Evaluating Opioid Analgesic Prescribing Limits: A Narrative Review

Impacts of State-Level Opioid Review Programs on Injured Workers and Their Health Care Providers: A Qualitative Study in Washington and Ohio

Policy Points Workers' compensation agencies have instituted opioid review policies to reduce unsafe prescribing. Providers reported more limited and cautious prescribing than in the past; both patients and providers reported collaborative pain-management relationships and satisfactory pain control for patients. Despite the fears articulated by pharmaceutical companies and patient advocates, opioid review programs have not generally resulted in unmanaged pain or reduced function in patients, anger or resistance from patients or providers, or damage to patient-provider relationships or clinical autonomy. Other insurance providers with broad physician networks may want to consider similar quality-improvement efforts to support safe opioid prescribing.

CONTEXT

Unsafe prescribing practices have been among the central causes of improper reception of opioids, unsafe use, and overdose in the United States. Workers' compensation agencies in Washington and Ohio have implemented opioid review programs (ORPs)-a form of quality improvement based on utilization review-to curb unsafe prescribing. Evidence suggests that such regulations indeed reduce unsafe prescribing, but pharmaceutical companies and patient advocates have raised concerns about negative impacts that could also result. This study explores whether three core sets of problems have actually come to pass: (1) unmanaged pain or reduced function among patients, (2) anger or resistance to ORPs from patients or providers, and (3) damage to patient-provider relationships or clinical autonomy.

METHODS

In-depth semistructured interviews were conducted with 48 patients (21 from Washington, 27 from Ohio) and 32 providers (18 from Washington, 14 from Ohio) who were purposively sampled to represent a range of injury and practice types. Thematic coding was conducted with codebooks developed using both inductive and deductive approaches.

FINDINGS

The consequences of opioid regulations have been generally positive: providers report more limited prescribing and a focus on multimodal pain control; patients report satisfactory pain control and recovery alongside collaborative relationships with providers. Participants attribute these patterns to a broad environment of opioid caution; they do not generally perceive workers' compensation policies as distinctly impactful. Both patients and providers comment frequently on the difficult aspects of interacting with workers' compensation agencies; effects of these range from simple inconvenience to delays in care, unmanaged pain, and reduced potential for physical recovery.

CONCLUSIONS

In general, the three types of feared negative impacts have not come to pass for either patients or providers. Although interacting with workers' compensation agencies involves difficulties typical of interacting with other insurers, opioid controls seem to have generally positive effects and are generally perceived of favorably.

Trajectories and predictors of high-occurrence pain flares in ambulatory cancer patients on opioids

BACKGROUND

Pain flares have a substantive impact on the quality of life and well-being of patients with cancer. We identified longitudinal trajectories (clusters) of cancer pain flares in ambulatory patients and sociodemographic and clinical predictors of these trajectories.

METHODS

In a prospective cohort study using ecological momentary assessment (mEMA), we collected patient-reported daily pain flare ratings data over 5 months and identified predictors and correlates using validated measures.

RESULTS

The mean age of the sample (N = 270) was 60.9 years (SD = 11.2), 64.8% were female, and 32.6% self-identified as African American. Four pain flare clusters were identified. The "high-occurrence" cluster (23% of patients) experienced 5.5 (SD = 5.47) daily flares, whereas low-moderate clusters (77%) reported 2.4 (SD = 2.74) daily flares (P < .000). Those in the high-occurrence cluster reported higher pain scores (P = .000), increased pain-related interference (P = .000), depressive symptoms (P = .023), lower quality of life (P = .001), and reduced pain self-efficacy (P = .006). Notably, 67.2% of those prescribed opioids as needed (PRN only) were in the high-occurrence pain flare cluster, compared with 27.9% with PRN and around-the-clock opioid prescriptions (P = .024). Individual predictors of high-occurrence pain flares were income below $30 000, unemployment, being African American, lower education level, Medicaid insurance, current opioid misuse (COMM), baseline inpatient hospital stay duration, and PRN-only opioid regimen. In the multiple predictor model, lower education level, unemployment, COMM score, extended inpatient duration, and PRN-only opioid regimen remained significant.

