Validation of a screener and opioid assessment measure for patients with chronic pain

Eight principles for safer opioid prescribing and cautions with benzodiazepines

The provision of long-term opioid analgesic therapy for chronic pain requires a careful risk/benefit analysis followed by clinical safety measures to identify and reduce misuse, abuse, and addiction and their associated morbidity and mortality. Multiple data sources show that benzodiazepines, prescribed for comorbid insomnia, anxiety, and mood disorders, heighten the risk of respiratory depression and other adverse outcomes when combined with opioid therapy. Evidence is presented for hazards associated with coadministration of opioids and benzodiazepines and the need for caution when initiating opioid therapy for chronic pain. Clinical recommendations follow, as drawn from 2 previously published literature reviews, one of which proffers 8 principles for safer opioid prescribing; the other review presents risks associated with benzodiazepines, suggests alternatives for co-prescribing benzodiazepines and opioids, and outlines recommendations regarding co-prescribing if alternative therapies are ineffective.

Good clinical practice guide for opioids in pain management: the three Ts - titration (trial), tweaking (tailoring), transition (tapering)

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Achieving good clinical practice in the use of opioids as part of a comprehensive pain management regimen can face significant challenges. Despite guidelines from governmental and pain society/organization sources, there are still significant hurdles. A review of some basic tenets of opioid analgesia based on current published knowledge and experiences about this important healthcare imperative is warranted.

CONTENT

Consistent with guidelines, the literature supports using the lowest total opioid dose that provides adequate pain control with the fewest adverse effects. Titration (or trial) during opioid initiation is a way of starting low and going slow (and assessing the appropriateness of a specific opioid and formulation). Recognizing that multiple factors contribute to an individual's personal experience of pain, the physical, psychological, social, cultural, spiritual, pharmacogenomic, and behavioral factors of the individual patient should be taken into account (tweaking, or tailoring). Finally, for those patients for whom transition (tapering) from opioid is desired, doing so too rapidly can have negative consequences and minimization of problems during this step can be achieved by proper tapering.

CONCLUSION

We conclude that a simultaneously aggressive, yet conservative, approach is advocated in the literature in which opioid therapy is divided into three key steps (the 3 T's): titration (or trial), tweaking (or tailoring), and transition (or tapering). Establishment of the 3 T's along with the application of other appropriate good medical practice and clinical experience/judgment, including non-pharmacologic approaches, can assist healthcare providers in the effort to achieve optimal management of pain.

Validation of a brief Opioid Compliance Checklist for patients with chronic pain

There has been a need for a brief assessment tool to determine compliance with use of prescribed opioids for pain. The purpose of this study was to develop and begin the validation of a brief and simple compliance checklist (Opioid Compliance Checklist [OCC]) for chronic pain patients prescribed long-term opioid therapy. A review of the literature of opioid therapy agreements led to a 12-item OCC that was repeatedly administered to 157 patients who were taking opioids for chronic pain and followed for 6 months. Validation of the OCC was conducted by identifying those patients exhibiting aberrant drug-related behavior as determined by any of the following: positive urine toxicology screen, a positive score on the Prescription Drug Use Questionnaire interview or Current Opioid Misuse Measure, and/or ratings by staff on the Addiction Behavior Checklist. Of the original 12 items, 5 OCC items appeared to best predict subsequent aberrant behaviors based on multivariate logistic regression analyses (cross-validated area under the receiver operating characteristic curve = .67). Although further testing is needed, these results suggest that the OCC is an easy-to-use, promising measure in monitoring opioid adherence among persons with chronic pain.

PERSPECTIVE

This study presents validation of a brief 5-item compliance checklist for use with chronic pain patients prescribed long-term opioid therapy. This measure asks patients about aberrant drug-related behavior over the past month, and any positive response indicates problems with adherence with opioids. Further cross-validation testing is needed.

Rethinking the role of opioids in the outpatient management of chronic nonmalignant pain

OBJECTIVE

Opioid analgesics are commonly and increasingly prescribed by physicians for the management of chronic pain. However, strong evidence supports the need for strategies that reduce opioid use. The objective of this review is to outline limitations associated with opioid use and discuss therapeutic techniques that can be adopted to optimize the use of opioids in the management of chronic nonmalignant pain.

SCOPE

Literature searches through MEDLINE and Cochrane databases were used to identify relevant journal articles. The search was limited to articles published from January 1980 to January 2014. Additional references were obtained from articles extracted during the database search. Relevant search terms included opioid, opioid abuse, chronic pain management, written care agreements, urine drug testing, and multimodal therapy.

FINDINGS

Opioids exhibit a well established abuse potential and evidence supporting the efficacy of opioids in chronic pain management is limited. In addition, opioid exposure is associated with adverse effects on multiple organ systems. Effective strategies designed to mitigate opioid abuse and diversion and optimize clinical outcomes should be employed.

CONCLUSIONS

Appropriate patient selection through identification of risk factors, urine drug testing, and access to prescription monitoring programs has been shown to effectively improve care. Structured opioid therapy in a multimodal platform, including use of a low initial dose, prescription of alternative non-opioid analgesics including non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and acetaminophen, as well as development of written care agreements to individualize and guide therapy has also been shown to improve patient outcomes. Implementation of opioid allocation strategies has the potential to encourage appropriate opioid use and improve patient care.

Management of persistent pain in the older patient: a clinical review

IMPORTANCE

Persistent pain is highly prevalent, costly, and frequently disabling in later life.

OBJECTIVE

To describe barriers to the management of persistent pain among older adults, summarize current management approaches, including pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic modalities; present rehabilitative approaches; and highlight aspects of the patient-physician relationship that can help to improve treatment outcomes. This review is relevant for physicians who seek an age-appropriate approach to delivering pain care for the older adult.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

Search of MEDLINE and the Cochrane database from January 1990 through May 2014, using the search terms older adults, senior, ages 65 and above, elderly, and aged along with non-cancer pain, chronic pain, persistent pain, pain management, intractable pain, and refractory pain to identify English-language peer-reviewed systematic reviews, meta-analyses, Cochrane reviews, consensus statements, and guidelines relevant to the management of persistent pain in older adults.

FINDINGS

Of the 92 identified studies, 35 evaluated pharmacologic interventions, whereas 57 examined nonpharmacologic modalities; the majority (n = 50) focused on older adults with osteoarthritis. This evidence base supports a stepwise approach with acetaminophen as first-line therapy. If treatment goals are not met, a trial of a topical nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug, tramadol, or both is recommended. Oral nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs are not recommended for long-term use. Careful surveillance to monitor for toxicity and efficacy is critical, given that advancing age increases risk for adverse effects. A multimodal approach is strongly recommended-emphasizing a combination of both pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic treatments to include physical and occupational rehabilitation, as well as cognitive-behavioral and movement-based interventions. An integrated pain management approach is ideally achieved by cultivating a strong therapeutic alliance between the older patient and the physician.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Treatment planning for persistent pain in later life requires a clear understanding of the patient's treatment goals and expectations, comorbidities, and cognitive and functional status, as well as coordinating community resources and family support when available. A combination of pharmacologic, nonpharmacologic, and rehabilitative approaches in addition to a strong therapeutic alliance between the patient and physician is essential in setting, adjusting, and achieving realistic goals of therapy.

