Reduction In Opioid Prescriptions Research Articles

Data-Driven Identification of Potentially Successful Intervention Implementations Using 5 Years of Opioid Prescribing Data: Retrospective Database Study.

We have previously demonstrated that opioid prescribing increased by 127% between 1998 and 2016. New policies aimed at tackling this increasing trend have been recommended by public health bodies, and there is some evidence that progress is being made. We sought to extend our previous work and develop a data-driven approach to identify general practices and clinical commissioning groups (CCGs) whose prescribing data suggest that interventions to reduce the prescribing of opioids may have been successfully implemented. We analyzed 5 years of prescribing data (December 2014 to November 2019) for 3 opioid prescribing measures-total opioid prescribing as oral morphine equivalent per 1000 registered population, the number of high-dose opioids prescribed per 1000 registered population, and the number of high-dose opioids as a percentage of total opioids prescribed. Using a data-driven approach, we applied a modified version of our change detection Python library to identify reductions in these measures over time, which may be consistent with the successful implementation of an intervention to reduce opioid prescribing. This analysis was carried out for general practices and CCGs, and organizations were ranked according to the change in prescribing rate. We identified a reduction in total opioid prescribing in 94 (49.2%) out of 191 CCGs, with a median reduction of 15.1 (IQR 11.8-18.7; range 9.0-32.8) in total oral morphine equivalence per 1000 patients. We present data for the 3 CCGs and practices demonstrating the biggest reduction in opioid prescribing for each of the 3 opioid prescribing measures. We observed a 40% proportional drop (8.9% absolute reduction) in the regular prescribing of high-dose opioids (measured as a percentage of regular opioids) in the highest-ranked CCG (North Tyneside); a 99% drop in this same measure was found in several practices (44%-95% absolute reduction). Decile plots demonstrate that CCGs exhibiting large reductions in opioid prescribing do so via slow and gradual reductions over a long period of time (typically over a period of 2 years); in contrast, practices exhibiting large reductions do so rapidly over a much shorter period of time. By applying 1 of our existing analysis tools to a national data set, we were able to identify rapid and maintained changes in opioid prescribing within practices and CCGs and rank organizations by the magnitude of reduction. Highly ranked organizations are candidates for further qualitative research into intervention design and implementation.

Prescription drug monitoring program mandates and opioid prescriptions received by patients dying of cancer.

11003 Background: Strong consensus supports opioid analgesics as first-line pain management for patients with poor prognosis cancer approaching the end of life (EoL). State legislations that mandate prescriber access of Prescription Drug Monitoring Programs (PDMPs) when prescribing opioids intend to mitigate unsafe opioid prescriptions but may have unintended consequences in restricting access to opioids for patients dying from cancer. This study seeks to assess associations between state implementation of comprehensive PDMP mandates –applicable to all prescribers and all clinical settings and not allowing prescriber discretion – with opioid prescriptions received by patients dying of cancer. Methods: We used SEER cancer registry linked with Medicare fee-for-service claims to identify 184,123 Medicare beneficiaries 66 years or older who died of cancer in 2011-2019 in one of 10 SEER states with an operating PDMP by the beginning of 2011. We measured opioid prescriptions dispensed to patients near the EoL, defined as 30 days prior to death or hospice admission. We exploited staggered implementation of comprehensive PDMP mandates and assessed the association of such implementation with opioid prescriptions dispensed to patients near the EoL. We estimated logistic regressions for dichotomous outcomes and Generalized Linear Models for continuous outcomes. Results: Implementation of comprehensive PDMP mandates was associated with a reduction in the rate of 1 or more opioid days near the EoL from 47.2% to 45.2% (difference, 0.02 [95% CI, -0.027, -0.012]), a reduction in the rate of 1 or more long-acting opioid days from 15.8% to 14.7% (difference, 0.011 [95% CI, -0.016, -0.006]), and a reduction of 130.8 (95% CI, -161.5, -100.2) in total morphine milligram equivalents (MMEs) and of 135.6 (95% CI, -215.1, -56.1) in MMEs from long-acting opioids among patients who received 1 or more days of opioids/long-acting opioids. Conclusions: Comprehensive PDMP mandates were associated with 4-9% reduction in opioid prescriptions dispensed to patients at the EOL. Specific strategies are needed to effectively exempt patients with active cancer from such mandates. [Table: see text]

Treatment characteristics of chronic low back pain patients treated with buprenorphine buccal film or transdermal patch.

