Opioid prescribing patterns among generalists & oncologists for Medicare Part D beneficiaries from 2013-2017.

2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 2070-2070
Author(s):  
Trevor Joseph Royce ◽  
Andrew Roberts ◽  
Stacie Dusetzina ◽  
Ankit Agarwal

2070 Background: In response to the opioid crisis, recent policies aiming to reduce opioid prescribing, misuse, & abuse have generated concern that patients with cancer pain may unintentionally experience reduced access to necessary opioid therapy. It is unknown how opioid prescribing patterns have changed between generalists and oncologists during this era. Methods: We conducted a longitudinal repeated cross-sectional study estimating adjusted annual national trends in opioid prescribing among generalists & oncologists using the Medicare Part D Prescriber Public Use Files 2013-2017. Poisson models estimated annual adjusted predicted mean rates of opioid prescribing-per-1,000 total prescriptions & long-acting opioid prescribing per-1,000 opioid prescriptions. Poisson models estimated adjusted incidence rate ratios (aIRRs) to quantify annual changes in prescribing rates. Results: From 2013-2017 the annual adjusted predicted mean rate of opioid prescriptions per 1,000 total prescriptions decreased from 53.4 to 41.3 among generalists (aIRR = 0.78; p < 0.01) and from 133.2 to 105.9 among oncologists (aIRR = 0.83; p < 0.01). The rate of long-acting opioid fills per 1,000 opioid prescriptions decreased from 96.0 to 87.0 (aIRR = 0.87; p < 0.01) and 235.1 to 222.5 (aIRR = 0.95; p < 0.01) for generalists & oncologists, respectively (Table). Conclusions: We found large declines in overall opioid prescribing rates among generalists (-22%) and oncologists (-17%) from 2013-2017. Long-acting opioid prescribing rates decreased over 2.5-times more among generalists than oncologists. Opioid policy & advocacy have been effective in reducing the extent of opioid prescribing in the Medicare population but how much of the decrease in prescribing by oncologists is ‘appropriate’ versus ‘inappropriate’ deserves further investigation. [Table: see text]

Orbit ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. 1-6
Author(s):  
Stephen C. Dryden ◽  
Jonathan E. Rho ◽  
Garrett C. Nix ◽  
Albert B. Vacheron ◽  
Sara N. Reggie ◽  
...  

Pain Medicine ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 21 (7) ◽  
pp. 1400-1407 ◽  
Author(s):  
Adam N Romman ◽  
Connie M Hsu ◽  
Lin-Na Chou ◽  
Yong-Fang Kuo ◽  
Rene Przkora ◽  
...  

Abstract Objective To examine opioid prescribing frequency and trends to Medicare Part D enrollees from 2013 to 2017 by medical specialty and provider type. Methods We conducted a retrospective, cross-sectional, specialty- and provider-level analysis of Medicare Part D prescriber data for opioid claims from 2013 to 2017. We analyzed opioid claims and prescribing trends for specialties accounting for ≥1% of all opioid claims. Results From 2013 to 2017, pain management providers increased Medicare Part D opioid claims by 27.3% to 1,140 mean claims per provider in 2017; physical medicine and rehabilitation providers increased opioid claims 16.9% to 511 mean claims per provider in 2017. Every other medical specialty decreased opioid claims over this period, with emergency medicine (–19.9%) and orthopedic surgery (–16.0%) dropping opioid claims more than any specialty. Physicians overall decreased opioid claims per provider by –5.2%. Meanwhile, opioid claims among both dentists (+5.6%) and nonphysician providers (+10.2%) increased during this period. Conclusions From 2013 to 2017, pain management and PMR increased opioid claims to Medicare Part D enrollees, whereas physicians in every other specialty decreased opioid prescribing. Dentists and nonphysician providers also increased opioid prescribing. Overall, opioid claims to Medicare Part D enrollees decreased and continue to drop at faster rates.


2021 ◽  
Vol Publish Ahead of Print ◽  
Author(s):  
Stephen C. Dryden ◽  
Holly A. O’Malley ◽  
Lindsey R. Adams ◽  
Garrett C. Nix ◽  
Jonathan E. Rho ◽  
...  

2017 ◽  
Vol 76 (3) ◽  
pp. 337-353 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elissa Ladd ◽  
Casey Fryer Sweeney ◽  
Anthony Guarino ◽  
Alex Hoyt

Many state legislatures restrict nurse practitioner (NP) scope of practice as a way of addressing patient safety concerns. The purpose of this study was to investigate the influence of state NP scope of practice laws on the prescription of oxycodone and hydrocodone containing medications by NP and MD/DO/PA prescribers to Medicare Part D beneficiaries. Using the Medicare Part D public use file, we analyzed oxycodone and hydrocodone containing prescriptions per Medicare Part D beneficiary by prescriber type, NP state scope of practice, and geographic variables. Our results demonstrate that the state scope of practice variable had the same effect, in identical direction and significance, on NP opioid prescribing patterns as it had on MD/DO/PA prescribers, a group to whom NP scope of practice laws do not apply. Thus, scope of practice in this study was not an exclusive predictor of NP practice and prescribing.


JAMA Oncology ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 6 (8) ◽  
pp. 1271
Author(s):  
Ankit Agarwal ◽  
Andrew Roberts ◽  
Stacie B. Dusetzina ◽  
Trevor J. Royce

2020 ◽  
Vol 113 (9) ◽  
pp. 350-359
Author(s):  
Michael Liu ◽  
Brian MacKenna ◽  
William B Feldman ◽  
Alex J Walker ◽  
Jerry Avorn ◽  
...  

Summary Objectives To estimate additional spending if NHS England paid the same prices as US Medicare Part D for the 50 single-source brand-name drugs with the highest expenditure in English primary care in 2018. Design Retrospective analysis of 2018 drug prescribing and spending in the NHS England prescribing data and the Medicare Part D Drug Spending Dashboard and Data. We examined the 50 costliest drugs in English primary care available as brand-name-only in the US and England. We performed cost projections of NHS England spending with US Medicare Part D prices. We estimated average 2018 US rebates as 1 minus the quotient of net divided by gross Medicare Part D spending. Setting England and US Participants NHS England and US Medicare systems Main outcome measures Total spending, prescriptions and claims in NHS England and Medicare Part D. All spending and cost measures were reported in 2018 British pounds. Results NHS England spent £1.39 billion on drugs in the cohort. All drugs were more expensive under US Medicare Part D than NHS England. The US–England price ratios ranged from 1.3 to 9.9 (mean ratio 4.8). Accounting for prescribing volume, if NHS England had paid US Medicare Part D prices after adjusting for estimated US rebates, it would have spent 4.6 times as much in 2018 on drugs in the cohort (£6.42 billion). Conclusions Spending by NHS England would be substantially higher if it paid US Medicare Part D prices. This could result in decreased access to medicines and other health services.


Author(s):  
Stephen C. Dryden ◽  
Garrett C. Nix ◽  
Jonathan E. Rho ◽  
Albert B. Vacheron ◽  
Samuel C. Fowler ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document