Archive for Opioid

An Overlooked Epidemic: Older Americans Taking Too Many Unneeded Drugs

An Overlooked Epidemic: Older Americans Taking Too Many Unneeded Drugs

Consider it America’s other prescription drug epidemic.

For decades, experts have warned that older Americans are taking too many unnecessary drugs, often prescribed by multiple doctors, for dubious or unknown reasons. Researchers estimate that 25 percent of people ages 65 to 69 take at least five prescription drugs to treat chronic conditions, a figure that jumps to nearly 46 percent for those between 70 and 79. Doctors say it is not uncommon to encounter patients taking more than 20 drugs to treat acid reflux, heart disease, depression or insomnia or other disorders.

Unlike the overuse of opioid painkillers, the polypharmacy problem has attracted little attention, even though its hazards are well documented. But some doctors are working to reverse the trend.

At least 15 percent of seniors seeking care annually from doctors or hospitals have suffered a medication problem; in half of these cases, the problem is believed to be potentially preventable. Studies have linked polypharmacy to unnecessary death. Older patients, who have greater difficulty metabolizing medicines, are more likely to suffer dizziness, confusion and falls. And the side effects of drugs are frequently misinterpreted as a new problem, triggering more prescriptions, a process known as a prescribing cascade.

The glide path to overuse can be gradual: A patient taking a drug to lower blood pressure develops swollen ankles, so a doctor prescribes a diuretic. The diuretic causes a potassium deficiency, resulting in a medicine to treat low potassium. But that triggers nausea, which is treated with another drug, which causes confusion, which in turn is treated with more medication.

For many patients, problems arise when they are discharged from the hospital on a host of new medications, layered on top of old ones.

Alice Cave, who divides her time between Alexandria, Va., and Tucson, Ariz., discovered this when she traveled to Cheyenne, Wyo., after her 87-year-old aunt was sent home following treatment for a stroke in 2015.

Before her hospitalization, Cave said, her aunt, a retired telephone company employee whose vision is impaired by glaucoma, had been taking seven drugs per day. Five new ones were added in the hospital, Cave said.

“She came home and had a huge bag of pills, half of which she was already taking, plus pages and pages of instructions,” she said. Some were supposed to be taken with food, some on an empty stomach. Cave said she spent several hours sorting the medications into a giant blue pillbox. “It was crazy — and scary.”

Cave said she felt helpless to do much; her aunt’s doctors didn’t question the need for more drugs.

When Shannon Brownlee’s mother was taken to an emergency room recently to determine whether her arm pain might signal a heart attack (it didn’t) a cardiologist prescribed five new drugs — including an opioid — to the small dose of a diuretic she had been taking to control her blood pressure.

Brownlee, senior vice president of the Lown Institute, a Boston-based group that seeks to improve health care quality by reducing unnecessary treatment, said that when her brother questioned the necessity of so many new drugs for a woman in her late 80s, the specialist replied frostily, “I don’t see anything wrong with prescribing lots of medication to older people.”

Bring the Pill Bottles

“This problem has gotten worse because the average American is on a lot more medications than 15 years ago,” said cardiologist Rita Redberg, a professor of medicine at the University of California at San Francisco.

Studies bolster Redberg’s contention: A 2015 report found that the share of Americans of all ages who regularly took at least five prescription drugs nearly doubled between 2000 and 2012, from 8 percent to 15 percent. University of Michigan researchers recently reported that the percentage of people older than 65 taking at least three psychiatric drugs more than doubled in the nine years beginning in 2004. Nearly half of those taking the potent medications, which include antipsychotic drugs used to treat schizophrenia, had no mental health diagnosis.

Redberg and other doctors are trying to counter the blizzard of prescriptions through a grass-roots movement called “deprescribing” — systematically discontinuing medicines that are inappropriate, duplicative or unnecessary.

Interest in deprescribing, which was pioneered in Canada and Australia, is growing in the United States, bolstered by physician-led efforts, such as the five-year-old Choosing Wisely campaign. The Beers Criteria, a list of overused and potentially unsafe drugs for seniors first published in 1991, has been followed by other tools aimed at curbing unnecessary drug use.

“Lots of different medications get started for reasons that are never supported by evidence,” said Redberg, editor in chief of JAMA Internal Medicine. “In general, we like the idea of taking a pill” a lot better than non-drug measures, such as improved eating habits or exercise.

“That’s what we were taught as physicians: to prescribe drugs,” said Ranit Mishori, a professor of family medicine at Georgetown University and a proponent of deprescribing. “We are definitely not taught how to take people off meds.”

Kathryn McGrath, a Philadelphia geriatrician, said she tries to begin every appointment with a review of medications, which she asks patients to bring with them. “I think having the pill bottles” is much more powerful than a list, said McGrath, who has written about how to deprescribe safely.

Although support is growing, deprescribing faces formidable obstacles.

Among them, experts say, is a paucity of research about how best to do it, relentless advertising that encourages consumers to ask their doctors for new drugs, and a strong disinclination – baked into the culture of medicine — to countermand what another physician has ordered. Time constraints play a significant role. So do performance measures that are viewed as a mandate to prescribe drugs even when they make virtually no sense, such as giving statins to terminally ill patients.

A Reluctance to Overrule

“There’s a reluctance to tinker or change things too much,” said University of Michigan geriatric psychiatrist Donovan Maust, who labels the phenomenon “clinical inertia.” When inheriting a new patient, Maust said, doctors tend to assume that if a colleague prescribed a drug, there must be a good reason for it — even if they don’t know what it is. Maust said he tries to combat inertia by writing time-limited orders for medication.

He recently began treating a man in his 80s with dementia who was taking eight psychiatric drugs — each of which can cause significant side effects and most of which had been prescribed for undetermined reasons.

“It’s very typical to see a patient who has a few episodes of reflux and is then put on a [proton pump inhibitor, or PPI] and a few years later are still taking it,” said Georgetown’s Mishori. Many experts say the heartburn drugs are overprescribed, and studies have linked their long-term use to fractures, dementia and premature death.

“This is a cultural problem and an awareness problem exacerbated by the fragmentation of care,” said Brownlee, the author of “Overtreated: Why Too Much Medicine is Making Us Sicker and Poorer.” Many doctors, she added, have never heard of deprescribing.

Before his death several years ago, doctors advised Brownlee’s father, a hospice patient, to continue taking a statin, along with several other medications. None would improve or extend his life, and all had potentially harmful side effects.

Rx: What For?

Older people taking lots of medication was what Canadian pharmacist Barbara Farrell encountered when she began working at a geriatric hospital in Ottawa nearly two decades ago. Her experience, she said, was a catalyst for the Canadian Deprescribing Network, a consortium of researchers, physicians, pharmacists and health advocates she co-founded. The group seeks to drastically reduce inappropriate medication use among Canadian seniors by 2020.

Farrell, a clinical scientist at the Bruyere Research Institute, has also helped write guidelines, used by doctors in the United States and other countries, to safely deprescribe certain classes of widely used drugs, including proton pump inhibitors and sedatives.

“I’ve found a lot of receptivity” to the guidelines among physicians, Farrell said. “We know there are pockets around Canada and the world where they’re being implemented.”

One of Farrell’s most memorable successes involved a woman in her late 70s who was using a wheelchair and was nearly comatose.

“She would literally slide out of her chair,” Farrell recalled. The woman was taking 27 drugs four times per day and had been diagnosed with dementia and a host of other ailments.

After reviewing her medications, Farrell and her colleagues were able to weed out duplicative and potentially harmful drugs and reduce the doses of others. A year later, the woman was “like a different person”: She was able to walk with a cane and live mostly independently, and she reported that her doctor said she did not have dementia after all.

When Farrell asked another patient why she was taking thyroid medication, the woman replied that her doctor had prescribed it for weight loss after her last pregnancy — in 1955.

“The patients I see are the tip of the iceberg,” Farrell said.

One way to facilitate deprescribing, Farrell said, is to require doctors to record why a drug is being prescribed, a proposal the deprescribing network has made to Canadian health officials. A recent study by a team from the Boston VA Healthcare System found strong support among doctors for this concept.

While some doctors are reluctant to discontinue medications, patients can be wary, too.

“They may say, ‘I tried stopping my sleeping pill and I couldn’t sleep the next night, so I figured I needed it,’” Farrell said. ” Nobody explained to them that rebound insomnia, which can occur after stopping sleeping pills, lasts three to five days.”

Mishori said that she deprescribes only one medication at a time so she can detect any problem that arises from that change. And, she adds, “I never take people off of a medication without doing something else.” In the case of heartburn drugs, she might first recommend taking the drug only when needed, not continuously. Or she might suggest a safer alternative, such as an over-the-counter antacid tablet.

Maust, the geriatric psychiatrist, recommends that doctors actively focus on “the big picture” and carefully weigh whether the benefits of a drug outweigh its risks.