Clinicians' perspective on the use of immunoassay versus definitive laboratory quantitation methodologies for medication monitoring

Treating chronic pain is complicated. Primary care doctors and others are called on to treat the vast majority of patients with pain, to do so in brief visits and to do it safely. This is a tall order, but it is possible to do it well when the proper tools are employed to aid the clinician in diagnosing and monitoring the patient. Among these tools, the one that has been most useful is urine drug testing. Prescribers can perform presumptive screens with the immunoassay method in my office, but this method has limitations in accuracy and specificity and sensitivity. When medically necessary, it makes sense to seek definitive testing from the laboratory to confirm results of immunoassay tests with chromatographic testing and/or when there is the possibility of a false negative in the office. These "false negatives" are extremely common, with patients using nonprescribed opioids and illicit medications often go undetected if one were to stop at the office-based result. These patients are in danger of addiction and overdose, and this added information is crucial in efforts to treat pain and avoid these complications.

Improving opioid prescription practices and reducing patient risk in the primary care setting

Chronic pain is complex, and the patient suffering from chronic pain frequently experiences concomitant medical and psychiatric disorders, including mood and anxiety disorders, and in some cases substance use disorders. Ideally these patients would be referred to an interdisciplinary pain program staffed by pain medicine, behavioral health, and addiction specialists. In practice, the majority of patients with chronic pain are managed in the primary care setting. The primary care clinician typically has limited time, training, or access to resources to effectively and efficiently evaluate, treat, and monitor these patients, particularly when there is the added potential liability of prescribing opioids. This paper reviews the role of opioids in managing chronic noncancer pain, including efficacy and risk for misuse, abuse, and addiction, and discusses several models employing novel technologies and health delivery systems for risk assessment, intervention, and monitoring of patients receiving opioids in a primary care setting.

American Society for Pain Management nursing position statement: pain management in patients with substance use disorders

The American Society for Pain Management Nursing (ASPMN) has updated its position statement on managing pain in patients with substance use disorders. This position statement is endorsed by the International Nurses Society on Addictions (IntNSA) and includes clinical practice recommendations based on current evidence. It is the position of ASPMN and IntNSA that every patient with pain, including those with substance use disorders, has the right to be treated with dignity, respect, and high-quality pain assessment and management. Failure to identify and treat the concurrent conditions of pain and substance use disorders will compromise the ability to treat either condition effectively. Barriers to caring for these patients include stigmatization, misconceptions, and limited access to providers skilled in these two categories of disorders. Topics addressed in this position statement include the scope of substance use and related disorders, conceptual models of addiction, ethical considerations, addiction risk stratification, and clinical recommendations.

Opioid misuse in Canada and critical appraisal of aberrant behavior screening tools

The incidence of prescription opioid misuse in Canada is increasing. Initiatives for safe prescribing practices for opioid medications include risk assessment for current and future opioid misuse. A clinical screening tool that can be universally applied to all patient populations is currently not available. Our objective was to provide a brief narrative review on opioid misuse from a Canadian perspective as well as a critical appraisal of the available clinical screening tools for detecting aberrant behaviors associated with opioid misuse. The Drug Abuse Screening Test, Addiction Behaviors Checklist, Diagnosis, Intractability, Risk and Efficacy Inventory, Pain Assessment and Documentation Tool, Prescription Drug Use Questionnaire, Prescription Opioid therapy Questionnaire, Screener and Opioid Assessment for Patients with Pain (SOAPP), Revised SOAPP, Pain Medication Questionnaire, Opioid Risk Tool and Current Opioid Misuse Measure were included in the following review. Overall, a wide variability in quality, sensitivity and specificity was observed between screening tools. There is an overall lack of applicability to diverse patient populations as the majority of screening tools have been validated in pain clinic populations only. To conclude, there is a great need for a validated and convenient aberrant behaviors risk assessment tool that can be applied to a diverse patient population in a clinical setting.

Adherence monitoring with chronic opioid therapy for persistent pain: a biopsychosocial-spiritual approach to mitigate risk

Opioids represent a mainstay in the pharmacologic management of persistent pain. Although these drugs are intended to support improved comfort and function, the inherent risk of abuse or addiction must be considered in the delivery of care. The experience of living with persistent pain often includes depression, fear, loss, and anxiety, leading to feelings of hopelessness, helplessness, and spiritual crisis. Collectively, these factors represent an increased risk for all patients, particularly those with a history of substance abuse or addiction. This companion article to the American Society for Pain Management Nursing "Position Statement on Pain Management in Patients with Substance Use Disorders" (2012) focuses on the intersection of persistent pain, substance use disorder (SUD), and chronic opioid therapy and the clinical implications of monitoring adherence with safe use of opioids for those with persistent pain. This paper presents an approach to the comprehensive assessment of persons with persistent pain when receiving opioid therapy by presenting an expansion of the biopsychosocial model to include spiritual factors associated with pain and SUD, thus formulating a biopsychosocial-spiritual approach to mitigate risk. Key principles are provided for adherence monitoring using the biopsychosocial-spiritual assessment model developed by the authors as a means of promoting sensitive and respectful care.

Opioid prescribing: a systematic review and critical appraisal of guidelines for chronic pain

BACKGROUND

Deaths due to prescription opioid overdoses have increased dramatically. High-quality guidelines could help clinicians mitigate risks associated with opioid therapy.

PURPOSE

To evaluate the quality and content of guidelines on the use of opioids for chronic pain.

DATA SOURCES

MEDLINE, National Guideline Clearinghouse, specialty society Web sites, and international guideline clearinghouses (searched in July 2013).

STUDY SELECTION

Guidelines published between January 2007 and July 2013 addressing the use of opioids for chronic pain in adults were selected. Guidelines on specific settings, populations, and conditions were excluded.

DATA EXTRACTION

Guidelines and associated systematic reviews were evaluated using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II (AGREE II) instrument and A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR), respectively, and recommendations for mitigating opioid-related risks were compared.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Thirteen guidelines met selection criteria. Overall AGREE II scores were 3.00 to 6.20 (on a scale of 1 to 7). The AMSTAR ratings were poor to fair for 10 guidelines. Two received high AGREE II and AMSTAR scores. Most guidelines recommend that clinicians avoid doses greater than 90 to 200 mg of morphine equivalents per day, have additional knowledge to prescribe methadone, recognize risks of fentanyl patches, titrate cautiously, and reduce doses by at least 25% to 50% when switching opioids. Guidelines also agree that opioid risk assessment tools, written treatment agreements, and urine drug testing can mitigate risks. Most recommendations are supported by observational data or expert consensus.