Aims: Retrospective insurance claims analysis exploring treatment characteristics in chronic low back pain patients prescribed buprenorphine buccal film (Belbuca®) or transdermal patches. Patients and methods: The first buprenorphine prescription (buccal film or transdermal patch) was an index event. Patients were observed over 6month pre- and post-index periods. Propensity score matching minimized the selection bias. Results: Buccal film patients had a higher buprenorphine daily dose (501.7 vs 270.9 µg; p <0.001). The patch-to-film switching rate was higher than vice versa (11.5 vs 3.8%; p <0.001). The buccal film showed a greater reduction in opioid prescriptions (-1.1 vs -0.7; p =0.012), daily morphine milligram equivalents (-12.6 vs -7.3; p <0.001) and opioid treatment duration (-13.4 vs -7.6days; p =0.022). Conclusion: Buccal film was associated with higher buprenorphine doses and a greater reduction of opioid burden.

Outcomes and GP perceptions of reviewing patients at risk of harm from opioids

Abstract Introduction The Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG) Medicines Optimisation workplan for 2021-22 had a focus on reducing harm from opioids.1,2 In particular, asking GP practices to identify and review two cohorts of patients: those on a combination of oxycodone and amitriptyline or similar high-risk combinations, and those over the age of 65 prescribed fentanyl transdermal patches. Practices were then expected to consider actions on how to reduce the risk for patients and also to provide feedback to the CCG on how the reviews had progressed. Aim We aimed to understand the outcomes, challenges and learning points experienced by practices in reviewing these patients. Methods Sixty practices were invited to participate. A feedback form was received from each practice that completed either or both reviews (covering anonymised outcomes of each review, challenges encountered, and practice-level learning points / changes made). Quantitative data were collated for each action, and feedback comments were categorised into broad groups. No patient details were collected. As this project was a service evaluation, ethical approval was not required. Results Forty-three practices completed the review of the combination of oxycodone and amitriptyline, though 5 of these had no patients to review. Overall, 185 patients were identified. Of these, 21 (11%) patients had the combination prescribing ceased, 22 (12%) were commenced on a reduction plan, and another 46 (25%) have been made aware of the risk and to report respiratory symptoms. Forty-three practices completed the fentanyl review, though one of these had no patients to review. Overall, 272 patients over 65 years were identified with 64 (24%) invited for a review with their GP or other allied health professional, 39 (14%) patients were put on a fentanyl patch dose reduction plan, and 14 (5%) had prescribing ceased. Practices reported various difficulties encountered with these reviews, including patient engagement in making changes to their pain medication which patients are reluctant to reduce; counselling and raising awareness of long-term effects of opioids to help gain patient understanding; how to manage complex patients who had been stable on their regimen over many years; and that it was time consuming to regularly check in with the patient and plan reduction regimens. Changes made by practices included recording risks discussed with patient in their medical record for easier future review; ensuring regular reviews, including by practice-based pharmacists, of patients prescribed opioids; trying to make time to see patients face to face; raising awareness of the risks of prescribing amitriptyline alongside oxycodone e.g. serotonin syndrome; and recognising that a collaborative process and patient engagement is necessary. Discussion/Conclusion The actions undertaken by practices link into national recommendations,1 with some GP feedback similar to the challenges and opportunities to improve patient safety on opioid use as reported elsewhere.3 Even with this small targeted patient cohort, this work demonstrates difficulties encountered by GPs in refraining from opioid prescribing. Other limitations of this small-scale review include lack of certainty whether reductions in opioid prescribing were always clinically appropriate, and reliance on practice feedback.

Practice-Level Variation in Opioid-Free Discharge Following Surgery for T1 Renal Masses: A MUSIC-KIDNEY Analysis.

Opioid prescription following surgery has played a role in the current opioid epidemic. We evaluated practice-level variation in opioid prescribing following surgery for cT1 renal masses and examined the relationships between opioid-free discharge and postoperative emergency department (ED) visits and readmissions. We retrospectively examined all T1 renal mass (RM) patients with data regarding postoperative opioid prescriptions within the Michigan Urological Surgery Improvement Collaborative-Kidney Mass: Identifying and Defining Necessary Evaluation and Therapy (MUSIC-KIDNEY) registry from April 2021 to March 2023. Patients were stratified into those who received opioids at discharge and those with opioid-free discharge. Associations with patient, tumor, and surgical factors were evaluated. Rates of postoperative ED visits and readmissions within 30 days were compared between cohorts. Practice-level variation was assessed. Of 414 patients who underwent surgery for T1 RM across 15 practices in MUSIC-KIDNEY, 23.7% had opioid-free discharge. Practice-level variation in rates of opioid-free discharge ranged from 6.7% to 55.0%. For patients prescribed opioids, the median number of pills was 10 (IQR 6-12). Patients with cT1b masses were more likely to have opioid-free discharge (44.9% vs 32%, OR 0.44; 95% CI 0.22-0.89). Rates of 30-day ED visits (7.0% vs 3.1%) and readmissions (4.1% vs 2.0%) were lower in the opioid-free discharge group but did not reach statistical significance. MUSIC-KIDNEY data suggest opioid-free discharge is not associated with increased rates of postoperative ED visits or readmissions. There exists wide practice-level variation in opioid prescriptions following surgery for T1 RM in the state of Michigan. Similar variation likely exists throughout the United States, and best surgical practice suggests reduction in opioid prescribing after nephrectomy.

