将大麻纳入处方药监控计划和医疗补助中的药物填充。

IF 2 3区 医学 Q2 ECONOMICS Health economics Pub Date : 2024-11-04 DOI:10.1002/hec.4911
Shelby R Steuart
{"title":"将大麻纳入处方药监控计划和医疗补助中的药物填充。","authors":"Shelby R Steuart","doi":"10.1002/hec.4911","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>To date, there is considerable evidence of the medical applications of cannabis, however concerns regarding the safety of cannabis are also mounting. To improve the safety of cannabis, nine states have added medical cannabis to their state PDMPs, helping providers to take patient cannabis use into consideration when making prescribing decisions. Across a variety of models using Medicaid State Drug Utilization claims data, I find statistically significant reductions in severely and moderately contraindicated medication fills across two outcomes. In my main specification, adding cannabis to a state PDMP is associated with a 14.4% (p < 0.01) and 7.74% (p < 0.001) decrease in the units per prescription, for severely and moderately contraindicated medications, respectively, as compared to states with legal medical cannabis dispensaries open. An interesting spillover effect of adding cannabis to PDMPs is an apparent decrease in the prescribing of scheduled narcotics, with Schedule II medications seeing a moderately significant decrease and Schedule IV medications seeing a 11.4% decrease (p < 0.01) in the prescribing rate and a 16.2% decrease (p < 0.001) in the units per prescription. The main analysis was conducted using the Borusyak et al. (2023) Imputation Estimator with a robustness check using the Callaway and Sant'Anna (2021) difference-in-difference. This work presents evidence that adding cannabis to a state PDMP impacts provider prescribing decisions involving medications that are contraindicated for use with cannabis as well as controlled substances. This paper demonstrates that adding cannabis to PDMPs influences prescribing and thus has the potential to make medical cannabis use safer. Conversely, this work indicates providers may have bias against patients who use cannabis and deny them life-improving medications (like controlled ADHD medication or opioids) on the basis of medical cannabis use. This paper also contributes to the literature comparing DD outcomes estimated using Borusyak, Jaravel, and Spiess' (2023) Imputation Estimator and Callaway and Sant'Anna's (2021) DD Estimator.</p>","PeriodicalId":12847,"journal":{"name":"Health economics","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The addition of cannabis to prescription drug monitoring programs and medication fills in Medicaid.\",\"authors\":\"Shelby R Steuart\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/hec.4911\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>To date, there is considerable evidence of the medical applications of cannabis, however concerns regarding the safety of cannabis are also mounting. To improve the safety of cannabis, nine states have added medical cannabis to their state PDMPs, helping providers to take patient cannabis use into consideration when making prescribing decisions. Across a variety of models using Medicaid State Drug Utilization claims data, I find statistically significant reductions in severely and moderately contraindicated medication fills across two outcomes. In my main specification, adding cannabis to a state PDMP is associated with a 14.4% (p < 0.01) and 7.74% (p < 0.001) decrease in the units per prescription, for severely and moderately contraindicated medications, respectively, as compared to states with legal medical cannabis dispensaries open. An interesting spillover effect of adding cannabis to PDMPs is an apparent decrease in the prescribing of scheduled narcotics, with Schedule II medications seeing a moderately significant decrease and Schedule IV medications seeing a 11.4% decrease (p < 0.01) in the prescribing rate and a 16.2% decrease (p < 0.001) in the units per prescription. The main analysis was conducted using the Borusyak et al. (2023) Imputation Estimator with a robustness check using the Callaway and Sant'Anna (2021) difference-in-difference. This work presents evidence that adding cannabis to a state PDMP impacts provider prescribing decisions involving medications that are contraindicated for use with cannabis as well as controlled substances. This paper demonstrates that adding cannabis to PDMPs influences prescribing and thus has the potential to make medical cannabis use safer. Conversely, this work indicates providers may have bias against patients who use cannabis and deny them life-improving medications (like controlled ADHD medication or opioids) on the basis of medical cannabis use. This paper also contributes to the literature comparing DD outcomes estimated using Borusyak, Jaravel, and Spiess' (2023) Imputation Estimator and Callaway and Sant'Anna's (2021) DD Estimator.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12847,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Health economics\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Health economics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1002/hec.4911\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ECONOMICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health economics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/hec.4911","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