LIMITATION

Exclusion of non-English-language guidelines and reliance on published information.

CONCLUSION

Despite limited evidence and variable development methods, recent guidelines on chronic pain agree on several opioid risk mitigation strategies, including upper dosing thresholds; cautions with certain medications; attention to drug-drug and drug-disease interactions; and use of risk assessment tools, treatment agreements, and urine drug testing. Future research should directly examine the effectiveness of opioid risk mitigation strategies.

PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE

California Department of Industrial Relations and California Commission on Health and Safety and Workers' Compensation.

The association between negative affect and prescription opioid misuse in patients with chronic pain: the mediating role of opioid craving

Over the past decade, considerable research has accumulated showing that chronic pain patients experiencing high levels of negative affect (NA) are at increased risk for prescription opioid misuse. The primary objective of the present study was to examine the factors that underlie the association between NA and prescription opioid misuse among patients with chronic pain. In this study, 82 patients with chronic musculoskeletal pain being prescribed opioid medication completed the Current Opioid Misuse Measure, a well-validated self-report questionnaire designed to assess prescription opioid misuse. Patients were also asked to complete self-report measures of pain intensity, NA, and opioid craving. A bootstrapped multiple mediation analysis was used to examine the mediating role of patients' pain intensity and opioid craving in the association between NA and prescription opioid misuse. Consistent with previous research, we found a significant association between NA and prescription opioid misuse. Interestingly, results revealed that opioid craving, but not pain intensity, mediated the association between NA and opioid misuse. The Discussion addresses the potential psychological and neurobiological factors that might contribute to the interrelationships among NA, opioid craving, and prescription opioid misuse in patients with pain. The clinical implications of our findings are also discussed.

PERSPECTIVE

Our study provides new insights into the factors that underlie the association between negative affect and prescription opioid misuse in patients with chronic pain. Our findings could have important clinical implications, particularly for patients being prescribed opioid medication, and for reducing rates of opioid misuse in patients with pain.

Electronic opioid risk assessment program for chronic pain patients: barriers and benefits of implementation

OBJECTIVES

A preliminary electronic pain assessment program known as Pain Assessment Interview Network, Clinical Advisory System (painCAS), was implemented in 2 pain centers over the course of 10 months to understand the tool's impact on opioid risk assessment documentation and clinical workflow. The program contains validated electronic versions of screeners for opioid misuse risk (SOAPP-R and Current Opioid Misuse Measure).

METHODS

Charts of patients with an initial and 2 follow-up visits were randomly selected for review of presence of opioid risk assessments before and after implementation of the electronic assessment program. Clinical and administrative staff members were interviewed to gain their perceptions of the impact of the program.

RESULTS

Significant increases were observed in the documentation of opioid risk assessments between the baseline patient chart reviews before implementation of the program (n = 66) and the postintervention patient chart reviews after the implementation of the program (n = 39), for both initial and follow-up clinic visits (P < 0.001). Specific benefits of the program identified by 7 clinicians and 8 administrators included ease of use, reduced paperwork, completion of the assessment before the clinic visit, and incorporation of information directly into an electronic medical record (EMR). Perceived barriers to implementation included poor patient compliance, changes in administration workflow, and difficulties associated with patients with no email addresses, and limited computer skills.

CONCLUSIONS

Implementation of an opioid risk electronic pain assessment program significantly increased the likelihood that a risk assessment would be included in the medical record, which has implications for improvement of quality of care.

Predictors of painkiller dependence among people with pain in the general population

OBJECTIVES

Self-medication with painkillers is widespread and increasing, and evidence about influences on painkiller dependence is needed to inform efforts to prevent and treat problem painkiller use.

DESIGN

Online questionnaire survey.

PARTICIPANTS

People in the general population who had pain and used painkillers in the last month (N = 112).

MEASUREMENTS

Pain frequency and intensity, use of over-the-counter and prescription painkillers, risk of substance abuse (Screener and Opioid Assessment for Patients with Pain [SOAPP] scale), depression, anxiety, stress, alexithymia, pain catastrophizing, pain anxiety, pain self-efficacy, pain acceptance, mindfulness, self-compassion, and painkiller dependence (Leeds Dependence Questionnaire).

RESULTS

In multiple regression, the independent predictors of painkiller dependence were prescription painkiller use (β 0.21), SOAPP score (β 0.31), and pain acceptance (β -0.29). Prescription painkiller use mediated the influence of pain intensity. Alexithymia, anxiety, and pain acceptance all moderated the influence of pain.

CONCLUSIONS

The people most at risk of developing painkiller dependence are those who use prescription painkillers more frequently, who have a prior history of substance-related problems more generally, and who are less accepting of pain. Based on these findings, a preliminary model is presented with three types of influence on the development of painkiller dependence: 1) pain leading to painkiller use, 2) risk factors for substance-related problems irrespective of pain, and 3) psychological factors related to pain. The model could guide further research among the general population and high-risk groups, and acceptance-based interventions could be adapted and evaluated as methods to prevent and treat painkiller dependence.

Treating pain in addicted patients: recommendations from an expert panel

Clinicians may face pragmatic, ethical, and legal issues when treating addicted patients. Equal pressures exist for clinicians to always address the health care needs of these patients in addition to their addiction. Although controversial, mainly because of the lack of evidence regarding their long-term efficacy, the use of opioids for the treatment of chronic pain management is widespread. Their use for pain management in the addicted population can present even more challenges, especially when evaluating the likelihood of drug-seeking behavior. As the misuse and abuse of opioids continues to burgeon, clinicians must be particularly vigilant when prescribing chronic opioid therapy. The purpose of this article is to summarize recommendations from a recent meeting of experts convened to recommend how primary care physicians should approach treatment of chronic pain for addicted patients when an addiction specialist is not available for a referral. As there is a significant gap in guidelines and recommendations in this specific area of care, this article serves to create a foundation for expanding chronic pain guidelines in the area of treating the addicted population. This summary is designed to be a practical how-to guide for primary care physicians, discussing risk assessment, patient stratification, and recommended therapeutic approaches.

Long-term use of opioids for complex chronic pain

Increased opioid prescribing for back pain and other chronic musculoskeletal pain conditions has been accompanied by dramatic increases in prescription-opioid addiction and fatal overdose. Opioid-related risks appear to increase with dose. Although short-term randomised trials of opioids for chronic pain have found modest analgesic benefits (a one-third reduction in pain intensity on average), the long-term safety and effectiveness of opioids for chronic musculoskeletal pain remains unknown. Given the lack of large, long-term randomised trials, recent epidemiologic data suggest the need for caution when considering long-term use of opioids to manage chronic musculoskeletal pain, particularly at higher dosage levels. Principles for achieving more selective and cautious use of opioids for chronic musculoskeletal pain are proposed.

