Chronic Opioid Therapy Patients Research Articles

Recovery from opioid use on a neuropsychoanalytic service.

Little is known about recovery from opioid use disorder (OUD) or outcomes of detoxification and drug-free treatment of chronic opioid therapy (COT). Harm reduction with medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD) is regarded as the only legitimate treatment. The Institutional Review Board (IRB) approved reporting deidentified outcomes. Patients seen over a 10-year period whose records suggested recovery were called and interviewed. Overall, 69/86 (80%) confirmed that they had been sober for at least a year, including 41 patients with OUD (75%) and 28 COT patients (90%). 91% were drug-free, and 9% were on MOUD. 79% preferred a psychotherapy approach. 21% preferred MOUD. Coming for more treatment and abstinence from tobacco were significantly correlated with recovery. This is the first report that we are aware of regarding the frequency of recovery from OUD and COT. We have complicated the discussion about what is the best treatment for patients with OUD and patients on COT. Advising that maintenance is the only legitimate treatment for patients who suffer from OUD or who are on COT seems both premature and jeopardizes the ability of treaters to individualize treatment recommendations.

Lessons Learned in Implementing a Chronic Opioid Therapy Management System.

Opioid misuse has resulted in significant morbidity and mortality in the United States, and safer opioid use represents an important challenge in the primary care setting. This article describes a research collaborative of health service researchers, systems engineers, and clinicians seeking to improve processes for safer chronic opioid therapy management in an academic primary care center. We present implementation results and lessons learned along with an intervention toolkit that others may consider using within their organization. Using iterative improvement lifecycles and systems engineering principles, we developed a risk-based workflow model for patients on chronic opioids. Two key safe opioid use process metrics-percent of patients with recent opioid treatment agreements and urine drug tests-were identified, and processes to improve these measures were designed, tested, and implemented. Focus groups were conducted after the conclusion of implementation, with barriers and lessons learned identified via thematic analysis. Initial surveys revealed a lack of knowledge regarding resources available to patients and prescribers in the primary care clinic. In addition, 18 clinicians (69%) reported largely "inheriting" (rather than initiating) their chronic opioid therapy patients. We tracked 68 patients over a 4-year period. Although process measures improved, full adherence was not achieved for the entire population. Barriers included team structure, the evolving opioid environment, and surveillance challenges, along with disruptions resulting from the 2019 novel coronavirus. Safe primary care opioid prescribing requires ongoing monitoring and management in a complex environment. The application of a risk-based approach is possible but requires adaptability and redundancies to be reliable.

Science, Medicine, and the Anesthesiologist

Science, Medicine, and the Anesthesiologist

Chronic Opioid Therapy Utilization Following an Acute Pain Prescription Supply Restriction Law: An Interrupted Time Series Analysis

Florida House Bill 21 (HB21) was implemented in July 2018 to limit Schedule II opioids prescriptions for patients with acute pain to a 3-day supply. Little is known about the potential unintended effects that such opioid restriction policies may have on chronic pain patients, who are exempt from the law. We aimed to evaluate the effect of HB21 on opioid utilization measures among a cohort of chronic opioid therapy (COT) patients. A quasi-experimental design with interrupted time series analyses. Pharmacy claims from January 1, 2015 to June 31, 2019 from a large employer-based health plan in Florida. COT patients were those who received a ≥ 70 days' supply of opioids in the prior 90 days, representing 15,310 patients. Interrupted time series analyses were conducted to compare the following monthly measures among COT patients before and after HB21 implementation: 1) number of COT patients, 2) daily Morphine Milligram Equivalents [MMEs], 3) days' supply of prescriptions. There was a significant 25% reduction in the trend (pre-HB21 RR: 0.95, 95% CI: 0.93, 0.96 versus post-HB21 RR: 0.70, 95% CI: 0.65, 0.76) and an 8% immediate decrease (RR: 0.92, 95% CI: 0.88, 0.97) in the monthly prevalence of COT patients after HB21 implementation. However, no significant change was observed in trends for monthly number of days supplied per prescription, monthly MMEs per COT patient-day, or total MMEs per prescription. Our study used data from employer-based private health insurance and did not include a longer post-policy period to adjust for implementation lag. Fewer patients received COT after HB21; however, patients who continued to receive COT experienced no significant changes in their regimen. The study did not assess whether COT patients were appropriately tapered or if therapeutic alternatives were initiated for new chronic pain patients.

