Adherence to Analgesics for Cancer Pain: A Comparative Study of African Americans and Whites Using an Electronic Monitoring Device

Cannabis and opioid perceptions, co-use, and substitution among patients across 4 NCI-Designated Cancer Centers

Prescription opioids are used for managing pain in persons with cancer, however, there are socioeconomic and racial disparities in medication access. Cannabis is increasingly used for cancer symptom management and as an opioid alternative. Limited data are available about patterns of opioid and cannabis use among patients with cancer. We used survey data from 4 National Cancer Institute-designated cancer centers in 3 states (n = 1220) to assess perceptions, use of cannabis and opioids for pain, their substitution, and racial and ethnic differences in each outcome. Compared with White patients, Black patients were less likely to use opioids for pain (odds ratio [OR] = 0.66; P = .035) and more likely to report that cannabis was more effective than opioids (OR = 2.46; P = .03). Race effects were mitigated (P > .05) after controlling for socioeconomic factors. Further research is needed to understand cannabis and opioid use patterns and how overlapping social determinants of health create a disadvantage in cancer symptom management for Black patients.

Potential role of cannabis in ameliorating observed racialized disparities in cancer pain management

Cancer-related pain affects a large proportion of all patients with cancer yet remains inadequately managed, particularly among patients from certain racialized backgrounds. Recently, there has been increased research and clinical interest in the use of medical cannabis for cancer pain management, including its potential to ameliorate race-based disparities in cancer pain control. Although medical cannabis is not currently a US Food and Drug Administration-approved treatment option for cancer-related pain, many oncologists discuss and recommend its use with their patients, underscoring the need for researchers and clinicians to proactively identify barriers to cannabis for cancer pain management that may disproportionately affect patients from certain racial groups. In this commentary, we highlight challenges that patients from racialized backgrounds may face when incorporating cannabis into their palliative care regimens and discuss opportunities for researchers and clinicians to address these challenges should medical cannabis become a recommended treatment option for cancer pain management. In particular, we identify challenges at the structural (eg, lack of insurance coverage), clinician (eg, racialized stereotypes regarding addiction and pain), and individual (eg, internalized stigma) levels and emphasize the importance of multilevel approaches in combating these challenges as the evidence base regarding medical cannabis and its potential harms and therapeutic benefits continues to accumulate.

Analysis of Nausea and Vomiting Frequency Following Opioid Dose Escalation and Its Risk Factors: A Single-Center Retrospective Observational Study

Background and Objective: Opioid-induced nausea and vomiting (OINV) is known to develop not only upon opioid introduction but also during opioid dose escalation, but the actual details are unclear. The aim of this study was to investigate the frequency of OINV in opioid dose escalation at a single center and to identify risk factors. Methods: A retrospective analysis of the medical records of hospitalized patients with cancer who underwent increased intake of oral oxycodone extended-release tablets at Komaki City Hospital between January 2016 and December 2019 was performed. Associations between the incidence of OINV and multiple factors were analyzed, including patient demographics, opioid daily dose, comorbidities, history of nausea after opioid introduction, and prophylactic antiemetic drugs. Results: Of the 132 patients analyzed, 56 (42.4%; grades 1 and 2, 36 and 20, respectively) developed opioid-induced nausea after opioid dose escalation, 26 (19.7%; grades 1 and 2, 19 and 7, respectively) developed opioid-induced vomiting, 58 (43.9%) had either opioid-induced nausea or vomiting. Thirty-five of 60 patients (55.0%) developed OINV among those who received prophylactic antiemetic drugs at opioid dose escalation. Performance status (≥2) (odds ratio [OR]: 2.36, 95% confidence interval [95% CI]: 1.15-4.84, p = 0.02) and history of nausea for opioid introduction (OR: 2.92, 95% CI: 1.20-7.10, p = 0.02) were detected as risk factors for the development of OINV. Conclusion: This study revealed a high incidence of OINV during opioid dose escalation, indicating that careful monitoring is required as at the time of opioid introduction. Further validation by a prospective study is required.