Changes in Surgical Opioid Prescribing and Patient-Reported Outcomes After Implementation of an Insurer Opioid Prescribing Limit

Insurers are increasingly limiting the duration of opioid prescriptions for acute pain. Among patients undergoing surgery, it is unclear whether implementation of these limits is associated with changes in opioid prescribing and patient-reported outcomes, such as pain. To assess changes in surgical opioid prescribing and patient-reported outcomes after implementation of an opioid prescribing limit by a large commercial insurer in Michigan. This was a cross-sectional study with an interrupted time series analysis. Data analyses were conducted from October 1, 2022, to February 28, 2023. The primary data source was the Michigan Surgical Quality Collaborative, a statewide registry containing data on opioid prescribing and patient-reported outcomes from adults undergoing common general surgical procedures. This registry is linked to Michigan's prescription drug monitoring program database, allowing observation of opioid dispensing. The study included 6045 adults who were covered by the commercial insurer and underwent surgery from January 1, 2017, to October 31, 2019. Policy limiting opioid prescriptions to a 5-day supply in February 2018. Among all patients, segmented regression models were used to assess for level or slope changes during February 2018 in 3 patient-reported outcomes: pain in the week after surgery (assessed on a scale of 1-4: 1 = none, 2 = minimal, 3 = moderate, and 4 = severe), satisfaction with surgical experience (scale of 0-10, with 10 being the highest satisfaction), and amount of regret regarding undergoing surgery (scale of 1-5, with 1 being the highest level of regret). Among patients with a discharge opioid prescription and a dispensed opioid prescription (prescription filled within 3 days of discharge), additional outcomes included total morphine milligram equivalents in these prescriptions, a standardized measure of opioid volume. Among the 6045 patients included in the study, mean (SD) age was 48.7 (12.6) years and 3595 (59.5%) were female. Limit implementation was not associated with changes in patient-reported satisfaction or regret and was associated with only a slight level decrease in patient-reported pain score (-0.15 [95% CI, -0.26 to -0.03]). Among 4396 patients (72.7%) with a discharge and dispensed opioid prescription, limit implementation was associated with a -22.3 (95% CI, -32.8 to -11.9) and -26.1 (95% CI, -40.9 to -11.3) level decrease in monthly mean total morphine milligram equivalents of discharge and dispensed opioid prescriptions, respectively. These decreases corresponded approximately to 3 to 3.5 pills containing 5 mg of oxycodone. This cross-sectional analysis of data from adults undergoing general surgical procedures found that implementation of an insurer's limit was associated with modest reductions in opioid prescribing but not with worsened patient-reported outcomes. Whether these findings generalize to other procedures warrants further study.

Academic detailing to improve appropriate opioid prescribing: a mixed-methods process evaluation.

Academic detailing, an educational outreach service for family physicians, was funded by the Ontario government to address gaps in opioid prescribing and pain management. We sought to evaluate the impact of academic detailing on opioid prescribing, and to understand how and why academic detailing may have influenced opioid prescribing. In this mixed-methods study, we collected quantitative and qualitative data concurrently from 2017 to 2019 in Ontario, Canada. We analyzed prescribing outcomes descriptively for a sample of participating physicians and compared them with a matched control group. We invited physicians to participate in qualitative interviews to discuss their experiences in academic detailing. Development and analysis of qualitative interviews was informed by the Theoretical Domains Framework. We triangulated qualitative and quantitative findings to understand the mechanisms that drove changes in opioid prescribing. Physicians receiving academic detailing (n = 238) achieved a greater reduction in opioid prescribing than matched controls (n = 238). Seventeen physicians completed interviews and reported that academic detailing addressed barriers to pain care, including lack of confidence, difficult interactions with patients and prescribing and tapering decisions. Academic detailing reinforced knowledge about opioid prescribing and pain management. Discussion of complex patients and talking points to use during challenging conversations were described as key drivers of practice change. The findings of this real-world, mixed-methods evaluation explain how an academic detailing service addressed key barriers and enablers to limit high-risk opioid prescribing in primary care. This nuanced understanding will be used to inform, spread and scale academic detailing.

