Opioid and non-opioid analgesic prescribing before and after the CDC's 2016 opioid guideline

The Influence of State Restrictions on Opioid Prescribing: 2006-2018

OBJECTIVE

To measure the longitudinal effect of opioid restrictions on prescribing patterns at the state and regional levels.

DESIGN

Health policy evaluation using a Poisson regression of opioid metrics from federal repositories to model what the estimated opioid counts are for the next fiscal year.

SETTING

State-specific prescribed opioid counts between 2006 and 2018 from CDC reports; population data were obtained from the U.S. Census Bureau for 2006-2018; and opioid prescribing restrictions were extracted from published reports and state regulatory databases.

INTERVENTION

Poisson regression models were fitted to assess the relationship of statewide restrictions on opioid prescribing counts adjusting for states' population.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE

Estimated opioid counts provided by the Poisson regression model.

RESULTS

Per capita rates of prescribed opioids peaked in 2012 at 86.2 per 100 population. Prescribing restrictions are associated with statistically significant decreases in opioid prescribing. Controlling for population and year, we found for every 100 opioid prescriptions in a state without restrictions, only 98 opioid prescriptions are expected for every additional year in a state with restrictions in place.

CONCLUSIONS

Contrary to other research conducted over a shorter study period, we found that restrictions do reduce opioid prescribing; however, a statistically significant change in rates may not be detectable in the early years after restrictions are enacted.

High-risk use of prescription opioids among patients treated for alcohol problems in New York State. A repeated cross-sectional study, 2005-2018

Background

Patients with alcohol use disorder (AUD) and high-risk opioid use are at risk of serious complications. The purpose of this study was to estimate the prevalence of and factors associated with high-risk opioid use in patients with an alcohol use problem from 2005 to 2018.

Methods

This repeated cross-sectional study analyzed data from first admissions for alcohol treatment (2005-2018) to the NYS Office of Addiction Services and Supports merged with Medicaid Claims Data. High-risk opioid use was defined as opioid dose ≥50 morphine mg equivalents (MME) per day; opioid prescriptions overlapping ≥7 days; opioids for chronic pain >90 days or opioids for acute pain >7 days.

Results

Patients receiving ≥50 MME increased from 690 to 3226 from 2005 to 2010; then decreased to 2330 in 2018. From 2005-2011, patients with opioid prescriptions overlapping ≥7 days increased from 226 to 1594 then decreased to 892 in 2018. From 2005-2010, opioid use >7 days for acute pain increased from 133 to 970 and plateaued after 2010. From 2005-2018, patients who received opioids >90 days for chronic pain trended from 186 to 1655. White patients, females, age 36-55, patients with chronic and acute pain diagnoses had the highest rates of high-risk use.

Conclusions

The prevalence of high-risk opioid use in patients with alcohol use problems increased from 2005 to 2011, and generally decreased after 2010. However, prevalence of opioids >90 days for chronic pain trended up from 2005 to 2018. High-risk opioid use among patients with AUD emphasizes the need to develop interventional strategies to improve patient care.

Heavy Versus Light Smoking: Its Association With Opioid Use, Chronic Pain, and Mental Health

INTRODUCTION

There is much concern that substance use treatment programs are rarely integrated with smoking cessation programs. Here, the first national statistics are presented on the connection between heavy vs. light smoking and the opioid epidemic.

METHODS

Using the 2013-2021 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey linked to the National Health Interview Survey, N=81,400 adults-years, logit regressions estimate the impact of heavy vs. light smoking on opioid use, chronic pain, work limitations due to pain, and poor mental health. Analyses were conducted from October 2023 to May 2024.

