Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-dsjbd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-05T05:13:37.882Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Independent and joint contributions of physical disability and chronic pain to incident opioid use disorder and opioid overdose among Medicaid patients

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  17 November 2023

Katherine L. Hoffman
Affiliation:
Department of Epidemiology, Mailman School of Public Health, Columbia University, New York, USA
Floriana Milazzo
Affiliation:
Department of Epidemiology, Mailman School of Public Health, Columbia University, New York, USA
Nicholas T. Williams
Affiliation:
Department of Epidemiology, Mailman School of Public Health, Columbia University, New York, USA
Hillary Samples
Affiliation:
Rutgers Institute for Health, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, USA
Mark Olfson
Affiliation:
Department of Epidemiology, Mailman School of Public Health, Columbia University, New York, USA
Ivan Diaz
Affiliation:
New York University Grossman School of Medicine
Lisa Doan
Affiliation:
New York University Grossman School of Medicine
Magdalena Cerda
Affiliation:
New York University Grossman School of Medicine
Stephen Crystal
Affiliation:
Rutgers Institute for Health, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, USA
Kara E. Rudolph*
Affiliation:
Department of Epidemiology, Mailman School of Public Health, Columbia University, New York, USA
*
Corresponding author: Kara E. Rudolph; Email: kr2854@cumc.columbia.edu
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Background

Chronic pain has been extensively explored as a risk factor for opioid misuse, resulting in increased focus on opioid prescribing practices for individuals with such conditions. Physical disability sometimes co-occurs with chronic pain but may also represent an independent risk factor for opioid misuse. However, previous research has not disentangled whether disability contributes to risk independent of chronic pain.

Methods

Here, we estimate the independent and joint adjusted associations between having a physical disability and co-occurring chronic pain condition at time of Medicaid enrollment on subsequent 18-month risk of incident opioid use disorder (OUD) and non-fatal, unintentional opioid overdose among non-elderly, adult Medicaid beneficiaries (2016–2019).

Results

We find robust evidence that having a physical disability approximately doubles the risk of incident OUD or opioid overdose, and physical disability co-occurring with chronic pain increases the risks approximately sixfold as compared to having neither chronic pain nor disability. In absolute numbers, those with neither a physical disability nor chronic pain condition have a 1.8% adjusted risk of incident OUD over 18 months of follow-up, those with physical disability alone have an 2.9% incident risk, those with chronic pain alone have a 3.6% incident risk, and those with co-occurring physical disability and chronic pain have a 11.1% incident risk.

Conclusions

These findings suggest that those with a physical disability should receive increased attention from the medical and healthcare communities to reduce their risk of opioid misuse and attendant negative outcomes.

Type
Original Article
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2023. Published by Cambridge University Press

Introduction

The drug overdose epidemic continues to pose a substantial health threat in the United States (Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, 2020). People with opioid use disorder (OUD) are at high risk of drug overdose (Hser et al., Reference Hser, Mooney, Saxon, Miotto, Bell, Zhu and Huang2017) and >10 times the risk of death from any cause (Degenhardt et al., Reference Degenhardt, Bucello, Mathers, Briegleb, Ali, Hickman and McLaren2011; Hser et al., Reference Hser, Mooney, Saxon, Miotto, Bell, Zhu and Huang2017). Between 1999 and 2021, more than 1 million people died from a drug overdose; opioids contributed to nearly 700 000 of those deaths (Cerdá et al., Reference Cerdá, Krawczyk, Hamilton, Rudolph, Friedman and Keyes2021; National Institute on Drug Abuse, 2023).

Chronic pain has been extensively explored as a risk factor for opioid misuse (Cerdá et al., Reference Cerdá, Krawczyk, Hamilton, Rudolph, Friedman and Keyes2021; Dunn et al., Reference Dunn, Saunders, Rutter, Banta-Green, Merrill, Sullivan and Von Korff2010; Marshall, Bland, Hulla, & Gatchel, Reference Marshall, Bland, Hulla and Gatchel2019; Orhurhu et al., Reference Orhurhu, Olusunmade, Urits, Viswanath, Peck, Orhurhu and Jatinder2019; Volkow & McLellan, Reference Volkow and McLellan2016); many people who experience opioid-related adverse events were initially exposed to opioids via a prescription (Fishbain, Cole, Lewis, Rosomoff, & Rosomoff, Reference Fishbain, Cole, Lewis, Rosomoff and Rosomoff2008). Chronic pain (often defined as pain that occurs on most days and lasts ≥3 months) affects a growing proportion of the population (Case, Deaton, & Stone, Reference Case, Deaton and Stone2020), an estimated 21% of US adults in 2021 (Rikard, Strahan, Schmit, & Guy, Reference Rikard, Strahan, Schmit and Guy2023). Although rates of prescription opioid use to manage acute and chronic pain have declined in recent years (Maestas, Sherry, & Strand, Reference Maestas, Sherry and Strand2021), their use remains common – 50% of Medicare beneficiaries with chronic pain were estimated to have received an opioid prescription in 2017 (Mikosz et al., Reference Mikosz, Zhang, Haegerich, Xu, Losby, Greenspan and Dowell2020). In particular, longer opioid prescription duration, higher doses, greater dose variability, and having multiple opioid prescribers have been implicated in increasing the risk of opioid misuse, development of OUD, and overdose (Cho et al., Reference Cho, Spence, Niu, Hui, Gray and Steinberg2020; Edlund et al., Reference Edlund, Martin, Russo, DeVries, Braden and Sullivan2014; Glanz, Binswanger, Shetterly, Narwaney, & Xu, Reference Glanz, Binswanger, Shetterly, Narwaney and Xu2019; Ozturk, Hong, McDermott, & Turk, Reference Ozturk, Hong, McDermott and Turk2021; Peirce, Smith, Abate, & Halverson, Reference Peirce, Smith, Abate and Halverson2012; Peters, Durand, Monteiro, Dumenco, & George, Reference Peters, Durand, Monteiro, Dumenco and George2018; Rose et al., Reference Rose, Bernson, Chui, Land, Walley, LaRochelle and Stopka2018; Savych, Neumark, & Lea, Reference Savych, Neumark and Lea2019; Volkow & McLellan, Reference Volkow and McLellan2016). Exposure to opioids, particularly over extended periods of time, may increase pain sensitivity, thereby making perceived pain worse, and in turn, resulting in higher opioid doses, creating a feedback loop (Angst & Clark, Reference Angst and Clark2006; Covington, Reference Covington2000; Kidner, Mayer, & Gatchel, Reference Kidner, Mayer and Gatchel2009; Mao, Price, & Mayer, Reference Mao, Price and Mayer1994; Mao, Sung, Ji, & Lim, Reference Mao, Sung, Ji and Lim2002). In addition, anxiety and depression are frequently comorbid with chronic pain (Cohen, Vase, & Hooten, Reference Cohen, Vase and Hooten2021; Fox & Reichard, Reference Fox and Reichard2013; Marshall et al., Reference Marshall, Bland, Hulla and Gatchel2019; Mills, Nicolson, & Smith, Reference Mills, Nicolson and Smith2019; Whitney, Hurvitz, & Peterson, Reference Whitney, Hurvitz and Peterson2018), which can increase the risk of taking medications that can negatively interact with opioids, such as benzodiazepines and other sedative hypnotics (Cho et al., Reference Cho, Spence, Niu, Hui, Gray and Steinberg2020; Gressler, Martin, Hudson, & Painter, Reference Gressler, Martin, Hudson and Painter2018; Rose et al., Reference Rose, Bernson, Chui, Land, Walley, LaRochelle and Stopka2018), and increase the risk of opioid misuse directly (Sullivan, Reference Sullivan2018).

Disability, which sometimes co-occurs with chronic pain (termed ‘high-impact chronic pain’) (Interagency Pain Research Coordinating Committee, 2016; Pitcher, Von Korff, Bushnell, & Porter, Reference Pitcher, Von Korff, Bushnell and Porter2019), may also be an independent risk factor for opioid misuse, OUD, and overdose. Disability rates among working-aged adults have increased over the past two decades (Choi, Schoeni, & Martin, Reference Choi, Schoeni and Martin2016; Lakdawalla, Bhattacharya, & Goldman, Reference Lakdawalla, Bhattacharya and Goldman2004; Martin, Freedman, Schoeni, & Andreski, Reference Martin, Freedman, Schoeni and Andreski2010); an estimated 30% of US adults now live with a disability (Taylor, Reference Taylor2018). However, examining disability as a risk factor for opioid misuse has received far less attention than chronic pain. Moreover, the limited literature that has examined disability as a risk factor for opioid misuse has not attempted to disentangle it from chronic pain (Hong, Geraci, Turk, Love, & McDermott, Reference Hong, Geraci, Turk, Love and McDermott2019; Reference Hong, Xie, Yadav, Tanner, Striley and Marlow2022; Lauer, Henly, & Brucker, Reference Lauer, Henly and Brucker2019; Ozturk et al., Reference Ozturk, Hong, McDermott and Turk2021; Reif et al., Reference Reif, Lauer, Adams, Brucker, Ritter and Mitra2021).