Patient outcomes after opioid dose reduction among patients with chronic opioid therapy.

The net effects of prescribing initiatives that encourage dose reductions are uncertain. We examined whether rapid dose reduction after high-dose chronic opioid therapy (COT) associates with suicide, overdose, or other opioid-related adverse events. This retrospective cohort study included Oregon Medicaid recipients with high-dose COT. Claims were linked with prescription data from the prescription drug monitoring program and death data from vital statistics, 2014 to 2017. Participants were placed into 4 mutually exclusive dose trajectory groups after the high-dose COT period, and Cox proportional hazard models were used to examine the effect of dose changes on patient outcomes in the following year. Of the 14,596 high-dose COT patients, 4191 (28.7%) abruptly discontinued opioid prescriptions, 1648 (11.3%) reduced opioid dose before discontinuing, 6480 (44.4%) had a dose reduction but never discontinued, and 2277 (15.6%) had a stable or increasing dose. Discontinuation, whether abrupt (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 3.63; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.42-9.25) or with dose reduction (aHR 4.47, 95% CI 1.68-11.88) significantly increased risk of suicide compared with those with stable or increasing dose. By contrast, discontinuation or dose reduction reduced the risk of overdose compared with those with a stable or increasing dose (aHR 0.36-0.62, 95% CI 0.20-0.94). Patients with an abrupt discontinuation were more likely to overdose on heroin (vs. prescription opioids) than patients in other groups (P < 0.0001). Our study suggests that patients on COT require careful risk assessment and supportive interventions when considering opioid discontinuation or continuation at a high dose.

Laboratory-Generated Urine Toxicology Interpretations: A Mixed Methods Study

Clinicians frequently order urine drug testing (UDT) for patients on chronic opioid therapy (COT), yet often have difficulty interpreting test results accurately. To evaluate the implementation and effectiveness of a laboratory-generated urine toxicology interpretation service for clinicians prescribing COT. Type II hybrid-convergent mixed methods design (implementation) and pre-post prospective cohort study with matched controls (effectiveness). Four ambulatory sites (2 primary care, 1 pain management, 1 palliative care) within 2 US academic medical institutions. Interpretative reports were generated by the clinical chemistry laboratory and were provided to UDT ordering providers via inbox message in the electronic health record (EHR). The Partners Institutional Review Board approved this study.Participants were primary care, pain management, and palliative care clinicians who ordered liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry UDT for COT patients in clinic. Intervention was a laboratory-generated interpretation service that provided an individualized interpretive report of UDT results based on the patient's prescribed medications and toxicology metabolites for clinicians who received the intervention (n = 8) versus matched controls (n = 18).Implementation results included focus group and survey feedback on the interpretation service's usability and its impact on workflow, clinical decision making, clinician-patient relationships, and interdisciplinary teamwork. Effectiveness outcomes included UDT interpretation concordance between the clinician and laboratory, documentation frequency of UDT results interpretation and communication of results to patients, and clinician prescribing behavior at follow-up. Among the 8 intervention clinicians (median age 58 [IQR 16.5] years; 2 women [25%]) on a Likert scale from 1 ("strongly disagree") to 5 ("strongly agree"), 7 clinicians reported at 6 months postintervention that the interpretation service was easy to use (mean 5 [standard deviation {SD}, 0]); improved results comprehension (mean 5 [SD, 0]); and helped them interpret results more accurately (mean 5 [SD, 0]), quickly (mean 4.67 [SD, 0.52]), and confidently (mean 4.83 [SD, 0.41]). Although there were no statistically significant differences in outcomes between cohorts, clinician-laboratory interpretation concordance trended toward improvement (intervention 22/32 [68.8%] to 29/33 [87.9%] vs. control 21/25 [84%] to 23/30 [76.7%], P = 0.07) among cases with documented interpretations. This study has a low sample size and was conducted at 2 large academic medical institutions and may not be generalizable to community settings. Interpretations were well received by clinicians but did not significantly improve laboratory-clinician interpretation concordance, interpretation documentation frequency, or opioid-prescribing behavior.