RESULTS

Only 37 percent of the population has ever smoked, but they used 69% of the nation's annual prescription opioids. Adults who smoked more than 5 cigarettes a day composed 12% of the population but used about the same number of opioids as the 63% of the population who never smoked. Adults who formerly smoked used 16% fewer opioids than adults who currently smoke (p<0.01). The percent with chronic pain during the year varied from 12.2% for adults who never smoked to 14.2% for light smoking, to 16.5% for those smoking more than a pack a day (p<0.01). Severe work limitations due to pain varied from 7.3% for adults who never smoked to 16.9% for those smoking more than a pack a day (p<0.01). Adults smoking more than a pack a day were twice as likely to report fair or poor mental health compared to those who never smoked (29.2% vs 13.6%) (p<0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

As nations deal with the opioid epidemic, integrating smoking cessation programs into substance abuse treatment programs appears prudent.

Opioid and non-opioid analgesic regimens after fracture and risk of serious opioid-related events

Background

Non-opioid analgesics are prescribed in combination with opioids among patients with long bone fracture to reduce opioid prescribing needs, yet evidence is limited on whether they reduce the risk of serious opioid-related events (SOREs). We compared the risk of SOREs among hospitalized patients with long bone fracture discharged with filled opioid prescriptions, with and without non-opioid analgesics.

Design

We identified a retrospective cohort of analgesic-naïve adult patients with a long bone fracture hospitalization using the Merative MarketScan Commercial Database (2013-2020). The exposure was opioid and non-opioid analgesic (gabapentinoids, muscle relaxants, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, acetaminophen) prescriptions filled in the 3 days before through 42 days after discharge. The outcome was the development of new persistent opioid use or opioid use disorder during follow-up (day 43 through day 408 after discharge). We used Cox proportional hazards regression with inverse probability of treatment weighting with overlap trimming to compare outcomes among those that filled an opioid and a non-opioid analgesic to those that filled only an opioid analgesic. In secondary analyses, we used separate models to compare those that filled a prescription for each specific non-opioid analgesic type with opioids to those that filled only opioids.

Results

Of 29 489 patients, most filled an opioid prescription alone (58.4%) or an opioid and non-opioid (22.0%). In the weighted proportional hazards regression model accounting for relevant covariates and total MME, filling both a non-opioid analgesic and an opioid analgesic was associated with 1.63 times increased risk of SOREs compared with filling an opioid analgesic only (95% CI 1.41 to 1.89). Filling a gabapentin prescription in combination with an opioid was associated with an increased risk of SOREs compared with those that filled an opioid only (adjusted HR: 1.84 (95% CI1.48 to 2.27)).

Conclusions

Filling a non-opioid analgesic in combination with an opioid was associated with an increased risk of SOREs after long bone fracture.

Level of evidence

Level III, prognostic/epidemiological.

Study type

Retrospective cohort study.

Self-Reported Pain Treatment Practices Among U.S. and Canadian Adults: Findings From a Population Survey

Background and Objectives

Pain treatments and their efficacy have been studied extensively. Yet surprisingly little is known about the types of treatments, and combinations of treatments, that community-dwelling adults use to manage pain, as well as how treatment types are associated with individual characteristics and national-level context. To fill this gap, we evaluated self-reported pain treatment types among community-dwelling adults in the United States and Canada. We also assessed how treatment types correlate with individuals' pain levels, sociodemographic characteristics, and country of residence, and identified unique clusters of adults in terms of treatment combinations.

Research Design and Methods

We used the 2020 "Recovery and Resilience" United States-Canada general online survey with 2 041 U.S. and 2 072 Canadian community-dwelling adults. Respondents selected up to 10 pain treatment options including medication, physical therapy, exercise, etc., and an open-ended item was available for self-report of any additional treatments. Data were analyzed using descriptive, regression-based, and latent class analyses.

Results

Over-the-counter (OTC) medication was reported most frequently (by 55% of respondents, 95% CI 53%-56%), followed by "just living with pain" (41%, 95% CI 40%-43%) and exercise (40%, 95% CI 38%-41%). The modal response (29%) to the open-ended item was cannabis use. Pain was the most salient correlate, predicting a greater frequency of all pain treatments. Country differences were generally small; a notable exception was alcohol use, which was reported twice as often among U.S. versus Canadian adults. Individuals were grouped into 5 distinct clusters: 2 groups relied predominantly on medication (prescription or OTC), another favored exercise and other self-care approaches, one included adults "just living with" pain, and the cluster with the highest pain levels employed all modalities heavily.

