Department of Health Policy and Management, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland (E.E.M., N.J.S., A.D.M., L.R.).
Departments of Anesthesiology and Health Management and Policy, School of Public Health, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan (M.C.B.).
Ann Intern Med. 2022 May;175(5):617-627. doi: 10.7326/M21-4363. Epub 2022 Mar 15.
There is concern that state laws to curb opioid prescribing may adversely affect patients with chronic noncancer pain, but the laws' effects are unclear because of challenges in disentangling multiple laws implemented around the same time.
To study the association between state opioid prescribing cap laws, pill mill laws, and mandatory prescription drug monitoring program query or enrollment laws and trends in opioid and guideline-concordant nonopioid pain treatment among commercially insured adults, including a subgroup with chronic noncancer pain conditions.
Thirteen treatment states that implemented a single law of interest in a 4-year period and unique groups of control states for each treatment state were identified. Augmented synthetic control analyses were used to estimate the association between each state law and outcomes.
United States, 2008 to 2019.
7 694 514 commercially insured adults aged 18 years or older, including 1 976 355 diagnosed with arthritis, low back pain, headache, fibromyalgia, and/or neuropathic pain.
Proportion of patients receiving any opioid prescription or guideline-concordant nonopioid pain treatment per month, and mean days' supply and morphine milligram equivalents (MME) of prescribed opioids per day, per patient, per month.
Laws were associated with small-in-magnitude and non-statistically significant changes in outcomes, although CIs around some estimates were wide. For adults overall and those with chronic noncancer pain, the 13 state laws were each associated with a change of less than 1 percentage point in the proportion of patients receiving any opioid prescription and a change of less than 2 percentage points in the proportion receiving any guideline-concordant nonopioid treatment, per month. The laws were associated with a change of less than 1 in days' supply of opioid prescriptions and a change of less than 4 in average monthly MME per day per patient prescribed opioids.
Results may not be generalizable to non-commercially insured populations and were imprecise for some estimates. Use of claims data precluded assessment of the clinical appropriateness of pain treatments.
This study did not identify changes in opioid prescribing or nonopioid pain treatment attributable to state laws.
National Institute on Drug Abuse.
人们担心限制阿片类药物处方的州法律可能会对患有慢性非癌痛的患者产生不利影响,但由于同时实施的多项法律难以区分,这些法律的效果尚不清楚。
研究州阿片类药物处方上限法、“制毒药房”法和强制性处方药物监测计划查询或登记法与商业保险成年人中阿片类药物和符合指南的非阿片类药物疼痛治疗趋势之间的关联,包括患有慢性非癌痛的亚组。
确定了在四年期间实施了一项感兴趣的单一法律的 13 个治疗州和每个治疗州的独特对照组州。使用增强型合成对照分析来估计每个州法律与结果之间的关联。
美国,2008 年至 2019 年。
7694514 名 18 岁或以上的商业保险成年人,其中 1976355 人被诊断患有关节炎、下背痛、头痛、纤维肌痛和/或神经性疼痛。
每月接受任何阿片类药物处方或符合指南的非阿片类药物疼痛治疗的患者比例,以及每位患者每月每天规定的阿片类药物的平均天数供应量和吗啡毫克当量(MME)。
尽管某些估计值的置信区间较宽,但法律与结果的变化幅度较小且无统计学意义。对于整体成年人和患有慢性非癌痛的成年人,13 项州法律中,每月接受任何阿片类药物处方的患者比例变化均小于 1 个百分点,每月接受任何符合指南的非阿片类药物治疗的患者比例变化均小于 2 个百分点。这些法律与阿片类药物处方的供应天数变化小于 1 天,以及规定阿片类药物的每位患者每天平均每月 MME 变化小于 4 有关。
结果可能不适用于非商业保险人群,并且某些估计值不够精确。使用索赔数据排除了对疼痛治疗的临床适当性的评估。
这项研究没有发现州法律导致阿片类药物处方或非阿片类药物疼痛治疗发生变化。
国家药物滥用研究所。