Reducing opioid prescribing after ambulatory breast reconstruction surgery.

The lack of evidence-based guidelines for postoperative opioid prescriptions following breast reconstruction contributes to a wide variation in prescribing practices and increases potential for misuse and abuse. Between August and December 2019, women who underwent outpatient breast reconstruction were surveyed 7-10 days before (n = 97) and after (n = 101) implementing a standardized opioid prescription reduction initiative. We compared postoperative opioid use, pain control, and refills in both groups. Patient reported outcomes were compared using the BREAST-Q physical wellbeing of the chest domain and a novel symptom Recovery Tracker. Before changes in prescriptions, patients were prescribed a median of 30 pills and consumed three pills (interquartile range [IQR: 1,9]). After standardization, patients were prescribed eight pills and consumed three pills (IQR: 1,6). There was no evidence of a difference in the proportion of patients experiencing moderate to very severe pain on the Recovery Tracker or in the early BREAST-Q physical wellbeing of the chest scores (p = 0.8 and 0.3, respectively). Standardizing and reducing opioid prescriptions for patients undergoing reconstructive breast surgery is feasible and can significantly decrease the number of excess pills prescribed. The was no adverse impact on early physical wellbeing, although larger studies are needed to obtain further data.

The 2017 North Carolina STOP Act is Associated With an Accelerated Decrease in Opioid Dispensing: A Statewide Analysis, 2013–2019

Background This study aimed to: 1) quantify the dispensing and days’ supply of opioid prescriptions prior to and after the NC STOP Act went into effect among Medicare Part D beneficiaries; 2) evaluate how the STOP Act impacted physician assistant and nurse practitioner opioid prescribing; and 3) evaluate whether the NC STOP Act is associated with reductions in opioid prescriptions’ days’ supply among Medicare Part D beneficiaries. Methods This was a secondary analysis of Medicare Part D Public Use Files for 2013–2019. Only North Carolina providers and select Schedule II (CII) and III (CIII) drugs and tramadol (CV) were included in the analysis. Multivariable Poisson regression models were used to analyze the data. Results In 2013, there were population-adjusted 180,565.2/100,000 claims for the included CII and CIII opioids, which decreased to 79,329.12/100,000 claims in 2019. Each of the multivariable Poisson regression models indicates a reduction in per-provider populationadjusted claims and days’ supply after the NC STOP Act went into effect for both selected CII and CIII medications and for tramadol. The results also indicate that the number of prescriptions for CII, CIII, and tramadol decreased over time. Limitations Due to the nature of the observational study design, we cannot conclude that the 2017 legislation had an effect on populationadjusted claims for certain CII and CIII opioids. Conclusions Since 2013 there has been a decreasing trend in certain CII and CIII opioids dispensations in Medicare beneficiaries, and the trend accelerated after the STOP Act went into effect.

Accounting for the interplay of interpersonal and structural trauma in the treatment of chronic non-cancer pain, opioid use disorder, and mental health in urban safety-net primary care clinics

While the epidemiological literature recognizes associations between chronic non-cancer pain (CNCP), opioid use disorder (OUD), and interpersonal trauma stemming from physical, emotional, sexual abuse or neglect, the complex etiologies and interplay between interpersonal and structural traumas in CNCP populations are under-examined. Research has documented the relationship between experiencing multiple adverse childhood experiences (ACEs) and the likelihood of developing an OUD as an adult. However, the ACEs framework is criticized for failing to name the social and structural contexts that shape ACE vulnerabilities in families. Social scientific theory and ethnographic methods offer useful approaches to explore how interpersonally- and structurally-produced traumas inform the experiences of co-occurring CNCP, substance use, and mental health. We report findings from a qualitative and ethnographic longitudinal cohort study of patients with CNCP (n = 48) who received care in safety-net settings and their primary care providers (n = 23). We conducted semi-structured interviews and clinical and home-based participant observation from 2018 to 2020. Here we focus our analyses on how patients and providers explained and situated the role of patient trauma in the larger clinical context of reductions in opioid prescribing to highlight the political landscape of the United States opioid overdose crisis and its impact on clinical interactions. Findings reveal the disproportionate burden structurally-produced, racialized trauma places on CNCP, substance use and mental health symptoms that shapes patients’ embodied experiences of pain and substance use, as well as their emotional experiences with their providers. Experiences of trauma impacted clinical care trajectories, yet providers and patients expressed limited options for redress. We argue for an adaptation of trauma-informed care approaches that contextualize the structural determinants of trauma and their interplay with interpersonal experiences to improve clinical care outcomes.