CONCLUSION

In ambulatory patients with cancer, high occurrence of pain flares may be mitigated by attention to opioid prescription factors and addressing social determinants of health needs of underserved patients.

Associations Between Management Pathway and Opioid Prescriptions for Patients Entering the Emergency Department With Neck and Back Pain

Objective

To determine associations between post-emergency department (ED) management pathways and downstream opioid prescriptions in patients seeking care for incident neck and/or back pain.

Patients and Methods

We identified patients seeking first-time ED care for neck and/or back pain from January 1, 2013, through November 6, 2017. We reported demographic characteristics and opioid prescriptions across management pathways using descriptive statistics and assessed the relative risk of any opioid prescription 12 months post-ED visit among 5 different post-ED management pathways using Poisson regression adjusted for patient demographic characteristics.

Results

Within 12 months after the index ED visit, 58.0% (n=10,949) were prescribed an opioid, with most patients prescribed an opioid within the first week (average daily morphine milligram equivalents of 6.8 mg (SD 9.6 mg). The morphine milligram equivalents decreased to 0.7 mg (SD 8.2 mg) by week 4 and remained consistently less than 1 mg between week 4 and 12 months. Compared with the ED to primary care provider pathway, the relative risk of opioid prescription between 7 days and 12 months after the index ED visit was similar for the ED to physical therapy pathway, higher for both the ED to hospital admission or repeat ED visit pathway (30% increase; relative risk (RR), 1.3; 95% CI, 1.17-1.44) and the ED to specialist pathway (19% increase; RR, 1.19; 95% CI, 1.07-1.33), and lower in the ED with no follow-up visits pathway (41% decrease; RR, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.54-0.65).

Conclusion

In general, more conservative care was associated with lower opioid prescription rates, and escalated care was associated with higher opioid prescription rates.

A multi-disciplinary program for opioid sparse arthroplasty results in reduced long-term opioid consumption: a four year prospective study

INTRODUCTION

The current opioid epidemic poses patient safety and economic burdens to healthcare systems worldwide. Postoperative prescriptions of opioids contribute, with reported opioid prescription rates following arthroplasty as high as 89%. In this multi-centre prospective study, an opioid sparing protocol was implemented for patients undergoing knee or hip arthroplasty. The primary outcome is to report our patient outcomes in the context of this protocol, and to examine the rate of opioid prescription on discharge from our hospitals following joint arthroplasty surgery. This is possibly associated with the efficacy of the newly implemented Arthroplasty Patient Care Protocol.

METHODS

Over three years, patients underwent perioperative education with the expectation to be opioid-free after surgery. Intraoperative regional analgesia, early postoperative mobilisation and multimodal analgesia were mandatory. Long-term opioid medication use was monitored and PROMs (Oxford Knee/Hip Score (OKS/OHS), EQ-5D-5 L) were evaluated pre-operatively, and at 6 weeks, 6 months and 1 year postoperatively. Primary and secondary outcomes were opiate use and PROMs at different time points.

RESULTS

A total of 1,444 patients participated. Two (0.2%) knee patients used opioids to one year. Zero hip patients used opioids postoperatively at any time point after six weeks (p < 0.0001). The OKS and EQ-5D-5 L both improved for knee patients from 16 (12-22) pre-operatively to 35 (27-43) at 1 year postoperatively, and 70 (60-80) preoperatively to 80 (70-90) at 1 year postoperatively (p < 0.0001). The OHS and EQ-5D-5 L both improved for hip patients from 12 (8-19) preoperatively to 44 (36-47) at 1 year postoperatively, and 65 (50-75) preoperatively to 85 (75-90) at 1 year postoperatively (p < 0.0001). Satisfaction improved between all pre- and postoperative time points for both knee and hip patients (p < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

Knee and hip arthroplasty patients receiving a peri-operative education program can effectively and satisfactorily be managed without long-term opioids when coupled with multimodal perioperative management, making this a valuable approach to reduce chronic opioid use.