RT Journal Article
SR Electronic
T1 Declining National Codeine Distribution in United States Hospitals and Pharmacies from 2011 to 2019
JF medRxiv
FD Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press
SP 2022.04.12.22273805
DO 10.1101/2022.04.12.22273805
A1 Kennalley, Amy L.
A1 Boureghda, Youcef A.
A1 Ganesh, Jay G.
A1 Watkins, Adam M.
A1 McCall, Kenneth L.
A1 Piper, Brian J.
YR 2022
UL http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2022/04/13/2022.04.12.22273805.abstract
AB Background Past research has identified pronounced regional disparities in use of different opioids but less is known for codeine. The primary objective of this study was to analyze the trends of distribution of prescriptions containing codeine in the United States (US) from 2010 to 2019. In addition, this study aimed to identify regional disparities in prescribed milligrams of codeine per person in 2019 and identify any unusual states.Methods The distribution of codeine via pharmacies, hospitals, and practitioners in kilograms was obtained from the Drug Enforcement Administration’s Automated Reports and Consolidated Ordering System (ARCOS) from 2010 to 2019. In addition, the number of prescriptions of codeine per 1,000 Medicaid enrollees was obtained from the State Drug Utilization Database.Results The total grams of codeine decreased (−25.0%) through all distributors from 2010 to 2019. The largest increase in total grams of codeine distributed between two consecutive years (2014 to 2015) was +28.9%. For a given distributor type, the largest decrease from 2010 to 2019 was hospitals (−89.6%). In 2019, the total mg of codeine per person distributed in Texas (11.46) was significantly higher relative to the national average (3.06, 1.88 SD). Codeine prescriptions to Medicaid patients peeked in the third quarter of 2016.Conclusion The peak of prescription codeine in 2011 was consistent with the overall peak in prescription opioids, with a subsequent decrease over the decade. This could be explained by relatively recent recommendations regarding the therapeutic use of codeine and how other antitussive agents may be of better use. The precipitous rise of codeine in Texas that we observed has been recognized in prior studies. These state-level disparities warrant further attention by opioid stewardship committees.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Funding StatementThis study did not receive any fundingAuthor DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesI 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.YesI 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).YesI 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.YesAll data produced are available online at ARCOS Retail Drug Summary Reports. https://www.deadiversion.usdoj.gov/arcos/retail_drug_summary/index.html