A Qualitative Study of the Pain Experience of Black Individuals With Cancer Taking Long-Acting Opioids

BACKGROUND

Little is known about the experience of Black individuals with cancer taking long-acting opioids for cancer pain.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to describe the day-to-day experience of living with pain and the experiences of taking opioids for pain management among Black individuals with cancer prescribed with long-acting opioids.

METHODS

This qualitative descriptive study was part of a larger investigation focused on opioid adherence. Participants (N = 14) were interviewed using a semistructured interview guide. Analysis followed conventional content analysis and constant comparison approaches. Sociodemographics, clinical information, and the Brief Pain Inventory form were collected.

RESULTS

The majority of the subsample was female (64.3%), not married (78.6%), and with a median age of 52.5 years. Participants were taking either MS Contin (85.7%) or OxyContin (14.3%). The Brief Pain Inventory median "average" pain severity scores and pain interference scores were 5.1/10 (interquartile range [IQR] = 6.1) and 3.5/10 (IQR = 6.7), respectively. Three themes are reported from the analyses: desire for control, barriers to pain relief, and isolation versus connectedness.

CONCLUSION

Our findings highlight the persistent nature of moderate to severe cancer pain and how pain and its treatment interfere with patients' lives. The findings describe ways that patients learn to manage and exert control over pain despite conflicting attitudes and dealing with opioid stigma.

IMPLICATION FOR PRACTICE

Clinicians should partner with patients with cancer, especially people of color, who may experience intersecting stigmas related to their cancer pain and opioid use, to best provide an individualized and culturally sensitive pain treatment plan.

Toward reducing racialized pain care disparities: Approaching cannabis research and access through the lens of equity and inclusion

There is growing interest in cannabis use for cancer pain. This commentary aims to discuss the evidence surrounding cannabis use for cancer pain in the context of the long-racialized landscape of cannabis policies and the disparity in pain control among cancer patients holding minoritized racial identities. Much evidence surrounding both the benefits and harms of cannabis use in cancer patients, and all patients in general, is lacking. Although drawing on the research in cancer that is available, it is also important to illustrate the broader context about how cannabis' deep roots in medical, political, and social history impact patient use and health care policies. There are lessons we can learn from the racialized disparities in opioid risk mitigation strategies, so they are not replicated in the settings of cannabis for cancer symptom management. Additionally, the authors intentionally use the term "cannabis" here rather than "marijuana.: In the early 1900s, the lay press and government popularized the use of the word "marijuana" instead of the more common "cannabis" to tie the drug to anti-Mexican prejudice.

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.

Association of Race/Ethnicity, Persistent Poverty, and Opioid Access Among Patients with Gastrointestinal Cancer Near the End of Life

BACKGROUND

Social determinants of health (SDoH) can impact access to healthcare. We sought to assess the association between persistent poverty (PP), race/ethnicity, and opioid access among patients with gastrointestinal cancer near the end-of-life (EOL).

METHODS

SEER-Medicare patients with gastric, liver, pancreatic, biliary, colon, and rectal cancer were identified between 2008 and 2016 near EOL, defined as 30 days before death or hospice enrolment. Data were linked with county-level poverty from the American Community Survey and the US Department of Agriculture (2000-2015). Counties were categorized as never high-poverty (NHP), intermittent high-poverty (IHP) and persistent poverty (PP). Trends in opioid prescription fills and daily dosages (morphine milligram equivalents per day) were examined.

RESULTS

Among 48,631 Medicare beneficiaries (liver: n = 6551, 13.5%; pancreas: n = 13,559, 27.9%; gastric: n = 5486, 1.3%; colorectal: n = 23,035, 47.4%), there was a steady decrease in opioid prescriptions near EOL. Black, Asian, Hispanic, and other racial groups had markedly decreased odds of filling an opioid prescription near EOL (Black: OR 0.84, 95% CI 0.79-0.90; Asian: OR 0.86, 95% CI 0.79-0.94; Hispanic: OR 0.90, 95% CI 0.84-0.95; Other: OR 0.83, 95% CI 0.74-0.93; all p < 0.05). Even after filling an opioid prescription, this subset of patients received lower daily doses versus White patients (Black: -16.5 percentage points, 95% CI -21.2 to -11.6; Asian: -11.9 percentage points, 95% CI -18.5 to -4.9; Hispanic: -19.1 percentage points, 95%CI -23.5 to -14.6; all p < 0.05). The disparity in opioid access and average daily doses among was attenuated in IHP/PP areas for Asian, Hispanic, and other racial groups, yet exacerbated among Black patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Race/ethnicity-based disparities in EOL pain management persist with SDoH-based variations in EOL opioid use. In particular, PP impacted EOL opioid access and utilization.