Discussion and Implications

Our findings provide new insights into recent pain treatment strategies among North American adults and identify population subgroups with potentially unmet need for more adaptive and effective pain management.

Changes in Prescribed Opioid Dosages Among Patients Receiving Medical Cannabis for Chronic Pain, New York State, 2017-2019

IMPORTANCE

Patients with chronic pain often receive long-term opioid therapy (LOT), which places them at risk of opioid use disorder and overdose. This presents the need for alternative or companion treatments; however, few studies on the association of medical cannabis (MC) with reducing opioid dosages exist.

OBJECTIVE

To assess changes in opioid dosages among patients receiving MC for longer duration compared with shorter duration.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This cohort study of New York State Prescription Monitoring Program data from 2017 to 2019 included patients receiving MC for chronic pain while also receiving opioid treatment. Of these, patients receiving LOT prior to receiving MC were selected. Individuals were studied for 8 months after starting MC. Data were analyzed from November 2021 to February 2022.

EXPOSURES

Selected patients were divided into 2 groups based on the duration of receiving MC: the nonexposure group received MC for 30 days or fewer, and the exposure group received MC for more than 30 days.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The main outcome was opioid dosage, measured by mean daily morphine milligram equivalent (MME). Analyses were conducted for 3 strata by opioid dosage prior to receiving MC: MME less than 50, MME of 50 to less than 90, and MME of 90 or greater.

RESULTS

A total of 8165 patients were included, with 4041 (median [IQR] age, 57 [47-65] years; 2376 [58.8%] female) in the exposure group and 4124 (median [IQR] age, 54 (44-62) years; 2370 [57.5%] female) in the nonexposure group. Median (IQR) baseline MMEs for the exposure vs nonexposure groups were 30.0 (20.0-40.0) vs 30.0 (20.0-40.0) in the lowest stratum, 60.0 (60.0-70.0) vs 60.0 (60.0-90.0) in the middle stratum, and 150.0 (100.0-216.2) vs 135.0 (100.0-218.0) in the highest stratum. During follow-up, significantly greater reductions in opioid dosage were observed among the exposure group. A dose-response association of patients' opioid dosage at baseline was observed with the differences in the monthly MME reductions between exposure and nonexposure groups, with a difference of -1.52 (95% CI, -1.67 to -1.37) MME for the lowest stratum, -3.24 (95% CI, -3.61 to -2.87) MME for the middle stratum, and -9.33 (95% CI, -9.89 to -8.77) MME for the highest stratum. The daily MME for the last month of the follow-up period among patients receiving longer MC was reduced by 48% in the lowest stratum, 47% in the middle stratum, and 51% in the highest stratum compared with the baseline dosages. Among individuals in the nonexposure group, daily MME was reduced by only 4% in the lowest stratum, 9% in the middle stratum, and 14% in the highest stratum.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

In this cohort study of patients receiving LOT, receiving MC for a longer duration was associated with reductions in opioid dosages, which may lower their risk of opioid-related morbidity and mortality.

Exploring the Association Between Opioid Use Disorder and Alzheimer's Disease and Dementia Among a National Sample of the U.S. Population

BACKGROUND

Past research suggests associations between heavy alcohol use and later life dementia. However, little is known about whether opioid use disorder (OUD) and dementia share this association, especially among age groups younger than 65 years old.

OBJECTIVE

Examine the association between OUD and Alzheimer's disease (AD) and dementia.

