The Value of Shorter Initial Opioid Prescriptions: A Simulation Evaluation

  • Margrét V. BjarnadóttirEmail author
  • David R. Anderson
  • Kislaya Prasad
  • Ritu Agarwal
  • D. Alan Nelson
Original Research Article



During the period from 1999 to 2016, more than 350,000 Americans died from overdoses related to the use of prescription opioids. To the extent that supply is directly related to overprescribing, policy interventions aimed at changing prescriber behavior, such as the recent Centers for Disease Control and Prevention guideline, are clearly warranted. Although these could plausibly reduce the prevalence of opioid overuse and dependency, little is known about their economic and health-related impacts.


The aim of this study was to quantify the efficacy of a policy intervention aimed at reducing the length of initial opioid prescriptions.

Study Design and Methods

A Markov decision process model was fitted on a retrospective cohort of 827,265 patients, and patient cost and health trajectories were simulated over a 24-month period. The model’s parameters were based on patients who received short (≤ 3 days) or long (> 7 days) initial opioid prescriptions, matched using propensity score methods.

Study Population

All active-duty US Army soldiers from 2011 to 2014; the data contained detailed medical and administrative information on over 11 million soldier-months corresponding to 827,265 individual soldiers.

Main Outcome Measure

Overall costs of a policy change, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) gained, and $/QALY gained.


Over a 2-year horizon, a reassignment of 10,000 patients to short initial duration would generate a cost saving in the vicinity of $3.1 million (excluding program costs), and would also lead to an estimated 4451 additional opioid-free months, i.e. months without any opioid prescriptions.


The analysis found that efforts to change prescriber behavior can be cost effective, and further studies into the implementation of such policies are warranted.



The authors gratefully acknowledge the support of the National Institute for Healthcare Management (NIHCM) Foundation to the Principal Investigator, Ritu Agarwal.

Author Contributions

The interpretation and reporting of the results are the sole responsibility of the authors. Dr. Bjarnadottir acts as guarantor of the work presented in this paper. Dr. Bjarnadottir contributed to the study design, data extraction, interpretation of the analysis, and writing of the manuscript. Dr. Anderson contributed to the study design, data analysis, interpretation of the results, and writing of the manuscript. Dr. Prasad built the simulation model and ran the analysis, and contributed to the study design, data analysis, and writing of the manuscript. Dr. Agarwal contributed to the study design, interpretation of the results, and writing of the manuscript. Dr. Nelson conducted the data collection and the initial structure of the study dataset, and contributed to writing of the manuscript.

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of interest

Margret V. Bjarnadottir, David Anderson, Kislaya Prasad, Al Nelson, and Ritu Agarwal have no other conflicts of interest to declare.

Supplementary material

40273_2019_847_MOESM1_ESM.pdf (533 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (PDF 533 kb)