“In geriatrics,” he said, “less is more.”

By Sandra G. BoodmanKHN’s coverage related to aging and improving the care of older adults is supported in part by The John A. Hartford Foundation.

Posted in: Opioid

Leave a Comment (0) →

Study: Range of Opioid Prescribers Play Important Role in Epidemic

Study: Range of Opioid Prescribers Play Important Role in Epidemic

A cross-section of opioid prescribers that typically do not prescribe large volumes of opioids, including primary care physicians, surgeons and non-physician health care providers, frequently prescribe opioids to high-risk patients, according to a new study by researchers at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. The findings suggest high-volume prescribers, including “pill mill” doctors, should not be the sole focus of public health efforts to curb the opioid abuse epidemic. The study also found “opioid shoppers,” patients who obtain prescriptions from multiple doctors and pharmacies, are much less common than other high-risk patient groups, suggesting why policy solutions focused on these patients have not yielded larger reductions in opioid overdoses.

“This crisis has been misconstrued as one involving just a small subset of doctors and patients,” said senior author G. Caleb Alexander, M.D., associate professor in the Department of Epidemiology at the Bloomberg School and founding co-Director of the Johns Hopkins Center for Drug Safety and Effectiveness. “Our results underscore the need for targeted interventions aimed at all opioid prescribers, not just high-volume prescribers alone.”

The study, which published on Nov. 29 in Addiction, comes as America’s opioid crisis continues to worsen. Opioids include not only the recreational, poppy-derived drug heroin but also many newer and much more potent synthetic painkillers available by prescription, such as fentanyl and oxycodone. Opioids tend to be highly addictive and when overdosed can stop a user from breathing. Drug overdose deaths in the U.S., which now mostly involve opioids, surged from about 52,000 in 2015 to more than 64,000 in 2016.

Alexander and colleagues have found in previous, smaller-scale studies that a small minority of doctors can account for an inordinately high proportion of opioid prescriptions: just 4 percent of opioid prescribers in Florida, for example, accounted for 40 percent of all opioid prescriptions in that state in 2010.

For this study, he and his team, including first author Hsien-Yen Chang, PhD, an assistant scientist in the Bloomberg School’s Department of Health Policy and Management, examined the relationship between high-volume prescribers and high-risk patients more closely. “While we and others have demonstrated that opioid prescribing tends to be concentrated among a relatively small group of providers, in the current study, we wanted to examine how commonly high-risk patients are prescribed opioids by low-volume prescribers,” Chang said. “We were also interested in whether we could identify systematic differences in the doses and durations prescribed by different groups of doctors caring for the same patients.”

The study covered more than 24 million opioid prescriptions in 2015 by more than 4 million residents of California, Florida, Georgia, Maryland, or Washington, as recorded in a nationwide pharmacy database, QuintilesIMS’ LifeLink LRx.

A key finding was that the high-volume prescribers – those who stayed in the top 5 percent, in terms of total opioid volume, during every quarter of 2015 – were far from being the only prescribers for high-risk patients. Across the five states studied, the remaining, low-volume prescribers accounted for 18 to 56 percent of all opioid prescriptions to high-risk patients, depending on how such patients were defined.

“The point here is that ordinary, low-volume prescribers are routinely coming into contact with high-risk patients, which should be a wake-up call for these prescribers,” Alexander said. “We need to build systems to help prescribers better identify these patients, screen them for opioid use disorders, and improve the quality of their pain management.”

The analysis also revealed “opioid shoppers,” the patient group most commonly thought of as being at high-risk for non-medical use, represent only a small fraction of all opioid users. The researchers defined opioid-shoppers in the study as those receiving prescriptions from more than three prescribers and three pharmacies during any 90-day period. They found this group made up just 0.1 percent of the 4 million patients covered in the study.

“The public health impact of ‘opioid-shoppers’ pales in comparison to that of other high-risk groups we examined,” Alexander said.

The first of these groups, “concomitant users,” were defined as people filling prescriptions for more than 30 days of opioids plus benzodiazepines, a class of tranquilizing drugs that includes Valium and Xanax. Like opioids, benzodiazepines can suppress the nerve signals that sustain breathing. “These two classes of drug interact and enhance each other–they make a dangerous combination,” Alexander said. Nearly one in 10 (9.3 percent) of the opioid prescription users covered in the study were concomitant users.

