Cited by 51Opioid Use Disorder TreatmentPain Management and Opioid UseHealthcare Policy and Management

Declines in opioid prescribing after a private insurer policy change - Massachusetts, 2011-2015

Open access
García, Macarena C., Dodek, Anton B., Kowalski, Tom, Fallon, John, Lee, Scott H., Iademarco, Michael F., Auerbach, John, Bohm, Michele K.·2016·MMWR Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report

Abstract

implemented a comprehensive opioid utilization program after learning that many of its members were receiving new prescriptions with a >30-day supply of opioids. The 2016 CDC Guideline for Prescribing Opioids for Chronic Pain recommends avoiding opioids as a first-line therapy for chronic pain and limiting quantities when initiating opioids for acute pain (5). CDC analyzed BCBSMA prescription claims data for the period 2011-2015 to assess the effect of the new utilization program on opioid prescribing rates. During the first 3 years after policy implementation, the average monthly prescribing rate for opioids decreased almost 15%, from 34 per 1,000 members to 29. The percentage of BCBSMA members per month with current opioid prescriptions also declined. The temporal association between implementation of the program and statistically significant declines in both prescribing rates and proportion of members using opioids suggests that the BCBSMA initiative played a role in reducing the use of prescription opioids among its members. Public and private insurers in the United States could benefit from developing their own best practices for prescription opioid utilization that ensure accessible pain care, while reducing the risk for dependence and abuse associated with these drugs.

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 · 10.15585/mmwr.mm6541a1

Cites

7 of 7 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?

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

1 of the 8 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
García, M. C., Dodek, A. B., Kowalski, T., Fallon, J., Lee, S. H., Iademarco, M. F., Auerbach, J., & Bohm, M. K.
Affiliations
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (US)
Venue
MMWR Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report
Published
2016-10-21
Volume
65
Issue
41
Pages
1125-1131
ISSN
  • 0149-2195 (ISSN-L)
  • 1545-861X
OpenAlex
W2533477981
Cited by
51
References
8
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 8
FWCI
7.30
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • MMWR Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Blue Cross Blue Shield of Massachusetts
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
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Healthcare Policy and Management
Keywords
opioid prescribing, chronic pain, acute pain, opioid use disorder, opioid abuse, prescribing guidelines
MeSH terms
Analgesics, Opioid, Humans, Insurance, Health, Massachusetts, Drug Prescriptions, Program Evaluation, Organizational Policy, Private Sector

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