Inside a Massive, Successful Effort to Stop Prescribing So Many Opioids

One medical group has figured out a way to sidestep the dangerously addictive drugs.

Matt Chase

In 2013, leaders at Partnership HealthPlan, the main public insurance provider for Medi-Cal patients in rural Northern California, discovered an alarming trend: Many counties where Partnership operated had among the highest rates of opioid prescribing and overdose in the state. Hydro­codone was the top-prescribed medication among Partnership patients, who include more than 570,000 Medi-Cal recipients from the vineyards of Sonoma County to the redwoods on the Oregon border. In Lake County, a poor, rural area bordering Sonoma, enough opioid painkillers were prescribed in 2013 to medicate every man, woman, and child with opioids for five months, according to a report by the California Health Care Foundation.

“If people were needing more, you just prescribed more,” said Dr. Marshall Kubota, a regional medical director for the provider. “That was a recipe for disaster.”

Opioids, a highly addictive class of compounds that includes OxyContin, Percocet, and Vicodin, are a uniquely American form of pain treatment: In 2014, the United States consumed nearly 70 percent of the world’s supply. As prescriptions have soared since 1996, when Purdue Pharma introduced OxyContin, opioid addiction and overdose rates have outpaced the trend. Yet chronic pain levels have increased, according to a recent study in the medical journal Pain—and many people who started on painkillers have transitioned to other illicit, stronger opioids like heroin or fentanyl. As a result, drug overdoses, most involving opioids, kill more than 1,000 Americans each week on average—more than HIV did at its peak in the mid-90s.

Kubota and his Partnership colleagues were faced with a question: How does a system of doctors change the decades-old practice of treating pain—from an ankle sprain to a chronic back problem—with addictive pills? And if not opioids, what do you give patients in pain?

Government researchers have been studying those same questions. Last year, the Centers for Disease Control and Preven­tion recommended that doctors avoid prescribing opioids for chronic pain and instead pursue alternative medications. Some anti­depressants and anti-seizure drugs can help quiet down the brain’s pain signaling. Physicians have found that sleeping pills can also be helpful, since chronic pain interferes with sleep, leading to a snowball effect where the body doesn’t restore itself as well as it would otherwise. Evidence suggests that the chemical compounds in marijuana could help some types of chronic pain, too. (And such studies aren’t just from California hippies: A recent New England Journal of Medicine article, co-authored by National Institutes of Health Director Francis Collins, says there is “strong evidence” that cannabinoids can treat pain.)

Even for acute pain, like that from a broken bone, opioids are often prescribed when a carefully calibrated cocktail of over-the-counter medications can do the trick just as well, says Nora Volkow, director of the National Institute on Drug Abuse. For example, one study published by the Journal of the American Dental Association found that a combination of ibuprofen and Tylenol is more effective in treating pain after wisdom teeth extraction than oxycodone. Another study in the Canadian Medical Association Journal found that for kids with fractures, ibuprofen is just as good at curbing pain as morphine.

Kubota and his colleagues took a multi­pronged approach. They required their physicians to attend courses about pain management, from “Rational and Irrational Opioid Prescribing” to “The Art (and Very Little) Science of Tapering Opioids.” They developed guidelines for emergency rooms and dentists—things like using Tylenol and local anesthetics before resorting to opioids to treat dental pain. They also prohibited doctors from prescribing more than 30 days of opioids unless a patient went through a strict authorization process.

But perhaps the most significant—and controversial—changes involved taking some opioids off the plan altogether. Partnership stopped covering potent, brand-name pills, many of which have high street value. It began suggesting antidepressants and anti-seizure medications for pain management. With the money Partnership saved on opioid prescriptions—about $1 million per month—it offered alternative benefits to patients, from chiropractic sessions to acupuncture.

All of this was a tough sell for doctors. “We became the bad guys,” admits Kubota. The hardest part for a lot of physicians was having what Kubota calls “the talk,” when doctors would inform patients that the new policy likely wouldn’t cover their continually increasing opioid dosages.

The talks paid off. Between 2014 and 2016, the number of Partnership patients on dangerous levels of opioids decreased by 79 percent. In the first quarter of 2017, Partnership clinicians prescribed about 70 percent fewer painkillers than they did in the first quarter of 2014. (By contrast, opioid prescribing rates nationally declined by 13 percent between 2012 and 2015 but were still three times higher than 1999 rates, according to the CDC.)

Kaiser Permanente of Southern California, which serves roughly 4.4 million patients, took a similar approach. According to the California Health Care Foundation, the Kaiser physicians now receive reports comparing their prescribing rates with those of their peers, and they require a signoff from another doctor specializing in pain management, oncology, or palliative care to give high doses of opioids or brand-name pills. Opioids prescribed by emergency department doctors are limited to three days. An online tool lets physicians consult a pain management specialist about specific cases in real time. Between 2013 and 2015, the health plan saw a 31 percent drop in the number of patients on unsafe doses.

Contrary to some doctors’ concerns, patients reported being more satisfied with Kaiser than before. Partnership physician Marie Mulligan says that after she curbed opioid prescriptions, her patients took on old hobbies that they had abandoned because of the pain; some have gone back to school or become more involved with their families. As she put it, “It’s getting them to gradually wake up.”

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate