联邦和州阿片类药物限制的竞争效应:受控物质法的证据。

IF 3.4 2区 经济学 Q1 ECONOMICS Journal of Health Economics Pub Date : 2023-09-01 DOI:10.1016/j.jhealeco.2023.102772
Sumedha Gupta , Thuy Nguyen , Patricia R. Freeman , Kosali Simon
{"title":"联邦和州阿片类药物限制的竞争效应:受控物质法的证据。","authors":"Sumedha Gupta ,&nbsp;Thuy Nguyen ,&nbsp;Patricia R. Freeman ,&nbsp;Kosali Simon","doi":"10.1016/j.jhealeco.2023.102772","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p><span>A significant concern in the policy landscape of the U.S. opioid crisis is whether supply-side controls can reduce opioid prescribing without harmful substitution. We consider an unstudied policy: the federal Controlled Substance Act (CSA) restrictions placed in August 2014 on tramadol, the second most popular opioid medication. This was followed seven weeks later by CSA restrictions for hydrocodone<span> combination products, the leading opioids on the market. Using regression discontinuity design (RDD) models, based on the timing of the (up-)scheduling changes, to explore </span></span>spillover effects, we find that tightening prescribing restrictions on one opioid reduces its use, but increases prescribing of close competitors, leading to no reduction in total opioid prescriptions.This suggests that supply restrictions are not effective in reducing opioid prescribing the presence of close substitutes that remain unrestricted.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":50186,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Health Economics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Competitive effects of federal and state opioid restrictions: Evidence from the controlled substance laws\",\"authors\":\"Sumedha Gupta ,&nbsp;Thuy Nguyen ,&nbsp;Patricia R. Freeman ,&nbsp;Kosali Simon\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jhealeco.2023.102772\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p><span>A significant concern in the policy landscape of the U.S. opioid crisis is whether supply-side controls can reduce opioid prescribing without harmful substitution. We consider an unstudied policy: the federal Controlled Substance Act (CSA) restrictions placed in August 2014 on tramadol, the second most popular opioid medication. This was followed seven weeks later by CSA restrictions for hydrocodone<span> combination products, the leading opioids on the market. Using regression discontinuity design (RDD) models, based on the timing of the (up-)scheduling changes, to explore </span></span>spillover effects, we find that tightening prescribing restrictions on one opioid reduces its use, but increases prescribing of close competitors, leading to no reduction in total opioid prescriptions.This suggests that supply restrictions are not effective in reducing opioid prescribing the presence of close substitutes that remain unrestricted.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50186,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Health Economics\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Health Economics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"96\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167629623000498\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"经济学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ECONOMICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Health Economics","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167629623000498","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

美国阿片类药物危机政策格局中的一个重大问题是,供应侧控制是否可以在不进行有害替代的情况下减少阿片类药处方。我们考虑了一项未经研究的政策:2014年8月对曲马多(第二流行的阿片类药物)实施的联邦《管制物质法》(CSA)限制。七周后,CSA对市场上领先的阿片类药物氢可酮组合产品进行了限制。使用回归不连续性设计(RDD)模型,基于(上)日程安排变化的时间,来探索溢出效应,我们发现,收紧对一种阿片类药物的处方限制会减少其使用,但会增加密切竞争对手的处方,导致阿片类药处方总量没有减少。这表明,供应限制并不能有效减少阿片类药物的处方——即存在不受限制的密切替代品。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Competitive effects of federal and state opioid restrictions: Evidence from the controlled substance laws

A significant concern in the policy landscape of the U.S. opioid crisis is whether supply-side controls can reduce opioid prescribing without harmful substitution. We consider an unstudied policy: the federal Controlled Substance Act (CSA) restrictions placed in August 2014 on tramadol, the second most popular opioid medication. This was followed seven weeks later by CSA restrictions for hydrocodone combination products, the leading opioids on the market. Using regression discontinuity design (RDD) models, based on the timing of the (up-)scheduling changes, to explore spillover effects, we find that tightening prescribing restrictions on one opioid reduces its use, but increases prescribing of close competitors, leading to no reduction in total opioid prescriptions.This suggests that supply restrictions are not effective in reducing opioid prescribing the presence of close substitutes that remain unrestricted.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Health Economics
Journal of Health Economics 医学-卫生保健
CiteScore
6.10
自引率
2.90%
发文量
96
审稿时长
49 days
期刊介绍: This journal seeks articles related to the economics of health and medical care. Its scope will include the following topics: Production and supply of health services; Demand and utilization of health services; Financing of health services; Determinants of health, including investments in health and risky health behaviors; Economic consequences of ill-health; Behavioral models of demanders, suppliers and other health care agencies; Evaluation of policy interventions that yield economic insights; Efficiency and distributional aspects of health policy; and such other topics as the Editors may deem appropriate.
期刊最新文献
Harm reduction for addictive consumption: When does it improve health and when does it backfire? The maternal and infant health consequences of restricted access to abortion in the United States The effects of tobacco 21 laws on smoking and vaping: Evidence from panel data and biomarkers The impact of children's access to public health insurance on their cognitive development and behavior Medical ethics and physician motivations
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1