Culturally Responsive Care Delivery in Oncology: The Example of Multiple Myeloma

Multiple myeloma (MM) represents ∼1% of all cancers and is the second most common hematologic malignancy worldwide. The incidence of MM is at least two times higher in Blacks/African Americans compared with their White counterparts, and Hispanics/Latinxs are among the youngest patients diagnosed with the disease. Recent advances in available treatments for MM have demonstrated significant improvement in survival outcomes; however, patients from non-White racial/ethnic groups clinically benefit less due to multiple factors including access to care, socioeconomic status, medical mistrust, underutilization of novel therapies, and exclusion from clinical trials. Health inequities in disease characteristics and risk factors based on race also contribute to inequities in outcomes. In this review, we highlight racial/ethnic factors as well as structural barriers attributed to variations in MM epidemiology and management. We focus on three populations-Black/African American, Hispanic/Latinx, and American Indian/Alaska Native-and review factors that healthcare professionals may consider when treating patients of color. We offer tangible advice for healthcare professionals on how to incorporate cultural humility into their practice by following the five key steps: establishing trust, respecting cultural diversity, undergoing cross-cultural training, counseling patients on appropriate available clinical trial options, and connecting patients to community resources. The outlined recommendations will help the medical community to better understand and apply the important concept of cultural humility into their practice to provide the best care for all their patients, regardless of race/ethnicity.

Racial and Ethnic Disparities in Opioid Access and Urine Drug Screening Among Older Patients With Poor-Prognosis Cancer Near the End of Life

PURPOSE

To characterize racial and ethnic disparities and trends in opioid access and urine drug screening (UDS) among patients dying of cancer, and to explore potential mechanisms.

METHODS

Among 318,549 non-Hispanic White (White), Black, and Hispanic Medicare decedents older than 65 years with poor-prognosis cancers, we examined 2007-2019 trends in opioid prescription fills and potency (morphine milligram equivalents [MMEs] per day [MMEDs]) near the end of life (EOL), defined as 30 days before death or hospice enrollment. We estimated the effects of race and ethnicity on opioid access, controlling for demographic and clinical factors. Models were further adjusted for socioeconomic factors including dual-eligibility status, community-level deprivation, and rurality. We similarly explored disparities in UDS.

RESULTS

Between 2007 and 2019, White, Black, and Hispanic decedents experienced steady declines in EOL opioid access and rapid expansion of UDS. Compared with White patients, Black and Hispanic patients were less likely to receive any opioid (Black, -4.3 percentage points, 95% CI, -4.8 to -3.6; Hispanic, -3.6 percentage points, 95% CI, -4.4 to -2.9) and long-acting opioids (Black, -3.1 percentage points, 95% CI, -3.6 to -2.8; Hispanic, -2.2 percentage points, 95% CI, -2.7 to -1.7). They also received lower daily doses (Black, -10.5 MMED, 95% CI, -12.8 to -8.2; Hispanic, -9.1 MMED, 95% CI, -12.1 to -6.1) and lower total doses (Black, -210 MMEs, 95% CI, -293 to -207; Hispanic, -179 MMEs, 95% CI, -217 to -142); Black patients were also more likely to undergo UDS (0.5 percentage points; 95% CI, 0.3 to 0.8). Disparities in EOL opioid access and UDS disproportionately affected Black men. Adjustment for socioeconomic factors did not attenuate the EOL opioid access disparities.

CONCLUSION

There are substantial and persistent racial and ethnic inequities in opioid access among older patients dying of cancer, which are not mediated by socioeconomic variables.