People with disabilities are a heterogeneous group, encompassing those with visual impairments, hearing and communication-related impairments, physical disabilities, intellectual disabilities, cognitive impairments, or developmental disorders, and mental disorders (Gómez-Zúñiga, Pousada, & Armayones, Reference Gómez-Zúñiga, Pousada and Armayones2023). Although vulnerabilities to opioid misuse are necessarily unique for every individual, the vulnerabilities of those within one of the above categories are likely more similar than across categories. However, most prior literature examining the relationship between disability and opioid misuse considered individuals with disabilities as a single group (Hong et al., Reference Hong, Xie, Yadav, Tanner, Striley and Marlow2022; Nicholson, Valentine, Ledingham, & Reif, Reference Nicholson, Valentine, Ledingham and Reif2022), compromising the ‘well-defined exposure’ requirement of casual inference (Hernan & Robins, Reference Hernan and Robins2023). Having a well-defined exposure is necessary for: (1) understanding and identifying causal mechanisms, (2) external validity, and (3) linking counterfactuals to real-world observed data (called ‘consistency’), which is fundamental for inferring causal relationships from observed data (Hernan & Robins, Reference Hernan and Robins2023; Pearl, Reference Pearl2018).

Consequently, in this paper, we focus on those with a likely physical disability to result in a more well-defined exposure. Musculoskeletal injuries are the most common federally compensated physical disability (Kidner et al., Reference Kidner, Mayer and Gatchel2009; Melhorn & Kennedy, Reference Melhorn, Kennedy, Schultz and Gatchel2005; Social Security Administration, 2015; Theis, Roblin, Helmick, & Luo, Reference Theis, Roblin, Helmick and Luo2018) and the most common type of work-related disability in the United States; they account for much of the increase in worker compensation claims and growth in disability insurance applications and beneficiaries since 2000 (Burkhauser & Daly, Reference Burkhauser and Daly2012; David & Duggan, Reference David and Duggan2006; Maestas, Reference Maestas2019; Social Security Administration, 2015).

Although physical disability has not been previously considered as an independent risk factor for opioid misuse, there are several reasons why it could contribute to risk. First, those with a disability have more contact with the health care system, in part due to Medicaid and Medicare access through Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI/SSI) (Ghertner, Reference Ghertner2021; King, Strumpf, & Harper, Reference King, Strumpf and Harper2016). Greater insurance access among those with disability may increase their access to a larger number of providers (Meara et al., Reference Meara, Horwitz, Powell, McClelland, Zhou, O'Malley and Morden2016), and both of these factors may, in turn, contribute to an increased likelihood of being prescribed opioids (Gebauer, Salas, Scherrer, Burge, & Schneider, Reference Gebauer, Salas, Scherrer, Burge and Schneider2019; Lauer et al., Reference Lauer, Henly and Brucker2019; Reif et al., Reference Reif, Lauer, Adams, Brucker, Ritter and Mitra2021; Stover et al., Reference Stover, Turner, Franklin, Gluck, Fulton-Kehoe, Sheppard and Egan2006), or other medications that may negatively interact with opioids (Cho et al., Reference Cho, Spence, Niu, Hui, Gray and Steinberg2020; Ford, Hinojosa, & Nicholson, Reference Ford, Hinojosa and Nicholson2018; Gressler et al., Reference Gressler, Martin, Hudson and Painter2018; Rose et al., Reference Rose, Bernson, Chui, Land, Walley, LaRochelle and Stopka2018), including for longer periods and at higher doses than those without a disability (Hong et al., Reference Hong, Geraci, Turk, Love and McDermott2019; Liaw, Kuo, Raji, & Baillargeon, Reference Liaw, Kuo, Raji and Baillargeon2020; Meara et al., Reference Meara, Horwitz, Powell, McClelland, Zhou, O'Malley and Morden2016; Morden et al., Reference Morden, Munson, Colla, Skinner, Bynum, Zhou and Meara2014; Ozturk et al., Reference Ozturk, Hong, McDermott and Turk2021; Savych et al., Reference Savych, Neumark and Lea2019). Second, individuals with a physical disability are also at higher risk of having anxiety and depression (Cree, Okoro, Zack, & Carbone, Reference Cree, Okoro, Zack and Carbone2020; Morden et al., Reference Morden, Munson, Colla, Skinner, Bynum, Zhou and Meara2014; Turner & Turner, Reference Turner and Turner2004; Whitney et al., Reference Whitney, Hurvitz and Peterson2018), which independently increase the likelihood of: (1) being prescribed opioids (Davis, Lin, Liu, & Sites, Reference Davis, Lin, Liu and Sites2017), (2) being prescribed benzodiazepines that may interact with opioids (Ford et al., Reference Ford, Hinojosa and Nicholson2018), and (3) misusing opioids (Dasgupta, Beletsky, & Ciccarone, Reference Dasgupta, Beletsky and Ciccarone2018; Krueger, Reference Krueger2017; Ledingham, Adams, Heaphy, Duarte, & Reif, Reference Ledingham, Adams, Heaphy, Duarte and Reif2022; McLean, Reference McLean2016; Monnat, Reference Monnat2018; Zoorob & Salemi, Reference Zoorob and Salemi2017). Relatedly, physical disability may create barriers to participating in work activities, worsening socioeconomic status (De Souza & Oliver Frank, Reference De Souza and Oliver Frank2011; Hughes & Avoke, Reference Hughes and Avoke2010) and social connectedness (Hughes & Avoke, Reference Hughes and Avoke2010; Wilson, Reference Wilson2011), which may, in turn, further worsen emotional well-being (Turner & Turner, Reference Turner and Turner2004; Wilson, Reference Wilson2011), and ultimately increase risk of non-medical opioid use (Dasgupta et al., Reference Dasgupta, Beletsky and Ciccarone2018; Krueger, Reference Krueger2017; McLean, Reference McLean2016; Monnat, Reference Monnat2018; Zoorob & Salemi, Reference Zoorob and Salemi2017). In terms of opioid-related outcomes, individuals with disabilities are reportedly at high risk of opioid misuse (Martin, Jin, Bertke, Yiin, & Pinkerton, Reference Martin, Jin, Bertke, Yiin and Pinkerton2020), non-fatal and fatal opioid overdose (Kuo, Raji, & Goodwin, Reference Kuo, Raji and Goodwin2019; Meara et al., Reference Meara, Horwitz, Powell, McClelland, Zhou, O'Malley and Morden2016; Peters et al., Reference Peters, Durand, Monteiro, Dumenco and George2018; Song, Reference Song2017), and developing OUD (Hong et al., Reference Hong, Xie, Yadav, Tanner, Striley and Marlow2022). Finally, even if individuals with a physical disability do not initially have co-occurring chronic pain, they could develop a chronic pain condition later if their disability worsens or initial opioid use increases pain sensitivity over time.

We estimate the independent and joint adjusted associations between having a physical disability and/or chronic pain condition at time of Medicaid enrollment and subsequent risk of incident OUD and non-fatal, unintentional opioid overdose.

Methods

Data and cohort

The study was approved by the Columbia University Institutional Review Board. We used data from the following Medicaid T-MSIS Analytic Files (TAF): Demographics, Other Services, Inpatient, and Pharmacy claims, for years 2016–2019. The study includes non-pregnant adults aged 35–64 years who were Medicaid beneficiaries enrolled 2016–2019 from the following 26 states that implemented Medicaid expansion under the Affordable Care Act in or prior to 2014: ND, VT, NH, CA, OR, MI, IA, NV, OH, IL, NY, MD, MA, RI, HI, WV, WA, KY, DE, AZ, NJ, MN, NM, CT, CO, AR (Kaiser Family Foundation, 2020). We focus on expansion states, because within these states Medicaid covers: (1) nearly all non-elderly disabled individuals during their initial 24 months receiving disability insurance (after that, individuals transition to Medicare [Rupp & Riley, Reference Rupp and Riley2012]), (2) nearly all low-income (up to 138% of the federal poverty limit), non-elderly adults under the Affordable Care Act (ACA) expansion (Kaiser Family Foundation, 2020), and (3) nearly 40% of those with OUD (Kaiser Family Foundation, 2019). We note that we used 35 as the minimum age to make our exposure groups more comparable, which we discuss further in Section S1 of the online Supplementary Materials. We subsequently excluded beneficiaries from Maryland due to unreliable diagnosis code data as determined by the Medicaid Data Quality Atlas (Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, 2023).

Cohort

Cohort enrollment began after a 6-month look-back or washout period to determine eligibility criteria. Because individuals who are disabled and receive SSDI transition to Medicare after 24 months (Rupp & Riley, Reference Rupp and Riley2012), we used a follow up period of 18 months, thereby including individuals for a maximum of 24 months (6 month washout + 18 month follow-up). A timeline of the study is shown in Fig. 1 and additional details are in Section S1 of the Supplementary Materials.

