Out of pocket expenses: effect of fee-waivers on opioid prescribing and dispensing

2021 ◽  
Vol 98 ◽  
pp. 103423
Author(s):  
Tim Boogaerts ◽  
Chanel De Swert ◽  
Adrian Covaci ◽  
Alexander L.N. van Nuijs ◽  
Wouter Hamelinck ◽  
...  
2005 ◽  
Vol 38 (19) ◽  
pp. 99
Author(s):  
JENNIFER SILVERMAN

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-6
Author(s):  
Paul Park ◽  
Victor Chang ◽  
Hsueh-Han Yeh ◽  
Jason M. Schwalb ◽  
David R. Nerenz ◽  
...  

OBJECTIVEIn 2017, Michigan passed new legislation designed to reduce opioid abuse. This study evaluated the impact of these new restrictive laws on preoperative narcotic use, short-term outcomes, and readmission rates after spinal surgery.METHODSPatient data from 1 year before and 1 year after initiation of the new opioid laws (beginning July 1, 2018) were queried from the Michigan Spine Surgery Improvement Collaborative database. Before and after implementation of the major elements of the new laws, 12,325 and 11,988 patients, respectively, were treated.RESULTSPatients before and after passage of the opioid laws had generally similar demographic and surgical characteristics. Notably, after passage of the opioid laws, the number of patients taking daily narcotics preoperatively decreased from 3783 (48.7%) to 2698 (39.7%; p < 0.0001). Three months postoperatively, there were no differences in minimum clinically important difference (56.0% vs 58.0%, p = 0.1068), numeric rating scale (NRS) score of back pain (3.5 vs 3.4, p = 0.1156), NRS score of leg pain (2.7 vs 2.7, p = 0.3595), satisfaction (84.4% vs 84.7%, p = 0.6852), or 90-day readmission rate (5.8% vs 6.2%, p = 0.3202) between groups. Although there was no difference in readmission rates, pain as a reason for readmission was marginally more common (0.86% vs 1.22%, p = 0.0323).CONCLUSIONSThere was a meaningful decrease in preoperative narcotic use, but notably there was no apparent negative impact on postoperative recovery, patient satisfaction, or short-term outcomes after spinal surgery despite more restrictive opioid prescribing. Although the readmission rate did not significantly increase, pain as a reason for readmission was marginally more frequently observed.


2020 ◽  
Vol 70 (suppl 1) ◽  
pp. bjgp20X711581
Author(s):  
Charlotte Greene ◽  
Alice Pearson

BackgroundOpioids are effective analgesics for acute and palliative pain, but there is no evidence base for long-term pain relief. They also carry considerable risks such as overdose and dependence. Despite this, they are increasingly prescribed for chronic pain. In the UK, opioid prescribing more than doubled between 1998 and 2018.AimAn audit at Bangholm GP Practice to understand the scale of high-strength opioid prescribing. The aim of the audit was to find out if indications, length of prescription, discussion, and documentation at initial consultation and review process were consistent with best-practice guidelines.MethodA search on Scottish Therapeutics Utility for patients prescribed an average daily dose of opioid equivalent ≥50 mg morphine between 1 July 2019 and 1 October 2019, excluding methadone, cancer pain, or palliative prescriptions. The Faculty of Pain Medicine’s best-practice guidelines were used.ResultsDemographics: 60 patients (37 females), average age 62, 28% registered with repeat opioid prescription, 38% comorbid depression. Length of prescription: average 6 years, 57% >5 years, 22% >10 years. Opioid: 52% tramadol, 23% on two opioids. Indications: back pain (42%), osteoarthritis (12%), fibromyalgia (10%). Initial consultation: 7% agreed outcomes, 35% follow-up documented. Review: 56% 4-week, 70% past year.ConclusionOpioid prescribing guidelines are not followed. The significant issues are: long-term prescriptions for chronic pain, especially back pain; new patients registering with repeat prescriptions; and no outcomes of treatment agreed, a crucial message is the goal is pain management rather than relief. Changes have been introduced at the practice: a patient information sheet, compulsory 1-month review for new patients on opioids, and in-surgery pain referrals.


2020 ◽  
Vol 82 (3) ◽  
pp. 700-708
Author(s):  
Justin M. McLawhorn ◽  
Matthew P. Stephany ◽  
William E. Bruhn ◽  
Lauren D. Crow ◽  
Brett M. Coldiron ◽  
...  

Surgery ◽  
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Randi S. Cartmill ◽  
Dou-Yan Yang ◽  
Benjamin J. Walker ◽  
Yasmin S. Bradfield ◽  
Tony L. Kille ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document