Psychological Evaluation of Patients With Cancer Presenting to the Emergency Department With Pain: Independent Predictors of Worse Pain Severity, Interference, and Higher Hourly Opioid Administration

PURPOSE

Pain is a common complaint in patients with cancer presenting to the emergency department (ED). This prospective study evaluated whether biopsychosocial factors could help predict cancer patients with risk of higher pain severity, pain interference, and opioid consumption.

METHODS

Patients with cancer presenting to the ED with a complaint of moderate-severe pain (≥ 4/10-numeric rating scale) completed validated self-report measures assessing sociodemographics, cancer-related treatments, pain severity and interference, medication use, and psychological symptoms (depression, anxiety, pain catastrophizing, and sleep disturbance). Opioids administered and subsequent hospitalization were abstracted. Univariable and multivariable regression analyses assessed factors associated with pain-related outcomes.

RESULTS

Participants (n = 175) presented with a variety of cancer types, with 76% having metastatic disease and 42% reporting current outpatient opioid use. Higher pain catastrophizing, lower depressive symptoms, lower income, outpatient opioid use, and historical chronic pain were independently associated with worse pain (P ≤ .05). Higher pain catastrophizing, anxiety, sleep disturbance, outpatient opioid use, and education were independently associated with worse pain interference (P ≤ .05). The sole independent predictor of ED opioid administration was outpatient opioid use. Patients taking outpatient opioids were younger, had lower health literacy, worse pain catastrophizing, sleep disturbance, depression/anxiety, and greater rates of metastatic cancer and cancer-related surgery (P ≤ .05).

CONCLUSION

Biopsychosocial factors, particularly pain catastrophizing, remained significantly associated with worse pain outcomes for patients with cancer in the ED even after controlling for demographic and clinical variables. Patient outpatient opioid use was independently associated with worse pain, interference, and greater opioid administration, identifying this as a marker for who may benefit most from adjuvant pharmacologic and behavioral interventions.

Making Pain Research More Inclusive: Why and How

Current knowledge about mechanisms and interventions for pain has largely been derived from samples that are healthier, wealthier, younger, and more likely to be White than the general population. Failure to conduct inclusive pain research not only restricts generalizability and application of findings, but also hampers the discovery of mechanisms and the development of measures and interventions that are valid across population subgroups. Most of all, inclusive practices are critical to ensure that underrepresented groups derive equitable benefit from pain research. Here, we provide guidance for the pain research community on how to adopt inclusive research practices. We define "inclusion" to encompass a range of identities and characteristics, including racialized group/ethnicity, disability status, gender identity, sexual orientation, and age. We first describe principles relevant to promoting inclusion in pain research, including attention to: 1) stakeholder engagement; 2) structural factors underlying inequities; 3) the limitations of "disparity" research; 4) intersectionality; and 5) universal design. Next, we provide checklists with practical strategies for making studies more inclusive at each stage of the research process. We conclude by calling for system-level changes to ensure that the future of pain research is socially just, scientifically productive, and responsive to the needs of all people. PERSPECTIVE: This paper offers guidance on promoting inclusion of underrepresented groups in pain research. We describe principles relevant to conducting more inclusive research; eg, attention to stakeholder engagement, structural factors, and universal design. We provide checklists with practical strategies for inclusion at each stage of the research process.

Top Ten Tips Palliative Care Clinicians Should Know About Delivering Antiracist Care to Black Americans

Racial disparities, including decreased hospice utilization, lower quality symptom management, and poor-quality end-of-life care have been well documented in Black Americans. Improving health equity and access to high-quality serious illness care is a national palliative care (PC) priority. Accomplishing these goals requires clinician reflection, engagement, and large-scale change in clinical practice and health-related policies. In this article, we provide an overview of key concepts that underpin racism in health care, discuss common serious illness disparities in Black Americans, and propose steps to promote the delivery of antiracist PC.

