U.S. state policies on opioid prescribing during the peak of the prescription opioid crisis: Associations with opioid overdose mortality.

BACKGROUND: In response to the opioid overdose crisis in the United States, many states implemented policies to guide opioid prescribing, but their impact on overdose mortality (prescription and non-prescription) remains poorly understood. We examined the impact of U.S. state opioid-prescribing policies on opioid overdose mortality following implementation. METHODS: We calculated opioid overdose mortality rates from 1999-2016 by U.S. state using the CDC WONDER database, overall and separately for overdose deaths from prescription and non-prescription opioids. For each state, policies active on 1/1/2014 were reviewed for the presence and strength of six provisions recommending judicious opioid prescribing practices; "strong" provisions used the words "should," "shall," or "must". Interrupted time series (ITS) tested the association of each strong provision with overdose mortality, overall and separately for prescription and non-prescription opioids, in the two years following implementation. Sensitivity analyses compared between states, used time-lagged analyses, and excluded synthetic opioids from non-prescription opioid deaths. RESULTS: All six provisions had consistent direction of effect in ITS and sensitivity analyses. Strong provisions for prescriber training and limits on opioid dose reduced the slope of overall and prescription opioid overdose mortality in both ITS and sensitivity analyses. Reduced non-prescription opioid overdose mortality was only associated with strong provision for prescriber training. Some provisions had a negative impact. In ITS, strong provision for prescriber response to misuse increased the slope of non-prescription opioid overdose mortality. Strong provision for mandatory prescription drug monitoring program use had no relationship with overdose mortality in ITS and was associated with increased overall, prescription and non-prescription opioid overdose mortality in between-state sensitivity analysis. CONCLUSION: Opioid prescribing policies in U.S. states at the peak of the prescription opioid epidemic had modest mortality benefit, and did not reduce non-prescription opioid overdose mortality. A strong provision for prescriber training was the only provision associated with reduced prescription and non-prescription opioid overdose mortality. These findings can inform future efforts addressing prescription drug epidemics.

Comparing Routine HIV and Hepatitis C Virus Screening to Estimate the Effect of Required Consent on HIV Screening Rates Among Hospitalized Patients.

OBJECTIVES: Routine screening for HIV and hepatitis C virus (HCV) among specified age cohorts is recommended. New York State requires consent before screening for HIV but not HCV. We sought to estimate the effect of the consent requirement on screening rates for HIV. METHODS: We performed a retrospective study of patients hospitalized in 2015-2016 at a tertiary care hospital in the Bronx, New York, during a period when prompts in the electronic health record facilitated screening for HIV and HCV among specified age cohorts. We compared proportions of patients eligible for screening for HIV and/or HCV who underwent screening and used generalized estimating equations and a meta-analytic weighted average to estimate an adjusted risk difference between undergoing HIV screening and undergoing HCV screening. RESULTS: Among 11 938 hospitalized patients eligible for HIV and/or HCV screening, 38.5% underwent screening for HIV and 59.1% underwent screening for HCV. The difference in screening rates persisted after adjusting for patient and admission characteristics (adjusted risk difference = 22.0%; 95% CI, 20.6%-23.4%). CONCLUSIONS: Whereas the requirement for consent was the only difference in the processes of screening for HIV compared with screening for HCV, differences in how the 2 viruses are perceived may also have contributed to the difference in screening rates. Nevertheless, our findings suggest that requiring consent continues to impede progress toward the public health goal of routine HIV screening.