Prescription opioid supply-restricting policies and hospital use by people prescribed opioid medications, Victoria, 2018-22: a controlled interrupted time series analysis.

IF 6.7 2区 医学 Q1 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
Suzanne Nielsen, Louisa Picco, Bosco Rowland, Nadine E Andrew, Taya A Collyer, Samanta Lalic, Rachelle Buchbinder, Christopher Pearce, Simon Bell, Dan I Lubman, Ting Xia
{"title":"Prescription opioid supply-restricting policies and hospital use by people prescribed opioid medications, Victoria, 2018-22: a controlled interrupted time series analysis.","authors":"Suzanne Nielsen, Louisa Picco, Bosco Rowland, Nadine E Andrew, Taya A Collyer, Samanta Lalic, Rachelle Buchbinder, Christopher Pearce, Simon Bell, Dan I Lubman, Ting Xia","doi":"10.5694/mja2.52713","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To investigate the combined effect of two policies for reducing prescription opioid supply in Australia on hospital use by people prescribed opioids in primary care.</p><p><strong>Study design: </strong>Retrospective data linkage study; controlled interrupted time series analysis of linked primary care electronic medication records and hospital admissions data.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>Three Victorian health care networks (Monash Health, Eastern Health, Peninsula Health); pre-intervention period: 1 April 2018 - 31 March 2020; intervention period: 1 April 2020 - 31 March 2022.</p><p><strong>Participants: </strong>People prescribed opioid medications at least twice during the preceding six months (opioid group) and propensity score-matched patients, based on age, gender, comorbidity, and residential postcode-based socio-economic status (control group); matching was undertaken for each month of the study period.</p><p><strong>Intervention: </strong>Mandatory prescription drug monitoring (from 1 April 2020); tighter restriction criteria for the subsidisation of opioid medications by the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme (PBS) (from 1 June 2020).</p><p><strong>Main outcome measures: </strong>Differences between the opioid and control groups in immediate changes after start of the intervention in rates of emergency department (ED) presentation and hospital admission related to opioid use, non-opioid substance use, self-harm, or mental health problems; differences between the two groups in the change in trend for these rates between the pre-intervention and intervention periods.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Propensity matching was undertaken for 179 091 people in the opioid group and a total of 389 061 people in the control group. The opioid-related ED presentation rate for the opioid group had been increasing prior to the intervention, but declined after its introduction at a rate not significantly different from that of the control group. The immediate change in non-opioid substance-related ED presentation rate was greater for the opioid group than the control group (β, 11.1 [95% confidence interval, 1.7-20.5] presentations per 100 000 patients); by 31 March 2022, the rate had declined to below the pre-intervention level. Differences between groups in changes to self-harm- and mental health-related presentations, and in all hospital admission rates, were not statistically significant.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Following implementation of two prescription opioid supply-restricting polices in 2020, the opioid-related ED presentation rate declined among people prescribed opioids; the non-opioid substance-related presentation rate initially increased, but was lower than the pre-intervention level by the end of the study period. Our findings suggest that some opioid-restricting policies can reduce opioid-related harm without increasing long term non-opioid substance- or mental health-related harm.</p><p><strong>Study registration: </strong>European post-authorisation study register (EUROPAS), EUPAS104005 (prospective).</p>","PeriodicalId":18214,"journal":{"name":"Medical Journal of Australia","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":6.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Medical Journal of Australia","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5694/mja2.52713","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: To investigate the combined effect of two policies for reducing prescription opioid supply in Australia on hospital use by people prescribed opioids in primary care.

Study design: Retrospective data linkage study; controlled interrupted time series analysis of linked primary care electronic medication records and hospital admissions data.

Setting: Three Victorian health care networks (Monash Health, Eastern Health, Peninsula Health); pre-intervention period: 1 April 2018 - 31 March 2020; intervention period: 1 April 2020 - 31 March 2022.

Participants: People prescribed opioid medications at least twice during the preceding six months (opioid group) and propensity score-matched patients, based on age, gender, comorbidity, and residential postcode-based socio-economic status (control group); matching was undertaken for each month of the study period.

Intervention: Mandatory prescription drug monitoring (from 1 April 2020); tighter restriction criteria for the subsidisation of opioid medications by the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme (PBS) (from 1 June 2020).