Figure 1. Study timeline for variable collection.

Figure 2 depicts the cohort exclusion/inclusion criteria. Using the above-described washout periods, we excluded those who were dual-eligible for Medicare, because Medicare would typically be the primary payer, and we did not have access to Medicare claims. Individuals who did not have an eligibility code during the washout period, or whose disability status could not be determined by their eligibility code were also excluded, as well as those with any OUD diagnosis during the washout period. In defining the rest of the exclusion criteria, we prioritized internal validity, more well-defined exposure groups, and more interpretable potential causal mechanisms. We provide rationale for each criterion in Section S1 of the Supplementary Materials. All codes used for these exclusion criteria, as well as code to implement the exclusion criteria are in a Github repository at https://github.com/CI-NYC/disability-chronic-pain.

Figure 2. Participant flow diagram for the enrollment cohort used for analyses.

Beneficiaries with incomplete study follow up, who turned 65, or who became Medicare-eligible during follow-up were censored at the point of these events.

Measures

Exposure

The exposure consisted of four mutually exclusive categories regarding health status at time of enrollment, ascertained during the 6-month washout period: (1) physical disability and co-occurring chronic pain, (2) physical disability only (without chronic pain), (3) chronic pain only, and (4) neither disability nor chronic pain. After using eligibility codes and exclusions to identify the subgroup of those with a likely physical disability, we confirmed most individuals (66%) had claims for a physically disabling condition. Another 16% did not have claims for a physically disabling condition but did have claims for a serious mental illness without psychosis, suggesting some across-category heterogeneity in our disability exposure group remained (online Supplementary Table S1, Supplementary Materials). We refer to this exposure as ‘physical disability’ throughout for brevity but note that it is more accurately defined as having a likely physical disability or serious mental illness without psychosis. However, given the prevalence of depressive, bipolar, and anxiety disorders in the adult Medicaid population (Chapel, Ritchey, Zhang, & Wang, Reference Chapel, Ritchey, Zhang and Wang2017; Han et al., Reference Han, Huang, Mitra, Hu, Pal, McClain and Kong2022; Thomas et al., Reference Thomas, Waxmonsky, Gabow, Flanders-McGinnis, Socherman and Rost2005), we chose not to exclude these individuals, because it would have resulted in exclusion of many who likely also had a physical disability. Instead, we control the mental health conditions as covariates.

Chronic pain status was identified using previously described non-cancer diagnoses (ICD-10 codes) typically associated with chronic pain (with modifications based on consultation with clinicians) (Mayhew et al., Reference Mayhew, DeBar, Deyo, Kerns, Goulet, Brandt and Von Korff2019), occurring at least two times for the same condition and at least 90 days apart during the washout period, to align with the common definition of pain lasting ≥3 months while excluding conditions potentially representing distinct acute pain diagnoses (Miller, Guy, Zhang, Mikosz, & Xu, Reference Miller, Guy, Zhang, Mikosz and Xu2019). We include more detail on the diagnoses used to define chronic pain status in Section S2 of the Supplementary Materials and in the Github repository.

Outcomes

Outcomes were ascertained in the 18 months following the washout period. The primary outcome of interest was incident OUD diagnosis, as defined by ICD-10 diagnosis codes indicating opioid abuse or dependence (Samples, Williams, Olfson, & Crystal, Reference Samples, Williams, Olfson and Crystal2018, Reference Samples, Williams, Crystal and Olfson2022). As a secondary OUD outcome, we defined OUD using the more expansive definition of Cochran et al. (Reference Cochran, Gordon, Lo-Ciganic, Gellad, Frazier, Lobo and Donohue2017), which indicates presence of any of four components: OUD ICD-10 codes; non-fatal, unintentional opioid overdose ICD-10 codes; MOUD treatment (methadone, buprenorphine, or naltrexone); or probable opioid misuse (Sullivan et al., Reference Sullivan, Edlund, Fan, DeVries, Braden and Martin2010) (a composite score summed over rolling 6-month periods, detailed in the Supplementary Materials). Another secondary outcome included incident non-fatal, unintentional opioid overdose, identified using ICD-10 codes. All relevant ICD codes and each outcome's implementation using these codes are detailed in the Github repository.

In a secondary analysis on a subset of beneficiaries without chronic pain, we also examined incident chronic pain (defined as detailed above), incident depressive and anxiety disorders using ICD codes, and opioid prescriptions for pain using NDC codes (Samples et al., Reference Samples, Williams, Olfson and Crystal2018).

Covariates

We used the washout period to characterize each beneficiary's baseline covariates: age in years, sex, race/ethnicity, English as their primary language, marriage/partnership status, household size, veteran status, income likely >133% of the Federal Poverty Level, any inpatient or outpatient diagnosis of bipolar disorder, any anxiety disorder, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), any depressive disorder, or other mental disorder (e.g. anorexia, personality disorders [Samples et al., Reference Samples, Williams, Olfson and Crystal2018]). We report missingness for each variable in online Supplementary Table S2 (Supplementary Materials).

Statistical analysis

We first computed descriptive statistics for all covariates and outcomes across the four exposure strata in the cohort. Then, we estimated adjusted associations comparing: (1) physical disability and co-occurring chronic pain, (2) physical disability only, and (3) chronic pain only v. the ‘neither’ category on each outcome of interest, adjusting for all baseline confounders and incorporating right censoring.

We estimated all adjusted analyses with collaborative targeted minimum loss-based estimation (TMLE) (Benkeser, Cai, & van der Laan, Reference Benkeser, Cai and van der Laan2020; Van der Laan et al., Reference Van der Laan and Rose2011). TMLE uses regressions for the outcome, exposure, and censoring models to produce an estimate that is robust to misspecification of at most one of these models, i.e. it is a doubly robust estimator. We used an ensemble of flexible machine learning algorithms to fit the outcome, exposure, and censoring regressions using the Superlearning algorithm with twofold cross-validation. Our candidate algorithms included generalized linear models, multivariate adaptive regression splines (MARS) (Milborrow, Reference Milborrow2011), and gradient boosting (Ke et al., Reference Ke, Meng, Finley, Wang, Chen, Ma and Liu2017). Superlearning optimally combines predictions from these candidate algorithms via weighting (van der Laan, Polley, & Hubbard, Reference van der Laan, Polley and Hubbard2007).

Sensitivity analyses

We implemented several sensitivity analyses. We first used a 12-month washout period followed by a 12-month follow-up period. This sensitivity analysis may more completely capture the exposure categories by using more time to detect disability, chronic pain, and their co-occurrence. For example, chronic pain was defined as at least two diagnosis codes for pain in the same anatomical location, at least 90 days but less than 12 months apart. In the second sensitivity analysis, instead of considering chronic pain, we considered any pain during the initial 6 month washout period.

In another exploratory secondary analysis, we examined potential risk factors contributing to the increased OUD and overdose risk for individuals with physical disability alone. We estimated associations between having physical disability alone v. neither on the following incident outcomes: chronic pain, any depressive disorder, any anxiety disorder, and any opioid prescription for pain (see Section S3 in the Supplementary Materials).

Finally, we performed a negative control outcome analysis to detect possible bias, and did not find any evidence of such bias (see Section S4 in the Supplementary Materials).

Code for all data cleaning and statistical analyses is available at https://github.com/CI-NYC/disability-chronic-pain.

Results

The cohort contained N = 2 441 252 beneficiaries (Fig. 2, Table 1). Overall, these beneficiaries were 49% female-identifying, 51% male-identifying, and 49% reported their race as white, non-Hispanic. The exposure groups included n = 6736 beneficiaries with both physical disability and chronic pain, n = 77 834 with chronic pain only, n = 51 015 with physical disability only, and n = 2 305 667 with neither condition. These groups had notably different characteristics observed during both baseline and study duration (Table 1). For example, compared to beneficiaries with chronic pain and/or physical disability, beneficiaries with neither condition were younger (median: 47, interquartile range [IQR] 40–54), with higher rates of non-white, non-Hispanic races reported (51%). In contrast, beneficiaries with both chronic pain and physical disability were oldest (median: 55, IQR 50–59) and had higher proportions of females (60%) and individuals of white, non-Hispanic race (60%). They had the highest rates of mental disorder diagnoses and were more likely to receive a prescription for antidepressants (40%), benzodiazepines (28%), anti-psychotics (12%), mood stabilizers (35%), stimulants (1.7%), and opioids for pain (66%) during the washout period than those with one or neither physical disability nor chronic pain condition.

