RAND Corporation, 4570 Fifth Avenue, Suite 600, Pittsburgh, PA, 15213, USA.
George Washington University Trachtenberg School of Public Policy, Washington, DC, USA.
J Gen Intern Med. 2023 Feb;38(3):733-737. doi: 10.1007/s11606-022-07891-w. Epub 2022 Dec 6.
During the COVID pandemic, overall buprenorphine treatment appeared to remain relatively stable, despite some studies suggesting a decrease in patients starting buprenorphine. There is a paucity of empirical information regarding patterns of buprenorphine treatment during the pandemic.
To better understand the patterns of buprenorphine episodes during the pandemic and how those patterns compared to pre-pandemic patterns.
Pharmacy claims representing approximately 92% of all prescriptions filled at retail pharmacies in all 50 US states and the District of Columbia.
Individuals filling buprenorphine prescriptions indicated for treatment of opioid use disorder.
The number of active, starting, and ending buprenorphine treatment episodes March 13 to December 1, 2020, and the expected number of such episodes in 2020 based on the growth in treatment episodes from March 13 to December 1, 2019.
The observed number of active buprenorphine episodes in December 2020 was comparable to the expected number, but new treatment episodes starting between March 13 and December 1, 2020, were 17.2% fewer than expected based on the 2019 experience. Similarly, the number of episodes that ended between March 13 and December 1, 2020, was 16.0% fewer than expected. Decreases from expected episode starts and ends occurred throughout the period but were greatest in the 2 months after the declaration of the public health emergency.
Beneath the apparent stability of buprenorphine patient numbers during the pandemic, the flow of individuals receiving buprenorphine treatment changed substantially. Our findings shed light on how policy changes meant to support buprenorphine prescribing influenced prescribing dynamics during that period, suggesting that while policy efforts may have been successful in maintaining existing patients in treatment, that success did not extend to individuals not yet in treatment.
在 COVID 大流行期间，尽管有一些研究表明开始接受丁丙诺啡治疗的患者有所减少，但总体丁丙诺啡治疗似乎仍保持相对稳定。关于大流行期间丁丙诺啡治疗模式的实证信息很少。
更好地了解大流行期间丁丙诺啡治疗的模式，以及这些模式与大流行前模式的比较。
代表全美 50 个州和哥伦比亚特区所有零售药店约 92%的处方的药房索赔。
填写丁丙诺啡处方以治疗阿片类药物使用障碍的个人。
2020 年 3 月 13 日至 12 月 1 日期间活跃、开始和结束的丁丙诺啡治疗发作的数量，以及根据 2019 年 3 月 13 日至 12 月 1 日期间治疗发作的增长预期的 2020 年此类发作的数量。
2020 年 12 月观察到的丁丙诺啡活跃发作数量与预期数量相当，但 2020 年 3 月 13 日至 12 月 1 日期间开始的新治疗发作比根据 2019 年经验预期的少 17.2%。同样，2020 年 3 月 13 日至 12 月 1 日期间结束的发作数量比预期的少 16.0%。从预期发作开始和结束的减少发生在整个期间，但在宣布公共卫生紧急状态后的 2 个月内最为严重。
在大流行期间丁丙诺啡患者数量的表面稳定之下，接受丁丙诺啡治疗的个体数量的流动发生了重大变化。我们的研究结果揭示了旨在支持丁丙诺啡处方的政策变化如何在那段时间影响处方动态，表明尽管政策努力可能成功地维持了现有患者的治疗，但这种成功并未扩展到尚未接受治疗的个体。
