Stopping or Decreasing Opioid Therapy in Patients on Chronic Opioid Therapy

Association of Opioid Use Disorder Diagnosis With Use of Physical Therapy and Chiropractic Care Among Chronic Low Back Pain Patients: A Group-Based Trajectory Analysis

Nonpharmacologic approaches are recommended as first-line treatment for chronic pain, and their importance is heightened among individuals with co-occurring opioid use disorder (OUD), in whom opioid therapies may be particularly detrimental. Our objectives were to assess the receipt and trajectories of nonpharmacologic pain treatment and determine the association of OUD diagnosis with these trajectories. This retrospective cohort study used Medicare claims data from 2016 to 2018 and applied group-based trajectory models to identify distinct patterns of physical therapy (PT) or chiropractic care treatment over the 12 months following a new episode of chronic low back pain. We used logistic regression models to estimate the association of co-occurring OUD with group membership in PT and chiropractic trajectories. Our sample comprised 607,729 beneficiaries at least 18 years of age, of whom 11.4% had a diagnosis of OUD. The 12-month prevalence of PT and chiropractic treatment receipt was 24.7% and 27.1%, respectively, and lower among Medicare beneficiaries with co-occurring OUD (PT: 14.6%; chiropractic: 6.8%). The final models identified 3 distinct trajectories each for PT (no/little use [76.6% of sample], delayed and increasing use [8.2%], and early and declining use [15.2%]); and chiropractic (no/little use [75.0% of sample], early and declining use [17.3%], and early and sustained use [7.7%]). People with OUD were more likely to belong in trajectories with little/no PT or chiropractic care as compared to other trajectories. The findings indicate that people with co-occurring chronic pain and OUD often do not receive early or any nonpharmacologic pain therapies as recommended by practice guidelines. PERSPECTIVE: PT and chiropractic care use were low overall and even lower among Medicare beneficiaries with co-occurring OUD compared with those without OUD. As updated guidelines on pain management are promulgated, targeted interventions (eg, insurance policy, provider, and patient education) are needed to ensure equitable access to guideline-recommended pain therapies.

Short- and long-term safety of discontinuing chronic opioid therapy among older adults with Alzheimer's disease and related dementia

BACKGROUND

Limited evidence exists on the short- and long-term safety of discontinuing versus continuing chronic opioid therapy (COT) among patients with Alzheimer's disease and related dementias (ADRD).

METHODS

This cohort study was conducted among 162,677 older residents with ADRD and receipt of COT using a 100% Medicare nursing home sample. Discontinuation of COT was defined as no opioid refills for ≥90 days. Primary outcomes were rates of pain-related hospitalisation, pain-related emergency department visit, injury, opioid use disorder (OUD) and opioid overdose (OD) measured by diagnosis codes at quarterly intervals during 1- and 2-year follow-ups. Poisson regression models were fit using generalised estimating equations with inverse probability of treatment weights to model quarterly outcome rates between residents who discontinued versus continued COT.

RESULTS

The study sample consisted of 218,040 resident episodes with COT; of these episodes, 180,916 residents (83%) continued COT, whereas 37,124 residents (17%) subsequently discontinued COT. Discontinuing (vs. continuing) COT was associated with higher rates of all outcomes in the first quarter, but these associations attenuated over time. The adjusted rates of injury, OUD and OD were 0, 69 and 60% lower at the 1-year follow-up and 11, 81 and 79% lower at the 2-year follow-up, respectively, for residents who discontinued versus continued COT, with no difference in the adjusted rates of pain-related hospitalisations or emergency department visits.

CONCLUSIONS

The rates of adverse outcomes were higher in the first quarter but lower or non-differential at 1-year and 2-year follow-ups between COT discontinuers versus continuers among older residents with ADRD.

Prevalence and correlates of DSM-5 opioid withdrawal syndrome in U.S. adults with non-medical use of prescription opioids: results from a national sample