Development and validation of the Patient Opioid Education Measure

BACKGROUND

Although there are screening tools to aid clinicians in assessing the risk of opioid misuse, an instrument to assess opioid-related knowledge is not currently available. The purpose of this study was to develop a content-valid, understandable, readable, and reliable Patient Opioid Education Measure (POEM).

METHODS

Using concept mapping, clinicians caring for patients with chronic pain participated in brainstorming, sorting, and rating need-to-know information for patients prescribed opioids. Concept mapping analyses identified seven clusters addressing knowledge and expectations associated with opioid use, including medicolegal issues, prescribing policies, safe use and handling, expected outcomes, side effects, pharmacology, and warnings.

RESULTS

The 49-item POEM was verbally administered to 83 patients (average age 51.3 ± 9.8 years, 77.1% female, 47.1% African American) taking opioids for chronic nonmalignant pain. Patients averaged in total 63.9% ± 14.3% (range 23%-91%) correct responses on the POEM. The POEM demonstrated substantial test-retest reliability (interclass correlation coefficient 0.87). The POEM had a mean readability Lexile (L) score of 805.9 ± 257.3 L (equivalent to approximately a US fifth grade reading level), with individual items ranging from 280 L to 1370 L.

CONCLUSION

The POEM shows promise for rapidly identifying patients' opioid-related knowledge gaps and expectations. Correcting misunderstandings and gaps could result in safer use of opioids in a clinical care setting.

Catastrophic thinking and increased risk for prescription opioid misuse in patients with chronic pain

BACKGROUND

As a consequence of the substantial rise in the prescription of opioids for the treatment of chronic noncancer pain, greater attention has been paid to the factors that may be associated with an increased risk for prescription opioid misuse. Recently, a growing number of studies have shown that patients with high levels of catastrophizing are at increased risk for prescription opioid misuse.

OBJECTIVE

The primary objective of this study was to examine the variables that might underlie the association between catastrophizing and risk for prescription opioid misuse in patients with chronic pain.

METHODS

Patients with chronic musculoskeletal pain (n=115) were asked to complete the SOAPP-R, a validated self-report questionnaire designed to identify patients at risk for prescription opioid misuse. Patients were also asked to complete self-report measures of pain intensity, catastrophizing, anxiety, and depression.

RESULTS

Consistent with previous research, we found that catastrophizing was associated with an increased risk for prescription opioid misuse. Results also revealed that the association between catastrophizing and risk for opioid misuse was partially mediated by patients' levels of anxiety. Follow-up analyses, however, indicated that catastrophizing remained a significant 'unique' predictor of risk for opioid misuse even when controlling for patients' levels of pain severity, anxiety and depressive symptoms.

DISCUSSION

Discussion addresses the factors that might place patients with high levels of catastrophizing at increased risk for prescription opioid misuse. The implications of our findings for the management of patients considered for opioid therapy are also discussed.

Pilot of a brief, web-based educational intervention targeting safe storage and disposal of prescription opioids

Prescription opioid misuse has been declared an American epidemic and a significant proportion of misused opioids are diverted from legitimate prescriptions. Patient education regarding appropriate use and the dangers of misuse has been identified as a key intervention target. The current study presents findings from the open pilot of a patient-tailored, brief, web-based intervention designed to improve knowledge of safe medication use, storage and disposal.

METHODS

Subjects were 62 treatment-seeking outpatients at two diverse outpatient health clinics (dental and pain management) who were prescribed an opioid medication. Subjects completed an online assessment of risk factors for prescription opioid misuse and the 15-minute Script Safety intervention. Knowledge and misuse behaviors were assessed at baseline, immediately post intervention (knowledge only) and at one-week and one-month follow up. Knowledge regarding safe prescription opioid use, storage and disposal improved significantly from pre to post intervention and was sustained at follow up (% correct from baseline to one-month follow up: unsafe to retain unused pills, 66.1% vs. 96.5%; unsafe to borrow pills from family/friends, 87.1% vs. 98.2%; best to store pills in cool, dry, secure location, 45.2% vs. 89.5%; not recommended to use expired medications, 75.8% vs. 96.5%; not recommended to flush all medications down the toilet, 45.2% vs. 82.5%, ps<.01). Reductions in self-reported misuse behaviors were also observed. Although preliminary, the findings highlight the potential utility of integrating brief, web-based educational interventions in community and primary health care settings.

Laboratory testing for prescription opioids

Opioid analgesic misuse has risen significantly over the past two decades, and these drugs now represent the most commonly abused class of prescription medications. They are a major cause of poisoning deaths in the USA exceeding heroin and cocaine. Laboratory testing plays a role in the detection of opioid misuse and the evaluation of patients with opioid intoxication. Laboratories use both immunoassay and chromatographic methods (e.g., liquid chromatography with mass spectrometry detection), often in combination, to yield high detection sensitivity and drug specificity. Testing methods for opioids originated in the workplace-testing arena and focused on detection of illicit heroin use. Analysis for a wide range of opioids is now required in the context of the prescription opioid epidemic. Testing methods have also been primarily based upon urine screening; however, methods for analyzing alternative samples such as saliva, sweat, and hair are available. Application of testing to monitor prescription opioid drug therapy is an increasingly important use of drug testing, and this area of testing introduces new interpretative challenges. In particular, drug metabolism may transform one clinically available opioid into another. The sensitivity of testing methods also varies considerably across the spectrum of opioid drugs. An understanding of opioid metabolism and method sensitivity towards different opioid drugs is therefore essential to effective use of these tests. Improved testing algorithms and more research into the effective use of drug testing in the clinical setting, particularly in pain medicine and substance abuse, are needed.

Risk stratification of opioid misuse among patients with cancer pain using the SOAPP-SF

BACKGROUND

Opioids are recognized as an integral part of the armamentarium in the management of cancer pain. There has been a growing awareness of the misuse of prescription opioids among cancer patients. More research is needed to detail risk factors and incidence for opioid misuse among cancer pain patients.

METHODS

We reviewed 522 patient charts that were seen in our Pain Center from January 1, 2009 to June 30, 2009 for risk stratification of opioid misuse with demographic and clinical factors utilizing the Screener and Opioid Assessment for Patients with Pain-short form (SOAPP-SF). Group differences based on High (≥4) and Low (<4) SOAPP-SF scores were evaluated at initial visit, follow-up within a month and 6-9 months.

