Back

National Increase but Pronounced Regional Disparities in Naloxone Prescribing to United States Medicaid and Medicare Patients

Manko, C. D.; Ahmed, M. S.; Harrison, L. H.; Kodavatiganti, S.; Lugo, N.; Konadu, J. O.; Khan, F.; Massari, C. A.; Sealey, T. K.; Addison, M. E.; Mbah, C. N.; McCall, K. L.; Fraiman, J. B.; Piper, B. J.

2023-05-24 pharmacology and therapeutics
10.1101/2023.05.17.23290119 medRxiv
Show abstract

BackgroundOpioid overdoses in the US have increased to unprecedented levels. Administration of the opioid antagonist naloxone can prevent overdoses. This study was conducted to reveal the pharmacoepidemiologic patterns in naloxone prescribing to Medicaid patients from 2018-2021 as well as Medicare in 2019. MethodsThe Medicaid State Drug Utilization Data File was utilized to extract information on number of prescriptions and amount prescribed of naloxone at a national and state level. States with naloxone prescription rates differing from the mean by [≥] 1.96 standard deviations were considered statistically significant. The Medicare Provider Utilization and Payment was also utilized to analyze prescription data from 2019. ResultsThe number of generic naloxone prescriptions per 100,000 Medicaid enrollees decreased 5.15% whereas brand naloxone prescriptions increased 245.00% from 2018-2021. There was a 33.14-fold difference in prescriptions between the highest (New Mexico = 1809.55) and lowest (South Dakota = 54.61) states in 2019. Medicare saw a 30.32-fold difference in prescriptions between the highest (New Mexico) and lowest states (also South Dakota) after correcting per 100,000 enrollees. ConclusionsThis pronounced increase in the number of naloxone prescriptions to Medicaid patients from 2018-2021 indicates a national response to this widespread public health emergency. Further research into the origins of the pronounced state-level disparities is warranted.

Matching journals

The top 7 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.