迄今为止,已有大量证据表明大麻具有医疗用途,但人们对大麻安全性的担忧也日益增加。为了提高大麻的安全性,九个州已将医用大麻添加到本州的 PDMP 中,帮助医疗服务提供者在开处方时考虑病人使用大麻的情况。在使用医疗补助(Medicaid)州药物使用报销数据的各种模型中,我发现在两种结果中,严重和中度禁忌药物的填充量在统计上有显著减少。在我的主要规范中,将大麻加入州 PDMP 与 14.4% (p
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
The addition of cannabis to prescription drug monitoring programs and medication fills in Medicaid.

To date, there is considerable evidence of the medical applications of cannabis, however concerns regarding the safety of cannabis are also mounting. To improve the safety of cannabis, nine states have added medical cannabis to their state PDMPs, helping providers to take patient cannabis use into consideration when making prescribing decisions. Across a variety of models using Medicaid State Drug Utilization claims data, I find statistically significant reductions in severely and moderately contraindicated medication fills across two outcomes. In my main specification, adding cannabis to a state PDMP is associated with a 14.4% (p < 0.01) and 7.74% (p < 0.001) decrease in the units per prescription, for severely and moderately contraindicated medications, respectively, as compared to states with legal medical cannabis dispensaries open. An interesting spillover effect of adding cannabis to PDMPs is an apparent decrease in the prescribing of scheduled narcotics, with Schedule II medications seeing a moderately significant decrease and Schedule IV medications seeing a 11.4% decrease (p < 0.01) in the prescribing rate and a 16.2% decrease (p < 0.001) in the units per prescription. The main analysis was conducted using the Borusyak et al. (2023) Imputation Estimator with a robustness check using the Callaway and Sant'Anna (2021) difference-in-difference. This work presents evidence that adding cannabis to a state PDMP impacts provider prescribing decisions involving medications that are contraindicated for use with cannabis as well as controlled substances. This paper demonstrates that adding cannabis to PDMPs influences prescribing and thus has the potential to make medical cannabis use safer. Conversely, this work indicates providers may have bias against patients who use cannabis and deny them life-improving medications (like controlled ADHD medication or opioids) on the basis of medical cannabis use. This paper also contributes to the literature comparing DD outcomes estimated using Borusyak, Jaravel, and Spiess' (2023) Imputation Estimator and Callaway and Sant'Anna's (2021) DD Estimator.

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
Health economics
Health economics 医学-卫生保健
CiteScore
3.60
自引率
4.80%
发文量
177
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: This Journal publishes articles on all aspects of health economics: theoretical contributions, empirical studies and analyses of health policy from the economic perspective. Its scope includes the determinants of health and its definition and valuation, as well as the demand for and supply of health care; planning and market mechanisms; micro-economic evaluation of individual procedures and treatments; and evaluation of the performance of health care systems. Contributions should typically be original and innovative. As a rule, the Journal does not include routine applications of cost-effectiveness analysis, discrete choice experiments and costing analyses. Editorials are regular features, these should be concise and topical. Occasionally commissioned reviews are published and special issues bring together contributions on a single topic. Health Economics Letters facilitate rapid exchange of views on topical issues. Contributions related to problems in both developed and developing countries are welcome.
期刊最新文献
The Dynamic and Heterogeneous Effects of COVID-19 Vaccination Mandates in the USA. Public Health Insurance and Healthcare Utilisation Decisions of Young Adults. Issue Information Diagnosis Related Payment for Inpatient Mental Health Care: Hospital Selection and Effects on Length of Stay. Aggregation Bias and Socioeconomic Gradients in Waiting Time for Hospital Admissions.
×
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