Background: In the U.S. non-medical use of prescription opioids (NMOU) is prevalent and often accompanied by opioid withdrawal syndrome (OWS). OWS has not been studied using nationally representative data.Objectives: We examined the prevalence and clinical correlates of OWS among U.S. adults with NMOU.Methods: We used data from 36,309 U.S. adult participants in the 2012-2013 National Epidemiologic Survey on Alcohol and Related Conditions-III, 1,527 of whom reported past 12-month NMOU. Adjusted linear and logistic regression models examined associations between OWS and its clinical correlates, including psychiatric disorders, opioid use disorder (OUD; excluding the withdrawal criterion), medical conditions, and healthcare utilization among people with regular (i.e. ≥3 days/week) NMOU (n = 534).Results: Over half (50.4%) of the sample was male. Approximately 9% of people with NMOU met criteria for DSM-5 OWS, with greater prevalence of OWS (∼20%) among people with regular NMOU. Individuals with bipolar disorder, dysthymia, panic disorder, and borderline personality disorder had greater odds of OWS (aOR range = 2.71-4.63). People with OWS had lower mental health-related quality of life (β=-8.32, p < .001). Individuals with OUD also had greater odds of OWS (aOR range = 26.02-27.77), an association that increased with more severe OUD. People using substance use-related healthcare services also had greater odds of OWS (aOR range = 6.93-7.69).Conclusion: OWS was prevalent among people with OUD and some psychiatric disorders. These findings support screening for OWS in people with NMOU and suggest that providing medication- assisted treatments and behavioral interventions could help to reduce the burden of withdrawal in this patient population.

Targeting Opioid Receptors in Addiction and Drug Withdrawal: Where Are We Going?

This review article offers an outlook on the use of opioids as therapeutics for treating several diseases, including cancer and non-cancer pain, and focuses the analysis on the opportunity to target opioid receptors for treating opioid use disorder (OUD), drug withdrawal, and addiction. Unfortunately, as has been well established, the use of opioids presents a plethora of side effects, such as tolerance and physical and physiological dependence. Accordingly, considering the great pharmacological potential in targeting opioid receptors, the identification of opioid receptor ligands devoid of most of the adverse effects exhibited by current therapeutic agents is highly necessary. To this end, herein, we analyze some interesting molecules that could potentially be useful for treating OUD, with an in-depth analysis regarding in vivo studies and clinical trials.

Nurse-Led Telephone Follow-Up Intervention for Titrating and Tapering Opioids in Chronic Pain Patients - A Feasibility Study

Background and Purpose

Opioids in chronic non-cancer pain are debated, but remain a part of the pain treatment for selected patients. Research is scarce on the relieving and adverse effects of opioids, and how to deliver opioid treatment in this patient group. This study's purpose was to assess the feasibility of a nurse-led telephone follow-up intervention for titrating or tapering opioids, including a pilot study of the intervention outcomes.

Patients and Methods

The feasibility assessment and process evaluation were performed according to the UK Medical Research Council (MRC) framework for evaluating complex interventions. A pilot study of the intervention outcomes was also performed. With a retrospective, descriptive, and longitudinal approach, we analyzed reports from 32 patients who titrated or tapered opioids. Information on demography, sleep satisfaction, health status, pain intensity/bothersomeness, opioid doses, and side effects was derived from the Oslo Pain Registry. Descriptive statistics, t-tests, and chi-square tests were used to analyze registry data.

Results

The study findings indicate that the intervention is feasible. Areas of impact were lack of a sound theory basis, unclear allocation criteria, and inconsistent and non-validated measurement tools. Mechanisms of change were interprofessional collaboration, nurses' knowledge and competencies, predictability, and availability. Statistical analyses showed no between-groups differences in demographical-, clinical-, and pain characteristics, except those who titrated opioids were significantly older than patients tapering opioids (P=0.010). All patients reported poor health and side effects at baseline. Those who tapered opioids had a significant reduction in opioid use (P=0.004). Titrating opioids was associated with a significant increase in side effects (P=0.038).

Conclusion

Considering the limitations and the strengths of the intervention, the present study indicates that the nurse-led telephone follow-up program is a feasible intervention. With the right adjustments and improvements, the intervention is eligible for a larger efficacy study.

Clinical Management of Opioid Withdrawal

Appropriate clinical management of opioid withdrawal is a crucial bridge to long-term treatment for opioid use disorder (OUD), because it is a high-risk time for potential opioid overdose and relapse. We provide a narrative review of evidence-based opioid withdrawal management strategies applicable to a variety of treatment settings and geographies. The goals of opioid withdrawal management include relieving suffering associated with withdrawal, providing appropriate diagnosis and screening, engaging patients in initiation of OUD treatment, and using harm reduction strategies, all guided by a patient-centered approach to care. In addition, we discuss complex cases, relapse prevention strategies, and new developments in opioid withdrawal management.

Patient engagement and prescription opioid use in perioperative pain management

OBJECTIVE

To examine (1) patient perceptions regarding their engagement and the engagement of their families in perioperative pain management, (2) demographic and clinical characteristics associated with perceived patient and family engagement, and (3) the association between perceived patient and family engagement and patient outcomes.

DESIGN

A prospective, observational study.