The intersection of drug use discrimination and racial discrimination in the management of chronic non-cancer pain in United States primary care safety-net clinics: Implications for healthcare system and clinic-level changes

BackgroundClinicians’ bias related to patients’ race and substance use history play a role in pain management. However, patients’ or clinicians’ understandings about discriminatory practices and the structural factors that contribute to and exacerbate these practices are underexamined. We report on perceptions of discrimination from the perspectives of patients with chronic non-cancer pain (CNCP) and a history of substance use and their clinicians within the structural landscape of reductions in opioid prescribing in the United States. MethodsWe interviewed 46 clinicians and 94 patients, using semi-structured interview guides, from eight safety-net primary care clinics across the San Francisco Bay Area from 2013 to 2020. We used a modified grounded theory approach to code and analyze transcripts. ResultsClinicians discussed using opioid prescribing guidelines with the goals of increased opioid safety and reduced bias in patient monitoring. While patients acknowledged the validity of clinicians’ concerns about opioid safety, they indicated that clinicians made assumptions about opioid misuse towards Black patients and patients suspected of substance use. Clinicians discussed evidence of discrimination in opioid prescribing at the clinic-wide level; racialized stereotypes about patients likely to misuse opioids; and their own struggles to overcome discriminatory practices regarding CNCP management. ConclusionWhile clinicians and patients acknowledged opioid safety concerns, the practical application of opioid prescribing guidelines impacted how patients perceived and engaged with CNCP care particularly for patients who are Black and/or report a history of substance use. We recommend healthcare system and clinic-level interventions that may remediate discriminatory practices and associated disparities.

Real-World Observational Evaluation of Common Interventions to Reduce Emergency Department Prescribing of Opioid Medications.

Prior work on opioid prescribing has examined dosing defaults, interruptive alerts, or "harder" stops such as electronic prescribing of controlled substances (EPCS), which has become increasingly required by state policy. Given that real-world opioid stewardship policies are concurrent and overlapping, the authors examined the effect of such policies on emergency department (ED) opioid prescriptions. The researchers performed observational analysis of all ED visits discharged between December 17, 2016, and December 31, 2019, across seven EDs of a hospital system. Four interventions were examined in chronological order, with each successive intervention added on top of all previous interventions: 12-pill prescription default, EPCS, electronic health record (EHR) pop-up alert, and 8-pill prescription default. The primary outcome was opioid prescribing, which was described as number of opioid prescriptions per 100 discharged ED visits and modeled as a binary outcome for each visit. Secondary outcomes included prescription morphine milligram equivalents (MME) and non-opioid analgesia prescriptions. A total of 775,692 ED visits were included in the study. Compared to the preintervention period, cumulative reductions in opioid prescribing were seen with incremental interventions, including after adding a 12-pill default (odds ratio [OR] 0.88, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.82-0.94), after adding EPCS (OR 0.7, 95% CI 0.63-0.77), after adding pop-up alerts (OR 0.67, 95% CI 0.63-0.71), and after adding an 8-pill default (OR 0.61, 95% CI 0.58-0.65). EHR-implemented solutions such as EPCS, pop-up alerts, and pill defaults had varying but significant effects on reducing ED opioid prescribing. Policy makers and quality improvement leaders might achieve sustainable improvements in opioid stewardship while balancing clinician alert fatigue through policy efforts promoting implementation of EPCS and default dispense quantities.

E051 A systematic review of audit and feedback tools to reduce opioid prescribing for chronic non-cancer pain