The Impact of Increased Hydrocodone Regulation on Opioid Prescribing in an Urban Safety-Net Health Care System.

Hydrocodone-combination analgesics were changed from Schedule III to Schedule II to discourage the prescribing of these analgesics. Our primary aim was to explore the effect of hydrocodone rescheduling on opioid prescribing within an urban safety-net health care system. Data were extracted from electronic records of ambulatory patients (N = 82,432 patients) prescribed hydrocodone-combination, codeine-combination, or tramadol opioid analgesics (N = 200,675 prescriptions) between October 6, 2013 and October 6, 2015. Data analyses modeled predicted probabilities of hydrocodone-combination prescriptions (HCPs). Chronic opioid therapy (COT) for chronic pain (ie, ≥3 opioid prescriptions/12 months) and morphine milligram equivalency (MME) levels were also examined. The probability of providers writing HCPs decreased significantly from pre- to postrescheduling (0.525 vs 0.158, respectively, P < .0001). However, this coincided with large probability increases in codeine-combination (0.064 vs 0.269) and tramadol prescriptions (0.412 vs 0.573). The probability of HCPs varied across physician specialty (P < .0001), patient diagnoses (P < .0001), COT versus non-COT patients (P < .0001), and patient characteristics (sex, race/ethnicity, and age; P < .05). COT patients received significantly more opioid prescriptions in the postrescheduling period (M = 4.81 vs M = 4.27; P < .0001). Patients on <20 MME/day increased slightly from pre- to postrescheduling (P < .0001). Significant declines in HCPs occurred after rescheduling; however, one third of patients prescribed opioids remained on doses ≥20 MME/day. Codeine- and tramadol-prescription probabilities increased significantly and providers may have an increased perception of safety about these medications. Physicians and health care systems must reduce their overreliance on opioids in treating pain, especially chronic pain, as all opioids incur some level of risk.

Team-Based Medicine: Incorporating a Clinical Pharmacist into Pain and Opioid Practice Management.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) reports that death from opioids has increased by more than five times since 1999. In response, federal and state organizations have released guidelines recommending best practice standards to combat the opioid epidemic. To evaluate the impact of a clinical pharmacist in a team-based care model on the adherence to best practice standards and access to care for management of patients prescribed chronic opioid therapy (COT). Retrospective chart review study. An outpatient physical medicine and rehabilitation clinic in a tertiary hospital. Three hundred eighty-three patients presenting to the clinic between January 2012 and August 2016 with chronic, noncancer pain. Comparison of adherence to best practice standards-including changes in morphine equivalent dose (MED), compliance with urine drug screenings, documentation of medication agreements, initiation of nonopioid medications, and the impact of comorbidities-was analyzed before and after a clinical pharmacist was added to the team. Data were gathered from the electronic medical record and the Prescription Monitoring Program. A control group of patients who did not see the pharmacist and were managed only by the physician section head was also compared to the group of patients managed by a clinical pharmacist. The primary outcome measurement evaluates the change in MED values over time. Secondary outcome measurements are to review compliance with annual urine drug screening, documentation of the medication agreement, initiation of nonopioid medications by the pharmacist, and assessment of the access to care for patients with chronic opioid therapy needs. A clinically significant reduction in MED with an average decrease of 207 mg was seen after five or more visits with the pharmacist. The pharmacist initiated nonopioid medications at 209 unique patient visits (19.5%). The pharmacist completed 1197 visits during the study time frame, increasing physician access by at least two additional visits per patient per year. Completion of urine drug screens and medication agreement reviews improved over time (P < .001). There was an increase in MED for patients who did not complete this monitoring, whereas the MED remained stable in patients who did complete the monitoring. The addition of a clinical pharmacist to an interdisciplinary team managing COT patients resulted in a MED reduction after five or more visits with the pharmacist, improved adherence to best practice standards, optimization of opioid and nonopioid medication therapy, and increased patient access. Developing a role for advanced practitioners, such as clinical pharmacist providers, working with patients on COT can result in significant improvements in patient access to care, adherence to best practice standards, and patient safety. III.

