Back

Declining National Codeine Distribution in United States Hospitals and Pharmacies from 2011 to 2019

Kennalley, A. L.; Boureghda, Y. A.; Ganesh, J. G.; Watkins, A. M.; McCall, K. L.; Piper, B. J.

2022-04-13 pain medicine
10.1101/2022.04.12.22273805 medRxiv
Show abstract

BackgroundPast research has identified pronounced regional disparities in use of different opioids but less is known for codeine. The primary objective of this study was to analyze the trends of distribution of prescriptions containing codeine in the United States (US) from 2010 to 2019. In addition, this study aimed to identify regional disparities in prescribed milligrams of codeine per person in 2019 and identify any unusual states. MethodsThe distribution of codeine via pharmacies, hospitals, and practitioners in kilograms was obtained from the Drug Enforcement Administrations Automated Reports and Consolidated Ordering System (ARCOS) from 2010 to 2019. In addition, the number of prescriptions of codeine per 1,000 Medicaid enrollees was obtained from the State Drug Utilization Database. ResultsThe total grams of codeine decreased (-25.0%) through all distributors from 2010 to 2019. The largest increase in total grams of codeine distributed between two consecutive years (2014 to 2015) was +28.9%. For a given distributor type, the largest decrease from 2010 to 2019 was hospitals (-89.6%). In 2019, the total mg of codeine per person distributed in Texas (11.46) was significantly higher relative to the national average (3.06, 1.88 SD). Codeine prescriptions to Medicaid patients peeked in the third quarter of 2016. ConclusionThe peak of prescription codeine in 2011 was consistent with the overall peak in prescription opioids, with a subsequent decrease over the decade. This could be explained by relatively recent recommendations regarding the therapeutic use of codeine and how other antitussive agents may be of better use. The precipitous rise of codeine in Texas that we observed has been recognized in prior studies. These state-level disparities warrant further attention by opioid stewardship committees.

Matching journals

The top 6 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.