Abstract Background/Aims Opioid prescribing has increased considerably over the 15 years for chronic non-cancer pain in the UK, including for musculoskeletal conditions. Whilst there are national and international guidelines to reduce inappropriate opioid prescribing, these are not always adhered to in practice. Audit and feedback is a common intervention for supporting clinical behaviour change. Little is known if such tools have been used to support safer opioid prescribing to date. This systematic review aimed to describe audit and feedback tools that were designed, implemented and led to changes in opioid prescribing practices. Methods A systematic review of the literature was performed as per the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses framework (PRISMA). Both Embase and MEDLINE were searched to identify studies that included audit and feedback tools in patients prescribed opioids with chronic non-cancer pain until the 31st of May 2021. Results Of the 539 studies imported, following removal of duplicates, 497 studies were screened. Following title and abstract review 6 full-text studies were assessed for eligibility. A total of three studies were deemed to meet inclusion criteria. Approaches found included: The Controlled Medication Advisory Board (CMAB), Systems Consultation and the Opioid Safety Initiative (OSI). CMAB involved the use of a dashboard to provide feedback to clinicians on referred patients. As a result the opioid prescribing rate per 100 patient visits decreased by 31% and the rate of co-prescription of benzodiazepines and opioids decreased by 56%. Systems Consultation involved the use of audit and feedback, academic detailing and external facilitation to reduce opioid prescribing. Systems consultation resulted in a statistically significant reduction in the morphine equivalent daily doses. The OSI used automatic electronic medical records auditing to enable clinic leaders to identify physician prescribing patterns via a dashboard. OSI enabled a 9.9% reduction in opioid prescriptions from 571,476 to 514,883. Conclusion Computerised audit and feedback tools may be effective interventions to support opioid stewardship initiative and promote safer opioid prescribing. Such approaches being used internationally could pave the way for similar initiatives in the UK and future research evaluating their impact on patient safety. Disclosure J. Feldman: None. M. Jani: Grants/research support; National Institute for Health and Care Research Advanced Fellowship (NIHR301413).

Association of Prescription Drug Monitoring Programs With Opioid Prescribing and Overdose in Adolescents and Young Adults.

Prescription opioid use is associated with substance-related adverse outcomes among adolescents and young adults through a pathway of prescribing, diversion and misuse, and addiction and overdose. Assessing the effect of current prescription drug monitoring programs (PDMPs) on opioid prescribing and overdoses will further inform strategies to reduce opioid-related harms. We performed interrupted time series analyses to measure the association between state-level implementation of PDMPs with annual opioid prescribing and opioid-related overdoses in adolescents (13 to 18 years) and young adults (19 to 25 years) between 2008 and 2019. We focused on PDMPs that included mandatory reviews by providers. Data were obtained from a commercial insurance company. Among 9,344,504 adolescents and young adults, 1,405,382 (15.0%) had a dispensed opioid prescription, and 6,262 (0.1%) received treatment for an opioid-related overdose. Mandated PDMP review was associated with a 4.2% (95% CI, 1.9% to 6.4%) reduction in annual opioid dispensations among adolescents and a 7.8% (95% CI, 4.7% to 10.9%) annual reduction among young adults. For opioid-related overdoses, mandated PDMP review was associated with a 16.1% (95% CI, 3.8 to 26.7) and 15.9% (95% CI, 7.6 to 23.4) reduction in annual opioid overdoses for adolescents and young adults, respectively. PDMPs were associated with sustained reductions in opioid prescribing and overdoses in adolescents and young adults. Although these findings support the value of mandated PDMPs as part of ongoing strategies to reduce opioid overdoses, further studies with prospective study designs are needed to characterize the effect of these programs fully.

De-Implementing Opioids for Dental Extractions (DIODE): a multi-clinic, cluster-randomized trial of clinical decision support strategies in dentistry

BackgroundOpioid pain relievers are commonly prescribed following dental extractions, but evidence shows that non-opioid analgesics often provide adequate pain relief with fewer risks. The current study examined clinical decision support (CDS) as a tool for de-implementing opioid prescribing in dentistry.MethodsThis prospective, cluster-randomized trial examined CDS for dental pain management at 22 HealthPartners Dental Group clinics in Minnesota. Dental providers (n = 49) were randomized to deliver care using CDS, CDS with patient education materials (CDS-E), or standard practice (SP). Randomization was stratified by provider type (dentist vs. oral surgeon) and baseline opioid prescribing volume. Patient records of dental extractions were examined for January 2019 through May 2021, representing a 12-month baseline and 15-month intervention period (N = 12,924). Opioid prescription at the visit (no vs. yes) was the primary outcome. Data were analyzed using generalized linear mixed models, adjusting for patient sex and age, extraction complexity, and baseline prescribing strata (volume and provider type).ResultsPatients were 56.2% female, with a mean age of 46.7 (SD = 20.0) years. Providers were 8% oral surgeons, 57% female, and with a mean age of 43.7 (SD = 11.2) years. There were significant decreases in opioid prescribing during the study (P < 0.001), representing a continuation of pre-existing trends to reduce opioid prescribing in these dental practices. There were no significant differences in opioid prescribing between CDS and SP (OR = 1.29; 97.5% CI = 0.93, 1.79; P = 0.08), or CDS-E and SP arms (OR = 1.27; 97.5% CI = 0.86, 1.79; P = 0.18). The direction of the association favored greater reductions in opioid prescribing in the SP arm. Despite training and implementation support, utilization of the CDS was low, particularly among oral surgeons, who were significantly more likely than other dentists to prescribe opioids. Among non-oral surgeon providers with the opportunity to access it, CDS utilization was not significantly associated with opioid prescribing.ConclusionsEquipping dentists with CDS resources, whether alone or accompanied by patient education materials, did not accelerate reductions in opioid prescribing beyond those observed in standard practice. Strategies are needed to enhance CDS utilization for patient care and safety surrounding analgesia following dental extractions.Trial registrationClinicaltrials.gov, NCT03584789.

