The impact of opioid prescription dose and duration during a workers compensation claim, on post-claim continued opioid use: A retrospective population-based study

Determining the influence of the Workers Compensation Board of Manitoba's opioid policy on prescription opioid use amongst WCB recipients

BACKGROUND

Opioid medications are commonly used by Workers Compensation Board (WCB) claimants following workplace injuries. The purpose of this study is to describe the impact of an opioid management policy on opioid prescriptions amongst a WCB-covered population compared to changes in the use of these medications in the general population of a Canadian province.

METHODS

We linked WCB claims data from 2006 to 2016 (13,155 claims, 11,905 individuals) to Manitoba provincial health records and compared opioid use amongst this group to 478,606 individuals aged 18-65. Linear regression was performed to examine the change over time in number of individuals being prescribed opioids for various durations and dosages of 50 or more, and 120 or more morphine equivalents (ME)/day for both the WCB and Manitoba population.

RESULTS

WCB claimants totaled 2.5% of Manitoba residents aged 18-65 who were prescribed opioids for non-cancer pain. After the introduction of the opioid use policy for the WCB population in November 2011, the number of people prescribed opioids declined 49.4% in the WCB group, while increasing 10.8% in the province as a whole. The number of individuals using 50 ME/day or more declined 43.1% in the WCB group and increased 5.8% in the province.

CONCLUSIONS

Opioid management programs organized by a compensation board can lead to a substantial reduction in the prescription of opioid medications to a WCB client population, including individuals who were prescribed higher doses of these medications when compared with general trends in the community.

Prescription opioid use and associated factors among US construction workers

BACKGROUND

Construction workers are among the segments of the US population that were hit hardest by the opioid prescription and overdose deaths in the past decades. Factors that underlie opioid use in construction workers have been compartmentalized and isolated in existing studies of opioid use and opioid overdose, but they ignore the overall context of their use. This study examines prescription opioid use and its association with a variety of occupational and nonoccupational factors in construction workers in the United States.

METHODS

Data from the 2011-2017 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey (n = 7994) were analyzed. The prevalence of prescribed opioid use and the association with occupational and nonoccupational characteristics among construction workers were examined in four multiple logistic regression models.

RESULTS

The odds of prescription opioid use for workers with occupational injuries was more than triple that of their noninjured counterparts when demographics and occupational factors were controlled (odds ratio = 3.38, 95% confidence interval: 2.38-4.81). Odds of prescription opioid use were higher in older construction workers, workers who were white, non-Hispanic, working part-time, and in poorer health, while Hispanic workers and those without health insurance were much less likely to report prescription opioid use.

CONCLUSIONS

Prescription opioid use among construction workers encompasses both occupational and nonoccupational factors. As an insight into opioid use among construction workers becomes clearer, effectively responding to the opioid crisis remains a challenge.

Prescription Dispensing Patterns Before and After a Workers' Compensation Claim: An Historical Cohort Study of Workers With Low Back Pain Injuries in British Columbia

OBJECTIVE

Compare prescription dispensing before and after a work-related low back injury.

METHODS

Descriptive analyses were used to describe opioid, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID), and skeletal muscle relaxant (SMR) dispensing 1 year pre- and post-injury among 97,124 workers in British Columbia with new workers' compensation low back claims from 1998 to 2009.

RESULTS

Before injury, 19.7%, 21.2%, and 6.3% were dispensed opioids, NSAIDs, and SMRs, respectively, increasing to 39.0%, 50.2%, and 28.4% after. Median time to first post-injury prescription was less than a week. Dispensing was stable pre-injury, followed by a sharp increase within 8 weeks post-injury. Dispensing dropped thereafter, but remained elevated nearly a year post-injury, an increase attributable to less than 2% of claimants.

CONCLUSION

These drug classes are commonly dispensed, particularly shortly after injury and dispensing is of short duration for most, though a small subgroup receives prolonged courses.