Chronic high-dose opioid users, comprising 3.7 percent of the total, were another high-risk group that dwarfed the opioid-shopper group. Chronic high-dose users were defined as those filling prescriptions for three months or more for opioids with daily doses equivalent in potency to more than 100 mg of morphine.

The researchers also analyzed prescribers’ prescription patterns and found that, for a group of patients seeing both high- and low-volume prescribers, high-volume prescribers on average prescribed larger doses compared to low-volume prescribers (61 vs. 53 mg morphine equivalents per prescription). Prescriptions from high-volume prescribers also provided about 40 percent more days of supply (22.1 vs. 15.6 days). “Even when the same patients were receiving prescriptions from both low-volume and high-volume prescribers, there was a clear tendency for the high-volume prescribers to provide higher doses for more days of use,” Chang said.

“Our study suggests systematic differences among prescribers. How many opioids you are prescribed, and for how long, appears to depend not only on who you are, but who you see,” Alexander said.

In late October of this year, the Bloomberg School of Public Health and the Clinton Foundation released a comprehensive report, “The Opioid Epidemic: From Evidence to Impact,” that provides evidence-based recommendations to reverse the rising tide of injuries and deaths from prescription opioids. Among its recommendations, the report emphasizes the important role that prescribing guidelines play in improving the safe use of prescription opioids by reducing high-risk use. It also underscores the role of Prescription Drug Monitoring Programs in helping to improve the ability for clinicians to deliver high-quality care for those with pain while reducing the risks associated with unsafe opioid use.

Posted in: Opioid

Leave a Comment (0) →

CMS Announces New Medicaid Policy to Combat Opioid Crisis

CMS Announces New Medicaid Policy to Combat Opioid Crisis

Just a week after President Trump declared the opioid epidemic a public health emergency, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) announced a new policy to allow states to design demonstration projects that increase access to treatment for opioid use disorder (OUD) and other substance use disorders (SUD). CMS’s new demonstration policy responds to the President’s directive and provides states with greater flexibility to design programs that improve access to high quality, clinically appropriate treatment.

Through this updated policy, states will be able to pay for a fuller continuum of care to treat SUD, including critical treatment in residential treatment facilities that Medicaid is unable to pay for without a waiver, according to a letter CMS sent to state Medicaid directors. Previously, states had been required to build out their entire delivery system for SUD treatment while also meeting rigid CMS standards before Medicaid demonstration approvals could be granted. The new policy will allow states to provide greater treatment options while improving their continuum of care over time.

According to a new study, nearly a quarter of patients on Medicaid filled a prescription for an opioid painkiller in 2015. Express Scripts, one of the largest pharmacy benefits manager of Medicaid drug benefits in the country, analyzed data on 1.8 million opioid prescriptions given to 3.1 million Medicaid enrollees in 14 states. It found that 6 percent of all Medicaid prescriptions were for opioids. Of those that acquired opioids, nearly one-third took the medications for more than 30 days.

Opioids also contributed notably to costs, accounting for 4.1 percent of plan costs overall. Medicaid enrollees are 10 times more likely to be drug addicts or substance abusers than the general population, according to the report.

In the letter, CMS said that state projects under its new program should aim to make notable improvements over the course of five years with goals to increase access, reduce overdose deaths, reduce use of the emergency department or inpatient care for drug addiction treatment and improve care coordination.

CMS also said that it will “ensure states take significant steps” to reduce opioid prescribing.

Posted in: Opioid

Leave a Comment (0) →

Trump: Opioid Epidemic “Worst Drug Crisis” in U.S. History

Trump: Opioid Epidemic “Worst Drug Crisis” in U.S. History

President Trump called the opioid epidemic the “worst drug crisis” to strike the U.S. in its history while declaring a public health emergency – not a national emergency as promised earlier in the summer. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, more than 140 American die every day from an opioid overdose, which made President Trump’s announcement one of the most anticipated of the last few months yet not quite what health care advocates were expecting.

“Nobody has seen anything like this going on now. As Americans, we cannot allow this to continue,” Trump said at a White House ceremony. “It is time to liberate our communities from this scourge of drug addiction. … We can be the generation that ends the opioid epidemic. We can do it.”

There’s a legal distinction between a public health emergency, which the secretary of Health and Human Services can declare under the Public Health Services Act, and a presidential emergency under the Stafford Act or the National Emergencies Act. The President’s Opioid Commission recommended in July for a declaration of national emergency in order for the president to have more power to waive privacy laws and Medicaid regulations.