METHODS

Electronic health records between 2000 and 2021 for patients age 12 or older were identified in the Cerner Real-World database™. Patients with a prior diagnosis of dementia were excluded. Patients were followed for 1-10 years (grouped by one, three, five, and ten-year follow-up periods) in a matched retrospective cohort study. Cox proportional hazards regressions were used to estimate adjusted hazard ratios (aHRs) of incident AD/dementia stratified by age and follow-up group.

RESULTS

A sample of 627,810 individuals with OUD were compared to 646,340 without OUD. Individuals with OUD exhibited 88% higher risk for developing AD/dementia compared to those without OUD (aHR = 1.88, 95% CI 1.74, 2.03) within 1 year follow-up and 211% (aHR = 3.11, 95% CI 2.63, 3.69) within 10 years follow-up. When stratifying by age, younger patients (age 12-44) had a greater disparity in odds of AD/dementia between OUD and non-OUD groups compared with patients older than 65 years.

CONCLUSIONS

Additional research is needed to understand why an association exists between OUD and AD/dementia, especially among younger populations. The results suggest that cognitive functioning screening programs for younger people diagnosed with OUD may be useful for targeting early identification and intervention for AD/dementia in particularly high risk and marginalized populations.

Trends in the Use of Opioids vs Nonpharmacologic Treatments in Adults With Pain, 2011-2019

IMPORTANCE

Chronic pain prevalence among US adults increased between 2010 and 2019. Yet little is known about trends in the use of prescription opioids and nonpharmacologic alternatives in treating pain.

OBJECTIVES

To compare annual trends in the use of prescription opioids, nonpharmacologic alternatives, both treatments, and neither treatment; compare estimates for the annual use of acupuncture, chiropractic care, massage therapy, occupational therapy, and physical therapy; and estimate the association between calendar year and pain treatment based on the severity of pain interference.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

A serial cross-sectional analysis was conducted using the nationally representative Medical Expenditure Panel Survey to estimate the use of outpatient services by cancer-free adults with chronic or surgical pain between calendar years 2011 and 2019. Data analysis was performed from December 29, 2021, to August 5, 2022.

EXPOSURES

Calendar year (2011-2019) was the primary exposure.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The association between calendar year and mutually exclusive pain treatments (opioid vs nonpharmacologic vs both vs neither treatment) was examined. A secondary outcome was the prevalence of nonpharmacologic treatments (acupuncture, chiropractic care, massage therapy, occupational therapy, and physical therapy). All analyses were stratified by pain type.

RESULTS

Among the unweighted 46 420 respondents, 9643 (20.4% weighted) received surgery and 36 777 (79.6% weighted) did not. Weighted percentages indicated that 41.7% of the respondents were aged 45 to 64 years and 55.0% were women. There were significant trends in the use of pain treatments after adjusting for demographic factors, socioeconomic status, health conditions, and pain severity. For example, exclusive use of nonpharmacologic treatments increased in 2019 for both cohorts (chronic pain: adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 2.72; 95% CI, 2.30-3.21; surgical pain: aOR, 1.53; 95% CI, 1.13-2.08) compared with 2011. The use of neither treatment decreased in 2019 for both cohorts (chronic pain: aOR, 0.43; 95% CI, 0.37-0.49; surgical pain: aOR, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.46-0.75) compared with 2011. Among nonpharmacologic treatments, chiropractors and physical therapists were the most common licensed healthcare professionals.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Among cancer-free adults with pain, the annual prevalence of nonpharmacologic pain treatments increased and the prevalent use of neither opioids nor nonpharmacologic therapy decreased for both chronic and surgical pain cohorts. These findings suggest that, although access to outpatient nonpharmacologic treatments is increasing, more severe pain interference may inhibit this access.