SETTING

The Personalized Pain Program (PPP) at the Johns Hopkins Hospital in Baltimore, Maryland.

PARTICIPANTS

Patients having more than one visit to the PPP.

INTERVENTIONS

n/a.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Since the inception of the PPP, patients were surveyed prior to each clinic visit to assess their pain severity and interference using the Brief Pain Inventory. Starting August 22, 2018, two additional questions were added to the survey to assess patient perceptions of their engagement and the engagement of their families in perioperative pain management. In addition, electronic medical records were reviewed to collect data on daily opioid consumption during the first and last PPP visits presurgery and post-surgery.

RESULTS

The final analysis included 511 survey responses from 155 patients. Perceived engagement of the patient in perioperative pain management improved over time (p < .001) and was significantly associated with reduction in prescription opioid consumption after surgery (coef = 12.7, SE = 5.8, p = .031).

CONCLUSIONS

Surgical patients and their family members should be actively engaged in perioperative pain management to improve prescription opioid use and the quality and safety of perioperative care.

Benefit-risk assessment and reporting in clinical trials of chronic pain treatments: IMMPACT recommendations

ABSTRACT

Chronic pain clinical trials have historically assessed benefit and risk outcomes separately. However, a growing body of research suggests that a composite metric that accounts for benefit and risk in relation to each other can provide valuable insights into the effects of different treatments. Researchers and regulators have developed a variety of benefit-risk composite metrics, although the extent to which these methods apply to randomized clinical trials (RCTs) of chronic pain has not been evaluated in the published literature. This article was motivated by an Initiative on Methods, Measurement, and Pain Assessment in Clinical Trials consensus meeting and is based on the expert opinion of those who attended. In addition, a review of the benefit-risk assessment tools used in published chronic pain RCTs or highlighted by key professional organizations (ie, Cochrane, European Medicines Agency, Outcome Measures in Rheumatology, and U.S. Food and Drug Administration) was completed. Overall, the review found that benefit-risk metrics are not commonly used in RCTs of chronic pain despite the availability of published methods. A primary recommendation is that composite metrics of benefit-risk should be combined at the level of the individual patient, when possible, in addition to the benefit-risk assessment at the treatment group level. Both levels of analysis (individual and group) can provide valuable insights into the relationship between benefits and risks associated with specific treatments across different patient subpopulations. The systematic assessment of benefit-risk in clinical trials has the potential to enhance the clinical meaningfulness of RCT results.

What Your Death Certificate Says About You May Be Wrong: A Narrative Review on CDC's Efforts to Quantify Prescription Opioid Overdose Deaths

Mortality data in most countries are reported using the International Classification of Diseases (ICD), managed by the WHO. In this paper, we show how the ICD is ill-suited for classifying drug-involved deaths, many of which involve polysubstance abuse and/or illicitly manufactured fentanyl (IMF). Opioids identified in death certificates are categorized according to six ICD T-codes: opium (T40.0), heroin (T40.1), methadone (T40.3), other synthetic narcotics (T40.4), and other and unspecified narcotics (T40.6). Except for opium, heroin, and methadone, all other opioids except those that are unspecified are aggregated in two T-codes (T40.2 and T40.4), depending upon whether they are natural/semisynthetic or synthetic opioids other than methadone. The result is a system that obscures the actual cause of most drug overdose deaths and, instead, just tallies the number of times each drug is mentioned in an overdose situation. We examined the CDC's methodology for coding other controlled substances according to the ICD and found that, besides fentanyl, the ICD does not distinguish between other licit and illicitly manufactured controlled substances. Moreover, we discovered that the CDC codes all methadone-related deaths as resulting from the prescribed form of the drug. These and other anomalies in the CDC's mortality reporting are discussed in this report. We conclude that the CDC was at fault for failing to correct the miscoding of IMF. Finally, we briefly discuss some of the public policy consequences of this error, the misguided focus by public health and safety officials on pharmaceutical opioids, their prescribers and users, and the pressing necessity for the CDC to reassess how it measures and reports drug-involved mortality.