Main outcome measures: Differences between the opioid and control groups in immediate changes after start of the intervention in rates of emergency department (ED) presentation and hospital admission related to opioid use, non-opioid substance use, self-harm, or mental health problems; differences between the two groups in the change in trend for these rates between the pre-intervention and intervention periods.

Results: Propensity matching was undertaken for 179 091 people in the opioid group and a total of 389 061 people in the control group. The opioid-related ED presentation rate for the opioid group had been increasing prior to the intervention, but declined after its introduction at a rate not significantly different from that of the control group. The immediate change in non-opioid substance-related ED presentation rate was greater for the opioid group than the control group (β, 11.1 [95% confidence interval, 1.7-20.5] presentations per 100 000 patients); by 31 March 2022, the rate had declined to below the pre-intervention level. Differences between groups in changes to self-harm- and mental health-related presentations, and in all hospital admission rates, were not statistically significant.

Conclusion: Following implementation of two prescription opioid supply-restricting polices in 2020, the opioid-related ED presentation rate declined among people prescribed opioids; the non-opioid substance-related presentation rate initially increased, but was lower than the pre-intervention level by the end of the study period. Our findings suggest that some opioid-restricting policies can reduce opioid-related harm without increasing long term non-opioid substance- or mental health-related harm.

Study registration: European post-authorisation study register (EUROPAS), EUPAS104005 (prospective).

处方阿片类药物供应限制政策和处方阿片类药物患者的医院使用,维多利亚州,2018-22:受控中断时间序列分析。
目的:探讨澳大利亚两项减少处方阿片类药物供应的政策对初级保健处方阿片类药物患者在医院使用的综合影响。研究设计:回顾性数据关联研究;链接的初级保健电子用药记录和住院数据的受控中断时间序列分析。环境:三个维多利亚保健网络(莫纳什保健、东部保健、半岛保健);预干预期:2018年4月1日至2020年3月31日;干预期:2020年4月1日至2022年3月31日。参与者:在过去六个月内至少两次开具阿片类药物的人(阿片类药物组)和基于年龄、性别、合并症和基于居住邮政编码的社会经济地位的倾向评分匹配的患者(对照组);在研究期间的每个月进行配对。干预措施:强制性处方药监测(从2020年4月1日起);药物福利计划(PBS)对阿片类药物补贴的更严格限制标准(从2020年6月1日起)。主要结局指标:阿片类药物组与对照组在阿片类药物使用、非阿片类物质使用、自残或精神健康问题相关的急诊科(ED)就诊率和住院率的干预开始后立即变化的差异;两组在干预前和干预期间这些比率变化趋势的差异。结果:阿片类药物组179 091人与对照组共389 061人进行倾向匹配。阿片类药物组的阿片类药物相关ED表现率在干预前一直在增加,但在干预后下降,与对照组的差异不显著。阿片类药物组非阿片类物质相关ED呈现率的即时变化大于对照组(β, 11.1[95%置信区间,1.7-20.5]/ 10万例患者);到2022年3月31日,这一比率已降至干预前水平以下。在自我伤害和精神健康相关表现的变化以及所有住院率方面,各组之间的差异没有统计学意义。结论:2020年两项处方阿片类药物限供政策实施后,处方阿片类药物人群阿片类药物相关ED发生率下降;非阿片类物质相关的呈现率最初增加,但在研究期结束时低于干预前的水平。我们的研究结果表明,一些限制阿片类药物的政策可以减少阿片类药物相关的危害,而不会增加长期的非阿片类物质或精神健康相关的危害。研究注册:欧洲授权后研究注册(EUROPAS), EUPAS104005(前瞻性)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Medical Journal of Australia
Medical Journal of Australia 医学-医学:内科
CiteScore
9.40
自引率
5.30%
发文量
410
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: The Medical Journal of Australia (MJA) stands as Australia's foremost general medical journal, leading the dissemination of high-quality research and commentary to shape health policy and influence medical practices within the country. Under the leadership of Professor Virginia Barbour, the expert editorial team at MJA is dedicated to providing authors with a constructive and collaborative peer-review and publication process. Established in 1914, the MJA has evolved into a modern journal that upholds its founding values, maintaining a commitment to supporting the medical profession by delivering high-quality and pertinent information essential to medical practice.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信