Methadone Prescribing Regulation for Opioid Use Disorder in Canada: Evidence for an East/West Policy Divide
Federal opioid agonist therapy policy: interrupted time series analysis of the impact of the methadone exemption removal across eight provinces in Canada
Citation
Sud A, Campbell C, Sivakumar A, Upshur R, Moineddin R, Chiu K. Federal opioid agonist therapy policy: interrupted time series analysis of the impact of the methadone exemption removal across eight provinces in Canada. BMC Health Serv Res. 2024 Aug 5;24(1):893. doi: 10.1186/s12913-024-11281-9. PMID: 39103784.
Abstract
Background: Federal deregulation of opioid agonist therapies are an attractive policy option to improve access to opioid use disorder care and achieve widespread beneficial impacts on growing opioid-related harms. There have been few evaluations of such policy interventions and understanding effects can help policy planning across jurisdictions.
Methods: Using health administrative data from eight of ten Canadian provinces, this study evaluated the impacts of Health Canada’s decision in May 2018 to rescind the requirement for Canadian health professionals to obtain an exemption from the Canadian Drugs and Substance Act to prescribe methadone for opioid use disorder. Over the study period of June 2017 to May 2019, we used descriptive statistics to capture overall trends in the number of agonist therapy prescribers across provinces and we used interrupted time series analysis to determine the effect of this decision on the trajectories of the agonist therapy prescribing workforces.
Results: There were important baseline differences in the numbers of agonist therapy prescribers. The province with the highest concentration of prescribers had 7.5 more prescribers per 100,000 residents compared to the province with the lowest. All provinces showed encouraging growth in the number of prescribers through the study period, though the fastest growing province grew 4.5 times more than the slowest. Interrupted time series analyses demonstrated a range of effects of the federal policy intervention on the provinces, from clearly positive changes to possibly negative effects.
Conclusions: Federal drug regulation policy change interacted in complex ways with provincial health professional regulation and healthcare delivery, kaleidoscoping the effects of federal policy intervention. For Canada and other health systems such as the US, federal policy must account for significant subnational variation in OUD epidemiology and drug regulation to maximize intended beneficial effects and mitigate the risks of negative effects.
Funding
Link