RESULTS

One hundred forty-nine of the 522 (29%) patients had a SOAPP-SF score of ≥4. The mean age for patients with high SOAPP-SF score (≥4) was 50 ± 14 vs 56 ± 14 for patients with low SOAPP-SF score (<4) (P < 0.0001). The pain scores were higher for patients with high SOAPP-SF score compared with patients with low SOAPP-SF score at consult (P < 0.0001). Morphine equivalent daily dose (MEDD) was higher for patients with high SOAPP-SF score compared with patients with low SOAPP-SF score at consult (P = 0.0461). Fatigue, feeling of well-being, and poor appetite were higher among the high SOAPP-SF group at initial visit (P < 0.0001, <0.0001, <0.0149, respectively). The high SOAPP-SF score patients also had statistically significant (P < 0.05) higher anxiety and depression scores at all three time points. In the multivariate analysis, patients younger than 55 years have a higher odds of having a "high" SOAPP-SF score than patients 55 years and older {odds ratio (OR) (95% confidence interval [CI]) = 2.76 (1.58, 4.81), P = 0.0003} adjusting for employment status, disease status, treatment status, usual pain score, and morphine equivalency at consult. Patients with higher usual pain score at consult have higher odds of a "high" SOAPP-SF score (OR [95% CI] = 1.34 [1.19, 1.51], P < 0.0001) adjusting for age, employment status, disease status, treatment status, and morphine equivalency at consult.

CONCLUSION

Patients classified by the SOAPP-SF in the current study as high risk tended to be younger, endorse more pain, have higher MEDD requirement, and endorse more symptoms of depression and anxiety. These findings are consistent with the literature on risk factors of opioid abuse in chronic pain patients which suggests that certain patient characteristics such as younger age, anxiety, and depression symptomatology are associated with greater risk for opioid misuse. However, a limitation of the current study is that other measures of opioid abuse were not available for validation and comparison with the SOAPP-SF.

Characteristics of medical inpatients with acute pain and suspected non-medical use of opioids

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to characterize medical inpatients with acute pain suspected of non-medical opioid use.

METHOD

Medical inpatients treated with opioids for acute pain referred for psychiatric consultation were administered questionnaires including the Screener and Opioid Assessment for Pain Patients (SOAPP) and the Hospital Misuse Checklist (HMC), developed for this study.

RESULTS

The nine subjects referred for evaluation of possible non-medical opioid use, compared to the 23 subjects referred for other reasons, were younger (37.7 vs. 51.3, t = 2.81, p = .012), more likely to score positive on the SOAPP (100% vs. 47.8%, Fisher's p < .05) and report lifetime histories of any substance use disorder (SUD) (88.9% vs. 30.4%, χ²  = 9.7, p = .002). No differences were found on items on the HMC.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this preliminary study indicate that medical inpatients with suspected non-medical use of opioids resemble chronic pain outpatients misusing opioids. Further research is needed to better characterize this patient population and to validate the HMC measure.

American Society for Pain Management nursing position statement: pain management in patients with substance use disorders

The American Society for Pain Management Nursing (ASPMN) has updated its position statement on managing pain in patients with substance use disorders. This position statement is endorsed by the International Nurses Society on Addictions (IntNSA) and includes clinical practice recommendations based on current evidence. It is the position of ASPMN and IntNSA that every patient with pain, including those with substance use disorders, has the right to be treated with dignity, respect, and high-quality pain assessment and management. Failure to identify and treat the concurrent conditions of pain and substance use disorders will compromise the ability to treat either condition effectively. Barriers to caring for these patients include stigmatization, misconceptions, and limited access to providers skilled in these two categories of disorders. Topics addressed in this position statement include the scope of substance use and related disorders, conceptual models of addiction, ethical considerations, addiction risk stratification, and clinical recommendations.

Screening for substance abuse and diversion in Virginia hospices

BACKGROUND

Although inadequate treatment of pain is a problem for hospice patients, increases in the medical use of opioids have been accompanied by increasing levels of abuse and diversion in the community. Balancing pain relief with concerns about abuse and diversion is a difficult issue for hospices.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to determine policies and practices in Virginia hospices regarding substance abuse and diversion in patients and their families.

METHODS

A survey was conducted of Virginia hospices about policies, perceptions, and training regarding substance abuse and diversion.

RESULTS

Twenty-three of 63 hospice agencies responded (36.5%). Less than half (43.8%) required mandatory substance abuse training. Only 43.5% had policies regarding screening for substance abuse in patients; 30.4% had a policy regarding screening for substance abuse in family members. Policies regarding screening for diversion in patients (21.7%), and families (17.4%) were rare. Policies regarding opioid use in patients with a history of substance abuse or diversion were uncommon (33.3%, 30.4%, respectively); 30.4% had policies regarding use of opioids in patients whose family members had a history of diversion or abuse. Thirty-eight percent of hospices agreed that substance abuse and diversion was a problem for their agency, and these agencies were more likely to have written policies or mandatory training.

CONCLUSION

Most Virginia hospices lack mandatory training and policies regarding substance abuse and diversion in patients and family members. More than one-third felt that abuse and diversion were problems in their agencies. A national conversation regarding policies toward substance abuse and diversion in hospice agencies is needed.

Risk for prescription opioid misuse among patients with a history of substance use disorder

BACKGROUND

History of substance use disorder (SUD) is associated with risk for prescription opioid misuse in chronic pain patients; however, little data are available regarding risk for prescription opioid misuse within the subgroup of patients with SUD histories.

METHODS

Participants with chronic pain, histories of SUD, and current opioid prescriptions were recruited from a single VA Medical Center. Participants (n=80) completed measures of risk for prescription opioid misuse, pain severity, pain-related interference, pain catastrophizing, attitudes about managing pain, emotional functioning, and substance abuse.

RESULTS

Participants were divided into three groups based on risk for prescription opioid misuse, as assessed by the Pain Medication Questionnaire (PMQ). Participants in the High-PMQ group reported more pain severity, interference, catastrophizing, depressive symptoms, and lowest self-efficacy for managing pain, relative to the Low-PMQ group; the High-PMQ group and Moderate-PMQ group differed on measures of pain severity, catastrophizing, and psychiatric symptoms (all p-values <0.05). The High-PMQ group had the highest rates of current SUD (32% versus 20% and 0, p=0.009). A regression analysis evaluated factors associated with PMQ scores: pain catastrophizing was the only variable significantly associated with risk for prescription opioid misuse.

CONCLUSIONS

Among patients with SUD histories, those with higher risk for prescription opioid misuse reported more pain and impairment, symptoms of depression, and were more likely to have current SUD, relative to patients with lower risk for prescription opioid misuse. In adjusted analyses, pain catastrophizing was significantly associated with risk for prescription opioid misuse, but current SUD status was not a significant predictor.

