Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comparative Study
. 2021 Jun 1;18(6):e1003631.
doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1003631. eCollection 2021 Jun.

Inequities in access to primary care among opioid recipients in Ontario, Canada: A population-based cohort study

Affiliations
Comparative Study

Inequities in access to primary care among opioid recipients in Ontario, Canada: A population-based cohort study

Tara Gomes et al. PLoS Med. .

Abstract

Background: Stigma and high-care needs can present barriers to the provision of high-quality primary care for people with opioid use disorder (OUD) and those prescribed opioids for chronic pain. We explored the likelihood of securing a new primary care provider (PCP) among people with varying histories of opioid use who had recently lost access to their PCP.

Methods and findings: We conducted a retrospective cohort study using linked administrative data among residents of Ontario, Canada whose enrolment with a physician practicing in a primary care enrolment model (PEM) was terminated between January 2016 and December 2017. We assigned individuals to 3 groups based upon their opioid use on the date enrolment ended: long-term opioid pain therapy (OPT), opioid agonist therapy (OAT), or no opioid. We fit multivariable models assessing the primary outcome of primary care reattachment within 1 year, adjusting for demographic characteristics, clinical comorbidities, and health services utilization. Secondary outcomes included rates of emergency department (ED) visits and opioid toxicity events. Among 154,970 Ontarians who lost their PCP, 1,727 (1.1%) were OAT recipients, 3,644 (2.4%) were receiving long-term OPT, and 149,599 (96.5%) had no recent prescription opioid exposure. In general, OAT recipients were younger (median age 36) than those receiving long-term OPT (59 years) and those with no recent prescription opioid exposure (44 years). In all exposure groups, the majority of individuals had their enrolment terminated by their physician (range 78.1% to 88.8%). In the primary analysis, as compared to those not receiving opioids, OAT recipients were significantly less likely to find a PCP within 1 year (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 0.55, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.50 to 0.61, p < 0.0001). We observed no significant difference between long-term OPT and opioid unexposed individuals (aHR 0.96; 95% CI 0.92 to 1.01, p = 0.12). In our secondary analysis comparing the period of PCP loss to the year prior, we found that rates of ED visits were elevated among people not receiving opioids (adjusted rate ratio (aRR) 1.20, 95% CI 1.18 to 1.22, p < 0.0001) and people receiving long-term OPT (aRR 1.37, 95% CI 1.28 to 1.48, p < 0.0001). We found no such increase among OAT recipients, and no significant increase in opioid toxicity events in the period following provider loss for any exposure group. The main limitation of our findings relates to their generalizability outside of PEMs and in jurisdictions with different financial incentives incorporated into primary care provision.

Conclusions: In this study, we observed gaps in access to primary care among people who receive prescription opioids, particularly among OAT recipients. Ongoing efforts are needed to address the stigma, discrimination, and financial disincentives that may introduce barriers to the healthcare system, and to facilitate access to high-quality, consistent primary care services for chronic pain patients and those with OUD.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

I have read the journal’s policy and the authors of this manuscript have the following competing interests to report: TG and RG have received grant funding from the Ontario Ministry of Health and CIHR. RG serves as a CIHR Scientific Director. DNJ is an unpaid member of Physicians for Responsible Opioid Prescribing (PROP). He is also a member of the American College of Medical Toxicology. Both groups have publicly available positions on this issue. He has received payment for lectures and medicolegal opinions regarding the safety and effectiveness of analgesics, including opioids. MMM has received honoraria for attending Advisory Board meetings for NovoNordisk and Neurocrine Biosciences.

Figures

Fig 1
Fig 1. Cohort selection.
Flow diagram of cohort selection and exclusion criteria for study cohort.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Petterson S, McNellis R, Klink K, Meyers D, Bazemore A. The state of primary care in the United States: A chartbook of facts and statistics. Washington: Robert Graham Center; 2018.
    1. Starfield B, Shi L, Macinko J. Contribution of primary care to health systems and health. Milbank Q. 2005;83(3):457–502. Epub 2005/10/06. 10.1111/j.1468-0009.2005.00409.x . - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Black LI, Schiller JS. State Variation in Health Care Service Utilization: United States, 2014. NCHS Data Brief. 2016;(245):1–8. Epub 2016/05/27. . - PubMed
    1. Statistics Canada. Primary Health Care Providers, 2016 2017 [January 24, 2020]. Available from: https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/pub/82-625-x/2017001/article/54863-eng.htm.
    1. Hay C, Pacey M, Bains N, Ardal S. Understanding the Unattached Population in Ontario: Evidence from the Primary Care Access Survey (PCAS). Healthc Policy. 2010;6(2):33–47. - PMC - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms

Substances

Grants and funding