Appendectomy Pain Medication Prescribing Variation in the U.S. Military Health System

Author:

Cronin William A12,Nealeigh Matthew D34ORCID,Harry Nathaniel M1,Kerr Christopher1,Cyr Kyle L12ORCID,Velosky Alexander G567,Highland Krista B2ORCID

Affiliation:

1. Department of Anesthesiology, Walter Reed National Military Medical Center , 4494 Palmer Rd N, Bethesda, MD 20814, USA

2. Department of Anesthesiology, Uniformed Services University , 4301 Jones Bridge Road, Bethesda, MD 20814, USA

3. Department of Surgery, Walter Reed National Military Medical Center , 4494 Palmer Rd N, Bethesda, MD 20814, USA

4. Department of Surgery, Uniformed Services University , 4301 Jones Bridge Road, Bethesda, MD 20814, USA

5. Defense and Veterans Center for Integrative Pain Management, Department of Anesthesiology, Uniformed Services University , 4301 Jones Bridge Road, Bethesda, MD 20814, USA

6. Henry M. Jackson Foundation for the Advancement of Military Medicine, Inc. , 6720A Rockledge Dr., #100, Bethesda, MD 20817, USA

7. Enterprise Intelligence and Data Solutions (EIDS) Program Office, Program Executive Office, Defense Healthcare Management Systems (PEO DHMS) , 3515 S. General McMullen, Building 1, San Antonio, TX 78226, USA

Abstract

ABSTRACT Introduction Post-appendectomy opioid prescription practices may vary widely across and within health care systems. Although guidelines encourage conservative opioid prescribing and prescribing of non-opioid pain medications, the variation of prescribing practices and the probability of opioid refill remain unknown in the U.S. Military Health System. Materials and Methods This retrospective observational cohort study evaluated medical data of 11,713 patients who received an appendectomy in the Military Health System between January 2016 and June 2021. Linear-mixed and generalized linear-mixed models evaluated the relationships between patient-, care-, and system-level factors and the two primary outcomes; the morphine equivalent dose (MED) at hospital discharge; and the probability of 30-day opioid prescription refill. Sensitivity analyses repeated the generalized linear-mixed model predicting the probability of opioid (re)fill after an appendectomy, but with inclusion of the full sample, including patients who had not received a discharge opioid prescription (e.g., 0 mg MED). Results Discharge MED was twice the recommended guidance and was not associated with opioid refill. Higher discharge MED was associated with opioid/non-opioid combination prescription (+38 mg) relative to opioid-only, lack of non-opioid prescribing at discharge (+6 mg), care received before a Defense Health Agency opioid safety policy was released (+61 mg), documented nicotine dependence (+8 mg), and pre-appendectomy opioid prescription (+5 mg) (all P < .01). Opioid refill was more likely for patients with complicated appendicitis (OR = 1.34; P < .01); patients assigned female (OR = 1.25, P < .01); those with a documented mental health diagnosis (OR = 1.32, P = .03), an antidepressant prescription (OR = 1.84, P < .001), or both (OR = 1.54, P < .001); and patients with documented nicotine dependence (OR = 1.53, P < .001). Opioid refill was less likely for patients who received care after the Defense Health Agency policy was released (OR = 0.71, P < .001), were opioid naive (OR = 0.54, P < .001), or were Asian or Pacific Islander (relative to white patients, OR = 0.68, P = .04). Results from the sensitivity analyses were similar to the main analysis, aside from two exceptions. The probability of refill no longer differed by race and ethnicity or mental health condition only. Conclusions Individual prescriber practices shifted with new guidelines, but potentially unwarranted variation in opioid prescribing dose remained. Future studies may benefit from evaluating patients’ experiences with pain management, satisfaction, and patient-centered education after appendectomy within the context of opioid prescribing practices, amount of medications used, and refill probability. Such could pave a way for standardized patient-centered procedures that both decrease unwarranted prescribing pattern variability and optimize pain management regimens.

Funder

Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences

Publisher

Oxford University Press (OUP)

Subject

Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health,General Medicine

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3