Opioid days' supply limits: an interrupted time-series analysis of opioid prescribing before and following a Massachusetts law.

Background: In 2016, Massachusetts passed the first-in-the-nation law limiting opioid naïve adults and all minors to a 7-day supply of opioids when prescribed in the outpatient setting.Objective: We hypothesized this policy would be associated with declines in the percent of opioid prescriptions with more than a 7-day supply among opioid naïve adults and minors for select prescriber groups.Methods: Interrupted time series analyses were conducted using measures from the Massachusetts Prescription Monitoring Program database for 2015 through 2017 (n = 13,672,325 opioid prescriptions; 54% to females). Outcomes were the monthly percent of opioid prescriptions greater than 7 days' supply in opioid naïve adults and in minors among select prescriber groups. Model estimates of the pre-policy trend, the average changes in the level pre/post-implementation, and the trend changes post-implementation were assessed.Results: Pre-policy trends showed significant monthly declines in the percent of opioid prescriptions greater than 7 days' supply for all prescriber groups. Policy implementation was associated with significant reduction in the level for opioid naïve adults among surgeons (-2.92%, p < .01), dentists (-0.23%, p < .01), and general medical providers (-2.22%, p = .04), and for minors among all-included prescribers (-2.97%, p < .01) and surgeons (-3.8%, p < .01). Post-implementation changes in trends were not significant except among opioid naïve adults for dentists (0.02%, p = .04).Conclusion: Within a context of significant reductions occurring in opioid prescriptions greater than 7 days' supply during this period, the Massachusetts policy was associated with further declines for opioid naïve adults and minors among select prescriber groups.

Multidisciplinary Team Reviews of Drug Overdose Deaths and the Use of Minigrants to Advance Recommendations: A Statewide Pilot in Rhode Island.

CONTEXT: Rhode Island has been significantly impacted by the opioid epidemic, ranking 11th in unintentional drug overdose rates in the United States in 2017. Illicit fentanyl was involved in the majority of these deaths. PROGRAM: To enhance surveillance of this epidemic, the RI Department of Health piloted in-depth, multidisciplinary, and multiagency team reviews of drug overdose deaths. The goals were to identify gaps in policies and programming and develop recommendations to prevent future deaths. Time-sensitive minigrants were offered to nonprofit organizations as a novel way to further the recommendations put forth from these reviews. IMPLEMENTATION: Legal agreements between select state agencies and institutions enabled broad team representation and the sharing of information during each meeting. Reviews, revolving around a common theme, were conducted for up to 10 deaths each quarter. Recommendations for prevention were generated by the team and summarized in a report to the Governor's Overdose Prevention and Intervention Task Force and the public within 1 month of each meeting. Announcements of minigrant opportunities and funding to advance the community-specific recommendations were paired with each meeting. EVALUATION: From November 2016 through May 2018, the pilot team convened 7 times, generated 78 recommendations, and distributed 31 minigrants. Early process evaluations of these grants have shown positive impact within local environments. Following the pilot phase, state legislation for these reviews was passed in June 2018. DISCUSSION: The RI Department of Health was able to successfully pilot a multidisciplinary review process for overdose deaths and has recently institutionalized this process through legislation. The successful implementation of many of the team's community-oriented recommendations, supported through a minigrant process, highlights the impact that small financial investments can have to address the opioid epidemic and may be a model for other jurisdictions seeking to advance recommendations from these types of reviews.

Opioid overdose rates and implementation of overdose education and nasal naloxone distribution in Massachusetts: interrupted time series analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the impact of state supported overdose education and nasal naloxone distribution (OEND) programs on rates of opioid related death from overdose and acute care utilization in Massachusetts. DESIGN: Interrupted time series analysis of opioid related overdose death and acute care utilization rates from 2002 to 2009 comparing community-year strata with high and low rates of OEND implementation to those with no implementation. SETTING: 19 Massachusetts communities (geographically distinct cities and towns) with at least five fatal opioid overdoses in each of the years 2004 to 2006. PARTICIPANTS: OEND was implemented among opioid users at risk for overdose, social service agency staff, family, and friends of opioid users. INTERVENTION: OEND programs equipped people at risk for overdose and bystanders with nasal naloxone rescue kits and trained them how to prevent, recognize, and respond to an overdose by engaging emergency medical services, providing rescue breathing, and delivering naloxone. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Adjusted rate ratios for annual deaths related to opioid overdose and utilization of acute care hospitals. RESULTS: Among these communities, OEND programs trained 2912 potential bystanders who reported 327 rescues. Both community-year strata with 1-100 enrollments per 100,000 population (adjusted rate ratio 0.73, 95% confidence interval 0.57 to 0.91) and community-year strata with greater than 100 enrollments per 100,000 population (0.54, 0.39 to 0.76) had significantly reduced adjusted rate ratios compared with communities with no implementation. Differences in rates of acute care hospital utilization were not significant. CONCLUSIONS: Opioid overdose death rates were reduced in communities where OEND was implemented. This study provides observational evidence that by training potential bystanders to prevent, recognize, and respond to opioid overdoses, OEND is an effective intervention.