STRategies to Improve Pain and Enjoy life (STRIPE): Protocol for a pragmatic randomized trial of pain coping skills training and opioid medication taper guidance for patients on long-term opioid therapy

High-dose, long-term opioid therapy (LtOT) is associated with risk for serious harms. Rapid opioid discontinuation may lead to increased pain, psychological distress, and illicit opioid use, but gradual, supported opioid taper may reduce these risks. We previously demonstrated that an opioid taper support and pain coping skills training intervention reduced opioid dose more than usual care (43% vs 19% dose reduction from baseline), with no increase in pain intensity and a significant reduction in activity interference. We aim to adapt and test this intervention in the Kaiser Permanente Washington healthcare system with STRategies to Improve Pain and Enjoy life (STRIPE), a pragmatic, randomized trial. Our goal was to randomize 215 participants on moderate-high dose (≥40 morphine milligram equivalent/day) LtOT to either cognitive-behavioral therapy-based pain coping skills training involving 18 telephone sessions over 52 weeks with optional opioid taper support or usual care. Data are collected from electronic health records, claims, and self-report. The primary outcomes are mean daily opioid dose and the pain intensity, interference with enjoyment of life, and interference with general activity (PEG) score at 12 months (primary time point) and 6 months (secondary time point). Secondary outcomes include having ≥30% opioid dose reduction from baseline, and patient-reported problem opioid use, opioid-related difficulties, pain self-efficacy, opioid craving, global impression of change, and anxiety and depressive symptoms at 6 and 12 months. If effective, this treatment could reduce opioid exposure and associated risks to patients, families, and communities while offering patients an alternative for managing pain. Trial registration: The study was first registered at Clinicaltrials.gov on November 16, 2018 (identifier: NCT03743402).

Medical Record Documentation About Opioid Tapering: Examining Benefit-to-Harm Framework and Patient Engagement

OBJECTIVE

Guidelines recommend that clinicians make decisions about opioid tapering for patients with chronic pain using a benefit-to-harm framework and engaging patients. Studies have not examined clinician documentation about opioid tapering using this framework.

DESIGN AND SETTING

Thematic and content analysis of clinician documentation about opioid tapering in patients' medical records in a large academic health system.

METHODS

Medical records were reviewed for patients aged 18 or older, without cancer, who were prescribed stable doses of long-term opioid therapy between 10/2015 and 10/2016 then experienced an opioid taper (dose reduction ≥30%) between 10/2016 and 10/2017. Inductive thematic analysis of clinician documentation within six months of taper initiation was conducted to understand rationale for taper, and deductive content analysis was conducted to determine the frequencies of a priori elements of a benefit-to-harm framework.

RESULTS

Thematic analysis of 39 patients' records revealed 1) documented rationale for tapering prominently cited potential harms of continuing opioids, rather than observed harms or lack of benefits; 2) patient engagement was variable and disagreement with tapering was prominent. Content analysis found no patients' records with explicit mention of benefit-to-harm assessments. Benefits of continuing opioids were mentioned in 56% of patients' records, observed harms were mentioned in 28%, and potential harms were mentioned in 90%.

CONCLUSIONS

In this study, documentation of opioid tapering focused on potential harms of continuing opioids, indicated variable patient engagement, and lacked a complete benefit-to-harm framework. Future initiatives should develop standardized ways of incorporating a benefit-to-harm framework and patient engagement into clinician decisions and documentation about opioid tapering.

Detoxification of Neuromodulation Eligible Patients by a Standardized Protocol: A Retrospective Pilot Study

OBJECTIVES

Patients eligible for spinal cord stimulation (SCS) generally experience excruciating pain, requiring more opioid consumption, which is usually an indication for SCS implantation. After final implantation, SCS has the ability to stabilize or decrease opioid usage in half of the patients. In this study, opioids were actively eliminated prior to implantation of any neuromodulation device with a standardized detoxification protocol. This pilot study aims to explore the feasibility, effectiveness, and safety of this opioid detoxification protocol prior to neuromodulation techniques.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In this retrospective pilot study, 70 patients who were taking opioids and who were eligible for neuromodulation techniques, underwent the detoxification program. A combined in- and out-patient clinic protocol was applied, whereby clonidine was the main component of both parts of the program. A multidisciplinary team with pain physicians and psychologists was responsible for performing this detoxification program. Safety and feasibility were systematically recorded during the hospitalization.

RESULTS

No serious safety issues were reported. At the start of the program, patients reported a mild sedative effect of clonidine. Additionally, most patients presented mild symptoms of opioid withdrawal, which were partially countered by the sedative effect of clonidine. Both patients and the medical staff found this protocol feasible in clinical practice. Concerning the effectiveness, a statistically significant decrease in median morphine milligram equivalents (MMEs) was found with a MME of 175 (Q1-Q3: 118.1-240) at baseline and at the last available follow-up visit the MME was 0 (Q1-Q3: 0-16.88).

CONCLUSIONS

This standardized detoxification program has proven its effectiveness, safety, and feasibility in this single-center experience pilot study in patients eligible for neuromodulation techniques.

