Cost-Effectiveness of Publicly Funded Treatment of Opioid Use Disorder in California

Background: Only 1 in 5 of the nearly 2.4 million Americans with an opioid use disorder received treatment in 2015. Fewer than half of Californians who received treatment in 2014 received opioid agonist treatment (OAT), and regulations for admission to OAT in California are more stringent than federal regulations. Objective: To determine the cost-effectiveness of OAT for all treatment recipients compared with the observed standard of care for patients presenting with opioid use disorder to California's publicly funded treatment facilities. Design: Model-based cost-effectiveness analysis. Data Sources: Linked population-level administrative databases capturing treatment and criminal justice records for California (2006 to 2010); published literature. Target Population: Persons initially presenting for publicly funded treatment of opioid use disorder. Time Horizon: Lifetime. Perspective: Societal. Intervention: Immediate access to OAT with methadone for all treatment recipients compared with the observed standard of care (54.3% initiate opioid use disorder treatment with medically managed withdrawal). Outcome Measures: Discounted quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and discounted costs. Results of Base-Case Analysis: Immediate access to OAT for all treatment recipients costs less (by $78 257), with patients accumulating more QALYs (by 0.42) than with the observed standard of care. In a hypothetical scenario where all Californians starting treatment of opioid use disorder in 2014 had immediate access to OAT, total lifetime savings for this cohort could be as high as $3.8 billion. Results of Sensitivity Analysis: 99.6% of the 2000 simulations resulted in lower costs and more QALYs. Limitation: Nonrandomized delivery of OAT or medically managed withdrawal. Conclusion: The value of publicly funded treatment of opioid use disorder in California is maximized when OAT is delivered to all patients presenting for treatment, providing greater health benefits and cost savings than the observed standard of care. Primary Funding Source: National Institute on Drug Abuse.

The Worst of Days

Annals for Hospitalists Inpatient Notes - Hospitalists and Digital Medicine—Overcoming the Productivity Paradox

Antibiotic Prescribing for Nonbacterial Acute Upper Respiratory Infections in Elderly Persons

Background: Reducing inappropriate antibiotic prescribing for acute upper respiratory tract infections (AURIs) requires a better understanding of the factors associated with this practice. Objective: To determine the prevalence of antibiotic prescribing for nonbacterial AURIs and whether prescribing rates varied by physician characteristics. Design: Retrospective analysis of linked administrative health care data. Setting: Primary care physician practices in Ontario, Canada (January–December 2012). Patients: Patients aged 66 years or older with nonbacterial AURIs. Patients with cancer or immunosuppressive conditions and residents of long-term care homes were excluded. Measurements: Antibiotic prescriptions for physician-diagnosed AURIs. A multivariable logistic regression model with generalized estimating equations was used to examine whether prescribing rates varied by physician characteristics, accounting for clustering of patients among physicians and adjusting for patient-level covariates. Results: The cohort included 8990 primary care physicians and 185 014 patients who presented with a nonbacterial AURI, including the common cold (53.4%), acute bronchitis (31.3%), acute sinusitis (13.6%), or acute laryngitis (1.6%). Forty-six percent of patients received an antibiotic prescription; most prescriptions were for broad-spectrum agents (69.9% [95% CI, 69.6% to 70.2%]). Patients were more likely to receive prescriptions from mid- and late-career physicians than early-career physicians (rate difference, 5.1 percentage points [CI, 3.9 to 6.4 percentage points] and 4.6 percentage points [CI, 3.3 to 5.8 percentage points], respectively), from physicians trained outside of Canada or the United States (3.6 percentage points [CI, 2.5 to 4.6 percentage points]), and from physicians who saw 25 to 44 patients per day or 45 or more patients per day than those who saw fewer than 25 patients per day (3.1 percentage points [CI, 2.1 to 4.0 percentage points] and 4.1 percentage points [CI, 2.7 to 5.5 percentage points], respectively). Limitation: Physician rationale for prescribing was unknown. Conclusion: In this low-risk elderly cohort, 46% of patients with a nonbacterial AURI were prescribed antibiotics. Patients were more likely to receive prescriptions from mid- or late-career physicians with high patient volumes and from physicians who were trained outside of Canada or the United States. Primary Funding Source: Ontario Ministry of Health and Long-term Care, Academic Medical Organization of Southwestern Ontario, Schulich School of Medicine and Dentistry, Western University, and Lawson Health Research Institute.

Curbing Firearm Violence: Identifying a Specific Target for Physician Action

Why Physician Leaders of Health Care Organizations Should Participate in Direct Patient Care

The Effectiveness of Total Worker Health Interventions: A Systematic Review for a National Institutes of Health Pathways to Prevention Workshop

Background: The Total Worker Health (TWH) program of the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health aims to advance worker well-being by integrating injury and illness prevention efforts with work-related safety and health hazard efforts. Purpose: To evaluate evidence on the benefits and harms of integrated TWH interventions. Data Sources: MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, and PsycINFO (January 1990 through September 2015); clinical trial registries; and reference lists. Study Selection: English-language studies that enrolled employed adults and compared integrated interventions with usual work practice, no intervention, or another intervention. Data Extraction: Dual abstraction and risk-of-bias (ROB) assessment. Data Synthesis: Ten of the 15 included studies had high ROB, primarily because of selection and attrition bias. Findings graded as having low strength of evidence (SOE) supported the effectiveness of TWH interventions for improving smoking cessation, as measured by self-reported 7-day abstinence over 22 to 26 weeks (2 randomized, controlled trials [RCTs]; n = 737), and increasing consumption of fruits and vegetables over 26 to 104 weeks (3 RCTs; n = 6056); results apply to populations of blue-collar manufacturing and construction workers. Findings graded as having low SOE supported the effectiveness of TWH interventions for reducing sedentary work behavior in office workers over 16 to 52 weeks (2 RCTs; n = 262). Evidence was insufficient or lacking for other outcomes of interest, such as rates of work injuries, quality of life, and harms. Limitation: Small, diverse body of evidence with many methodological limitations; possible publication bias. Conclusion: Integrated TWH interventions might improve health behaviors (for example, reduce tobacco use and sedentary behavior and improve diet) of workers, but effects of these interventions on injuries and overall quality of life are not known. Primary Funding Source: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality.

Reporting of Sex Effects by Systematic Reviews on Interventions for Depression, Diabetes, and Chronic Pain

Systematic reviews (SRs) have the potential to contribute uniquely to the evaluation of sex and gender differences (termed “sex effects”). This article describes the reporting of sex effects by SRs on interventions for depression, type 2 diabetes mellitus, and chronic pain conditions (chronic low back pain, knee osteoarthritis, and fibromyalgia). It includes SRs published since 1 October 2009 that evaluate medications, behavioral interventions, exercise, quality improvement, and some condition-specific treatments. The reporting of sex effects by primary randomized, controlled trials is also examined. Of 313 eligible SRs (86 for depression, 159 for type 2 diabetes mellitus, and 68 for chronic pain), few (n = 29) reported sex effects. Most SRs reporting sex effects used metaregression, whereas 9 SRs used subgroup analysis or individual-patient data meta-analysis. The proportion of SRs reporting the sex distribution of primary studies varied from a low of 31% (n = 8) for low back pain to a high of 68% (n = 23) for fibromyalgia. Primary randomized, controlled trials also infrequently reported sex effects, and most lacked an adequate sample size to examine them. Therefore, all SRs should report the proportion of women enrolled in primary studies and evaluate sex effects using appropriate methods whenever power is adequate.

Speak Up! Addressing the Paradox Plaguing Patient-Centered Care

Reflections on Marriage Equality