Natural Language Processing–Identified Problem Opioid Use and Its Associated Health Care Costs

Use of prescription opioids and problems of abuse and addiction have increased over the past decade. Claims-based studies have documented substantial economic burden of opioid abuse. This study utilized electronic health record (EHR) data to identify chronic opioid therapy (COT) patients with problem opioid use (POU) and compared costs with those for COT patients without POU. This study utilized EHR and claims data from an integrated health care system. Patients received COT (≥70 days’ supply in ≥1 calendar quarter, 2006–2012). Natural language processing (NLP) identified notations of opioid addiction, abuse, misuse, or overuse, and manual validation was performed. Cases had evidence of POU (index = first POU notation), and controls, sampled 9:1, did not. Health care resource utilization was measured and costs estimated using Medicare reimbursement rates. A longitudinal analysis of costs was conducted using generalized estimating equations. Adjusted analyses controlled for baseline age, gender, region, specific comorbidities, and a comorbidity index. The analysis population included 1,125 cases and 10,128 controls. Unadjusted costs were higher for cases in all three years. After controlling for covariates, total costs remained higher in cases and were significantly higher in the first year of follow-up ($38,064 vs. $31,674, P = .0048). The largest cost difference was observed in the first month of follow-up. COT patients with POU experienced significantly higher costs compared with COT patients without POU in the first year of follow-up. The greatest difference in costs was observed around identification of POU.

Doctor-Patient Trust Among Chronic Pain Patients on Chronic Opioid Therapy after Opioid Risk Reduction Initiatives: A Survey.

This analysis examined patients' perceptions about trust within the doctor-patient relationship related to managing opioid pain medications. We compared perceptions among chronic opioid therapy (COT) patients who were and were not exposed to opioid risk reduction initiatives. Between 2014 and 2016, we surveyed 1588 adults with chronic pain receiving COT about their trust in their prescribing doctor, their perceptions of their doctor's trust in them, their concerns about opioid prescribing, and their knowledge of opioid safety concerns. The population included adults receiving care in intervention settings that implemented opioid risk reduction initiatives and control settings with similar COT patients that did not. Overall, 82.2% of COT patients said they trusted their doctor's judgment, with more agreement among patients in the control clinics (86.3%; n = 653) than in the intervention clinics (77.9%; n = 935; P = .002). Similarly, slightly more patients in the control clinics believed their physician trusted how they managed their opioid pain medicines (91.1%) compared with the intervention clinics (86.2%; P = .002). The percent who worried that their doctor would stop prescribing opioid pain medicine was 29.3% in intervention clinics and 21.8% in control clinics (P = .007). Although COT patients typically reported favorable perceptions of doctor-patient trust in managing opioid pain medicines, implementation of opioid risk reduction initiatives may have reduced levels of trust for a minority of COT patients. This suggests that it may be possible to implement opioid risk-reduction initiatives while sustaining high levels of doctor-patient trust for most COT patients.

Impact of Opioid Dose Reduction and Risk Mitigation Initiatives on Chronic Opioid Therapy Patients at Higher Risk for Opioid-Related Adverse Outcomes

