Association between prescription drug monitoring programs use mandates and prescription stimulants received by Medicaid enrollees

Abstract

AbstractIntroductionPrescription drug monitoring program (PDMP) use mandates are an important policy tool to curb nonmedical opioid use. However, data are scarce about their efficacy on other commonly used prescription drugs such as stimulants.MethodsWe used 2010–2020 state‐level secondary data from Medicaid State Drug Utilisation Data and quasi‐experimental difference‐in‐differences research design to estimate the association between PDMP use mandates and population‐adjusted stimulants (amphetamines and methylphenidate) prescribing outcomes: (i) number of prescriptions filled; and (ii) total amount reimbursed in US dollars. To account for heterogeneity in mandates across US states, two policy variables were considered: limited and expansive. Limited PDMP use mandates require prescribers or dispensers to check the PDMP only when prescribing/dispensing opioids or benzodiazepines, while expansive PDMP use mandates are non‐specific to opioids/benzodiazepines and require prescribers or dispensers to check the PDMP when prescribing/dispensing targeted controlled substances in Drug Enforcement Agency Schedule II–V. The sample included 49 US states and the District of Columbia. Nevada was excluded since it implemented the PDMP mandate before the period of analysis.ResultsThe state‐wide implementation of the PDMP use mandate, either limited or expansive, was not associated with the number of prescriptions filled or the total amount reimbursed in US dollars for stimulants among Medicaid enrollees.Discussion and ConclusionThere was no evidence for the associations between PDMP use mandates and stimulant prescribing among Medicaid enrollees. Future works are encouraged to replicate the study in other populations and with longer post‐period analysis when the impact of the mandates might be more successfully materialised.