, Baltimore, USA.
Implement Sci. 2018 Feb 26;13(1):37. doi: 10.1186/s13012-018-0719-8.
The U.S. opioid epidemic has been driven by the high volume of opioids prescribed by healthcare providers. U.S. states have recently enacted four types of laws designed to curb high-risk prescribing practices, such as high-dose and long-term opioid prescribing, associated with opioid-related mortality: (1) mandatory Prescription Drug Monitoring Program (PDMP) enrollment laws, which require prescribers to enroll in their state's PDMP, an electronic database of patients' controlled substance prescriptions, (2) mandatory PDMP query laws, which require prescribers to query the PDMP prior to prescribing an opioid, (3) opioid prescribing cap laws, which limit the dose and/or duration of opioid prescriptions, and (4) pill mill laws, which strictly regulate pain clinics to prevent nonmedical opioid prescribing. Some pain experts have expressed concern that these laws could negatively affect pain management among patients with chronic non-cancer pain. This paper describes the protocol for a mixed-methods study analyzing the independent effects of these four types of laws on opioid prescribing patterns and chronic non-cancer pain treatment, accounting for variation in implementation and enforcement of laws across states.
Many states have enacted multiple opioid prescribing laws at or around the same time. To overcome this issue, our study focuses on 18 treatment states that each enacted a single law of interest, and no other potentially confounding laws, over a 4-year period (2 years pre-/post-law). Qualitative interviews with key leaders in each of the 18 treatment states will characterize the timing, scope, and strength of each state law's implementation and enforcement. This information will inform the design and interpretation of synthetic control models analyzing the effects of each of the two types of laws on two sets of outcomes: measures of (1) high-risk opioid prescribing and (2) non-opioid treatments for chronic non-cancer pain.
Study of mandatory PDMP enrollment, mandatory PDMP query, opioid prescribing cap, and pill mill laws is timely given a dynamic policy environment in which numerous states pass, revise, implement, and enforce varied laws to address opioid prescribing each year. Findings will inform enactment, implementation, and enforcement of these laws in additional states.
美国的阿片类药物泛滥是由医疗保健提供者开出的大量阿片类药物推动的。美国各州最近颁布了四种旨在遏制与阿片类药物相关死亡率相关的高风险处方实践的法律,例如大剂量和长期阿片类药物处方:(1)强制性处方药物监测计划(PDMP)注册法,要求处方医生在其所在州的 PDMP 中注册,PDMP 是患者受控物质处方的电子数据库,(2)强制性 PDMP 查询法,要求处方医生在开具阿片类药物之前查询 PDMP,(3)阿片类药物处方上限法,限制阿片类药物处方的剂量和/或持续时间,以及(4)药丸磨坊法,严格规范疼痛诊所以防止非医疗阿片类药物处方。一些疼痛专家担心这些法律可能会对慢性非癌痛患者的疼痛管理产生负面影响。本文描述了一项混合方法研究的方案,该研究分析了这四种法律对阿片类药物处方模式和慢性非癌痛治疗的独立影响,同时考虑了各州法律的实施和执行情况的变化。
许多州在同一时间或前后颁布了多项阿片类药物处方法律。为了解决这个问题,我们的研究集中在 18 个治疗州,这些州在四年期间(法律颁布前/后两年)各颁布了一项单一的感兴趣的法律,没有其他可能混淆的法律。对 18 个治疗州的每一位关键领导人进行定性访谈,以描述每个州法律的实施和执行的时间、范围和力度。这些信息将为分析每两种类型的法律对两组结果(1)高风险阿片类药物处方和(2)慢性非癌痛的非阿片类药物治疗的影响的综合控制模型的设计和解释提供信息。
鉴于动态政策环境,每年都有许多州通过、修订、实施和执行各种法律来解决阿片类药物处方问题,对强制性 PDMP 注册、强制性 PDMP 查询、阿片类药物处方上限和药丸磨坊法律的研究是及时的。研究结果将为其他州制定、实施和执行这些法律提供信息。