Cited by 19Opioid Use Disorder TreatmentPain Management and Opioid UsePharmaceutical Practices and Patient Outcomes

Distribution of opioid prescribing and high-risk prescribing among U.S. dentists in 2019

Open access
Chua, Kao-Ping, Waljee, Jennifer F., Gunaseelan, Vidhya, Nalliah, Romesh P., Brummett, Chad M.·2022·American Journal of Preventive Medicine

Abstract

Introduction It is unknown whether certain dentists account for disproportionate shares of dental opioid prescriptions and high-risk prescriptions. Identifying and characterizing such dentists could inform the targeting of initiatives to improve the appropriateness and safety of dental opioid prescribing.Methods In May 2021, the authors conducted a cross-sectional analysis using the IQVIA Longitudinal Prescription Database, which reports dispensing from 92% of U.S. pharmacies, and 2 provider databases (IQVIA OneKey, National Plan and Provider Enumeration System). Analyses included opioid prescriptions from dentists dispensed in 2019 to patients aged >12 years. High-risk prescriptions were those considered high risk by any of 3 metrics (prescriptions to opioid-naïve patients exceeding a 3-day supply, prescriptions with daily opioid dosage ≥50 morphine milligram equivalents, opioid prescriptions with benzodiazepine overlap). Among all prescriptions and high-risk prescriptions, the authors calculated the proportion accounted for by high-volume dentists -- those with prescription counts in the 95th percentile or higher. Using logistic regression, the characteristics associated with being a high-volume dentist were identified.Results In 2019, a total of 141,345 dentists accounted for 10,736,743 opioid prescriptions dispensed to patients aged >12 years; 4,242,634 (39.5%) were high-risk prescriptions. The 7,079 high-volume dentists, a group representing 5.0% of the 141,345 dentists, accounted for 46.9% of all prescriptions and 47.5% of high-risk prescriptions. Male sex, younger age, non‒Northeast location, and specialization in oral and maxillofacial surgery were associated with a higher risk of being a high-volume dentist.Conclusions In 2019, high-volume dentists accounted for almost half of dental opioid prescriptions and high-risk prescriptions. Quality improvement initiatives targeting these dentists may be warranted.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.amepre.2021.09.017

Cites

31 of 31 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Adolescents and young adults filling or receiving an opioid prescription after a dental procedure may have an increased risk of developing long-term opioid use and overdose than those who did not fill or receive an opioid prescription.

    “In addition, adolescents and young adults filling or receiving an opioid prescription after a dental procedure may have an increased risk of developing long-term opioid use and overdose than those who did not fill or receive an opioid prescription.”

    From Evidence-based clinical practice guideline for the pharmacologic management of acute dental pain in adolescents, adults, and older adults (2024) · cites this paper as [14]

    The Introduction (page unavailable) says dental opioid prescribing increases the risk of adverse events, including overdose and addiction, and emphasizes adolescents and young adults. The Methods > Measures section links prescriptions exceeding a 3-day supply to long-term opioid use. The paper does not establish the claimed comparison with young dental patients who did not fill or receive an opioid prescription for both outcomes. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Chua, K.-P., Waljee, J. F., Gunaseelan, V., Nalliah, R. P., & Brummett, C. M.
Affiliations
University of Michigan (US)
Corresponding author
Chua, Kao-Ping
Venue
American Journal of Preventive Medicine
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2022-03
Volume
62
Issue
3
Pages
317-325
ISSN
0749-3797 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4213216895
Cited by
19
References
31
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 1
FWCI
3.75
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • American Journal of Preventive Medicine (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
National Institute on Drug Abuse (K08DA048110)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Opioid Use Disorder Treatment
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine › Pain Management and Opioid Use
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Geriatrics and Gerontology › Pharmaceutical Practices and Patient Outcomes
Keywords
high-risk prescribing, opioid prescribing, opioid-naive patients, morphine milligram equivalents, maxillofacial surgery, dentist characteristics, prescription appropriateness
MeSH terms
Analgesics, Opioid, Child, Cross-Sectional Studies, Dentists, Humans, Male, Practice Patterns, Physicians', Drug Prescriptions, Prescriptions

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review