IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0221153.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Opioid prescription patterns in Germany and the global opioid epidemic: Systematic review of available evidence

Author

Listed:
  • Bastian Rosner
  • Jessica Neicun
  • Justin Christopher Yang
  • Andres Roman-Urrestarazu

Abstract

Introduction: Opioids are one of the most important and effective drug classes in pain medicine with a key role in most medical fields. The increase of opioid prescription over time has led to higher numbers of prescription opioid misuse, abuse and opioid-related deaths in most developed OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development) countries around the world. Whilst reliable data on the prevalence of opioid treatment is accessible for many countries, data on Germany specifically is still scarce. Considering Germany being the largest country in the European Union, the lack of evidence-based strategies from long-term studies is crucial. The aim of this work is to review and summarise relevant published literature on the prevalence of opioid prescription in Germany to adequately inform health policy strategies. Methods: A systematic review of the epidemiology of opioid prescription in Germany was conducted, searching PubMed and Web of Science. Eligibility criteria were defined prior to conducting the search. Literature concerning Germany, published in English and German was included and the search was replicated by three independent researchers. Two levels of screening were employed. Disagreement was resolved by face-to-face discussion, leading to a consensus judgement. Results: Our electronic search yielded 735 articles. Reviewing titles and abstracts yielded 19 relevant articles. Three authors examined each article’s full text more closely and determined that twelve papers should be included. Of the twelve identified studies—with publication dates ranging from 1985 to 2016—six were retrospective cross-sectional studies and six were retrospective repeated-measures cross-sectional studies. Sample sizes ranged from 92,842 to ≈ 11,000,000 participants. Data sources of included studies showed vast heterogeneity. The reviewed literature suggested an increase in the number of patients with opioid prescriptions and defined daily doses of opioids per recipient in Germany over time. The majority of opioid prescriptions was used for patients with non-cancer pain. Opioid use was more common in older people, women and in the north of Germany. Fentanyl was shown to be the most prescribed strong opioid in outpatient settings in Germany, despite not being the first-line choice for chronic pain conditions. All data published before 2000—but none of the more recent studies—suggested an insufficient treatment of pain using opioids. There were no signs for a current opioid epidemic in Germany. Conclusions: Despite some limitations of the review and the heterogeneity of studies, it can be stated that the number of opioid prescriptions overall as well as the number of people receiving opioid treatment have increased over time. Most prescriptions were found to be for strong opioids and patients with non-cancer pain. Even though patterns of opioid prescription follow trends observed in other developed countries, there are no signs of an opioid epidemic in Germany. Therefore, this review could currently not find a need for urgent health policy interventions regarding opioid prescription practices. However, critical gaps in the literature remain and more research is needed to make more reliable judgements.