A living systematic review to assess the analgesic undertreatment in cancer patients

This living, systematic review aims to provide an updated summary of the available evidence on pain undertreatment prevalence in patients with cancer; correlations with some potential determinants and confounders were also carried out. We updated a systematic review published in 2014, including observational and experimental studies reporting the use of the pain management index (PMI) in adults with cancer and pain, from 2014 to 2020. We conducted searches in PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, and Google Scholar. We performed univariate and multivariable regression analyses to describe the relationship between PMI and a list of potential explanatory variables. Twenty new papers were identified, yielding a total sample size of 66 studies. The proportion of patients classified as undertreated according to the year of study publication shows a higher decrease from 1994 to 2013 (-13% as relative change) than the most recent years 2014-2020 (-11%). The quality of the included studies has increased over the years (from 80% to 93%). At the multivariable analysis, a statistically significant relationship was confirmed between undertreatment and the year of the publication of the study and with a low-medium economic level of the countries where the studies were conducted. Despite the improvement when compared to the period 1994-2000,-still about 40% of the cases identified received an analgesic treatment inadequate to the intensity of pain, according to the PMI. Despite its intrinsic limitations, PMI continues to be widely used and it could allow a continuous monitoring of pain management across a different mix of studies and patients.

Racial-ethnic Differences in Reasons for Misuse of Prescription Medications Among US Adults

OBJECTIVES

This study aims to investigate racial-ethnic differences in reasons for misuse of prescription medications among a nationally representative sample of US adults.

METHODS

We analyzed data from the 2015-2019 National Surveys on Drug Use and Health. The study population includes US adults (18-49 years old) who reported misuse of 3 types of prescription drugs (stimulants [n = 6139], sedatives and tranquilizers [n = 5643], and pain relievers [n = 8780]) for 3 reasons: medical-only (eg, to help with pain), recreational-only (eg, to get high), or combined medical and recreational reasons. Multinomial logistic regressions assessed the association between reasons of misuse of prescription medications and self-identified race-ethnicity.

RESULTS

Misuse of the 4 types of prescription medications was primarily motivated by medical reasons (63%-80%). Compared to non-Hispanic Whites, non-Hispanic Blacks (nHB), and Hispanics (H) were less likely to report misuse of pain relievers for combined (nHB: adjusted relative risk ratio [aRRR] = 0.6, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.4, 0.7; H; aRRR = 0.7, 95% CI: 0.5, 0.9) or recreational reasons (nHB: aRRR = 0.8, 95% CI: 0.6, 1.0; H; aRRR = 0.7, 95% CI: 0.6, 0.9) rather than medical-only reasons. The odds of misuse of sedatives and tranquilizers for recreational-only reasons as opposed to medical-only reasons were higher among nHB (aRRR = 1.9, 95% CI: 1.3, 2.7) and H (aRRR = 1.9, 95% CI: 1.4, 2.4) than among non-Hispanic Whites.

CONCLUSIONS

The increased misuse of prescription pain relievers for medical reasons among racial-ethnic minority groups demonstrates a continued need to investigate underlying structural factors driving these behaviors. The higher odds of sedative and tranquilizer misuse for recreational purposes among racial-ethnic minority groups warrant further investigation.

Impact of Cannabis Use on Least Pain Scores Among African American and White Patients with Cancer Pain: A Moderation Analysis

INTRODUCTION

Based on many published reports, African American patients with cancer experience higher pain severity scores and lower pain relief than White patients. This disparity results from undertreatment of pain and is compounded by low adherence to prescribed non-opioid and opioid analgesics among African American patients with cancer. While nearly one in four patients use cannabis to manage cancer-related symptoms, less is known about how cannabis use influences pain relief in this patient population.

METHODS

This study is based on preliminary data from an ongoing study of longitudinal outcomes of opioid therapy among African American and White patients with cancer. Linear mixed-effects models were utilized to assess the interaction of race and cannabis use on pain relief using "least pain" item scores from the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) averaged across three time points. Models were adjusted for sociodemographic and clinical variables.

RESULTS

This analysis included 136 patients (49 African American, 87 White). Overall, 30.1% of the sample reported cannabis use for cancer pain. The mean "least pain" score on BPI was 3.3 (SD=2.42) on a scale of 0-10. African American patients had a mean "least pain" score 1.32±0.48 units higher (indicating lower pain relief) than White patients (p=0.006). Cannabis use did not have a significant main effect (p=0.28). However, cannabis use was a significant moderator of the relationship between race and "least pain" (p=0.03). In the absence of cannabis use, African Americans reported higher "least pain" scores compared to Whites (mean difference=1.631±0.5, p=0.001). However, this disparity was no longer observed in African American patients reporting cannabis use (mean "least pain" difference=0.587±0.59, p=0.32).