We aimed to determine if opioid risk reduction initiatives including dose reduction and risk mitigation strategies for chronic noncancer pain patients receiving chronic opioid therapy (COT) had a differential impact on average daily opioid doses of COT patients at higher risk for opioid-related adverse outcomes compared with lower-risk patients. Interrupted time series. Group Health Cooperative (GH), a health care delivery system and insurance within Washington State, between 2006 and 2014. GH enrollees on COT defined as receiving a supply of 70 or more days of opioids within 90 days using electronic pharmacy data for filled prescriptions. We compared the average daily morphine equivalent doses (MED) of COT patients with and without each of the following higher-risk characteristics: mental disorders, substance use disorders, sedative use, and male gender. In all four pairwise comparisons, the higher-risk subgroup had a higher average daily MED than the lower-risk subgroup across the study period. Adjusted for covariates, modest differences in the annual rate of reduction in average daily MED were noted between higher- and lower-risk subgroups in three pairwise comparisons: those with mental disorders vs without (-8.2 mg/y vs -5.2 mg/y, P = 0.005), with sedative use vs without (-9.2 mg/y vs -5.8 mg/y, P = 0.004); mg), in men vs women (-8.8 mg/y vs -5.9 mg/y, P = 0.01). Using clinical policy initiatives in a health care system, dose reductions were achieved among COT patients at higher risk for opioid-related adverse outcomes that were at least as large as those among lower-risk patients.

Comparing Pain and Depressive Symptoms of Chronic Opioid Therapy Patients Receiving Dose Reduction and Risk Mitigation Initiatives With Usual Care

Dose reduction and risk mitigation initiatives have been recommended to reduce opioid-related risks among patients receiving chronic opioid therapy (COT), but questions remain over whether these initiatives worsen pain control and quality of life. In 2014 to 2015, we interviewed 1,588 adult COT patients within a health care system in Washington State and compared those who received dose reduction and risk mitigation initiatives in primary care clinics (intervention) with patients in comparable health care settings without initiatives (control). The primary outcomes were pain assessed using the pain, enjoyment, and general activity (PEG) scale, a 3-item scale to assess global pain intensity and interference, with secondary measures including depression (Patient Health Questionnaire-8 scale). Generalized estimating equations for linear regression models were used to estimate differences in mean scores between intervention and control sites. Estimated differences, adjusted for patient characteristics and weighted for nonresponse, between patients at intervention and control clinics were not clinically significant for the PEG (−.03, 95% confidence interval = −.25 to .19) or Patient Health Questionnaire-8 (−.64, 95% confidence interval = −1.19 to −.08). We found no evidence that COT patients in clinics with dose reduction and risk mitigation initiatives had clinically meaningful differences in pain intensity, interference with activities and enjoyment of life, or depressive symptoms compared with control health care settings. PerspectiveThis article evaluates the effect of dose reduction and risk mitigation initiatives, such as those recently recommended by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, to reduce risks associated with COT on global pain and interference, depressive symptoms, and perceived pain relief and bothersomeness of side effects.

Prevalence of prescription opioid use disorder among chronic opioid therapy patients after health plan opioid dose and risk reduction initiatives

BackgroundNo studies have assessed the comparative effectiveness of guideline-recommended interventions to reduce risk of prescription opioid use disorder among chronic opioid therapy (COT) patients. We compared the prevalence of prescription opioid use disorder among COT patients from intervention clinics that had implemented opioid dose and risk reduction initiatives for more than 4 years relative to control clinics that had not. MethodsAfter a healthcare system in Washington State implemented interventions to reduce opioid dose and risks, we surveyed 1588 adult primary care COT patients to compare the prevalence of prescription opioid use disorder among COT patients from the intervention and control clinics. Intervention clinics managed COT patients at lower COT doses and with more consistent use of risk reduction practices. Control clinics cared for similar COT patients but prescribed higher opioid doses and used COT risk reduction practices inconsistently. Prescription opioid use disorder was assessed with the Psychiatric Research Interview for Substance and Mental Disorders. ResultsThe prevalence of prescription opioid use disorder was 21.5% (95% CI=18.9% to 24.4%) among COT patients in the intervention clinics and 23.9% (95% CI=20.5% to 27.6%) among COT patients in the control clinics. The adjusted relative risk of prescription opioid use disorder was 1.08 (95% CI=0.89, 1.32) among the control clinic patients relative to the intervention clinic patients. ConclusionsLong-term implementation of opioid dose and risk reduction initiatives was not associated with lower rates of prescription opioid use disorder among prevalent COT patients. Extreme caution should be exercised by clinicians considering COT for patients with chronic non-cancer pain until benefits of this treatment and attendant risks are clarified.

