{"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}
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.
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.