Designing opioids that deter abuse

Prescription opioid formulations designed to resist or deter abuse are an important step in reducing opioid abuse. In creating these new formulations, the paradigm of drug development target should be introduced. Biological targets relating to the nature of addiction may pose insurmountable hurdles based on our current knowledge and technology, but products that use behavioral targets seem logical and feasible. The population of opioid abusers is large and diverse so behavioral targets are more challenging than they appear at first glance. Furthermore, we need to find ways to correlate behavioral observations of drug liking to actual use and abuse patterns. This may involve revisiting some pharmacodynamic concepts in light of drug effect rather than peak concentration. In this paper we present several new opioid analgesic agents designed to resist or deter abuse using physical barriers, the inclusion of an opioid agonist or antagonist, an aversive agent, and a prodrug formulation. Further, this paper also provides insight into the challenges facing drug discovery in this field. Designing and screening for opioids intended to resist or deter abuse is an important step to meet the public health challenge of burgeoning prescription opioid abuse.

Aberrant drug-related behaviors: unsystematic documentation does not identify prescription drug use disorder

OBJECTIVE

No evidence-based methods exist to identify prescription drug use disorder (PDUD) in primary care (PC) patients prescribed controlled substances. Aberrant drug-related behaviors (ADRBs) are suggested as a proxy. Our objective was to determine whether ADRBs documented in electronic medical records (EMRs) of patients prescribed opioids and benzodiazepines could serve as a proxy for identifying PDUD.

DESIGN

A cross-sectional study of PC patients at an urban, academic medical center.

SUBJECTS

Two hundred sixty-four English-speaking patients (ages 18-60) with chronic pain (≥3 months), receiving ≥1 opioid analgesic or benzodiazepine prescription in the past year, were recruited during outpatient PC visits.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Composite International Diagnostic Interview defined Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition (DSM-IV) diagnoses of past year PDUD and no disorder. EMRs were reviewed for 15 prespecified ADRBs (e.g., early refill, stolen medications) in the year before and after study entry. Fisher's exact test compared frequencies of each ADRB between participants with and without PDUD.

RESULTS

 Sixty-one participants (23%) met DSM-IV PDUD criteria and 203 (77%) had no disorder; 85% had one or more ADRB documented. Few differences in frequencies of individual behaviors were noted between groups, with only "appearing intoxicated or high" documented more frequently among participants with PDUD (N = 10, 16%) vs no disorder (N = 8, 4%), P = 0.002. The only common ADRB, "emergency visit for pain," did not discriminate between those with and without the disorder (82% PDUD vs 78% no disorder, P = 0.6).

CONCLUSIONS

EMR documentation of ADRBs is common among PC patients prescribed opioids or benzodiazepines, but unsystematic clinician documentation does not identify PDUDs. Evidence-based approaches are needed.

Cross-Validation of a Screener to Predict Opioid Misuse in Chronic Pain Patients (SOAPP-R)

OBJECTIVES

The Screener and Opioid Assessment for Patients with Pain - Revised (SOAPP-R) is a self-report questionnaire designed to predict aberrant medication-related behaviors among persons with chronic pain. This measure was developed to complement current risk assessment practices and to improve a clinician's ability to assess a patient's risk for opioid misuse. The aim of this study was to cross-validate the SOAPP-R with a new sample of chronic, non-cancer pain patients.

METHODS

Three hundred and two participants (N=302) prescribed opioids for pain were recruited from five pain management centers in the U.S. Subjects completed a series of self-report measures and were followed for five months. Patients were rated by their treating physician, had a urine toxicology screen, and were classified on the Aberrant Drug Behavior index.

RESULTS

Seventy-three percent (73.2%) of the subjects (N= 221) were followed and 66 participants repeated the SOAPP-R after one week for test-retest reliability. The reliability and predictive validity, as measured by the area under the curve (AUC), were found to be highly significant (test-retest reliability = .91; coefficient alpha = .86; AUC = .74) and were sufficiently similar to values found with the initial sample. A cut-off score of 18 revealed a sensitivity of .80 and specificity of .52.

CONCLUSIONS

Results of this cross-validation study suggest that the psychometric parameters of the SOAPP-R are not based solely on the unique characteristics of the initial validation sample. The SOAPP-R is found to be a reliable and valid screening tool for risk of aberrant drug-related behavior among chronic pain patients.

Problematizing 'drugs': A cultural assessment of recreational pharmaceutical use among young adults in the US

Recent trends in the recreational use of pharmaceuticals among young adults in the United States highlight a number of issues regarding the problematization of drugs. Two constructions of recreational pharmaceutical use are analyzed. On the one hand, categorical frameworks based upon epidemiological data are created by institutions and media and depict recreational pharmaceutical use as illicit in unqualified, absolute terms. This is done through discourses that equate nonmedical pharmaceutical use with culturally established forms of illicit drug use. On the other hand, users' multi-dimensional constructions of recreational pharmaceutical use emphasise social context, personal experience, and individual risk perceptions. The problematization of recreational pharmaceutical use points to intergenerational conflicts, as well as to struggles over definitions of "drug abuse" and "hard drugs", and highlights the impact of pharmaceuticalization on recreational drug use among young people.

Distinguishing features of cancer patients who smoke: pain, symptom burden, and risk for opioid misuse

Although many cancer patients who have pain are smokers, the extent of their symptom burden and risk for opioid misuse are not well understood. In this study we analyzed records of patients being treated for cancer pain, 94 of whom were smokers and 392 of whom were nonsmokers, to determine smoking status group differences. Smokers had significantly higher pain intensity, fatigue, depression, and anxiety than nonsmokers (independent samples t-tests P < .002). Smokers were at higher risk for opioid misuse based on the short form of the Screener and Opioid Assessment for Patients with Pain (SOAPP). Specifically, smokers had more frequent problems with mood swings, taking medications other than how they are prescribed, a history of illegal drug use, and a history of legal problems (chi-square tests P ≤ .002). Changes in pain and opioid use were examined in a subset of patients (146 nonsmokers and 46 smokers) who were receiving opioid therapy on at least 2 of the 3 data time points (consult, follow-up 1 month after consult, follow-up 6 to 9 months after consult). Results based on multilevel linear modeling showed that over a period of approximately 6 months, smokers continued to report significantly higher pain than nonsmokers. Both smokers and nonsmokers reported a significant decline in pain across the 6-month period; the rate of decline did not differ across smokers and nonsmokers. No significant difference over time was found in opioid use between smokers and nonsmokers. These findings will guide subsequent studies and inform clinical practice, particularly the relevancy of smoking cessation.

PERSPECTIVE

This article describes pain, symptom burden, and risk for opioid misuse among cancer patients with pain across smoking status. Smoking appears to be a potential mechanism for having an increased pain and symptom burden and risk for opioid misuse. This improved understanding of cancer pain will inform clinical practice.

