RT Journal Article
SR Electronic
T1 Rise and Regional Disparities in Buprenorphine Utilization in the United States
JF medRxiv
FD Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press
SP 19006163
DO 10.1101/19006163
A1 Pashmineh, Amir Azar R.
A1 Cruz-Mullane, Alexandra
A1 Podd, Jaclyn C.
A1 Lam, Warren S.
A1 Kaleem, Suhail H.
A1 Lockard, Laura B.
A1 Mandel, Mark R.
A1 Chung, Daniel Y.
A1 Davis, Corey S.
A1 Nichols, Stephanie D.
A1 McCall, Kenneth L.
A1 Piper, Brian J.
YR 2019
UL http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2019/09/09/19006163.abstract
AB Aims Buprenorphine is an opioid partial-agonist used to treat Opioid Use Disorders (OUD). While several state and federal policy changes have attempted to increase buprenorphine availability, access remains well below optimal levels. This study characterized how buprenorphine utilization in the United States has changed over time and whether there are regional disparities in distribution.Measurements Buprenorphine weights distributed from 2007 to 2017 were obtained from the Drug Enforcement Administration. Data was expressed as the percent change and as the mg per person in each state. Separately, the formulations for prescriptions covered by Medicaid (2008 to 2018) were examined.Findings Buprenorphine distributed to pharmacies increased about seven-fold (476.8 to 3,179.9 kg) while the quantities distributed to hospitals grew five-fold (18.6 to 97.6 kg) nationally from 2007 to 2017. Buprenorphine distribution per person was almost 20-fold higher in Vermont (40.4 mg/person) relative to South Dakota (2.1 mg/person). There was a strong association between the number of waivered physicians per 100K population and distribution per state (r(49) = +0.76, p < .0005). The buprenorphine/naloxone sublingual film (Suboxone) was the predominant formulation (92.6% of 0.31 million Medicaid prescriptions) in 2008 but this accounted for less than three-fifths (57.3% of 6.56 million prescriptions) in 2018.Conclusions Although buprenorphine availability has substantially increased over the last decade, distribution was very non-homogenous across the US.Competing Interest StatementBJP has a grant in review with Pfizer. The other authors report no relevant conflicts of interest.Funding StatementSoftware to complete this project was provided by Husson University School of Pharmacy and the NIEHS (T32 ES007060-31A1). BJP was a Fahs-Beck Fellow and supported by the Center of Excellence, Health Resources Services Administration (D34HP31025).Author DeclarationsAll relevant ethical guidelines have been followed and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesAll necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.Not ApplicableAny clinical trials involved have been registered with an ICMJE-approved registry such as ClinicalTrials.gov and the trial ID is included in the manuscript.Not ApplicableI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant Equator, ICMJE or other checklist(s) as supplementary files, if applicable.YesOriginal data is available online. https://www.deadiversion.usdoj.gov/arcos/retail_drug_summary/index.html https://www.medicaid.gov/medicaid/prescription-drugs/state-drug-utilization-data/index.html