Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30566426›Full record

ArticlePloS one2018

Payments from drug companies to physicians are associated with higher volume and more expensive opioid analgesic prescribing.

Mark A Zezza, Marcus A Bachhuber

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
3.0field-weighted citation impact, top 10% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

16 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 37 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Mark A ZezzaNew York State Health Foundation, New York City, New York, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0003-1905-4343
Marcus A BachhuberDivision of General Internal Medicine, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Montefiore Medical Center, Bronx, New York, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-5610-8382
Albert Einstein College of Medicine · US

Funding

Leveraging the electronic health record to reduce opioid analgesic prescriptionsK08DA043050 · NIDA · ALBERT EINSTEIN COLLEGE OF MEDICINE, INC · PI BACHHUBER, MARCUS A · 2017 to 2018
$223k
NIDA NIH HHS K08 DA043050
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWhile the rise in opioid analgesic prescribing and overdose deaths was multifactorial, financial relationships between opioid drug manufacturers and physicians may be one important factor.

methodsUsing national data from 2013 to 2015, we conducted a retrospective cohort study linking the Open Payments database and Medicare Part D drug utilization data. We created two cohorts of physicians, those receiving opioid-related payments in 2014 and 2015, but not in 2013, and those receiving opioid-related payments in 2015 but not in 2013 and 2014. Our main outcome measures were expenditures on filled prescriptions, daily doses filled, and expenditures per daily dose. For each cohort, we created a comparison group that did not receive an opioid-related payment in any year and was matched on state, specialty, and baseline opioid expenditures. We used a difference-in-differences analysis with linear generalized estimating equations regression models.

resultsWe identified 6,322 physicians who received opioid-related payments in 2014 and 2015, but not in 2013; they received a mean total of $251. Relative to comparison group physicians, they had a significantly larger increase in mean opioid expenditures ($6,171; 95% CI: 4,997 to 7,346), daily doses dispensed (1,574; 95%CI: 1,330 to 1,818) and mean expenditures per daily dose ($0.38; 95% CI: 0.29 to 0.47). We identified 8,669 physicians who received opioid-related payments in 2015, but not in 2013 or 2014; they received a mean total of $40. Relative to comparison physicians, they also had a larger increase in mean opioid expenditures ($1,031; 95% CI: 603 to 1,460), daily doses dispensed (557; 95% CI: 417 to 697), and expenditures per daily dose ($0.06; 95% CI: 0.002 to 0.13).

conclusionsOur findings add to the growing public policy concern that payments from opioid drug manufacturers can influence physician prescribing. Interventions are needed to reduce such promotional activities or to mitigate their influence.

Indexed as

Analgesics, OpioidDrug CostsDrug IndustryDrug PrescriptionsDrug Utilization ReviewGift GivingHealth ExpendituresHumansMedicare Part DPractice Patterns, Physicians'Public PolicyRetrospective StudiesUnited StatesAnalgesics, Opioid

Identifiers

PMID30566426
PMCPMC6300290
OpenAlexW2905172544

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.