Table 1. Analytical cohort characteristics stratified by physical disability and chronic pain status

All descriptive statistics are median (interquartile range, IQR) for continuous measures, and n (%) for categorical measures.

a Median (interquartile range [IQR]); n (%).

b AIAN = American Indian and Alaska Native.

c TANF = temporary assistance for needy families.

d SSI = supplemental security income.

e ADD/ADHD = attention deficit (hyperactivity) disorder.

f OUD = opioid use disorder.

g ICD = International classification of diseases.

h Among beneficiaries with any opioid prescriptions.

i Defined as any abuse or non-fatal overdose diagnosis code, or probable misuse, or medication for OUD treatment.

* Suppressed due to small cell size.

Adjusted analyses

After adjusting for baseline confounders and right-censoring, an estimated 11.13% (95% confidence interval [CI] 9.85–12.41%) of individuals with physical disability and chronic pain had an incident OUD diagnosis within 18 calendar months (Fig. 3). The estimated adjusted incident risk of OUD was 3.64% (95% CI 3.43–3.85%) and 2.89% (95% CI 2.66–3.13%) for individuals with chronic pain only or physical disability only, respectively. The estimated incidence was lowest for individuals with neither physical disability nor chronic pain: 1.78% (95% CI 1.76–1.80). The adjusted incidence rates for OUD using the composite criteria were similar (Fig. 3).

Figure 3. Panel A: Estimated adjusted incidences and 95% CIs of each outcome if the entire cohort were to have each of the four chronic pain and physical disability exposure status. Panel B: Adjusted incidence differences and 95% CIs for disability and chronic pain exposure statuses contrasted with the ‘neither’ exposure status. Panel C: Adjusted incidence differences 95% CIs for an exposure status of physical disability and chronic pain compared to (1) pain only and (2) disability only.

Adjusted incidence rates of non-fatal, unintentional opioid overdose were smaller, but followed a similar pattern as above. An estimated 0.40% (95% CI 0.00–0.80%) of individuals with physical disability and chronic pain at study entry had an incident opioid overdose within 18 calendar months (Fig. 3). The incidence rates were the same for the chronic pain only and disability only groups, 0.14% (95% CI 0.09–0.19%) and 0.14% (95% CI 0.08–0.20%), respectively. Again, the estimated incidence was lowest for individuals with neither physical disability nor chronic pain: 0.05% (95% CI 0.05–0.06%).

We then estimated the average risk differences of incident OUD and incident non-fatal, unintentional opioid overdose comparing those with (1) co-occurring chronic pain and physical disability, (2) physical disability alone, and (3) chronic pain alone to the neither exposure group. All risk differences and their 95% CIs are shown in Fig. 3. Risk ratios, reflecting associations on the multiplicative scale are given in Table 2.

Table 2. Estimated risk ratios of each disability and chronic pain exposure group compared to the ‘neither’ disability nor pain exposure group, for the primary and secondary outcomes

a CI, confidence interval.

b OUD, opioid use disorder.

c ICD, International Classification of Diseases.

d Defined as any abuse or non-fatal overdose diagnosis code, or probable misuse, or medication for OUD treatment.

For OUD, co-occurring physical disability and chronic pain conferred a 9.35 percentage point (95% CI 8.07–10.63) increased additive risk as compared to neither, which translated to a 625% relative risk (RR = 6.25). Having a chronic pain disorder alone conferred a 1.86 percentage point (95% CI 1.65–2.07) increased risk, and having a physical disability alone conferred a 1.11 percentage point (95% CI 0.88–1.35) increased risk. There were also significant joint effects of co-occurring physical disability and chronic pain on incident OUD in comparison to disability only (8.24 percentage points; 95% CI 6.94–9.54) and chronic pain only (7.49 percentage points; 95% CI 6.19–8.79). The same pattern was seen for the secondary, composite OUD definition.

For non-fatal, unintentional opioid overdose events, co-occurring physical disability and pain conferred a 0.35 percentage point (95% CI −0.05 to 0.75) increased additive risk compared to neither, which translated into a 757% relative risk (RR = 7.57). Having physical disability alone or chronic pain alone conferred identical increased additive risk as compared to neither, with risk differences (RD) of 0.08 (95% CI 0.03–0.14). There were also positive joint effects of co-occurring physical disability and pain on incident opioid overdose in comparison to either physical disability only or chronic pain only; however, confidence intervals were wide (RD: 0.26; 95% CI −0.14 to 0.67; and 0.26; 95% CI −0.14 to 0.66).

Sensitivity analyses

Online Supplementary Fig. S1 (Supplementary Materials) presents adjusted incidence risk estimates and incident risk differences for the sensitivity analysis considering a 12-month washout. Although incidence rates were lower, as expected given the 50% shorter follow-up time, results resembled the primary analysis. The main difference between this and the primary analysis was that the confidence intervals for the co-occurring physical disability and chronic pain and physical disability alone exposure groups were wide in the case of the overdose outcome, crossing the null.

Online Supplementary Fig. S2 (Supplementary Materials) presents adjusted incidence risk estimates and incident risk differences for the sensitivity analysis including any pain ICD code (i.e. not restricted to chronic pain). Again, results were generally similar as for the primary analysis. The main difference between this and the primary analysis was that physical disability alone conferred greater risk than pain alone.

Finally, in an exploratory, secondary analysis, we estimated the adjusted associations between having a physical disability alone and variables that may be mediators of the relationship between physical disability and the outcomes of OUD and opioid overdose. There were positive associations between physical disability and incident chronic pain (RD: 9.65 percentage points, 95% CI 8.44–10.87), incident anxiety disorder (6.78 percentage points, 95% CI 2.90–10.67), incident depressive disorder (6.67, 95% CI 4.33–9.01), and a new opioid prescription for pain (6.92, 95% CI [2.12–11.72]) (online Supplementary Table S3).

Discussion

Our findings from a large cohort of over 2.4 million Medicaid beneficiaries provide some of the first compelling evidence that those with physical disabilities are at increased risk of opioid misuse – even if they do not have co-occurring pain or chronic pain. Having a physical disability significantly increased risk of incident OUD and unintentional opioid overdose – physical disability without chronic pain approximately doubled the risks and physical disability with chronic pain increased the risks approximately sixfold. Those with physical disability and co-occurring chronic pain had 11.1% risk of developing incident OUD over 18 months of follow-up, and those with physical disability without chronic pain had 2.9% risk (as compared to 1.8% risk in the neither group). Those with physical disability and co-occurring chronic pain had 0.4% risk of incident opioid overdose over 18 months of follow-up, and those with physical disability without chronic pain had 0.14% risk (as compared to 0.05% risk in the neither group). Our findings were robust to multiple sensitivity analyses.

It is difficult to put our adjusted incidence rate estimates into context due to a lack of incidence rate estimates in the literature. Prevalence estimates of OUD among individuals aged 12 and older in the United States range from 0.62% to 4.08% (Barocas et al., Reference Barocas, White, Wang, Walley, LaRochelle, Bernson and Linas2018; Keyes et al., Reference Keyes, Rutherford, Hamilton, Barocas, Gelberg, Mueller and Cerdá2022; Substance Abuse & Mental Health Services Administration, 2021). Assuming an average duration of 10–20 years for OUD (Hser, Huang, Chou, & Anglin, Reference Hser, Huang, Chou and Anglin2007; Strang et al., Reference Strang, Volkow, Degenhardt, Hickman, Johnson, Koob and Walsh2020), this would translate to incidence rates over 18 months of 0.05–0.61%. The incidence rates we estimate here are significantly higher, even in neither group. This could be in part due to: (1) our focus on adults 35–64 years as opposed to all individuals ≥12 years and (2) our focus on the Medicaid population, which is a population at much higher risk of OUD – Medicaid covers approximately 40% of those with OUD (Kaiser Family Foundation, 2019) despite covering only 10% of US adults (Center for Medicaid & CHIP Services, 2023).

