Emergency Medicine Providers Systematically Underestimate Their Opioid Prescribing Practices

Background: Opioid misuse is a known public health problem, nationwide and in Massachusetts. The Massachusetts Hospital Association (MHA) developed recommendations to address opioid prescribing in the ED setting, and UMassMemorial Health Care recently implemented a system-wide opioid practice guideline mirroring the MHA policy. Little is known about methods to influence behavior change among ED providers related to opioid prescribing practices. Guideline implementation provided a unique opportunity for a natural experiment related to prescribing patterns, and we hypothesized that a simultaneous experimental intervention to provide clinicians with their individual prescribing data would alter their practices beyond any effect achieved solely by being subject to the new guidelines. Methods: As part of an ongoing, prospective, randomized trial of an intervention hypothesized to influence providers’ opioid prescribing, we developed a survey instrument consisting of graphical depictions of the distributions of three measures of opioid prescribing among all ED providers at four UMass-affiliated EDs (attending and resident physicians and advanced practice providers). Clinicians randomized to the intervention arm were asked to identify his/her perceived position on each distribution. We compared each provider’s self-perception to their actual decile. Results: Fifty-one providers were randomized to the intervention arm. Forty-eight completed the survey (94%). Providers underestimated their decile of opioid prescriptions per hundred total prescriptions by a median of one decile (p=0.0399 for difference from zero). Attendings underestimated their decile of percentage of patients dispositioned with an opioid prescription by a median of two deciles (p=0.0292), while residents did not exhibit a significant difference. Providers showed systematic disagreement with their raw number of prescriptions for extended-release opioid formulations (kappa -0.18), underestimating by a median of one. Conclusions: Based upon three measures of ED opioid prescribing, providers’ self-perceptions of their practices systematically underestimated their actual prescribing, which likely has implications related to efforts to influence clinician behavior change

Effect of a Data-Driven Intervention on Opioid Prescribing Intensity Among Emergency Department Providers: A Randomized Controlled Trial

OBJECTIVE: Little is known about accuracy of provider self-perception of opioid prescribing. We hypothesized that an intervention asking emergency department (ED) providers to self-identify their opioid prescribing practices compared to group norms-and subsequently providing them with their actual prescribing data-would alter future prescribing compared to controls. METHODS: This was a prospective, multi-center randomized trial in which all attending physicians, residents, and advanced practice providers at four EDs were randomly assigned to either no intervention or a brief data-driven intervention during which providers were: (1) asked to self-identify and explicitly report to research staff their perceived opioid prescribing in comparison to their peers, and then (2) given their actual data with peer group norms for comparison. Our primary outcome was the change in each provider\u27s proportion of patients discharged with an opioid prescription at six and twelve months. Secondary outcomes were opioid prescriptions per hundred total prescriptions and normalized morphine milligram equivalents prescribed. Our primary comparison stratified intervention providers by those who underestimated their prescribing and those who did not underestimate their prescribing, both compared to controls. RESULTS: Among 109 total participants, 51 were randomized to the intervention, 65% of whom underestimated their opioid prescribing. Intervention participants who underestimated their baseline prescribing had larger-magnitude decreases than controls (Hodges-Lehmann difference -2.1 prescriptions per hundred patients at 6 months [95% CI -3.9 to -0.5] and -2.2 per hundred at 12 months [95% CI -4.8 to -0.01]). Intervention participants who did not underestimate their prescribing had similar changes to controls. CONCLUSIONS: Self-perception of prescribing was frequently inaccurate. Providing clinicians with their actual opioid prescribing data after querying their self-perception reduced future prescribing among providers who underestimated their baseline prescribing. Our findings suggest that guideline and policy interventions should directly address the potential barrier of inaccurate provider self-awareness