Psychological risk factors for poor outcome of spine surgery and spinal cord stimulator implant: a review of the literature and their assessment with the MMPI-2-RF

Back pain is experienced by up to of 85% of the United States population. Most often it resolves with minimal to no medical treatment. For those whose pain endures, worsens, or becomes protracted, conservative care is typically first attempted. Individuals who continue to experience significant back pain are often considered for surgical procedures, the results of which are not uniformly positive. The consequences of failed surgical intervention can be quite devastating, and psychosocial factors have been found to predict poor outcome. The literature on psychosocial risk factors for failed back surgery is reviewed first, identifying psychological dysfunction in the domains of emotions, cognitions, behavior, and interpersonal processes as increasing the risk for failed back surgery. Empirical findings with the MMPI-2 Restructured Form (MMPI-2-RF) are presented next, including descriptive analyses with a sample of 1341 individuals assessed as part of a pre-surgical psychological screening. Correlations between MMPI-2-RF scale scores and measures of the primary risk factors identified in this review are reported for a smaller sample of 197 pre-surgical candidates. Interpretive implications of the MMPI-2-RF findings are discussed along with suggestions for further research in this area.

Integrating pain management in clinical practice

There is much evidence to suggest that psychological and social issues are predictive of pain severity, emotional distress, work disability, and response to medical treatments among persons with chronic pain. Psychologists can play an important role in the identification of psychological and social dysfunction and in matching personal characteristics to effective interventions as part of a multidisciplinary approach to pain management, leading to a greater likelihood of treatment success. The assessment of different domains using semi-structured clinical interviews and standardized self-report measures permits identification of somatosensory, emotional, cognitive, behavioral and social issues in order to facilitate treatment planning. In this paper, we briefly describe measures to assess constructs related to pain and intervention strategies for the behavioral treatment of chronic pain and discuss related psychiatric and substance abuse issues. Finally, we offer a future look at the role of integrating pain management in clinical practice in the psychological assessment and treatment for persons with chronic pain.

Prescription opioid abuse, chronic pain, and primary care: a Co-occurring Disorders Clinic in the chronic disease model

Abuse of opioids has become a public health crisis. The historic separation between the addiction and pain communities and a lack of training in medical education have made treatment difficult to provide, especially in primary care. The Co-occurring Disorders Clinic (COD) was established to treat patients with co-morbid chronic pain and addiction. This retrospective chart review reports results of a quality improvement project using buprenorphine/naloxone to treat co-occurring chronic non-cancer pain (CNCP) and opioid dependence in a primary care setting. Data were collected for 143 patients who were induced with buprenorphine/naloxone (BUP/NLX) between June 2009 and November 2011. Ninety-three patients (65%) continued to be maintained on the medication and seven completed treatment and were no longer taking any opioid (5%). Pain scores showed a modest, but statistically significant improvement on BUP/NLX, which was contrary to our expectations and may be an important factor in treatment retention for this challenging population.

Spine-area pain in military personnel: a review of epidemiology, etiology, diagnosis, and treatment

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

Nonbattle illnesses and injuries are the major causes of unit attrition in modern warfare. Spine-area pain is a common disabling injury in service members associated with a very low return-to-duty (RTD) rate.

PURPOSE

To provide an overview of the current understanding of epidemiology, possible causes, and relative prognosis of spine-area pain syndromes in military personnel, including a discussion of various treatment options available in theaters of operation.

STUDY DESIGN

Literature review.

METHODS

Search focusing on epidemiology, etiology and associative factors, and treatment of spinal pain using electronic databases, textbooks, bibliographic references, and personal accounts.

RESULTS

Spine-area pain is the most common injury or complaint "in garrison" and appears to increase during training and combat deployments. Approximately three-quarters involve low back pain, followed by cervical and midback pain syndromes. Some predictive factors associated with spine-area pain are similar to those observed in civilian cohorts, such as psychosocial distress, heavy physical activity, and more sedentary lifestyle. Risk factors specific to military personnel include concomitant psychological trauma, g-force exposure in pilots and airmen, extreme shock and vibration exposure, heavy combat load requirements, and falls incurred during airborne, air assault, and urban dismounted ground operations. Effective forward-deployed treatment has been difficult to implement, but newer strategies may improve RTD rates.

CONCLUSIONS

Spine-area pain syndromes comprise a major source of unit attrition and are often the result of duty-related burdens incurred during combat operations. Current strategies in theaters of operation that may improve the low RTD rates include individual and unit level psychological support, early resumption of at least some forward-area duties, multimodal treatments, and ergonomic modifications.

Problematizing “Drugs”: A Cultural Assessment of Recreational Pharmaceutical Use among Young Adults in the United States

Recent trends in the recreational use of pharmaceuticals among young adults in the United States highlight a number of issues regarding the problematization of drugs. Two constructions of recreational pharmaceutical use are analyzed. On the one hand, categorical frameworks based upon epidemiological data are created by institutions and media and depict recreational pharmaceutical use as illicit in unqualified, absolute terms. This is done through discourses that equate nonmedical pharmaceutical use with culturally established forms of illicit drug use. On the other hand, users' multi-dimensional constructions of recreational pharmaceutical use emphasize social context, personal experience, and individual risk perceptions. The problematization of recreational pharmaceutical use points to intergenerational conflicts, as well as to struggles over definitions of “drug abuse” and “hard drugs,” and highlights the impact of pharmaceuticalization on recreational drug use among young people.

Do patients know they are on pain medication agreements? Results from a sample of high-risk patients on chronic opioid therapy

OBJECTIVE

Pain medicine agreements are frequently recommended for use with high-risk patients on chronic opioid therapy. We assessed how consistently pain medicine agreements were used and whether patients were aware that they had signed a pain medicine agreement in a sample of HIV-infected adults prescribed chronic opioid treatment.

DESIGN

We recruited patients from a longitudinal cohort of community-based HIV-infected adults and recruited the patients' primary care providers (PCPs). The patients completed in-person interviews and PCPs completed mail-based questionnaires about the patients' use of pain medicine agreements. Among patients prescribed chronic opioid therapy, we analyzed the prevalence of pain medicine agreement use, patient factors associated with their use, and agreement between patient and clinician reports of pain agreements.

RESULTS

We had 84 patient-clinician dyads, representing 38 PCPs. A total of 72.8% of patients fit the diagnostic criteria for a lifetime substance use disorder. PCPs reported using pain medicine agreements with 42.9% of patients. Patients with pain medicine agreements were more likely to be smokers (91.7% vs 58.3%; P = 0.001) and had higher mean scores on the Screener and Opioid Assessment for Patients with Pain (µ = 26.0 [standard deviation, SD] = 9.7) vs µ = 19.5 [SD = 9.3]; P = 0.003). Patients reported having a pain medicine agreement with a sensitivity of 61.1% and a specificity of 64.6%.

CONCLUSIONS

In a high-risk sample, clinicians were using agreements at a low rate, but were more likely to use them with patients at highest risk of misuse. Patients exhibited low awareness of whether they signed a pain medicine agreement.