Methodological considerations for estimating policy effects in the context of co-occurring policies

Understanding how best to estimate state-level policy effects is important, and several unanswered questions remain, particularly about the ability of statistical models to disentangle the effects of concurrently enacted policies. In practice, many policy evaluation studies do not attempt to control for effects of co-occurring policies, and this issue has not received extensive attention in the methodological literature to date. In this study, we utilized Monte Carlo simulations to assess the impact of co-occurring policies on the performance of commonly-used statistical models in state policy evaluations. Simulation conditions varied effect sizes of the co-occurring policies and length of time between policy enactment dates, among other factors. Outcome data (annual state-specific opioid mortality rate per 100,000) were obtained from 1999 to 2016 National Vital Statistics System (NVSS) Multiple Cause of Death mortality files, thus yielding longitudinal annual state-level data over 18 years from 50 states. When co-occurring policies are ignored (i.e., omitted from the analytic model), our results demonstrated that high relative bias (> 82%) arises, particularly when policies are enacted in rapid succession. Moreover, as expected, controlling for all co-occurring policies will effectively mitigate the threat of confounding bias; however, effect estimates may be relatively imprecise (i.e., larger variance) when policies are enacted in near succession. Our findings highlight several key methodological issues regarding co-occurring policies in the context of opioid-policy research yet also generalize more broadly to evaluation of other state-level policies, such as policies related to firearms or COVID-19, showcasing the need to think critically about co-occurring policies that are likely to influence the outcome when specifying analytic models.

Trends in Prescriptions for Non-opioid Pain Medications Among U.S. Adults With Moderate or Severe Pain, 2014-2018

As opioid prescribing has declined, it is unclear how the landscape of prescription pain treatment across the U.S. has changed. We used nationally-representative data from the Medical Expenditure Health Survey, 2014 to 2018 to examine trends in prescriptions for opioid and non-opioid pain medications, including acetaminophen, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, gabapentinoids, and antidepressants among U.S. adults with self-reported pain. Overall, from 2014 to 2018, the percentage of participants receiving a prescription for opioids declined, (38.8% vs 32.8%), remained stable for non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (26.8% vs 27.7%), and increased for acetaminophen (1.6% vs 2.3%), antidepressants (9.6% vs 12.0%) and gabapentinoids (13.2% vs 19.0%). In this period, the adjusted odds of receiving an opioid prescription decreased (aOR = .93, 95% CI = .90-.96), while the adjusted odds of receiving antidepressant, gabapentinoid and acetaminophen prescriptions increased (antidepressants: aOR = 1.08, 95% CI = 1.03-1.13 gabapentinoids: aOR = 1.11, 95% CI = 1.06-1.17; acetaminophen: aOR = 1.10, 95% CI: 1.02-1.20). Secondary analyses stratifiying within the 2014 to 2016 and 2016 to 2018 periods revealed particular increases in prescriptions for gabapentinoids (aOR = 1.13, 95% CI = 1.05-1.21) and antidepressants (aOR = 1.23, 95% CI = 1.12-1.35) since 2016. PERSPECTIVE: These data demonstrate that physicians are increasingly turning to CDC-recommended non-opioid medications for pain management, particularly antidepressants and gabapentinoids. However, evidence for these medications' efficacy in treating numerous common pain conditions, including low back pain, remains limited.

Acupuncture therapy as an Evidence-Based Nonpharmacologic Strategy for Comprehensive Acute Pain Care: the Academic Consortium Pain Task Force White Paper Update

Background

A crisis in pain management persists, as does the epidemic of opioid overdose deaths, addiction, and diversion. Pain medicine is meeting these challenges by returning to its origins: the Bonica model of multidisciplinary pain care. The 2018 Academic Consortium White Paper detailed the historical context and magnitude of the pain crisis and the evidence base for nonpharmacologic strategies. More than 50% of chronic opioid use begins in the acute pain care setting. Acupuncture may be able to reduce this risk.

Objective

This article updates the evidence base for acupuncture therapy for acute pain with a review of systematic reviews and meta-analyses on postsurgical/perioperative pain with opioid sparing and acute nonsurgical/trauma pain, including acute pain in the emergency department.