Perioperative Pain Management and Opioid Stewardship: A Practical Guide

Surgical procedures are key drivers of pain development and opioid utilization globally. Various organizations have generated guidance on postoperative pain management, enhanced recovery strategies, multimodal analgesic and anesthetic techniques, and postoperative opioid prescribing. Still, comprehensive integration of these recommendations into standard practice at the institutional level remains elusive, and persistent postoperative pain and opioid use pose significant societal burdens. The multitude of guidance publications, many different healthcare providers involved in executing them, evolution of surgical technique, and complexities of perioperative care transitions all represent challenges to process improvement. This review seeks to summarize and integrate key recommendations into a "roadmap" for institutional adoption of perioperative analgesic and opioid optimization strategies. We present a brief review of applicable statistics and definitions as impetus for prioritizing both analgesia and opioid exposure in surgical quality improvement. We then review recommended modalities at each phase of perioperative care. We showcase the value of interprofessional collaboration in implementing and sustaining perioperative performance measures related to pain management and analgesic exposure, including those from the patient perspective. Surgery centers across the globe should adopt an integrated, collaborative approach to the twin goals of optimal pain management and opioid stewardship across the care continuum.

Chronic pain and COVID-19: pathophysiological, clinical and organizational issues

During the lockdown phase of the COVID-19 pandemic, a call not to neglect the continuum of care of patients who present with chronic diseases, including pain, was made. In the field of pain, COVID-19 had an impact both from a clinical (i.e., the influence of SARS-CoV-2 infection on pain) and organizational (i.e., how patients with chronic pain should be managed in the post-COVID-19 era) perspective. Furthermore, patients with chronic pain are also frequently frail subjects, affected from multiple comorbidities and hence are at increased risk of infection. On these bases, how the necessity to continue pain therapy will be pursued in the post-COVID-19 era? In this paper, we comment on the above-mentioned topics, on the basis of available data and our experience as pain therapists.

Pain rehabilitation's dual power: Treatment for chronic pain and prevention of opioid-related risks

The purpose of this article is to provide a data-driven exploration of an interdisciplinary pain rehabilitation program (PRP) as a viable option for addressing the dual crises of chronic pain and opioid use. Psychologists are crucial providers in the PRP, in both intervention and leadership roles. There is well-established literature supporting pain rehabilitation as an effective treatment for chronic pain and functioning, but there are few studies examining the effects of pain rehabilitation on opioid misuse risk. We evaluated data from 60 patients with diverse chronic pain conditions who completed an interdisciplinary PRP to evaluate changes in pain, functioning (self-report and objective physical measure), psychological symptoms, and health-related quality of life. To evaluate the effect of pain rehabilitation on opioid-related risks, we examined opioid use and opioid misuse behaviors (measured by the Current Opioid Misuse Measure; COMM) pre- and posttreatment. Results demonstrated statistically significant improvements in all outcomes, with medium effect sizes for pain severity and large effect sizes for functioning, psychological symptoms, and emotional quality of life. Fifty-eight percent of patients were on opioid medications at entry compared with 15% at discharge. Among patients who entered on opioids, mean COMM scores were significantly reduced from above the cutoff for misuse risk (M = 13.57) to below the cutoff (M = 5.86). Overall, this study provided strong support for pain rehabilitation as an effective treatment for chronic pain and related suffering, while also providing a prevention-based opportunity for reducing opioid-related risk. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).

A Comprehensive Update of Lofexidine for the Management of Opioid Withdrawal Symptoms

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This is a comprehensive review of the literature regarding the use of Lofexidine for opiate withdrawal symptoms. It covers the background and necessity of withdrawal programs and the management of withdrawal symptoms and then covers the existing evidence of the use of Lofexidine for this purpose.

RECENT FINDINGS

Opiate abuse leads to significant pain and suffering. However, withdrawal is difficult and often accompanied by withdrawal symptoms and renewed cravings. These symptoms are driven mostly by signaling in the locus coeruleus and the mesolimbic system and a rebound increase in noradrenaline, producing symptoms such as anxiety, gastrointestinal upset, and tension. Lofexidine, an alpha-2 agonist, can be used to manage acute withdrawal symptoms before starting maintenance treatment with either methadone or buprenorphine. Lofexidine, if FDA approved for management of withdrawal symptoms and has been proved to be both effective and safe.

SUMMARY

Opiate addiction is increasing and plaguing the western world and specifically the U.S. It takes a large toll on both a personal and societal level and carries a high cost. Withdrawal is difficult, both related to withdrawal symptoms and renewed cravings. Lofexidine has been shown to be effective in reducing the former and could potentially aid in recovery and withdrawal.