Alcohol and Drug Use and Aberrant Drug-Related Behavior Among Patients on Chronic Opioid Therapy

ABSTRACTObjective: To better identify individuals on chronic opioid therapy (COT) at high risk for aberrant-drug related behavior (ADRB). We examine whether patients with low level alcohol and drug use have similar characteristics to those with alcohol and drug disorders. We then examined the relationship of alcohol and drug use to ADRBs among COT patients. Methods: The sample was 972 randomly selected COT patients (age 21–80 years old) from a large health system in Northern California, USA, and interviewed in 2009. Logistic regression models were used to model the dependent variables of: alcohol use, illicit drug use, alcohol disorders, illicit drug disorders, and ADRBs. Results: The odds of daily/weekly alcohol use were lower for those with a high daily opioid dose (120+ mg/day vs. <20 mg/day) (OR = 0.32, p < 0.010). Illicit drug disorders were associated with depression (OR = 2.31, p < .001) and being on a high daily opioid dose (OR = 5.51, p < .01). Participants with illicit drug use had higher odds of giving (OR = 2.57, p < 0.01) and receiving opioids from friends or family (OR = 3.25, p < 0.001), but disorder diagnoses were not associated with ADRBs. Conclusions: Findings reinforce that illicit drug use should be of high concern to clinicians prescribing opioids, and suggest it should be considered separately from alcohol use and alcohol disorders in the evaluation of ADRBs. Frequent alcohol use is low, but not uncommon, and suggests a need to discuss specific issues regarding safe use of opioids among persons who use alcohol that may differ from their risk of drug use.

A longitudinal study of depression among middle-aged and senior patients initiating chronic opioid therapy

BackgroundImproved understanding how depressive symptoms change with sustained opioid use is needed. MethodsWe prospectively assessed patients 45 years or older initiating chronic opioid therapy (COT) at baseline and at 4 and 12 months, differentiating recent COT initiators (n=748) and continuing users (n=468). Level of opioid use before 12-month follow-up was classified as regular/higher-dose, intermittent/lower-dose, or minimal/no use. Depressive symptoms were assessed using the Patient Health Questionnaire-8 (PHQ-8). ResultsDepressive symptoms decreased, on average, from baseline to 12 months regardless of level of opioid use. COT patients with regular/higher-dose compared to those with intermittent/lower-dose opioid use (who had similar pain outcomes) did not differ in PHQ-8 scores at 12 months (adjusted mean difference −0.14, 95% CI, −1.07, 0.78 for COT initiators). At 12 months, COT patients with intermittent/lower-dose use had higher adjusted PHQ-8 scores than did those with minimal/no opioid use (adjusted mean difference 0.77, 95% CI, 0.03–1.52 for COT initiators). However, 77% of patients who discontinued opioids cited improved pain as a reason for discontinuation, while 21% cited negative emotional effects of opioids as a reason for discontinuation. Discontinuation was more common among persons who, at baseline, attributed 3 or more depressive symptoms to opioid use. LimitationsResults are relevant to older COT patients receiving low to moderate opioid doses. ConclusionsDepressive symptoms did not increase with sustained opioid use. Depressive symptoms were not higher with regular/higher-dose compared to intermittent/lower-dose use. Persons who perceived negative effects of opioids on emotions more often discontinued their use.

Primary Care Clinic Re-Design for Prescription Opioid Management.