However, declaring a public health emergency, which can only last for 90 days and be renewed a number of times, demonstrates the complexity of an opioid crisis that continues to grow through an ever-evolving cycle of addiction, from prescription pain pills to illegal heroin to the lethality of fentanyl.

What the public health emergency won’t do is free up much federal funding. Acting Health and Human Services Secretary Eric Hargan will be given more room to loosen certain regulations that he otherwise would not be able to.

The declaration will expand access to telemedicine to better help those with an addiction in remote areas receive medications; allow for the shifting of resources within HIV/AIDS programs to help people eligible for those programs receive substance use disorder treatments; and more. It could spur a fight for funding in Congress, as Senate Democrats have introduced a bill to put $45 billion toward the epidemic. Many Republicans also back much more funding to combat the epidemic.

The opioid action is the first public health emergency with a nationwide scope since a year-long emergency to prepare for the H1N1 influenza virus in 2009 and 2010.

Posted in: Opioid

Leave a Comment (0) →

CDC Reports Rising Rates of Drug Overdose Deaths in Rural Areas

CDC Reports Rising Rates of Drug Overdose Deaths in Rural Areas

Rates of drug overdose deaths are rising in nonmetropolitan (rural) areas, surpassing rates in metropolitan (urban) areas, according to a new report in the Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report (MMWR) released this week by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

Drug overdoses are the leading cause of injury death in the United States, resulting in approximately 52,000 deaths in 2015. This report analyzed trends in illicit drug use and disorders from 2003-2014 and drug overdose deaths from 1999-2015 in urban and rural areas. In 1999, drug overdose death rates for urban areas were higher than in rural areas (6.4 per 100,000 population versus 4.0 per 100,000). The rates converged in 2004, and in 2006 the rural rate began trending higher than the urban rate. In 2015, the most recent year in this analysis, the rural rate of 17.0 per 100,000 remains slightly higher than the urban rate of 16.2 per 100,000.

Urban and rural areas experienced significant increases in the percentage of people reporting past-month illicit drug use. However, there were also significant declines in the percentage of people with drug use disorders among those reporting illicit drug use in the past year. The new findings also show an increase in overdose deaths between 1999 and 2015 among urban and rural residents. This increase was consistent across sex, race, and intent (unintentional, suicide, homicide, or undetermined).

“The drug overdose death rate in rural areas is higher than in urban areas,” said CDC Director Brenda Fitzgerald, M.D. “We need to understand why this is happening so that our work with states and communities can help stop illicit drug use and overdose deaths in America.”

Although the percentage of people reporting illicit drug use is less common in rural areas, the effects of use appear to be greater. The percentage of people with drug use disorders among those reporting past-year illicit drug use were similar in rural and urban areas.

Additional findings from the CDC study:

  • In 1999, drug overdose death rates for urban areas were higher than in rural areas (6.4 per 100,000 population versus 4.0 per 100,000). The rates converged in 2004, and by 2006 the rural rate (11.7 per 100,000) was slightly higher than the urban rate (11.5 per 100,000).
  • The percentage of people reporting past-month use of illicit drugs declined for youth ages 12-17 over a 10-year period but increased substantially in other age groups.
  • The percentage of people reporting past-month use of illicit drugs was higher for urban areas during the study period.
  • Among people reporting illicit drug use in the past year, drug use disorders decreased during the study period.
  • In 2015, approximately six times as many drug overdose deaths occurred in urban areas than in rural areas (urban: 45,059; rural: 7,345).

Most overdose deaths occurred in homes, where rescue efforts may fall to relatives who have limited knowledge of or access to life-saving treatment and overdose follow-up care. Considering where people live and where they die from overdose could improve interventions to prevent overdose. Understanding differences in illicit drug use, illicit drug use disorders, and drug overdose deaths in urban and rural areas can help public health professionals to identify, monitor, and prioritize responses.

Visit HHS’s Opioids website for more information on their 5-point strategy to combat the opioid crisis.

Visit CDC’s Opioid Overdose website for data, tools, and resources on opioid overdose prevention.

Visit CDC’s Rural Health website for more information on rural health topics.

Posted in: Opioid

Leave a Comment (0) →

CVS Pharmacy, Others to Limit Prescriptions for Opioids

CVS Pharmacy, Others to Limit Prescriptions for Opioids

Beginning in February 2018, CVS Pharmacy will limit the dose of opioid pain medication and restrict new prescriptions for acute pain to a 7-day supply, which adheres to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s guidelines for prescribing opioids. This limit involves capping daily low-dosages and requires patients to receive versions of the medication that give pain-relief for a short period of time rather than a long duration. However, pharma companies seem to be following in the pharmacy’s footsteps as well.

