on variation in state laws over time, to further minimize confounding. RESULTS: The adjusted incidence of persistent postoperative opioid use was 3.5% (95%CI 3.3%-3.7%) for patients facing a limit of ≤7 days supply, compared with 3.3% (95%CI 3.3%-3.3%) for patients facing no prescribing limits (p=0.13 for difference compared to no prescribing limits) and 3.4%, (95%CI 3.2%-3.6%) for patients facing a limit of >7 days supply (p=0.43 for difference compared to no prescribing limits). CONCLUSIONS: Laws limiting opioid prescriptions were not associated with subsequent reductions in persistent postoperative opioid use.
Authors: Chad M Brummett; Jennifer F Waljee; Jenna Goesling; Stephanie Moser; Paul Lin; Michael J Englesbe; Amy S B Bohnert; Sachin Kheterpal; Brahmajee K Nallamothu Journal: JAMA Surg Date: 2017-06-21 Impact factor: 14.766
Authors: Chintan V Dave; Elisabetta Patorno; Jessica M Franklin; Krista Huybrechts; Ameet Sarpatwari; Aaron S Kesselheim; Brian T Bateman Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2019-11 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Michael L Kent; Robert W Hurley; Gary M Oderda; Debra B Gordon; Eric Sun; Monty Mythen; Timothy E Miller; Andrew D Shaw; Tong J Gan; Julie K M Thacker; Matthew D McEvoy Journal: Anesth Analg Date: 2019-08 Impact factor: 5.108
Authors: Stephen S Johnston; John M Morton; Iftekhar Kalsekar; Eric M Ammann; Chia-Wen Hsiao; Jenna Reps Journal: Value Health Date: 2019-05 Impact factor: 5.725
Authors: Naheed K Jivraj; Faizal Raghavji; Jennifer Bethell; Duminda N Wijeysundera; Karim S Ladha; Brian T Bateman; Mark D Neuman; Hannah Wunsch Journal: Anesthesiology Date: 2020-06 Impact factor: 7.892
Authors: Christina A Mikosz; Kun Zhang; Tamara Haegerich; Likang Xu; Jan L Losby; Arlene Greenspan; Grant Baldwin; Deborah Dowell Journal: JAMA Netw Open Date: 2020-05-01
Authors: Sunil Agarwal; John D Bryan; Hsou Mei Hu; Jay S Lee; Kao-Ping Chua; Rebecca L Haffajee; Chad M Brummett; Michael J Englesbe; Jennifer F Waljee Journal: JAMA Netw Open Date: 2019-12-02