A natural question is that if there is a unique contribution of physical disability to the development of OUD and opioid overdose, separate from pain or chronic pain, what could the contributing mechanisms be? A confluence of mechanisms related to limited social connectedness, loneliness, mental health, more precarious economic conditions, increased access to health insurance but reduced access to behavioral health and substance use treatment services (as compared to those without a disability) could contribute. First, disability of all types, including physical disability, has been found to be associated with substantially constricted social networks, decreased social connectedness, and increased social isolation (Emerson, Fortune, Llewellyn, & Stancliffe, Reference Emerson, Fortune, Llewellyn and Stancliffe2021a; Gómez-Zúñiga et al., Reference Gómez-Zúñiga, Pousada and Armayones2023; Krahn, Walker, & Correa-De-Araujo, Reference Krahn, Walker and Correa-De-Araujo2015; Macdonald et al., Reference Macdonald, Deacon, Nixon, Akintola, Gillingham, Kent and Highmore2018; Mithen, Aitken, Ziersch, & Kavanagh, Reference Mithen, Aitken, Ziersch and Kavanagh2015). Those with a disability, including a physical disability, are much less likely to live with a partner, less likely to have daily contact with family and friends, less likely to be employed, and less likely to participate in activities outside the home, resulting in many more hours spent alone than people without a disability (Gómez-Zúñiga et al., Reference Gómez-Zúñiga, Pousada and Armayones2023; Krahn et al., Reference Krahn, Walker and Correa-De-Araujo2015; Macdonald et al., Reference Macdonald, Deacon, Nixon, Akintola, Gillingham, Kent and Highmore2018; Mithen et al., Reference Mithen, Aitken, Ziersch and Kavanagh2015). Likely due, at least in part, to reduced social connectedness, those with disabilities experience substantially greater feelings of loneliness (Emerson et al., Reference Emerson, Fortune, Llewellyn and Stancliffe2021a, Reference Emerson, Stancliffe, Fortune and Llewellyn2021b; Gómez-Zúñiga et al., Reference Gómez-Zúñiga, Pousada and Armayones2023; Macdonald et al., Reference Macdonald, Deacon, Nixon, Akintola, Gillingham, Kent and Highmore2018); worse confidence, self-esteem, overall well-being (Emerson et al., Reference Emerson, Fortune, Llewellyn and Stancliffe2021a; Reference Emerson, Stancliffe, Fortune and Llewellyn2021b; Gómez-Zúñiga et al., Reference Gómez-Zúñiga, Pousada and Armayones2023; Turner & Turner, Reference Turner and Turner2004; Wilson, Reference Wilson2011); and increased risks of depression and anxiety (Morden et al., Reference Morden, Munson, Colla, Skinner, Bynum, Zhou and Meara2014; Whitney et al., Reference Whitney, Hurvitz and Peterson2018), consistent with our findings (online Supplementary Table S3). Loneliness, depression, anxiety, and worse emotional health in general, may all increase risk of substance misuse, including opioid misuse in particular (Cance et al., Reference Cance, Saavedra, Wondimu, Scaglione, Hairgrove and Graham2021; Dasgupta et al., Reference Dasgupta, Beletsky and Ciccarone2018; Krueger, Reference Krueger2017; Ledingham et al., Reference Ledingham, Adams, Heaphy, Duarte and Reif2022; McLean, Reference McLean2016; Monnat, Reference Monnat2018; Segrin, McNelis, & Pavlich, Reference Segrin, McNelis and Pavlich2018; Zoorob & Salemi, Reference Zoorob and Salemi2017). A second, albeit related pathway, may operate through financial stress, though we note that all individuals included in this analysis likely were ≤ 133% FPL. However, people with physical disabilities are less likely to be employed (indeed, the primary way that people with disabilities access Medicaid coverage is through SSDI/SSI, which requires that their disability prevents them from working). Labor force exits usually reduce income and socioeconomic status in general, increasing economic stress (De Souza & Oliver Frank, Reference De Souza and Oliver Frank2011; Hughes & Avoke, Reference Hughes and Avoke2010; Wilson, Reference Wilson2011), which then increases risk of depression, anxiety, and substance misuse, including the misuse of opioids (Dasgupta et al., Reference Dasgupta, Beletsky and Ciccarone2018; Krueger, Reference Krueger2017; McLean, Reference McLean2016; Monnat, Reference Monnat2018; Zoorob & Salemi, Reference Zoorob and Salemi2017). Third, in the United States, people with disabilities that qualify for SSDI/SSI are enrolled in Medicaid for the initial 24 months of SSDI/SSI receipt. This population's insured status could, as an unintended consequence, increase access to prescribed opioids, though again, we note that all individuals in this analysis were insured. Finally, focusing on further downstream mechanisms, having a physical disability may create practical barriers to behavioral health and substance use treatment, including treatment for OUD that could increase duration of OUD and risk of overdose (Glazier & Kling, Reference Glazier and Kling2013). For example, methadone treatment requires daily or near-daily visits that may be difficult for those with disabilities to access. And nearly all treatment programs offering pharmacotherapy have visit requirements and abstinence requirements that may be prohibitive for someone with a physical disability (Jakubowski & Fox, Reference Jakubowski and Fox2020; Kourounis et al., Reference Kourounis, Richards, Kyprianou, Symeonidou, Malliori and Samartzis2016; West, Graham, & Cifu, Reference West, Graham and Cifu2009). Indeed, a growing body of research finds that people with disabilities are less likely to receive and continue pharmacotherapy for OUD (Lauer et al., Reference Lauer, Henly and Brucker2019; Thomas et al., Reference Thomas, Stewart, Ledingham, Adams, Panas and Reif2023). The most rigorous way to estimate the contribution of each of these mechanisms is by doing a causal mediation analysis, which we are currently pursuing as a subject of future work.

Although this analysis provides robust evidence of the unique risk conferred by having a physical disability to opioid misuse as measured by the development of OUD and overdose, it is limited in several aspects. First, measurement error is likely, though we took several steps to mitigate its impact. We restricted our analysis to 2016–2019, which allowed us to use only TAF files only ICD-10 codes instead of a mix of ICD-9 and ICD-10 (Yang et al., Reference Yang, Pasalic, Rock, Davis, Nechuta and Zhang2021) and avoid measurement errors and idiosyncrasies introduced by the COVID-19 pandemic. We may expect our effect estimates to be even more pronounced after the start of the COVID-19 pandemic. This is because during this period: (1) Congress required Medicaid beneficiaries to be continuously enrolled (as part of the Families First Coronavirus Response Act), which would reduce the extent of censoring, (2) rates of opioid overdose increased (Ahmad, Rossen, & Sutton, Reference Ahmad, Rossen and Sutton2021), (3) rates of chronic pain increased (in part due to long COVID) (Shanthanna, Nelson, Kissoon, & Narouze, Reference Shanthanna, Nelson, Kissoon and Narouze2022), and (4) rates of physical disability increased, also likely in part due to long COVID (Roberts, Ives-Rublee, & Khattar, Reference Roberts, Ives-Rublee and Khattar2022).There are other measurement error concerns with other state-variable combinations, though mostly having to do with missingness, and none which rose to the level justifying their exclusion (Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, 2023).

Another limitation was that our ‘physical disability’ exposure groups were imperfect in that we used eligibility codes to determine probable disability and specific disability types. Ideally, we would be able to link SSDI/SSI approvals with Medicaid claims to identify which beneficiaries received Medicaid through disability insurance and their qualifying disability. However, such linkages were infeasible. Alternatively, we could have used the SSDI receipt variable from the TAF demographics file to determine any SSDI disability, but that variable had high levels of missingness (Table 1). Consequently, our use of eligibility codes combined with exclusion criteria was designed to identify a more well-defined exposure group comprised mostly of those with probable physical disability. Nonetheless, our group of beneficiaries with likely physical disability was still heterogeneous (online Supplementary Table S1), and beneficiaries with disabilities may have an eligibility codes that do not indicate disability. Analogously, our ‘chronic pain’ exposure groups were also imperfect in that we use diagnosis codes for conditions typically associated with chronic pain, which may miss individuals with chronic pain arising from other conditions as well as individuals who do not have ≥2 claims for their chronic pain condition. In addition, it is plausible that some individuals with such conditions do not have chronic pain. Such mismeasurement means our estimates may be conservative.

Our analysis also benefited from several strengths. First, we analyzed an extremely large cohort of over 2.4 million beneficiaries, which mitigates finite sample bias and also improves the generalizability of our results to the non-elderly, non-pregnant, non-institutionalized Medicaid population in the states that enacted Medicaid expansion. Second, we used a doubly robust, data-adaptive estimator to flexibly adjust for possible confounding variables and non-random right-censoring without relying on correct parametric model specification (Benkeser et al., Reference Benkeser, Cai and van der Laan2020; Van der Laan et al., Reference Van der Laan and Rose2011). Third, we conducted several sensitivity analyses to assess the extent to which our findings were robust to certain judgements in the analytic process and found that our inferences were maintained.

Lastly, as stated above, our work disentangled and quantified the independent and joint contributions of (1) physical disability and (2) chronic pain on incident risk of OUD and opioid overdose. In addition, we sought to reduce heterogeneity in defining our group of beneficiaries with physical disability – a majority of those in this exposure group had a physical disability, and 16% had disability likely due to a serious mental illness. We found robust evidence that individuals with a likely physical disability are at high risk of developing OUD and of opioid overdose – even beneficiaries with no chronic pain were at 174% higher risk of developing OUD (95% CI 162–187%) and 214% of overdose (95% CI 203–225%) over 18 months if they had a physical disability. These findings suggest that those with a physical disability should receive increased focus from the medical and healthcare communities to reduce their risk of opioid misuse and attendant negative outcomes. Future work could examine the mechanisms by which this increased risk is conferred and identify possible points of intervention.

Supplementary material

The supplementary material for this article can be found at https://doi.org/10.1017/S003329172300332X

Funding statement

This work was supported by the National Institute on Drug Abuse (grant number R01DA053243). The authors assert that all procedures contributing to this work comply with the ethical standards of the relevant national and institutional committees on human experimentation and with the Helsinki Declaration of 1975, as revised in 2008.