Impact of Postsurgical Opioid Prescription Reduction in General Surgery Patients.

Purpose: Recent studies suggest a large percentage of post-surgical opioid prescriptions are not utilized. This surplus of opioids provides supply for diversion or entry into the waste cycle. Recommendations are available for general surgery procedures which may optimize prescribed quantity while maintaining patient satisfaction which this work was initiated to investigate. Methods: This retrospective patient survey was conducted with Institutional Review Committee approval following adjustments to discharge opioid prescription quantities in an individual General Surgeon practice. Patients were contacted via phone to assess the impact of the reduced opioid quantities. Patients were categorized based on whether they utilized the entire prescription or opioid remained. Data collected include baseline demographics, inpatient stay characteristics, opioid use patterns, and satisfaction with overall pain control. The primary endpoint was to determine if patients were satisfied with their pain control based on response. Secondary endpoints included if patient characteristics could be identified that signal larger opioid quantity use, and whether unused opioids were disposed. Results: Thirty patients utilized all opioid prescribed, 60 had some quantity remaining. Baseline data appear similar aside from age with younger patients using more opioid. Patients were satisfied with their overall pain control in 93% of respondents. A total of 960 opioid tablets (11.4 ± 4.8 tabs/patient) were not prescribed, 8% required refill. Opioid disposal yet to occur in 85% of patients. Conclusion: An evidence-based reduction in opioid discharge prescriptions following general surgery procedures resulted in nearly 1000 opioid tablets not being dispensed without having a negative impact on patient satisfaction.

Changes in Opioid Prescription Rates at Discharge After Targeted Provider Education in the Emergency Department

Introduction: Opioid-related mortality continues to increase in the United States and emergency departments (ED) are a source of opioid prescribing. A review was conducted of prescribing practices and all prescribers were given targeted education to modify prescribing patterns and facilitate guideline recommended opioid prescribing. This study seeks to evaluate prescribing practices after implementation of the education that occurred December 23 to 31, 2019 on prescribing habits. The pre-education group was defined as the period of January 1, 2019 to December 31, 2019. The post-education group was defined as the period of January 1, 2020 to December 31, 2020. Objective: Evaluate the total number of prescriptions and prescription doses in morphine milligram equivalent (MME) prescribed between pre-education and post-education groups. Secondary endpoints will be an evaluation of the number of doses, length of therapy, and the rates of prescribing per 100 discharges. Methods: A retrospective chart review at a single center suburban ED was conducted comparing prescribing after education was provided. Patients were excluded if they were under the age of 18 years, admitted or transferred to an acute care facility, or prescribed an opioid for a non-analgesic purpose. Results: There was a 34% reduction in the total number of opioid prescriptions from the pre-education group compared to the post-education group (4,253 to 2,818). Between the 2 groups, there was a reduction in MME of 8.8 (92.2 ± 60.4 vs 83.4 ± 60), P < 0.001, number of tablets by 0.9 tablets (13.6 ± 5.2 vs 12.7 ± 5.4), P < 0.001, and day supply by 0.12 (4.45 ± 2.1 vs 4.33 ± 2.0), P = 0.017. Percentage of the total number of opioid prescriptions per 100 discharges decreased by 0.4% from 5.1% to 4.7%. Conclusion: After targeting providers through education, a reduction in opioid prescribing was identified through all endpoints.

The impact of opioid prescribing report cards in Medicaid.