CONCLUSION

These findings point to the possible role of cannabis in cancer pain management and its potential to reduce racial disparities. These findings are preliminary and further research into the role of cannabis in cancer pain outcomes is needed.

Chronic pain severity, impact, and opioid use among patients with cancer: An analysis of biopsychosocial factors using the CHOIR learning health care system

BACKGROUND

Despite the biopsychosocial underpinnings of chronic noncancer pain, relatively little is known about the contribution of psychosocial factors to chronic cancer pain. The authors aimed to characterize associations between biopsychosocial factors and pain and opioid use among individuals with chronic pain and cancer.

METHODS

The authors conducted a retrospective, cross-sectional study of 700 patients with chronic pain and cancer seeking treatment at an academic tertiary pain clinic. Patients completed demographic questionnaires and validated psychosocial and pain measures. Multivariable, hierarchical linear and logistic regressions assessed the relative contributions of biopsychosocial factors to the primary dependent variables of pain severity, pain interference, and opioid use.

RESULTS

Participants were 62% female and 66% White with a mean age of 59 ± 15 years, and 55% held a college degree or higher. Older age, African American or "other" race, sleep disturbance, and pain catastrophizing were significantly associated with higher pain severity (F(5,657) = 22.45; P ≤ .001; R² = 0.22). Depression, sleep disturbance, pain catastrophizing, lower emotional support, and higher pain severity were significantly associated with pain interference (F(5,653) = 9.47; P ≤ .001; R² = 0.44). Lastly, a poor cancer prognosis (Exp(B) = 1.62) and sleep disturbance (Exp(B) = 1.02) were associated with taking opioids, whereas identifying as Asian (Exp(B) = 0.48) or Hispanic (Exp(B) = 0.47) was associated with lower odds of using opioids.

CONCLUSIONS

Modifiable psychological factors-specifically sleep disturbance, depression, and pain catastrophizing-were uniquely associated with pain and opioid use in patients with chronic pain and diverse cancer diagnoses. Future behavioral pain interventions that concurrently target sleep may improve pain among patients with cancer.

LAY SUMMARY

Feeling depressed, worrying about pain, and bad sleep are related to higher pain symptoms in individuals with chronic pain and cancer. Specifically, those who struggle to sleep have worse pain and use more opioids. Also, individuals who have a bad prognosis for their cancer are more likely to be using opioid pain medications. Although race and cancer are related to chronic pain in patients, psychological well-being is also strongly related to this same pain.

Revisiting patient-related barriers to cancer pain management in the context of the US opioid crisis

ABSTRACT

Patient fear of addiction is a well-documented barrier to the use of analgesic medications for cancer pain control. Over the past 2 decades in the United States, an "opioid crisis" has arisen, accompanied by risk messages delivered through news outlets, public health education, and patient-provider communication. The purpose of this study was to determine if patient-related barriers to cancer pain management-specifically, fears of addiction-and related pain outcomes (pain severity, pain interference with daily life, and adequacy of pain management) have worsened over the last 20 years. A sample of 157 outpatients with active recurrent or active metastatic cancer completed the Barriers Questionnaire-II (BQ-II) and measures of pain and analgesic use. We identified 7 comparison studies published between 2002 and 2020 that reported patient-related barriers using the BQ-II. Significant linear relationships were found between later year of publication and greater fear of addiction (harmful effect subscale score, B = 0.0350, R2 = 0.0347, F1,637 = 23.19, P < 0.0001) and between year of publication and more pain management barriers overall (total BQ-II score, B = 0.039, R2 = 0.065, F1,923 = 73.79, P < 0.0001). Relationships between BQ-II scores (harmful effect and total) and pain outcomes did not change over time. Despite worsening in patient-related barriers, the proportion of patients with adequate vs inadequate analgesic use did not differ over time. Notably, 40% of participants reported inadequate analgesic use, a statistic that has not improved in 20 years. Additional research is necessary to clarify factors contributing to changing beliefs. Findings indicate a continuing need for clinical and possibly system/policy-level interventions to support adequate cancer pain management.

