Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30865779›Full record

ArticlePain medicine (Malden, Mass.)2020

Reducing High-Dose Opioid Prescribing: State-Level Morphine Equivalent Daily Dose Policies, 2007-2017.

Sara E Heins, Katherine P Frey, G Caleb Alexander, Renan C Castillo

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Pain medicine (Malden, Mass.), 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. A Practical Approach to Acute Postoperative Pain Management in Chronic Pain Patients.Journal of perianesthesia nursing : official journal of the American Society of PeriAnesthesia Nurses · 2020
    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

4 authors.

Sara E HeinsRAND Corporation, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.
Katherine P FreyDepartment of Health Policy and Management, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland.
G Caleb AlexanderDepartment of Health Policy and Management, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland.
Renan C CastilloDepartment of Health Policy and Management, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland.

Funding

The Impact of Morphine Equivalent Dose Thresholds on Prescribing and OutcomesR36HS025557 · AHRQ · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI HEINS, SARA · 2017 to 2017
$35k
AHRQ HHS R36 HS025557
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo describe current state-level policies in the United States, January 1, 2007-June 1, 2017, limiting high morphine equivalent daily dose (MEDD) prescribing.

methodsState-level MEDD threshold policies were reviewed using LexisNexis and Westlaw Next for legislative acts and using Google for nonlegislative state-level policies. The websites of each state's Medicaid agency, health department, prescription drug monitoring program, workers' compensation board, medical board, and pharmacy board were reviewed to identify additional policies. The final policy list was checked against existing policy compilations and academic literature and through contact with state health agency representatives. Policies were independently double-coded on the categories: state, agency/organization, policy type, effective date, threshold level, and policy exceptions.

resultsCurrently, 22 states have at least one type of MEDD policy, most commonly guidelines (14 states), followed by prior authorizations (four states), rules/regulations (four states), legislative acts (three states), claim denials (two states), and alert systems/automatic patient reports (two states). Thresholds range widely (30-300 mg MEDD), with higher thresholds generally corresponding to more restrictive policies (e.g., claim denial) and lower thresholds corresponding to less restrictive policies (e.g., guidelines). The majority of policies exclude some groups of opioid users, most commonly patients with terminal illnesses or acute pain.

conclusionsMEDD policies have gained popularity in recent years, but considerable variation in threshold levels and policy structure point to a lack of consensus. This work provides a foundation for future evaluation of MEDD policies and may inform states considering adopting such policies.

Indexed as

Legislation, DrugPractice Patterns, Physicians'Analgesics, OpioidDrug PrescriptionsHumansOpioid-Related DisordersPolicyUnited StatesAnalgesics, OpioidOpioidsPrescriptionsQuality of Health Care

Identifiers

PMID30865779
PMCPMC8607298

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.