Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35801988›Full record

ArticleHealth services research2022

Effects of state opioid prescribing cap laws on opioid prescribing after surgery.

Ian Schmid, Elizabeth A Stuart, Alexander D McCourt, Kayla N Tormohlen, Elizabeth M Stone, Corey S Davis, Mark C Bicket, Emma E McGinty

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Health services research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing 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

14 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Observational
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. 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

8 authors.

Ian SchmidDepartment of Mental Health, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-0865-7053
Elizabeth A StuartDepartment of Mental Health, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.
Alexander D McCourtDepartment of Health Policy and Management, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.
Kayla N TormohlenDepartment of Health Policy and Management, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-4790-4731
Elizabeth M StoneDepartment of Health Policy and Management, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.
Corey S DavisNetwork for Public Health Law, Los Angeles, California, USA.
Mark C BicketDepartment of Anesthesiology, University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA.
Emma E McGintyDepartment of Mental Health, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.

Funding

Integrating data for causal inference in behavioral healthT32MH122357 · NIMH · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI Rashelle Jean Musci, Elizabeth A. Stuart · 2020 to 2026
$1.8M
Mental Health Services and Systems Training ProgramT32MH109436 · NIMH · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI Matthew Eisenberg, Elizabeth A. Stuart · 2017 to 2026
$1.7M
NIMH NIH HHS T32 MH109436NIMH NIH HHS T32 MH122357
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo evaluate the effects of state opioid prescribing cap laws on opioid prescribing after surgery. DATA SOURCES: OptumLabs Data Warehouse administrative claims data covering all 50 states from July 2012 through June 2019. STUDY

designWe included individuals from 20 states that had implemented prescribing cap laws without exemptions for postsurgical pain by June 2019 and individuals from 16 control states plus the District of Columbia. We used a difference-in-differences approach accounting for differential timing in law implementation across states to estimate the effects of state prescribing cap laws on postsurgical prescribing of opioids. Outcome measures included filling an opioid prescription within 30 days after surgery; filling opioid prescriptions of specific doses or durations; and the number, days' supply, daily dose, and pill quantity of opioid prescriptions. To assess the validity of the parallel counterfactual trends assumption, we examined differences in outcome trends between law-implementing and control states in the years preceding law implementation using an equivalence testing framework. DATA COLLECTION/EXTRACTION

methodsWe included the first surgery in the study period for opioid-naïve individuals undergoing one of eight common surgical procedures. PRINCIPAL

findingsState prescribing cap laws were associated with 0.109 lower days' supply of postsurgical opioids on the log scale (95% Confidence Interval [CI]: -0.139, -0.080) but were not associated with the number (Average treatment effect on the treated [ATT]: -0.011; 95% CI: -0.043, 0.021) or daily dose of postsurgical opioid prescriptions (ATT: -0.013; 95% CI: -0.030, 0.005). The negative association observed between prescribing cap laws and the probability of filling a postsurgical opioid prescription (ATT: -0.041; 95% CI: -0.054, -0.028) was likely spurious, given differences between law-implementing and control states in the pre-law period.

conclusionsPrescribing cap laws appear to have minimal effects on postsurgical opioid prescribing.

Indexed as

Analgesics, OpioidPractice Patterns, Physicians'District of ColumbiaDrug PrescriptionsHumansAnalgesics, Opioidcausal inferencedifference-in-differenceslawopioidpostsurgical pain

Identifiers

PMID35801988
PMCPMC9441291

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.