RTI International, Rockville, Maryland.
RTI International, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina.
J Stud Alcohol Drugs. 2021 Mar;82(2):214-218.
This study characterized the use of prior authorization for opioid use disorder medications as compared with that for opioid pain medications in the United States among Medicare Part D plans.
Medicare Part D formulary data from 2017-2019 were used to describe differences in prior authorization between opioid use disorder medications and opioid pain medications.
In 2017, 72% of Medicare Part D formularies required prior authorization for brand buprenorphine-naloxone, whereas 6% of formularies required prior authorization for brand oxycodone. In 2019, 3% of formularies required prior authorization for brand buprenorphine-naloxone, whereas 16% of formularies required prior authorization for brand oxycodone. Throughout the study period, other formulary restrictions such as quantity limits were similar for both medications.
The disparate use of prior authorization in 2017 for opioid use disorder medications as compared with opioid pain medications suggests that formulary decision making may be inconsistent between medications used to treat substance use disorders and those used to treat pain. If Part D formularies publicly released their decision-making criteria, then there would be a greater understanding of why prior authorization was differentially applied. Greater transparency would help ensure that formulary decisions are not the result of biases and stigma toward substance use disorders.
本研究比较了美国医疗保险处方药计划中美沙酮类药物使用障碍药物和阿片类疼痛药物的事先授权使用情况。
使用 2017-2019 年医疗保险处方药处方集数据,描述美沙酮类药物使用障碍药物和阿片类疼痛药物之间事先授权的差异。
2017 年,72%的医疗保险处方药处方集要求品牌丁丙诺啡-纳洛酮预先授权,而 6%的处方集要求品牌羟考酮预先授权。2019 年,3%的处方集要求品牌丁丙诺啡-纳洛酮预先授权,而 16%的处方集要求品牌羟考酮预先授权。在整个研究期间,两种药物的其他处方集限制,如数量限制,相似。
2017 年美沙酮类药物使用障碍药物与阿片类疼痛药物相比,事先授权的使用存在显著差异,这表明用于治疗物质使用障碍的药物和用于治疗疼痛的药物之间的处方集决策可能不一致。如果医疗保险处方药集公开其决策标准,那么人们将更好地了解为什么事先授权的应用存在差异。更大的透明度将有助于确保处方集决策不是对物质使用障碍的偏见和污名化的结果。