Patterns, Changes, and Trends in Prescription Opioid Dispensing in Canada, 2005–2016

Abstract

Background: Levels of prescription opioid (PO) dispensing have been rising in Canada – also in global comparison – since the mid-2000s, and are co-occurring with extensive POrelated morbidity and mortality. Previous analyses have demonstrated correlations between PO dispensing and related harm levels, yet also distinct heterogeneous interprovincial POdispensing patterns, in regards to quantities and individual PO formulations. Several systemlevel interventions have been implemented recently (since 2012) to address high PO-use levels and related harms in Canada; the effects of these interventions on PO-dispensing levels remain largely unexamined. Objectives: Our aim was to examine over-time patterns and trends of levels of PO dispensing quantitatively (in defined daily doses [DDDs]) for ‘strong’ and ‘weak’ opioids and qualitatively (by individual PO formulations) by province and Canada total, for the period of 2005–2016. Methods: We examined annual PO-dispensing levels, by ‘weak’ and ‘strong’ POs (individual PO formulations, but excluding methadone), by province and for Canada total, from 2005– 2016. Raw dispensing information for POs were obtained from IMSQuintiles CompuScript [new name: IQVIA], based on monthly retail dispensing data from a representative sample of community pharmacies covering about 80% of all dispensing episodes in Canada. These data were converted into annual dispensing values in DDDs (DDD/1,000 population/day), based on standard methodology, for the PO formulation groups of interest. Patterns and trends of ‘strong’ and ‘weak’ POs and individual PO formulations were examined descriptively, aided by segmented regression analyses to identify significant break-points in over-time trends. In addition, changes in ‘strong’/‘weak’ PO dispensing ratios between 2005 and 2016 were examined. Results: ‘Weak’ PO use remained largely stable across Canada over the study period. For ‘strong’ PO dispensing, half of the provinces featured consistent increases, while remaining provinces presented initial increases with subsequently reverting downward trends at divergent levels. Dispensing of individual ‘strong’ PO formulations varied interprovincially; specifically, substantial decreases for oxycodone co-occurred with increases in other ‘strong’ PO formulations. The dispensing ratios for ‘strong’/‘weak’ POs increased significantly across jurisdictions between 2005 and 2016 (P < .05). Limitations: Retail pharmacy-based data do not cover the total – but the large majority – of PO dispensing in Canada. There are limitations to DDD/1,000 population/day as a comparative measurement unit for PO dispensing. The causal contribution of interventions associated with changes in PO dispensing observed cannot be verified with the data available. Conclusions: Heterogeneous trends for PO dispensing, driven mostly by variations in ‘strong’ PO use, continue to be observed provincially across Canada. Recent changes in PO dispensing are likely influenced by recent intervention efforts (e.g., PO de-scheduling, monitoring, guidelines) aiming to reduce PO-related harms, which, however, have shown limited impact on PO-dispensing levels to date. Key words: Opioids, prescribing, dispensing, interventions, policy, population, monitoring, Canada

What proportion of patients with chronic noncancer pain are prescribed an opioid medicine? Systematic review and meta‐regression of observational studies

“…The proportion of patients with chronic noncancer pain, including chronic low back pain, who are prescribed opioids is not well understood. Opioid prescribing data have been reported from individual healthcare settings . However, there are no systematic reviews that have synthesized these data in the chronic noncancer pain population.…”

Examining correlations between opioid dispensing and opioid-related hospitalizations in Canada, 2007 - 2016

“…We examined possible correlations between opioid dispensing and opioid-related hospitalization rates across Canada in contexts of most provinces featuring inversion patterns for opioid dispensing during the study period (2007 -2016; [22]). These patterns reflect recent reductions in opioid availability following a variety of restrictive measures (e.g., intensified prescription monitoring, de-scheduling of select opioid formulations, restrictive opioid prescription guidelines) in a wider context of continuously rising opioid-related mortality and morbidity outcomes [3,38,39].…”

“…We used national data on community-based PO dispensing across Canada -i.e., the 10 provinces -for the study period; the vast majority (e.g., ~80%) of opioid medications are dispensed through retail pharmacies [22]. Raw prescription opioid dispensing data, including both branded and generic medications, were obtained from IQVIA's Compuscript prescription database, drawn from a representative, stratified, and continuously refreshed sample of ~6,000 retail pharmacies towards estimating pan-Canadian dispensing total through patented geo-spatial projection methodology as previously used in multiple related analyses [23][24][25].…”

“…In Canada, despite overall distinctly high levels of opioid availability, opioid dispensing has considerably varied inter-provincially up to 3-fold in standardized volumes. Over-time, an inversion trend has been observed: While levels of opioid-dispensing consistently increased until about 2012, some -but not all -provinces featured substantial declines thereafter [22].…”

Warning from Canada: Latin America, South Africa and India may face an opioid epidemic in the coming years

“…However, the amount of opioids (in morphine milligram equivalents) prescribed per person is still approximately three times higher than it was in 1999 [2]. In Canada, prescription opioid analgesics (POAs) increased in all provinces from 2005 to 2011 [3]. More than 90% of licit morphine is used by roughly 20% of the global society, primarily in the US, Canada, Germany and Australia, and approximately 66% of the world' s population have almost no access to opioids, despite having a high disease burden from conditions and illnesses known to cause pain [4].…”