According to the CVS plan, for a patient to receive an opioid prescription for longer than seven days, the patient would need to complete a pre-authorization for the medication — obtained after the pharmacy benefit manager consults with the prescribing doctor — and will have to pay for them out of pocket. The plan also includes in-store pharmacy training and awareness programs on opioid safety and addiction prevention, along with 750 in-store medical disposal units.

While the seven-day quantity limit on opioid prescriptions is intended for CVS Caremark’s PBM clients and applies only to prescriptions written for acute conditions, such as a minor surgery or dental procedure, CVS is not the first — and will not the be last — to place limitations on opioid prescriptions. Earlier this week during a meeting of President Trump’s opioid commission, the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America announced support to limit the supply of opioids to seven days for acute pain management. PhRMA is a trade organization representing more than three dozen pharma companies, including AstraZeneca, Bayer, Allergan, Bristol-Myer Squibb, Eli Lilly, Johnson & Johnson, Merck, Pfizer, Teva, Novartis, GlaxoSmithKline, and Purdue Pharma.

In August, OptumRx announced the initial results of its Opioid Risk Management program, which is also reducing opioid use. The program places maximum fill limits on opioid therapy regardless of whether the patient is new to opioids or a chronic user. Results include:

  • 82 percent decrease in prescriptions above the CDC guideline recommended dose of 50 mg morphine equivalent dose (MED) per day for first-fill acute prescriptions;
  • 65 percent decrease in prescriptions for first-fill acute opioid treatment written above the maximum seven-day supply;
  • 68 percent decrease in prescriptions for current chronic opioid utilizers issues for >90 mg MED; and
  • 14 percent reduction in average dose across all opioid prescriptions.

Posted in: Opioid

Leave a Comment (0) →

STUDY: Patients Prescribed Opioids in the ER Less Likely to Use Them Long Term

STUDY: Patients Prescribed Opioids in the ER Less Likely to Use Them Long Term

WASHINGTON – Compared to other medical settings, emergency patients who are prescribed opioids for the first time in the emergency department are less likely to become long-term users and more likely to be prescribed these powerful painkillers in accordance with The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention guidelines. A paper analyzing 5.2 million prescriptions for opioids is being published online today in Annals of Emergency Medicine (“Opioid Prescribing for Opioid-Naïve Patients in Emergency Department and Other Settings: Characteristics of Prescriptions and Association with Long-Term Use”).

“Our paper lays to rest the notion that emergency physicians are handing out opioids like candy,” said lead study author Molly Moore Jeffery, PhD., scientific director of the Mayo Clinic Division of Emergency Medicine Research in Rochester, Minn. “Close adherence to prescribing guidelines may help explain why the progression to long-term opioid use is so much lower in the ER. Most opioid prescriptions written in the emergency department are for a shorter duration, written for lower daily doses and less likely to be for long-acting formulations.”

In the emergency department, opioid prescriptions exceeding seven days were 84 to 91 percent (depending on insurance status) lower than in non-emergency settings. Prescriptions from the ER were 23 to 37 percent less likely to exceed 50 morphine milligram equivalents and 33 to 54 percent less likely to exceed 90-milligram equivalents (a high dose). Prescriptions from the ER were 86 to 92 percent less likely to be written for long-acting or extended-release formulations than those attributed to non-emergency settings.

Regardless of insurance status, patients receiving opioid prescriptions in the emergency department were less likely to progress to long-term opioid use. For patients seen in the ER, 1.1 percent with private insurance, 3.1 percent with Medicare (age 65 or older) and 6.2 percent with disabled Medicare progressed to long-term use. Put another way, patients with commercial insurance were 46 percent less likely to progress to long-term opioid use, Medicare patients age 65 and older were 56 percent less likely to progress to long-term opioid use and patients with disabled Medicare were 58 percent less likely to progress to long-term use if they received an opioid prescription in the emergency department.

“Over time, prescriptions written in the ER for high-dose opioids decreased between 2009 and 2011,” said Ms. Jeffery. “Less than 5 percent of opioid prescriptions from the ER exceeded seven days, which is much lower than the percentage in non-emergency settings. Further research should explore how we can replicate the success of opioid prescribing in emergency departments in other medical settings.”

Posted in: Opioid

Leave a Comment (0) →
Page 4 of 4 1234