Patterns of Opioid Prescribing and Predictors of Chronic Opioid Use in an Industrial Cohort, 2003 to 2013

OBJECTIVE

To appreciate the impact of the opioid epidemic in workers, we described opioid prescription patterns in a US industrial cohort over a 10-year period and assessed predictors of chronic prescription.

METHODS

A multiyear (2003 to 2013) cross-sectional analysis of employer-sponsored health care claims for enrolled workers (N: 21,357 to 44,769) was performed.

RESULTS

The proportion of workers prescribed opioids nearly doubled in the 10-year period. The strongest predictor of chronic opioid prescribing was year, with an increase in prescriptions each year from 2003 to 2013 (odds ratio = 2.90, 95% confidence interval: 2.41 to 3.48). Additional predictors included older age, white race, hourly wage, low back pain, and osteoarthritis.

CONCLUSIONS

Opioid prescribing for industrial workers substantially increased from 2003 to 2013. Occupational health professionals should be aware of the potential for chronic opioid use among workers to assess job safety and appropriate treatment of work-related injuries.

High-dose opioids for chronic non-cancer pain: an overview of Cochrane Reviews

BACKGROUND

Chronic pain is typically described as pain on most days for at least three months. Chronic non-cancer pain (CNCP) is any chronic pain that is not due to a malignancy. Chronic non-cancer pain in adults is a common and complex clinical issue where opioids are routinely used for pain management. There are concerns that the use of high doses of opioids for chronic non-cancer pain lacks evidence of effectiveness and may increase the risk of adverse events.

OBJECTIVES

To describe the evidence from Cochrane Reviews and Overviews regarding the efficacy and safety of high-dose opioids (here defined as 200 mg morphine equivalent or more per day) for chronic non-cancer pain.

METHODS

We identified Cochrane Reviews and Overviews through a search of the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (The Cochrane Library). The date of the last search was 18 April 2017. Two review authors independently assessed the search results. We planned to analyse data on any opioid agent used at high dose for two weeks or more for the treatment of chronic non-cancer pain in adults.

MAIN RESULTS

We did not identify any reviews or overviews meeting the inclusion criteria. The excluded reviews largely reflected low doses or titrated doses where all doses were analysed as a single group; no data for high dose only could be extracted.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is a critical lack of high-quality evidence regarding how well high-dose opioids work for the management of chronic non-cancer pain in adults, and regarding the presence and severity of adverse events. No evidence-based argument can be made on the use of high-dose opioids, i.e. 200 mg morphine equivalent or more daily, in clinical practice. Trials typically used doses below our cut-off; we need to know the efficacy and harm of higher doses, which are often used in clinical practice.

Adverse events associated with medium- and long-term use of opioids for chronic non-cancer pain: an overview of Cochrane Reviews

BACKGROUND

Chronic pain is common and can be challenging to manage. Despite increased utilisation of opioids, the safety and efficacy of long-term use of these compounds for chronic non-cancer pain (CNCP) remains controversial. This overview of Cochrane Reviews complements the overview entitled 'High-dose opioids for chronic non-cancer pain: an overview of Cochrane Reviews'.

OBJECTIVES

To provide an overview of the occurrence and nature of adverse events associated with any opioid agent (any dose, frequency, or route of administration) used on a medium- or long-term basis for the treatment of CNCP in adults.

METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (the Cochrane Library) Issue 3, 2017 on 8 March 2017 to identify all Cochrane Reviews of studies of medium- or long-term opioid use (2 weeks or more) for CNCP in adults aged 18 and over. We assessed the quality of the reviews using the AMSTAR criteria (Assessing the Methodological Quality of Systematic Reviews) as adapted for Cochrane Overviews. We assessed the quality of the evidence for the outcomes using the GRADE framework.