Suggested Citation

  • Bastian Rosner & Jessica Neicun & Justin Christopher Yang & Andres Roman-Urrestarazu, 2019. "Opioid prescription patterns in Germany and the global opioid epidemic: Systematic review of available evidence," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(8), pages 1-20, August.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0221153
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0221153
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0221153
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0221153&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0221153?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Van Zee, A., 2009. "The promotion and marketing of oxycontin: Commercial triumph, public health tragedy," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 99(2), pages 221-227.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. William Encinosa & Didem Bernard & Thomas M. Selden, 2022. "Opioid and non-opioid analgesic prescribing before and after the CDC’s 2016 opioid guideline," International Journal of Health Economics and Management, Springer, vol. 22(1), pages 1-52, March.
    2. Abhimanyu Sud & Darren K. Cheng & Rahim Moineddin & Erin Zlahtic & Ross Upshur, 2021. "Time series-based bibliometric analysis of a systematic review of multidisciplinary care for opioid dose reduction: exploring the origins of the North American opioid crisis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(11), pages 8935-8955, November.
    3. Ravi Katari, Dean Baker, 2015. "Patent Monopolies and the Costs of Mismarketing Drugs," CEPR Reports and Issue Briefs 2015-11, Center for Economic and Policy Research (CEPR).
    4. Johanna Catherine Maclean & Justine Mallatt & Christopher J. Ruhm & Kosali Simon, 2022. "The Opioid Crisis, Health, Healthcare, and Crime: A Review of Quasi-Experimental Economic Studies," The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, , vol. 703(1), pages 15-49, September.
    5. McGranahan, David A. & Parker, Timothy S., 2021. "The Opioid Epidemic: A Geography in Two Phases," USDA Miscellaneous 310390, United States Department of Agriculture.
    6. Deiana, Claudio & Giua, Ludovica & Nistico, Roberto, 2019. "The Economics behind the Epidemic: Afghan Opium Price and Prescription Opioids in the US," IZA Discussion Papers 12872, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    7. Anne Case & Angus Deaton, 2017. "Mortality and Morbidity in the 21st Century," Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, Economic Studies Program, The Brookings Institution, vol. 48(1 (Spring), pages 397-476.
    8. James F. Anderson & Kelley Reinsmith-Jones & Willie M. Brooks, Jr. & Adam H. Langsam, 2017. "Paradigm Shift in Responding to Drug Users and Addicts: From a Criminal Justice to a Public Health Approach," International Journal of Social Science Studies, Redfame publishing, vol. 5(5), pages 1-15, May.
    9. Shannon M. Monnat, 2022. "Demographic and Geographic Variation in Fatal Drug Overdoses in the United States, 1999–2020," The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, , vol. 703(1), pages 50-78, September.
    10. Boslett, Andrew & Hill, Elaine, 2022. "Mortality during resource booms and busts," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 115(C).
    11. McGranahan, David & Parker, Timothy, 2021. "The Opioid Epidemic: A Geography in Two Phases," Economic Research Report 327197, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    12. Jessica Y. Ho, 2019. "The Contemporary American Drug Overdose Epidemic in International Perspective," Population and Development Review, The Population Council, Inc., vol. 45(1), pages 7-40, March.
    13. Francisco A. Montiel Ishino & Tamika Gilreath & Faustine Williams, 2020. "Finding the Hidden Risk Profiles of the United States Opioid Epidemic: Using a Person-Centered Approach on a National Dataset of Noninstitutionalized Adults Reporting Opioid Misuse," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(12), pages 1-14, June.
    14. Shiyu Zhang & Daniel Guth, 2021. "The OxyContin Reformulation Revisited: New Evidence From Improved Definitions of Markets and Substitutes," Papers 2101.01128, arXiv.org, revised Jan 2021.
    15. Yang, Tse-Chuan & Shoff, Carla & Kim, Seulki, 2022. "Social isolation, residential stability, and opioid use disorder among older Medicare beneficiaries: Metropolitan and non-metropolitan county comparison," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 292(C).
    16. David M. Cutler & Edward L. Glaeser, 2021. "When Innovation Goes Wrong: Technological Regress and the Opioid Epidemic," NBER Working Papers 28873, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    17. Graham, Francis W. & de New, Sonja C. & Nielsen, Suzanne & Petrie, Dennis, 2023. "Revisiting the OxyContin Reformulation: The Role of Licit Substitutes," IZA Discussion Papers 16653, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    18. van Amsterdam, Jan & Phillips, Lawrence D. & Henderson, Graeme & Bell, James & Bowden-Jones, Owen & Hammersley, Richard & Ramsey, John & Taylor, Polly & Dale-Perera, Annette & Melichar, Jan & van den , 2015. "Ranking the harm of non-medically used prescription opioids in the UK," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 64653, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    19. Janet Currie & Hannes Schwandt, 2020. "The Opioid Epidemic Was Not Primarily Caused by Economic Distress But by Other Factors that Can be More Readily Addressed," Working Papers 2020-25, Princeton University. Economics Department..
    20. Sim, Yongbo, 2023. "The effect of opioids on crime: Evidence from the introduction of OxyContin," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 74(C).

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0221153. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.