Doctor Shopping Has Always Been Rare

By Roger Chriss, Columnist

A commonly cited factor in the opioid crisis is "doctor shopping" -- the act of seeing multiple physicians in order to get an opioid prescription without medical justification. States like Indiana are passing prescribing laws with the specific goal of preventing doctor shopping in an effort to address the opioid crisis.

However, doctor shopping has not at any time in the past decade been a statistically significant factor in the opioid crisis.  The National Institute of Drug Abuse tells us that only one out of every 143 patients who received a prescription for an opioid painkiller in 2008 obtained prescriptions from multiple physicians "in a pattern that suggests misuse or abuse of the drugs." That’s a rate of about 0.7 percent.

The importance of doctor shopping over the last decade was not because of frequency -- it has more to do with quantity. Research shows that the 0.7% of people who doctor-shopped were buying about 2 percent of the prescriptions for opioid medications, constituting about 4% of the amount dispensed.

Moreover, these doctor-shoppers tended to be young, to pay in cash, and to see five or six prescribers in a short period of time, so they are easily identifiable and can be thwarted with prescription drug monitoring programs (PDMP’s).


Diversion prevention had long been seen as important. Back in 1999, the Drug Enforcement Administration published “Don’t Be Scammed by a Drug Abuser,” which included advice to doctors and pharmacists on how to recognize drug abusers and prevent doctor-shopping. And states like Washington specifically list doctor shopping among the indicators of opioid addiction in prescribing guidelines, making recognition and intervention key goals for prescribers. 

These efforts have paid off. A study in the journal Substance Abuse found that the number of prescriptions diverted fell from approximately 4.30 million (1.75% of all prescriptions) in 2008 to approximately 3.37 million (1.27% of all prescriptions) in 2012. The study concluded that “diversion control efforts have likely been effective.”

Similarly, Pharmacy Times reported a 40% decrease in doctor shopping in West Virginia between 2014 and 2015, thanks in part to efforts by that state’s Board of Pharmacy Controlled Substance Monitoring Program.

The Inspector General of the Department of Health and Human Services found in 2017 that among 43.6 million Medicare beneficiaries, only 22,308 “appeared to be doctor shopping.” That’s a minuscule rate of 0.05 percent.

“You have this narrative that there are these opioid shoppers and rogue prescribers and they’re driving the epidemic, and in fact the data suggests otherwise,” says Dr. Caleb Alexander, who co-authored a 2017 study in the journal Addiction.

"The study found that of those prescribed opioids in 2015, doctor shoppers were exceedingly rare, making up less than one percent of prescription opioid users,” Alexander told Mother Jones.

Doctor shopping is still a problem in other contexts. Opioids are not the only class of medication that people seek to obtain illicitly for a variety of reasons, from hypochondriasis to malingering. PDMPs and other law enforcement efforts have a useful role to play in addressing these issues, and the opioid crisis requires ongoing efforts to prevent drug theft and diversion at all levels of the supply chain.

But claims that doctor shopping is a significant factor in the opioid crisis are mistaken. Doctor shopping was not significant in 2008, and measures to reduce diversion have succeeded, making doctor shopping in 2018 that much rarer.

Roger Chriss.jpg

Roger Chriss lives with Ehlers Danlos syndrome and is a proud member of the Ehlers-Danlos Society. Roger is a technical consultant in Washington state, where he specializes in mathematics and research.

The information in this column should not be considered as professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. It is for informational purposes only and represents the author’s opinions alone. It does not inherently express or reflect the views, opinions and/or positions of Pain News Network.