BACKGROUND: Performance feedback has been used for decades to improve health care quality and safety, with varying degrees of success. One example is the use of customized report cards that target inappropriate prescribing of high-risk medications, including opioids. Randomized controlled trials suggest that report cards are an effective tool to change opioid prescribing behavior, but their effectiveness in community settings is unclear. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the impact of opioid prescribing report cards, which were mailed to Medicaid providers in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. METHODS: Using a quasi-experimental approach, we compared trends in opioid prescribing by Medicaid providers in Philadelphia, who received a report card in late 2017, with Medicaid providers in surrounding counties, who did not receive report cards. First, we used propensity score matching to balance observed differences in the treatment and comparison groups; matching variables included provider specialty, sex, and selected characteristics of providers' Medicaid patient panels. We then estimated a difference-in-differences model to isolate the impact of report cards on opioid prescribing. RESULTS: The analytical sample included 1,598 providers in Philadelphia and 2,117 providers in surrounding counties, who prescribed opioids to 99,548 Medicaid patients during the study period. Although the number of Medicaid patients receiving opioids and the days supplied of opioids declined in both Philadelphia and surrounding counties during the study period, there was a larger reduction in Philadelphia Medicaid than in surrounding counties after the report cards were mailed. In the 6 months after the report cards were mailed (January 2018 to June 2018) compared with the 6 months before they were mailed (July 2017 to December 2017), we estimate that the reduction in opioid prescribing in Philadelphia Medicaid amounted to nearly 3 fewer Medicaid patients with an opioid prescription per month. CONCLUSIONS: After customized opioid prescribing report cards were mailed to Medicaid providers in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, there was a statistically significant reduction in opioid prescribing to Medicaid patients relative to surrounding counties. Our findings suggest that opioid prescribing report cards with peer comparison are an effective way to influence opioid prescribing behavior among Medicaid providers. Report cards can complement other initiatives that target inappropriate opioid prescribing, such as prescription drug monitoring programs and prior authorization. DISCLOSURES: Drs Candon and Rothbard and Ms Shen received funding from Community Behavioral Health in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. Drs Xue, Cole, and Donohue received funding from Pennsylvania Department of Human Services. Neither Community Behavioral Health nor the Pennsylvania Department of Human Services was involved in the study design; collection, analysis, and interpretation of data; writing of the report; or the decision to submit the report for publication.

Decreasing opioid prescribing at discharge while maintaining adequate pain management is sustainable

Background:In 2018, using a pragmatic multimodal approach, discharge opioid prescriptions were reduced without affecting pain control management. Herein, we assessed whether this approach was sustainable and whether discharge opioid prescriptions could be further reduced.Methods:This is a single center prospective study of patients who underwent elective outpatient procedures provided by our institution‘s Acute Care Surgery Division surgeons. Adult patients who underwent elective surgeries performed by surgeons in the Division of Acute Care Surgery from November 2018 to June 2021 and agreed to participate were included. The opioid prescriptions pre-populated in the order set at discharge were reduced from 20 pills to 10 pills in May 2020. Demographics, opioid information, non-opioid adjuncts prescribed, reported use of opioids prescribed, and patients’ satisfaction were collected. Opioids were converted to oral morphine equivalents (OME).Results:A total of 178 patients were included. Elective surgeries performed mainly included inguinal hernia repair (38.8%), laparoscopic cholecystectomy (30.3%), cyst excision (13.5%), and umbilical hernia (8.4%). One hundred twenty-five and 53 patients underwent an elective operation with a surgeon in the Acute Care Surgery Division before and after the number of opioids pre-populated in the order set at discharge was reduced from 20 pills to 10 pills, respectively. Reducing the pre-populated discharge opioid prescriptions led to a significant decrease in OME prescribed (75 [75–76.5] vs. 80 [75–150], p < 0.001) without affecting patients’ satisfaction with pain management (excellent/good: 87.8% vs. 84%; p = 0.305)Conclusions:Our pragmatic multimodal approach is sustainable and allows for additional opioid prescription reduction without affecting patients’ satisfaction with pain management.

Reduction in opioid prescribing and administration in hospitalized acute care medical patients.

The Rocky Mountain Chapter of the Society of Hospital Medicine developed 2020 Opioid Prescribing and Treatment Guidelines for the medical inpatient, including five pathways for treating medical inpatients with pain. Ten Colorado hospitals participated in a 6-month initiative to implement the prescribing pathways, with an aim of reducing opioid prescribing by 15 percent for five commonly encountered medical conditions. Results showed 9.4 percent decrease in opioid morphine equivalent units, 3.4 percent reduction in opioid administrations, and 5.1 percent increase in alternatives to opioid administrations per patient day. Specialty-specific opioid prescribing guidance can help hospitalists change opioid prescribing behavior and should be considered in other specialties.