  1. 1.
    Seth P, Scholl L, Rudd RA, et al. Overdose deaths involving opioids, cocaine, and psychostimulants—United States, 2015–2016. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2018;67(12):349–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Nelson LS, Juurlink DN, Perrone J. Addressing the opioid epidemic. JAMA. 2015;314(14):1453–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Compton WM, Jones CM, Baldwin GT. Relationship between nonmedical prescription-opioid use and heroin use. N Engl J Med. 2016;374(2):154–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Castlight Health. The Opioid Crisis in America’s Workforce. 2016. Accessed 9 Mar 2019.
  5. 5.
    Lipari RN, Hughes A. How people obtain the prescription pain relievers they misuse. The CBHSQ Report. Center for Behavioral Health Statistics and Quality, Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration; 2017. Accessed 9 Mar 2019.
  6. 6.
    CNN Library: Opioid Crisis Fast Facts. Accessed 9 Mar 2019.
  7. 7.
    Murphy SM, Polsky D. Economic evaluations of opioid use disorder interventions. Pharmacoeconomics. 2016;34(9):863–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Dowell D, Haegerich TM, Chou R. CDC guideline for prescribing opioids for chronic pain—United States, 2016. MMWR Recomm Rep. 2016;65(No. RR-1):1–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Shah A, Hayes CJ, Martin BC. Characteristics of initial prescription episodes and likelihood of long-term opioid use—United States, 2006–2015. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2017;66:265–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Deyo RA, Hallvik SE, Hildebran C, et al. Association between initial opioid prescribing patterns and subsequent long-term use among opioid-naïve patients: a statewide retrospective cohort study. J Gen Intern Med. 2017;32(1):21–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Radcliffe S. Will limiting opioid prescriptions to 7 days have an impact? Health News; 2017. Accessed 9 Mar 2019.
  12. 12.
    Doran CM. Economic evaluation of interventions to treat opiate dependence. Pharmacoeconomics. 2008;26(5):371–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Chetty M, Kenworthy JJ, Langham S, et al. A systematic review of health economic models of opioid agonist therapies in maintenance treatment of non-prescription opioid dependence. Addict Sci Clin Pract. 2017;12(1):6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Rosenbaum PR, Rubin DB. The central role of the propensity score in observational studies for causal effects. Biometrika. 1983;70(1):41–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Ciesielski T, Iyengar R, Bothra A, et al. A tool to assess risk of de novo opioid abuse or dependence. Am J Med. 2016;129(7):699–705.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Dunn KM, Saunders KW, Rutter CM, et al. Opioid prescriptions for chronic pain and overdose: a cohort study. Ann Intern Med. 2010;152(2):85–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Whitehead SJ, Ali A. Health outcomes in economic evaluation: the QALY and utilities. Br Med Bull. 2010;96(1):5–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    U.S. Army Recruiting Command. Accessed 15 Jan 2018.
  19. 19.
    War and Sacrifice in the Post-9/11 Era. Washington, DC: Pew Research Center; 2011.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    QALY. Segen’s Medical Dictionary; 2011. Accessed 27 Oct 2018.
  21. 21.
    Schackman BR, Leff JA, Moore DBA, et al. Cost-effectiveness of long-term outpatient buprenorphine-naloxone treatment for opioid dependence in primary care. J Gen Int Med. 2012;27(6):669–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Nosyk B, Guh DP, Bansback NJ, et al. Cost-effectiveness of diacetylmorphine versus methadone for chronic opioid dependence refractory to treatment. CMAJ. 2012;184(6):E317–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Price MJ, Briggs AH. Development of an economic model to assess the cost effectiveness of asthma management strategies. Pharmacoeconomics. 2002;20(3):183–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Neumann PJ, Sanders GD, Russel LB, Siegel JE, Ganiats TG, editors. Cost-effectiveness in health and medicine. 2nd ed. New York: Oxford University Press; 2017.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Freedman-Weiss MR, Chiu AS, Solomon DG, et al. Opioid prescribing habits of general versus pediatric surgeons after uncomplicated laparoscopic appendectomy. J Surg Res. 2019;235:404–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Scully RE, Schoenfeld AJ, Jiang W, et al. Defining optimal length of opioid pain medication prescription after common surgical procedures. JAMA Surg. 2018;153(1):37–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Institute for Clinical and Economic Review. Institute for Clinical and Economic Review posts revised value assessment framework for public comment; 2017. Accessed 9 Mar 2019.
  28. 28.
    US Army. Army Regulation 40-501. Standards of Medical Fitness; 2017. Accessed 9 Mar 2019.
  29. 29.
    Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Prescription Opioid data; 2018. Accessed 13 Mar 2019.
  30. 30.
    Inciardi JA, Surratt HL, Lugo Y, et al. The diversion of prescription opioid analgesics. Law Enforc Exec Forum. 2007;7(7):127–41.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Greenwood BN, Agarwal R, Agarwal R, Gopal A. The role of individual and organizational expertise in the adoption of new practices. Org Sci 2019;30(1):191–213.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Thaler R, Sunstein C. Nudge: improving decisions about health, wealth, and Happiness. New Haven: Yale University Press; 2008.Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Wechsler H, Nelson TE, Lee JE, et al. Perception and reality: a national evaluation of social norms marketing interventions to reduce college students’ heavy alcohol use. J Stud Alcohol. 2003;64(4):484–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Schultz PW, Nolan JM, Cialdini RB, et al. The constructive, destructive, and reconstructive power of social norms. Psychol Sci. 2007;18(5):429–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Robert H. Smith School of Business, Decision, Operations, and Information TechnologiesUniversity of MarylandCollege ParkUSA
  2. 2.School of Business, Management and OperationsVillanova UniversityVillanovaUSA
  3. 3.Division of Primary Care and Population Health, Department of Medicine, School of MedicineStanford UniversityStanfordUSA

Personalised recommendations