Geographical disparities and differences in medical specialty prescribing of dronabinol in Medicare from 2014 to 2019

Abstract

Purpose The purpose of our study was to investigate dronabinol prescribing in Medicare from 2014 to 2019 by provider specialty and state. Methods Data was collected and analyzed from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services databases from 2014 to 2019. The mean number of prescriptions for each area of practice, each individual year, and for 2014 to 2019 overall for the 50 United States and District of Columbia was determined. The prescriptions were separated by state and the state totals were determined. Individual states with dronabinol prescriptions >1.96 standard deviations (SD) from the mean were identified as significant. Results The total number of dronabinol prescriptions decreased 9.1% from 2014 to 2019. Dronabinol prescriptions were more concentrated in the eastern United States in 2019 than compared to 2014 [Tennessee (107.2), Kentucky (94.2), and West Virginia (87.6) (>1.96 SD)]. The largest portion of dronabinol prescriptions originated from primary care (1,736) compared to specialty areas of practice (1,233). Internal medicine (789.5), family medicine (608.8), hematology-oncology (343.3), nurse practitioners (337.3), and infectious disease (271.0) had the highest average number of dronabinol prescriptions per year (p<0.05). The areas of practice with the highest ratio of percent dronabinol prescriptions to percent Medicare utilization were infectious disease (15.8), hematology-oncology (12.2), and medical oncology (12.1). Conclusion Dronabinol usage declined among Medicare patients and became more concentrated in the eastern United States. Most prescriptions originated from primary care, although after accounting for Medicare patient utilization, the highest ratios originated from infectious disease, hematology-oncology, and medical oncology.

Competing Interest Statement

BJP has a competing interest due to involvement with Geisinger's Academic Clinical Research Center.

Funding Statement

This study was funded by the Health Resources Services Administration (D34HP31025) and the Geisinger Academic Clinical Research Center.

Author Declarations

I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.

Yes

The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:

Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services: https://data.cms.gov/provider-summary-by-type-of-service/medicare-part-d-prescribers/medicare-part-d-prescribers-by-provider-and-drug https://data.cms.gov/summary-statistics-on-beneficiary-enrollment/medicare-and-medicaid-reports/medicare-total-enrollment https://data.cms.gov/summary-statistics-on-use-and-payments/medicare-service-type-reports/medicare-physician-non-physician-practitioner-supplier

I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.

Yes

I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).

Yes

I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.

Yes

留言 (0)

沒有登入
gif