Competing interests

None.

References

Ahmad, F. B., Rossen, L. M., & Sutton, P. (2021). Provisional drug overdose death counts. National Center for Health Statistics. Accessed: 21 July 2023.Google Scholar
Angst, M. S., & Clark, J. D. (2006). Opioid-induced hyperalgesia: A qualitative systematic review. The Journal of the American Society of Anesthesiologists, 104(3), 570587.Google ScholarPubMed
Barocas, J. A., White, L. F., Wang, J., Walley, A. Y., LaRochelle, M. R., Bernson, D., … Linas, B. P. (2018). Estimated prevalence of opioid use disorder in Massachusetts, 2011–2015: A capture–recapture analysis. American Journal of Public Health, 108(12), 16751681.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Benkeser, D., Cai, W., & van der Laan, M. J. (2020). A nonparametric super-efficient estimator of the average treatment effect. Statistical Science, 35(3), 484495.Google Scholar
Burkhauser, R. V., & Daly, M. C. (2012). Social security disability insurance: Time for fundamental change. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 31(2), 454461.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cance, J. D., Saavedra, L. M., Wondimu, B., Scaglione, N. M., Hairgrove, S., & Graham, P. W. (2021). Examining the relationship between social connection and opioid misuse: A systematic review. Substance Use & Misuse, 56(10), 14931507.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Case, A., Deaton, A., & Stone, A. A. (2020). Decoding the mystery of American pain reveals a warning for the future. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 117(40), 2478524789.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Center for Medicaid and CHIP Services. (2023). February 2023 Medicaid and CHIP enrollment trends snapshot. https://www.medicaid.gov/medicaid/national-medicaid-chip-program-information/downloads/february-2023-medicaid-chip-enrollment-trend-snapshot.pdf. Accessed 22 June 2023.Google Scholar
Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. (2020). Ongoing emergencies & disasters. https://www.cms.gov/About-CMS/Agency-Information/Emergency/EPRO/Current-Emergencies/Ongoing-emergencies. Accessed 11 July 2020.Google Scholar
Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. (2023). Medicaid data quality atlas. https://www.medicaid.gov/dq-atlas/welcome. Accessed: 10 November 2022.Google Scholar
Cerdá, M., Krawczyk, N., Hamilton, L., Rudolph, K. E., Friedman, S. R., & Keyes, K. M. (2021). A critical review of the social and behavioral contributions to the overdose epidemic. Annual Review of Public Health, 42, 95114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chapel, J. M., Ritchey, M. D., Zhang, D., & Wang, G. (2017). Prevalence and medical costs of chronic diseases among adult Medicaid beneficiaries. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 53(6), S143S154.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cho, J., Spence, M. M., Niu, F., Hui, R. L., Gray, P., & Steinberg, S. (2020). Risk of overdose with exposure to prescription opioids, benzodiazepines, and non-benzodiazepine sedative-hypnotics in adults: A retrospective cohort study. Journal of General Internal Medicine, 35, 696703.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Choi, H., Schoeni, R. F., & Martin, L. G. (2016). Are functional and activity limitations becoming more prevalent among 55 to 69-year-olds in the United States? PloS One, 11(10), e0164565.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cochran, G., Gordon, A. J., Lo-Ciganic, W.-H., Gellad, W. F., Frazier, W., Lobo, C., … Donohue, J. M. (2017). An examination of claims-based predictors of overdose from a large Medicaid program. Medical Care, 55(3), 291.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cohen, S. P., Vase, L., & Hooten, W. M. (2021). Chronic pain: An update on burden, best practices, and new advances. The Lancet, 397(10289), 20822097.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Covington, E. C. (2000). Opiophobia, opiophilia, opioagnosia. Pain Medicine, 1(3), 217223.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cree, R. A., Okoro, C. A., Zack, M. M., & Carbone, E. (2020). Frequent mental distress among adults, by disability status, disability type, and selected characteristics – United States, 2018. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, 69(36), 1238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dasgupta, N., Beletsky, L., & Ciccarone, D. (2018). Opioid crisis: No easy fix to its social and economic determinants. American Journal of Public Health, 108(2), 182186.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
David, H., & Duggan, M. G. (2006). The growth in the social security disability rolls: A fiscal crisis unfolding. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 20(3), 7196.Google Scholar
Davis, M. A., Lin, L. A., Liu, H., & Sites, B. D. (2017). Prescription opioid use among adults with mental health disorders in the United States. The Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine, 30(4), 407417.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Degenhardt, L., Bucello, C., Mathers, B., Briegleb, C., Ali, H., Hickman, M., & McLaren, J. (2011). Mortality among regular or dependent users of heroin and other opioids: A systematic review and meta-analysis of cohort studies. Addiction, 106(1), 3251.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
De Souza, L., & Oliver Frank, A. (2011). Patients’ experiences of the impact of chronic back pain on family life and work. Disability and Rehabilitation, 33(4), 310318.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dunn, K. M., Saunders, K. W., Rutter, C. M., Banta-Green, C. J., Merrill, J. O., Sullivan, M. D., … Von Korff, M. (2010). Opioid prescriptions for chronic pain and overdose: A cohort study. Annals of Internal Medicine, 152(2), 8592.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Edlund, M. J., Martin, B. C., Russo, J. E., DeVries, A., Braden, J. B., & Sullivan, M. D. (2014). The role of opioid prescription in incident opioid abuse and dependence among individuals with chronic non-cancer pain: The role of opioid prescription. The Clinical Journal of Pain, 30(7), 557.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Emerson, E., Fortune, N., Llewellyn, G., & Stancliffe, R. (2021a). Loneliness, social support, social isolation and wellbeing among working age adults with and without disability: Cross-sectional study. Disability and Health Journal, 14(1), 100965.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Emerson, E., Stancliffe, R., Fortune, N., & Llewellyn, G. (2021b). Disability, loneliness and health in the UK: Cross-sectional survey. European Journal of Public Health, 31(3), 533538.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fishbain, D. A., Cole, B., Lewis, J., Rosomoff, H. L., & Rosomoff, R. S. (2008). What percentage of chronic nonmalignant pain patients exposed to chronic opioid analgesic therapy develop abuse/addiction and/or aberrant drug-related behaviors? A structured evidence-based review. Pain Medicine, 9(4), 444459.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ford, J. A., Hinojosa, M. S., & Nicholson, H. L. (2018). Disability status and prescription drug misuse among us adults. Addictive Behaviors, 85, 6469.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fox, M. H., & Reichard, A. (2013). Disability, health, and multiple chronic conditions among people eligible for both Medicare and Medicaid, 2005–2010. Preventing Chronic Disease, 10, E157.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gebauer, S., Salas, J., Scherrer, J. F., Burge, S., Schneider, F. D., & Residency Research Network of Texas (RRNeT) Investigators. (2019). Disability benefits and change in prescription opioid dose. Population Health Management, 22(6), 503510.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ghertner, R. (2021). Receipt of disability benefits and prescription opioid prevalence. Journal of General Internal Medicine, 36(2), 557558.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Glanz, J. M., Binswanger, I. A., Shetterly, S. M., Narwaney, K. J., & Xu, S. (2019). Association between opioid dose variability and opioid overdose among adults prescribed long-term opioid therapy. JAMA Network Open, 2(4), e192613e192613.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Glazier, R. E., & Kling, R. N. (2013). Recent trends in substance abuse among persons with disabilities compared to that of persons without disabilities. Disability and Health Journal, 6(2), 107115.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gómez-Zúñiga, B., Pousada, M., & Armayones, M. (2023). Loneliness and disability: A systematic review of loneliness conceptualization and intervention strategies. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, 1040651.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gressler, L. E., Martin, B. C., Hudson, T. J., & Painter, J. T. (2018). Relationship between concomitant benzodiazepine-opioid use and adverse outcomes among us veterans. Pain, 159(3), 451459.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Han, Y., Huang, H., Mitra, R., Hu, H., Pal, S., McClain, C., … Kong, M. (2022). Prevalence and treatment utilization of patients diagnosed with depression and anxiety disorders based on Kentucky Medicaid 2012–2019 datasets. Journal of Depression and Anxiety, 11, 459.Google ScholarPubMed
Hernan, M. A., & Robins, J. M. (2023). Causal inference: What if. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.Google Scholar