Use of statewide electronic emergency department data for occupational injury surveillance: a feasibility study in Massachusetts.

BACKGROUND: Statewide datasets of emergency department (ED) visits may be useful for occupational injury surveillance. Using data from 12 hospitals, we evaluated two indicators of work-relatedness in reported ED data and the availability of employment information in medical charts. METHODS: Workers' compensation as payer and/or "yes" in an injury-at-work field were used to define probable work-related (PWR) injury visits in the Massachusetts ED dataset. Charts were reviewed for a sample of 1,002 PWR and 250 probable nonwork-related (PNWR) cases. RESULTS: Using chart information as the gold standard, indicators of work-relatedness had a sensitivity of 82%, specificity of 97%, and predictive value positive of 86%. Employer name was in charts for 89% of PWR and 42% of PNWR cases. Occupation was available for 34% of PWR cases. CONCLUSION: Electronic ED data are useful for state surveillance of occupational injuries. Improvements in attribution of work-relatedness and collection of available employer identifiers and occupational information would enhance its usefulness. The performance of indicators of work-relatedness in ED datasets should be examined in different states.

Completeness and accuracy of International Classification of Disease (ICD) external cause of injury codes in emergency department electronic data.

The accuracy of external cause of injury codes (E codes) for work-related and non-work-related injuries in Massachusetts emergency department data were evaluated. Medical records were reviewed and coded by a nosologist with expertise in E coding for a stratified random sample of 1000 probable work-related (PWR) and 250 probable non-work-related (PNWR) cases. Cause of injury E codes were present for 98% of reviewed cases and accurate for 65% of PWR cases and 57% of PNWR cases. Place of occurrence E codes were present in less than 30% of cases. Broad cause of injury categories were accurate for about 85% of cases. Non-specific categories (not elsewhere classified, not specified) accounted for 34% of broad category misclassifications. Among specified causes, machinery injuries were misclassified most often (39/60, 65%), predominantly as cut/pierce or struck by/against. E codes reliably identify the broad mechanism of injury, but inaccuracies and incompleteness suggest areas for training of hospital admissions staff, providers, and coders.

From surveillance to action: early gains from the National Violent Death Reporting System.

OBJECTIVES: Drawing from the experiences of individual state programs that currently participate in the National Violent Death Reporting System (NVDRS), this article reviews some of the practical benefits that may accrue from the introduction of violent death surveillance systems. DESIGN: As a state-based surveillance system that uses multiple data sources and relies upon multiple stakeholders, the NVDRS program has fostered an array of initiatives within and among individual state programs. State-based initiatives highlighted in this article were selected on the basis of a purposive sampling strategy intended to illustrate key aspects of program development. SETTING: The NVDRS state programs are in Alaska, California, Colorado, Georgia, Kentucky, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New Mexico, North Carolina, Oklahoma, Oregon, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Utah, Virginia, and Wisconsin. RESULTS: The NVDRS has helped to build alliances and collaborative efforts between key stakeholders, facilitated the recognition of violent death as a public health problem through outreach and media attention, acted as a catalyst for new projects, enhanced surveillance of special populations and utility for evaluation, and identified key circumstances that will target interventions in state prevention planning. CONCLUSIONS: The NVDRS has implemented data collection efforts and is beginning to produce and analyze findings. In the process of implementing the data collection system and publicizing findings, state NVDRS programs are realizing other gains that strengthen their surveillance efforts. The use of data for prevention purposes will be the ultimate indicator of program success.