MAIN RESULTS

We included a total of 16 reviews in our overview, of which 14 presented unique quantitative data. These 14 Cochrane Reviews investigated 14 different opioid agents that were administered for time periods of two weeks or longer. The longest study was 13 months in duration, with most in the 6- to 16-week range. The quality of the included reviews was high using AMSTAR criteria, with 11 reviews meeting all 10 criteria, and 5 of the reviews meeting 9 out of 10, not scoring a point for either duplicate study selection and data extraction, or searching for articles irrespective of language and publication type. The quality of the evidence for the generic adverse event outcomes according to GRADE ranged from very low to moderate, with risk of bias and imprecision being identified for the following generic adverse event outcomes: any adverse event, any serious adverse event, and withdrawals due to adverse events. A GRADE assessment of the quality of the evidence for specific adverse events led to a downgrading to very low- to moderate-quality evidence due to risk of bias, indirectness, and imprecision.We calculated the equivalent milligrams of morphine per 24 hours for each opioid studied (buprenorphine, codeine, dextropropoxyphene, dihydrocodeine, fentanyl, hydromorphone, levorphanol, methadone, morphine, oxycodone, oxymorphone, tapentadol, tilidine, and tramadol). In the 14 Cochrane Reviews providing unique quantitative data, there were 61 studies with a total of 18,679 randomised participants; 12 of these studies had a cross-over design with two to four arms and a total of 796 participants. Based on the 14 selected Cochrane Reviews, there was a significantly increased risk of experiencing any adverse event with opioids compared to placebo (risk ratio (RR) 1.42, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.22 to 1.66) as well as with opioids compared to a non-opioid active pharmacological comparator, with a similar risk ratio (RR 1.21, 95% CI 1.10 to 1.33). There was also a significantly increased risk of experiencing a serious adverse event with opioids compared to placebo (RR 2.75, 95% CI 2.06 to 3.67). Furthermore, we found significantly increased risk ratios with opioids compared to placebo for a number of specific adverse events: constipation, dizziness, drowsiness, fatigue, hot flushes, increased sweating, nausea, pruritus, and vomiting.There was no data on any of the following prespecified adverse events of interest in any of the included reviews in this overview of Cochrane Reviews: addiction, cognitive dysfunction, depressive symptoms or mood disturbances, hypogonadism or other endocrine dysfunction, respiratory depression, sexual dysfunction, and sleep apnoea or sleep-disordered breathing. We found no data for adverse events analysed by sex or ethnicity.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

A number of adverse events, including serious adverse events, are associated with the medium- and long-term use of opioids for CNCP. The absolute event rate for any adverse event with opioids in trials using a placebo as comparison was 78%, with an absolute event rate of 7.5% for any serious adverse event. Based on the adverse events identified, clinically relevant benefit would need to be clearly demonstrated before long-term use could be considered in people with CNCP in clinical practice. A number of adverse events that we would have expected to occur with opioid use were not reported in the included Cochrane Reviews. Going forward, we recommend more rigorous identification and reporting of all adverse events in randomised controlled trials and systematic reviews on opioid therapy. The absence of data for many adverse events represents a serious limitation of the evidence on opioids. We also recommend extending study follow-up, as a latency of onset may exist for some adverse events.

A comparison of opioid use between WCB recipients and other Manitobans for knee, shoulder, back and carpal tunnel release procedures

BACKGROUND

This study's objectives were to evaluate whether WCB claimants with conditions requiring certain surgical procedures are more likely to be prescribed outpatient opioids than other Manitobans and whether those prescribed opioids are more likely to still be on opioid medications 6 months post procedure.

METHODS

We compared 7,246 WCB claims for a number of surgical procedures to 65,032 similar procedures performed in other Manitobans. Logistic regression was used to explore the association between being a WCB claimant and being prescribed opioids, while controlling for type of surgical procedure and other potential confounders.

RESULTS

WCB claimants were more likely than other Manitobans to be prescribed opioids (adjusted OR 1.38; 95%CI 1.30-1.47). Amongst those prescribed opioids, the odds of being still on opioids 6 months post-procedure were not significantly elevated for WCB claimants (adjusted OR 1.09 95%CI 0.97-1.23).

CONCLUSIONS

WCB claimants are prescribed opioids more often than non-claimants for similar procedures.