Hong, Y., Geraci, M., Turk, M. A., Love, B. L., & McDermott, S. W. (2019). Opioid prescription patterns for adults with longstanding disability and inflammatory conditions compared to other users, using a nationally representative sample. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 100(1), 8694.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hong, Y.-R., Xie, Z., Yadav, S., Tanner, R., Striley, C., & Marlow, N. M. (2022). Opioid use behaviors among people with disability in the United States: An analysis of the national survey on drug use and health. Journal of Addiction Medicine, 17(1), e27e35.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hser, Y.-I., Huang, D., Chou, C.-P., & Anglin, M. D. (2007). Trajectories of heroin addiction: Growth mixture modeling results based on a 33-year follow-up study. Evaluation Review, 31(6), 548563.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hser, Y.-I., Mooney, L. J., Saxon, A. J., Miotto, K., Bell, D. S., Zhu, Y., … Huang, D. (2017). High mortality among patients with opioid use disorder in a large healthcare system. Journal of Addiction Medicine, 11(4), 315.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hughes, C., & Avoke, S. K. (2010). The elephant in the room: Poverty, disability, and employment. Research and Practice for Persons with Severe Disabilities, 35(1–2), 514.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Interagency Pain Research Coordinating Committee. (2016). National pain strategy: A comprehensive population health-level strategy for pain. Technical report. Accessed: 05 July 2020.Google Scholar
Jakubowski, A., & Fox, A. (2020). Defining low-threshold buprenorphine treatment. Journal of Addiction Medicine, 14(2), 9598.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kaiser Family Foundation. (2019). Medicaid's role in addressing the opioid epidemic. https://www.kff.org/infographic/medicaids-role-in-addressing-opioid-epidemic/Google Scholar
Kaiser Family Foundation. (2020). Status of state Medicaid expansion decisions: Interactive map. https://www.kff.org/medicaid/issue-brief/status-of-state-medicaid-expansion-decisions-interactive-map/Google Scholar
Ke, G., Meng, Q., Finley, T., Wang, T., Chen, W., Ma, W., … Liu, T.-Y. (2017). Lightgbm: A highly efficient gradient boosting decision tree. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 30, 31463154.Google Scholar
Keyes, K. M., Rutherford, C., Hamilton, A., Barocas, J. A., Gelberg, K. H., Mueller, P. P., … Cerdá, M. (2022). What is the prevalence of and trend in opioid use disorder in the United States from 2010 to 2019? Using multiplier approaches to estimate prevalence for an unknown population size. Drug and Alcohol Dependence Reports, 3, 100052.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kidner, C. L., Mayer, T. G., & Gatchel, R. J. (2009). Higher opioid doses predict poorer functional outcome in patients with chronic disabling occupational musculoskeletal disorders. The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery. American volume, 91(4), 919927.Google ScholarPubMed
King, N. B., Strumpf, E., & Harper, S. (2016). Has the increase in disability insurance participation contributed to increased opioid-related mortality? Annals of Internal Medicine, 165(10), 729730.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kourounis, G., Richards, B. D. W., Kyprianou, E., Symeonidou, E., Malliori, M.-M., & Samartzis, L. (2016). Opioid substitution therapy: Lowering the treatment thresholds. Drug and Alcohol Dependence, 161, 18.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Krahn, G. L., Walker, D. K., & Correa-De-Araujo, R. (2015). Persons with disabilities as an unrecognized health disparity population. American Journal of Public Health, 105(S2), S198S206.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Krueger, A. B. (2017). Where have all the workers gone? An inquiry into the decline of the us labor force participation rate. Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, 2017(2), 1.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kuo, Y.-F., Raji, M. A., & Goodwin, J. S. (2019). Association of disability with mortality from opioid overdose among US Medicare adults. JAMA Network Open, 2(11), e1915638.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lakdawalla, D. N., Bhattacharya, J., & Goldman, D. P. (2004). Are the young becoming more disabled? Health Affairs, 23(1), 168176.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lauer, E. A., Henly, M., & Brucker, D. L. (2019). Prescription opioid behaviors among adults with and without disabilities–United States, 2015–2016. Disability and Health Journal, 12(3), 519522.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ledingham, E., Adams, R. S., Heaphy, D., Duarte, A., & Reif, S. (2022). Perspectives of adults with disabilities and opioid misuse: Qualitative findings illuminating experiences with stigma and substance use treatment. Disability and Health Journal, 15(2), 101292.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Liaw, V., Kuo, Y.-F., Raji, M. A., & Baillargeon, J. (2020). Opioid prescribing among adults with disabilities in the United States after the 2014 federal hydrocodone rescheduling regulation. Public Health Reports, 135(1), 114123.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Macdonald, S. J., Deacon, L., Nixon, J., Akintola, A., Gillingham, A., Kent, J., … Highmore, L. (2018). ‘The invisible enemy’: Disability, loneliness and isolation. Disability & Society, 33(7), 11381159.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maestas, N. (2019). Identifying work capacity and promoting work: A strategy for modernizing the SSDI program. The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 686(1), 93120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maestas, N., Sherry, T. B., & Strand, A. (2021). Opioid use among social security disability insurance applicants, 2013–2018. Journal of Disability Policy Studies, 10442073221150613.Google Scholar
Mao, J., Price, D. D., & Mayer, D. J. (1994). Thermal hyperalgesia in association with the development of morphine tolerance in rats: Roles of excitatory amino acid receptors and protein kinase C. Journal of Neuroscience, 14(4), 23012312.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mao, J., Sung, B., Ji, R.-R., & Lim, G. (2002). Chronic morphine induces downregulation of spinal glutamate transporters: Implications in morphine tolerance and abnormal pain sensitivity. Journal of Neuroscience, 22(18), 83128323.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Marshall, B., Bland, M. K., Hulla, R., & Gatchel, R. J. (2019). Considerations in addressing the opioid epidemic and chronic pain within the USA. Pain Management, 9(2), 131138.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Martin, C. J., Jin, C., Bertke, S. J., Yiin, J. H., & Pinkerton, L. E. (2020). Increased overall and cause-specific mortality associated with disability among workers’ compensation claimants with low back injuries. American Journal of Industrial Medicine, 63(3), 209217.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Martin, L. G., Freedman, V. A., Schoeni, R. F., & Andreski, P. M. (2010). Trends in disability and related chronic conditions among people ages fifty to sixty-four. Health Affairs, 29(4), 725731.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mayhew, M., DeBar, L. L., Deyo, R. A., Kerns, R. D., Goulet, J. L., Brandt, C. A., & Von Korff, M. (2019). Development and assessment of a crosswalk between ICD-9-cm and ICD-10-cm to identify patients with common pain conditions. The Journal of Pain, 20(12), 14291445.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McLean, K. (2016). “There's nothing here”: Deindustrialization as risk environment for overdose. International Journal of Drug Policy, 29, 1926.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Meara, E., Horwitz, J. R., Powell, W., McClelland, L., Zhou, W., O'Malley, A. J., & Morden, N. E. (2016). State legal restrictions and prescription-opioid use among disabled adults. New England Journal of Medicine, 375(1), 4453.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Melhorn, J. M., & Kennedy, E. M. (2005). Musculoskeletal disorders, disability, and return-to-work (repetitive strain) the quest for objectivity. In Schultz, I.Z. & Gatchel, R.J. (Eds.), Handbook of complex occupational disability claims: Early risk identification, intervention, and prevention (pp. 231254). Boston, MA: Springer.Google Scholar
Mikosz, C. A., Zhang, K., Haegerich, T., Xu, L., Losby, J. L., Greenspan, A., … Dowell, D. (2020). Indication-specific opioid prescribing for US patients with Medicaid or private insurance, 2017. JAMA Network Open, 3(5), e204514.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Milborrow, S. (2011). Earth: multivariate adaptive regression splines. Derived from MDA:MARS by T. Hastie and R. Tibshirani. R package.Google Scholar
Miller, G. F., Guy, G. P. Jr, Zhang, K., Mikosz, C. A., & Xu, L. (2019). Prevalence of nonopioid and opioid prescriptions among commercially insured patients with chronic pain. Pain Medicine, 20(10), 19481954.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mills, S. E., Nicolson, K. P., & Smith, B. H. (2019). Chronic pain: A review of its epidemiology and associated factors in population-based studies. British Journal of Anaesthesia, 123(2), e273e283.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mithen, J., Aitken, Z., Ziersch, A., & Kavanagh, A. M. (2015). Inequalities in social capital and health between people with and without disabilities. Social Science & Medicine, 126, 2635.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Monnat, S. M. (2018). Factors associated with county-level differences in US drug-related mortality rates. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 54(5), 611619.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Morden, N. E., Munson, J. C., Colla, C. H., Skinner, J. S., Bynum, J. P., Zhou, W., … Meara, E. R. (2014). Prescription opioid use among disabled Medicare beneficiaries: Intensity, trends and regional variation. Medical Care, 52(9), 852859.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
National Institute on Drug Abuse. (2023). Drug overdose death rates. Trends and statistics. https://nida.nih.gov/research-topics/trends-statistics/overdose-death-rates. Accessed: 10 July 2023.Google Scholar