The challenge of responding to prescription opioid overuse within the United States has fallen disproportionately on the primary care clinic setting. Here we describe a framework comprised of 6 Building Blocks to guide efforts within this setting to address the use of opioids for chronic pain. Investigators conducted site visits to thirty primary care clinics across the United States selected for their use of team-based workforce innovations. Site visits included interviews with leadership, clinic tours, observations of clinic processes and team meetings, and interviews with staff and clinicians. Data were reviewed to identify common attributes of clinic system changes around chronic opioid therapy (COT) management. These concepts were reviewed to develop narrative descriptions of key components of changes made to improve COT use. Twenty of the thirty sites had addressed improvements in COT prescribing. Across these sites a common set of 6 Building Blocks were identified: 1) providing leadership support; 2) revising and aligning clinic policies, patient agreements (contracts) and workflows; 3) implementing a registry tracking system; 4) conducting planned, patient-centered visits; 5) identifying resources for complex patients; and 6) measuring progress toward achieving clinic objectives. Common components of clinic policies, patient agreements and data tracked in registries to assess progress are described. In response to prescription opioid overuse and the resulting epidemic of overdose and addiction, primary care clinics are making improvements driven by a common set of best practices that address complex challenges of managing COT patients in primary care settings.

Impact of an opioid risk reduction initiative on motor vehicle crash risk among chronic opioid therapy patients.

Although prescription opioids have been associated with higher motor vehicle crash (MVC) risk, it is unknown whether health system initiatives to better manage chronic opioid therapy (COT) can reduce MVC risk at the population level. We conducted an interrupted time series population-level cohort study at Group Health (GH), between January 2006 and September 2014, comparing MVC risk among COT patients who were GH members receiving care in either group practice or contracted care settings. Group practice COT risk reduction initiatives were implemented in two phases: (1) altered prescribing expectations and (2) multifaceted initiatives. These initiatives did not exist in the contracted care network. We compared the adjusted quarterly rate of MVC between group practice and contracted care patients over time using a modified Poisson regression model for a binary outcome. A total of 32 691 COT patients (27.4% from contracted care) met eligibility criteria and experienced a total of 1956 MVCs during study follow-up (mean, 8.1 quarters per person), of which 810 were serious injury crashes. Crash rates were not significantly different between the patient groups within any of the time periods. Analyses stratified by concurrent prescription of a sedative hypnotic or benzodiazepine found no significant difference between the group practice and contracted care patients. There was a modest elevation of MVC risk for high-dose patients relative to former COT patients who stopped receiving opioids. The risk of MVC was not mitigated in a large cohort of COT patients exposed to a health plan policy initiative that substantially lowered mean opioid dose. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Electronic Health Records to Evaluate and Account for Non-response Bias: A Survey of Patients Using Chronic Opioid Therapy

In observational studies concerning drug use and misuse, persons misusing drugs may be less likely to respond to surveys. However, little is known about differences in drug use and drug misuse risk factors between survey respondents and nonrespondents. Using electronic health record (EHR) data, we compared respondents and non-respondents in a telephone survey of middle-aged and older chronic opioid therapy patients to assess predictors of interview nonresponse. We compared general patient characteristics, specific opioid misuse risk factors, and patterns of opioid use associated with increased risk of opioid misuse. Inverse probability weights were calculated to account for nonresponse bias by EHR-measured covariates. EHR-measured covariate distributions for the full sample (nonrespondents and respondents), the unweighted respondent sample, and the inverse probability weighted respondent sample are reported. We present weighted and unweighted prevalence of self-reported opioid misuse risk factors. Among 2489 potentially eligible patients, 1477 (59.3%) completed interviews. Response rates differed with age (45-54 years, 51.8%; 55-64 years, 58.7%; 65-74 years, 67.9%; and 75 years or older, 59.9%). Tobacco users had lower response rates than did nonusers (53.5% versus 60.9%). Charlson comorbidity score was also related to response rates. Individuals with a Charlson score of 2 had the highest response rate at 65.6%; response rates were lower amoung patients with the lowest (the patients with the fewest health conditions had response rates of 56.7-60.0%) and the highest Charlson scores (patients with the most health conditions had response rates of 52.2-56.0%). These bivariate relationships persisted in adjusted multivariable logistic regression models predicting survey response. Response rates of persons with and without specific opioid misuse risk factors were similar (e.g., 58.7% for persons with substance abuse diagnoses, 59.4% for those without). Opioid use patterns associated with opioid misuse did not predict response rates (e.g., 60.6% versus 59.2% for those receiving versus not receiving opioids from 3 or more physicians outside their primary care clinic). Very few patient characteristics predicted non-response; thus, inverse probability weights accounting for nonresponse had little impact on the distributions of EHR-measured covariates or self-reported measures related to opioid use and misuse. Response rates differed by characteristics that predict nonresponse in general health surveys (age, tobacco use), but did not appear to differ by specific patient or drug use risk factors for prescription opioid misuse among middle- and older-aged chronic opioid therapy patients. When observational studies are conducted in health plan populations, electronic health records may be used to evaluate nonresponse bias and to adjust for variables predicting interview nonresponse, complementing other research uses of EHR data in observational studies.