Risk factor assessment for problematic use of opioids for chronic pain

Opioid analgesics provide effective treatment for noncancer pain, but many health providers have concerns about cognitive effects, tolerance, dependence, and addiction. Misuse of opioids is prominent in patients with chronic pain and early recognition of misuse risk could help providers offer adequate patient care while implementing appropriate levels of monitoring to reduce aberrant drug-related behaviors. Many persons with chronic pain also have significant medical and psychiatric comorbidities that affect treatment decisions. Neuropsychologists can play an important role in the identification of psychological and social dysfunction and in matching personal characteristics to effective interventions as part of a multidisciplinary approach to pain management. The assessment of different domains using semi-structured interviews, sensory and neuropsychological testing, and standardized self-report measures permits identification of somatosensory, emotional, cognitive, behavioral, and social issues in order to facilitate treatment planning. In this review we discuss opioid abuse and misuse issues that often arise in the treatment of patients with chronic pain, and present an overview of assessment and treatment strategies that can be effective in improving outcomes associated with the use of prescription opioids for pain. Finally we briefly discuss the effect of opiate analgesics on cognition and review some intervention strategies for chronic pain patients.

Is smoking associated with alcohol-drug dependence in patients with pain and chronic pain patients? An evidence-based structured review

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to determine if there is consistent evidence for smoking to be considered a red flag for development of opioid dependence during opioid exposure in patients with pain and chronic pain patients (CPPs).

METHODS

Six hundred and twenty-three references were found that addressed the areas of smoking, pain, and drug-alcohol dependence. Fifteen studies remained after exclusion criteria were applied and sorted into four groupings addressing four hypotheses: patients with pain and CPPs who smoke are more likely than their nonsmoking counterparts to use opioids, require higher opioid doses, be drug-alcohol dependent, and demonstrate aberrant drug-taking behaviors (ADTBs). Each study was characterized by the type of study it represented according to the Agency for Health Care Policy and Research (AHCPR) guidelines and independently rated by two raters according to 13 quality criteria to generate a quality score. The percentage of studies in each grouping supporting/not supporting each hypothesis was calculated. The strength and consistency of the evidence in each grouping was rated by the AHCPR guidelines.

RESULTS

In each grouping, 100% of the studies supported the hypothesis for that grouping. The strength and consistency of the evidence was rated as A (consistent multiple studies) for the first hypothesis and as B (generally consistent) for the other.

CONCLUSIONS

There is limited consistent indirect evidence that smoking status in patients with pain and CPPs is associated with alcohol-drug and opioid dependence. Smoking status could be a red flag for opioid-dependence development on opioid exposure.

A pilot cohort study of the determinants of longitudinal opioid use after surgery

BACKGROUND

Determinants of the duration of opioid use after surgery have not been reported. We hypothesized that both preoperative psychological distress and substance abuse would predict more prolonged opioid use after surgery.

METHODS

Between January 2007 and April 2009, a prospective, longitudinal inception cohort study enrolled 109 of 134 consecutively approached patients undergoing mastectomy, lumpectomy, thoracotomy, total knee replacement, or total hip replacement. We measured preoperative psychological distress and substance use, and then measured the daily use of opioids until patients reported the cessation of both opioid consumption and pain. The primary end point was time to opioid cessation. All analyses were controlled for the type of surgery done.

RESULTS

Overall, 6% of patients continued on new opioids 150 days after surgery. Preoperative prescribed opioid use, depressive symptoms, and increased self-perceived risk of addiction were each independently associated with more prolonged opioid use. Preoperative prescribed opioid use was associated with a 73% (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.51%-87%) reduction in the rate of opioid cessation after surgery (P = 0.0009). Additionally, each 1-point increase (on a 4-point scale) of self-perceived risk of addiction was associated with a 53% (95% CI 23%-71%) reduction in the rate of opioid cessation (P = 0.003). Independent of preoperative opioid use and self-perceived risk of addiction, each 10-point increase on a preoperative Beck Depression Inventory II was associated with a 42% (95% CI 18%-58%) reduction in the rate of opioid cessation (P = 0.002). The variance in the duration of postoperative opioid use was better predicted by preoperative prescribed opioid use, self-perceived risk of addiction, and depressive symptoms than postoperative pain duration or severity.

CONCLUSIONS

Preoperative factors, including legitimate prescribed opioid use, self-perceived risk of addiction, and depressive symptoms each independently predicted more prolonged opioid use after surgery. Each of these factors was a better predictor of prolonged opioid use than postoperative pain duration or severity.

A comparison of various risk screening methods in predicting discharge from opioid treatment

OBJECTIVES

Risk assessment and stratification has become an important aspect of the prescribing of opioids to patients with chronic pain. There is little empirical data available on the sensitivity and specificity of commonly used risk assessment tools. This paper describes 2 studies that compare the prediction capabilities of various risk assessment tools.

METHODS

The first study presents data on patients at a pain practice whose treatment with opioids was stopped due to their engaging in aberrant drug-related behavior. Patients were assessed with the Screener and Opioid Assessment for Patients with Pain-Revised (SOAPP-R), the Pain Medication Questionnaire, the Opioid Risk Tool, and a clinical interview. A second study compared the risk assessment measures, SOAPP-R, Pain Medication Questionnaire, Opioid Risk Tool, and a clinical interview. Data were gathered on whether patients had engaged in aberrant drug-related behavior at 6-month follow-up.

RESULTS

Significant differences in the measures were found. Accuracy did not appear to be a function of the type of aberrant drug-related behavior that the patient engaged in for any of the measures. The clinical interview showed the best sensitivity of the 4 risk measures in predicting risk. The SOAPP-R showed the best sensitivity of the self-report measures. However, the SOAPP-R appears to overrate risk.

DISCUSSION

Overall, these studies indicate that not all risk assessment tools are equal in their ability to accurately predict future aberrant drug-related behavior. It may be that written risk assessment tools that use more subtle items are better suited to certain patient populations.

The changing landscape of opioid prescribing: long-acting and extended-release opioid class-wide Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy

Prescriptions for opioid analgesics to manage moderate-to-severe chronic noncancer pain have increased markedly over the last decade, as have postmarketing reports of adverse events associated with opioids. As an unintentional consequence of greater prescription opioid utilization, there has been the parallel increase in misuse, abuse, and overdose, which are serious risks associated with all opioid analgesics. In response to these concerns, the Food and Drug Administration announced the requirement for a class-wide Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy (REMS) for long-acting and extended-release (ER) opioid analgesics in April 2011. An understanding of the details of this REMS will be of particular importance to primary care providers. The class-wide REMS is focused on educating health care providers and patients on appropriate prescribing and safe use of ER opioids. Support from primary care will be necessary for the success of this REMS, as these clinicians are the predominant providers of care and the main prescribers of opioid analgesics for patients with chronic pain. Although currently voluntary, future policy will likely dictate that providers undergo mandatory training to continue prescribing medications within this class. This article outlines the elements of the class-wide REMS for ER opioids and clarifies the impact on primary care providers with regard to training, patient education, and clinical practice.