Nicholson, J., Valentine, A., Ledingham, E., & Reif, S. (2022). Peer support at the intersection of disability and opioid (mis) use: Key stakeholders provide essential considerations. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 19(15), 9664.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Orhurhu, V., Olusunmade, M., Urits, I., Viswanath, O., Peck, J., Orhurhu, M. S., … Jatinder, G. (2019). Trends of opioid use disorder among hospitalized patients with chronic pain. Pain Practice, 19(6), 656663.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ozturk, O., Hong, Y., McDermott, S., & Turk, M. (2021). Prescription drug monitoring programs and opioid prescriptions for disability conditions. Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, 19, 415428.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pearl, J. (2018). Does obesity shorten life? Or is it the soda? On non-manipulable causes. Journal of Causal Inference, 6(2), 16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peirce, G. L., Smith, M. J., Abate, M. A., & Halverson, J. (2012). Doctor and pharmacy shopping for controlled substances. Medical Care, 50(6), 494500.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Peters, J. L., Durand, W. M., Monteiro, K. A., Dumenco, L., & George, P. (2018). Opioid overdose hospitalizations among Medicare-disability beneficiaries. The Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine, 31(6), 881896.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pitcher, M. H., Von Korff, M., Bushnell, M. C., & Porter, L. (2019). Prevalence and profile of high-impact chronic pain in the United States. The Journal of Pain, 20(2), 146160.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Reif, S., Lauer, E. A., Adams, R. S., Brucker, D. L., Ritter, G. A., & Mitra, M. (2021). Examining differences in prescription opioid use behaviors among US adults with and without disabilities. Preventive Medicine, 153, 106754.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rikard, S. M., Strahan, A. E., Schmit, K. M., & Guy, G. P. Jr (2023). Chronic pain among adults – United States, 2019–2021. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, 72(15), 379.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Roberts, L., Ives-Rublee, M., & Khattar, R. (2022). Covid-19 likely resulted in 1.2 million more disabled people by the end of 2021 – workplaces and policy will need to adapt. https://www.americanprogress.org/article/covid-19-likely-resulted-in-1-2-million-more-disabled-people-by-the-end-of-2021-workplaces-and-policy-will-need-to-adapt/. Accessed 26 September 2023.Google Scholar
Rose, A. J., Bernson, D., Chui, K. K. H., Land, T., Walley, A. Y., LaRochelle, M. R., … Stopka, T. J. (2018). Potentially inappropriate opioid prescribing, overdose, and mortality in Massachusetts, 2011–2015. Journal of General Internal Medicine, 33(9), 15121519.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rupp, K., & Riley, G. F. (2012). Longitudinal patterns of Medicaid and Medicare coverage among disability cash benefit awardees. Social Security Bulletin, 72, 19.Google ScholarPubMed
Samples, H., Williams, A. R., Crystal, S., & Olfson, M. (2022). Psychosocial and behavioral therapy in conjunction with medication for opioid use disorder: Patterns, predictors, and association with buprenorphine treatment outcomes. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment, 139, 108774.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Samples, H., Williams, A. R., Olfson, M., & Crystal, S. (2018). Risk factors for discontinuation of buprenorphine treatment for opioid use disorders in a multi-state sample of Medicaid enrollees. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment, 95, 917.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Savych, B., Neumark, D., & Lea, R. (2019). Do opioids help injured workers recover and get back to work? The impact of opioid prescriptions on duration of temporary disability. Industrial Relations: A Journal of Economy and Society, 58(4), 549590.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Segrin, C., McNelis, M., & Pavlich, C. A. (2018). Indirect effects of loneliness on substance use through stress. Health Communication, 33(5), 513518.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Shanthanna, H., Nelson, A., Kissoon, N., & Narouze, S. (2022). The COVID-19 pandemic and its consequences for chronic pain: A narrative review. Anaesthesia, 77(9), 10391050.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Social Security Administration. (2015). Annual statistical report on the social security disability insurance program, 2014. SSA publication, 1311826.Google Scholar
Song, Z. (2017). Mortality quadrupled among opioid-driven hospitalizations, notably within lower-income and disabled white populations. Health Affairs, 36(12), 20542061.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Stover, B. D., Turner, J. A., Franklin, G., Gluck, J. V., Fulton-Kehoe, D., Sheppard, L., … Egan, K. (2006). Factors associated with early opioid prescription among workers with low back injuries. The Journal of Pain, 7(10), 718725.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Strang, J., Volkow, N. D., Degenhardt, L., Hickman, M., Johnson, K., Koob, G. F., … Walsh, S. L. (2020). Opioid use disorder. Nature Reviews Disease Primers, 6(1), 3.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration. (2021). 2021 National Survey of Drug Use and Health (NSDUH) releases. https://www.samhsa.gov/data/release/2021-national-survey-drug-use-and-health-nsduh-releases. Accessed 22 June 2023.Google Scholar
Sullivan, M. D. (2018). Depression effects on long-term prescription opioid use, abuse, and addiction. The Clinical Journal of Pain, 34(9), 878884.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sullivan, M. D., Edlund, M. J., Fan, M.-Y., DeVries, A., Braden, J. B., & Martin, B. C. (2010). Risks for possible and probable opioid misuse among recipients of chronic opioid therapy in commercial and Medicaid insurance plans: The Troup Study. Pain, 150(2), 332339.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Taylor, D. M. (2018). Americans with disabilities: 2014. U.S. Census Bureau, Household Economic Studies, Current Population Reports, P70152. https://www.census.gov/content/dam/Census/library/publications/2018/demo/p70-152.pdf. Accessed 05 June 2022.Google Scholar
Theis, K. A., Roblin, D. W., Helmick, C. G., & Luo, R. (2018). Prevalence and causes of work disability among working-age US adults, 2011–2013, NHIS. Disability and Health Journal, 11(1), 108115.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Thomas, C. P., Stewart, M. T., Ledingham, E., Adams, R. S., Panas, L., & Reif, S. (2023). Quality of opioid use disorder treatment for persons with and without disabling conditions. JAMA Network Open, 6(3), e232052.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Thomas, M. R., Waxmonsky, J. A., Gabow, P. A., Flanders-McGinnis, G., Socherman, R., & Rost, K. (2005). Prevalence of psychiatric disorders and costs of care among adult enrollees in a Medicaid HMO. Psychiatric Services, 56(11), 13941401.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Turner, J. B., & Turner, R. J. (2004). Physical disability, unemployment, and mental health. Rehabilitation Psychology, 49(3), 241249.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
van der Laan, M. J., Polley, E. C., & Hubbard, A. E. (2007). Super learner. Statistical Applications in Genetics & Molecular Biology, 6(25), Article 25.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Van der Laan, M. J., & Rose, S. (2011). Targeted learning: Causal inference for observational and experimental data (Vol. 4). New York, NY: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Volkow, N. D., & McLellan, A. T. (2016). Opioid abuse in chronic pain–misconceptions and mitigation strategies. New England Journal of Medicine, 374(13), 12531263.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
West, S. L., Graham, C. W., & Cifu, D. X. (2009). Rates of alcohol/other drug treatment denials to persons with physical disabilities: Accessibility concerns. Alcoholism Treatment Quarterly, 27(3), 305316.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Whitney, D. G., Hurvitz, E. A., & Peterson, M. D. (2018). Cardiometabolic disease, depressive symptoms, and sleep disorders in middle-aged adults with functional disabilities: NHANES 2007–2014. Disability and Rehabilitation, 42(15), 21862191.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilson, W. J. (2011). When work disappears: The world of the new urban poor. New York, NY: Vintage.Google Scholar
Yang, H., Pasalic, E., Rock, P., Davis, J. W., Nechuta, S., & Zhang, Y. (2021). Interrupted time series analysis to evaluate the performance of drug overdose morbidity indicators shows discontinuities across the ICD-9-CM to ICD-10-CM transition. Injury Prevention, 27(Suppl. 1), i35i41.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Zoorob, M. J., & Salemi, J. L. (2017). Bowling alone, dying together: The role of social capital in mitigating the drug overdose epidemic in the United States. Drug and Alcohol Dependence, 173, 19.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Figure 0

Figure 1. Study timeline for variable collection.

Figure 1

Figure 2. Participant flow diagram for the enrollment cohort used for analyses.

Figure 2

Table 1. Analytical cohort characteristics stratified by physical disability and chronic pain status

Figure 3

Figure 3. Panel A: Estimated adjusted incidences and 95% CIs of each outcome if the entire cohort were to have each of the four chronic pain and physical disability exposure status. Panel B: Adjusted incidence differences and 95% CIs for disability and chronic pain exposure statuses contrasted with the ‘neither’ exposure status. Panel C: Adjusted incidence differences 95% CIs for an exposure status of physical disability and chronic pain compared to (1) pain only and (2) disability only.

Figure 4

Table 2. Estimated risk ratios of each disability and chronic pain exposure group compared to the ‘neither’ disability nor pain exposure group, for the primary and secondary outcomes

Supplementary material: File

Hoffman et al. supplementary material

Hoffman et al. supplementary material
Download Hoffman et al. supplementary material(File)
File 1.7 MB