The Impact of Opioid Risk Reduction Initiatives on High-Dose Opioid Prescribing for Patients on Chronic Opioid Therapy

Avoiding high opioid doses may reduce chronic opioid therapy (COT) risks, but the feasibility of reducing opioid doses in community practice is unknown. Washington State and a health plan's group practice implemented initiatives to reduce high-dose COT prescribing. The group practice physicians were exposed to both initiatives, whereas contracted physicians were exposed only to statewide changes. Using interrupted time series analyses, we assessed whether these initiatives reduced opioid doses among COT patients in group practice (n = 16,653) and contracted care settings (n = 5,552). From 2006 to June 2014, the percentage of COT patients receiving ≥120 mg morphine equivalent dose declined from 16.8% to 6.3% in the group practice versus 20.6 to 13.6% among COT patients of contracted physicians. The proportion receiving excess opioid days supplied declined from 24.0 to 10.4% among group practice COT patients and from 20.1 to 14.7% among COT patients of contracted physicians. Reductions in prescribing of high opioid dose and excess opioid days supplied followed state and health plan initiatives to change opioid prescribing. Reductions were substantially greater in the group practice setting that implemented additional initiatives to alter shared physician expectations regarding appropriate COT prescribing, compared with the contracted physicians' patients. PerspectiveWashington State and a health plan's group practice implemented initiatives to reduce high-dose COT prescribing. Group practice physicians were exposed to both initiatives, whereas the health plan's contracted physicians were exposed to only the statewide changes. Reductions in prescribing of high opioid dose, average daily dose, and excess opioid days supplied followed state and health plan initiatives to change opioid prescribing. Reductions were substantially greater in the group practice setting that implemented additional initiatives to alter shared physician expectations regarding appropriate COT prescribing, compared with the contracted physicians' patients.

Evaluation of Health Plan Interventions to Influence Chronic Opioid Therapy Prescribing.

Evaluate health plan interventions targeting physician chronic opioid therapy (COT) prescribing. In 2006, Group Health's (GH) Integrated Group Practice (IGP) initiated diverse interventions targeting COT prescriber norms and practices. In 2010, the IGP implemented a COT guideline, including a mandated online course for physicians managing COT. These interventions were not implemented in GH's network practices. We compared trends in GH-IGP and network practices for 2006 to 2012 in the percent of patients receiving COT and their opioid dose. We compared physician beliefs before versus after the mandated course and precourse to postcourse changes in COT dosing for IGP physicians who took the course. From 2006 to 2012, mean (SE) daily opioid dose among IGP COT patients (intervention setting) declined from 74.1 mg (1.9 mg) morphine equivalent dose (MED) to 48.3 mg (1.0 mg) MED. Dose changes among GH network COT patients (control setting) were modest-88.2 mg (5.0 mg) MED in 2006 to 75.7 mg (2.3 mg) MED in 2012. Among physicians taking the mandated course in 2011, we observed precourse to postcourse changes toward more conservative opioid prescribing beliefs. However, COT dosing trends did not change precourse to postcourse. Following initiatives implemented to alter physician prescribing practices and norms, mean opioid dose prescribed to COT patients declined more in intervention than control practices. Physicians reported more conservative beliefs regarding opioid prescribing immediately after completing an online course in 2011, but the course was not associated with additional reductions in mean daily opioid dose prescribed by physicians completing the course.