Methods

To update reviews cited in the 2018 White Paper, electronic searches were conducted in PubMed, MEDLINE, CINAHL, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials for “acupuncture” and “acupuncture therapy” and “acute pain,” “surgery,” “peri-operative,” “trauma,” “emergency department,” “urgent care,” “review(s) ,” “systematic review,” “meta-analysis,” with additional manual review of titles, links, and reference lists.

Results

There are 22 systematic reviews, 17 with meta-analyses of acupuncture in acute pain settings, and a review for acute pain in the intensive care unit. There are additional studies of acupuncture in acute pain settings.

Conclusion

The majority of reviews found acupuncture therapy to be an efficacious strategy for acute pain, with potential to avoid or reduce opioid reliance. Future multicenter trials are needed to clarify the dosage and generalizability of acupuncture for acute pain in the emergency department. With an extremely low risk profile, acupuncture therapy is an important strategy in comprehensive acute pain care.

The Role of Spinal Cord Stimulation in Reducing Opioid Use in the Setting of Chronic Neuropathic Pain: A Systematic Review

OBJECTIVE

The aim was to examine research on the impact of spinal cord stimulation (SCS) on the reduction of preimplantation opioid dose and what preimplantation opioid dose is associated with a reduction or discontinuation of opioid use postimplantation.

METHODS

Systematic review of literature from PubMed, Web of Science, and Ovid Medline search of "opioid" and "pain" and "spinal cord stimulator." Inclusion criteria included original research providing data on SCS preimplantation opioid dosing and 12 months postimplantation opioid dosing or that correlated specific preimplantation opioid dose or opioid dose cutoff with significantly increased likelihood of opioid use discontinuation at 12 months postimplantation.

RESULTS

Systematic review of the literature yielded 17 studies providing data on pre-SCS and post-SCS implantation dose and 4 providing data on the preimplantation opioid dose that significantly increased likelihood of opioid use discontinuation at 12 months postimplantation. Data from included studies indicated that SCS is an effective tool in reducing opioid dose from preimplantation levels at 12 months postimplantation. Data preliminarily supports the assertion that initiation of SCS at a preimplantation opioid dose of ≤20 to ≤42.5 morphine milligram equivalents increases the likelihood of postimplantation elimination of opioid use.

DISCUSSION

SCS is an effective treatment for many types of chronic pain and can reduce or eliminate chronic opioid use. Preimplantation opioid dose may impact discontinuation of opioid use postimplantation and the effectiveness of SCS in the relief of chronic pain. More research is needed to support and strengthen clinical recommendations for initiation of SCS use at lower daily opioid dose.

Opioid Dosage Levels, Concurrent Risk Factors and Self-Perceptions among Chronic Pain, Opioid-Managed Individuals at Elevated Risk for Opioid Overdose

While current opioid prescribing guidelines highlight a dose-response relationship between therapeutic management and overdose risk, other concurrent risk factors have also been identified. However, there is little data in assessing the relationship between risk factor prevalence, associated provider communication, and subsequent perceptions of overdose risk among chronic pain, opioid-managed (CPOM) patients. An online questionnaire was distributed in June 2020 to a sample of CPOM individuals (n = 190) treated with an opioid prescription at or above 50 daily MME, or any dosage alongside benzodiazepines. CPOM individuals reported a mean daily MME of 470, with half (52.6%) receiving a concurrent benzodiazepine prescription. All patients reported past month alcohol use, and 67.4% indicated a risk-elevating diagnosed medical condition. In assessing provider communication, 41.6% reported no discussion focusing on the risks of one’s opioid therapy. Subsequently, 62.1% perceived themselves as having “no risk”, and 60.0% were “not at all concerned” (60.0%) about experiencing an opioid overdose. Organizational policies should focus on implementing consistent methods of patient education regarding overdose risk, as well as assessments of behaviors or characteristics that my increase an individual’s risk of opioid overdose. These policies should also include other forms of evidence-based overdose risk prevention such as co-prescriptions of naloxone.