Gaps in the Use of Long-Acting Opioids Within Intervals of Consecutive Days Among Cancer Outpatients Using Electronic Pill Caps

OBJECTIVE

This study describes individual cancer patients' nonuse of extended-release or long-acting (ER/LA) opioids, including periods of gap between opioid doses taken.

DESIGN

Secondary analysis of a three-month observational study of prescribed ER/LA opioids monitored using electronic pill caps.

SETTING

Two outpatient oncology clinics of a large health system in the Mid-Atlantic region.

PARTICIPANTS

Inclusion was based on self-identified African Americans and whites, at least 18 years old, diagnosed with solid tumors or multiple myeloma. For the current analysis, the additional inclusion criterion was prescription of an oral ER/LA opioid for cancer pain to be taken around the clock.

METHODS

The electronic monitoring period for each study participant was partitioned into intervals of days between days with one or more openings (using medication event monitoring systems) representing rates of ER/LA opioid nonuse over consecutive days and over time.

RESULTS

Of the sample (N = 109), two-thirds of the cancer patients had some nonuse of prescribed ER/LA opioids, with one in four having nonuse during 31.5-87.5% of their electronic-monitoring periods. Nonuse over periods of five or more, six or more, and seven or more consecutive days occurred for 37.6%, 34.9%, and 30.3% of the participants, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

About one in three ambulatory cancer patients in this study had substantial gaps between days of ER/LA opioid use, potentially resulting in risk of overdose depending upon the prescribed ER/LA opioid type, dose, and length of the time the opioid was stopped and resumed at the previous dose. This phenomenon has received little to no attention in the opioid safety discourse.

The Association Between Analgesic Treatment Beliefs and Electronically Monitored Adherence for Cancer Pain

OBJECTIVES

To determine whether clusters based on analgesic treatment beliefs among patients with cancer predict objective analgesic adherence.

SAMPLE & SETTING

207 patients with cancer in the outpatient setting who were aged 18 years or older, self-identified as White or African American, were diagnosed with solid tumor or multiple myeloma, and were prescribed at least one around-the-clock analgesic prescription for reported cancer pain.

METHODS & VARIABLES

This study is a secondary analysis of an existing dataset. General linear modeling with a backward elimination approach was applied to determine whether previously identified analgesic treatment belief clusters, as well as sociodemographic, clinical, and pain variables, were associated with adherence behaviors.

RESULTS

Significant explanatory factors were experiential in nature and included sociodemographic, clinical, and pain-related variables, explaining 21% of the variance in analgesic adherence. Analgesic belief clusters were not predictive of adherence.

IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING

Future research should examine sociodemographic and other clinical factors, as well as the influence of analgesic treatment beliefs, to better understand adherence behaviors among patients with cancer.

Design and conduct of confirmatory chronic pain clinical trials

The purpose of this article is to provide readers with a basis for understanding the emerging science of clinical trials and to provide a set of practical, evidence-based suggestions for designing and executing confirmatory clinical trials in a manner that minimizes measurement error. The most important step in creating a mindset of quality clinical research is to abandon the antiquated concept that clinical trials are a method for capturing data from clinical practice and shifting to a concept of the clinical trial as a measurement system, consisting of an interconnected set of processes, each of which must be in calibration for the trial to generate an accurate and reliable estimate of the efficacy (and safety) of a given treatment. The status quo of inaccurate, unreliable, and protracted clinical trials is unacceptable and unsustainable. This article gathers aspects of study design and conduct under a single broad umbrella of techniques available to improve the accuracy and reliability of confirmatory clinical trials across traditional domain boundaries.

Palliative Care's Role Managing Cancer Pain During the Opioid Crisis: A Qualitative Study of Patients, Caregivers, and Clinicians

CONTEXT

Patients with cancer face symptoms because of disease and treatment, and pain is common and complex. The opioid crisis may complicate patients' and clinicians' experiences of managing pain in cancer care.

OBJECTIVES

In our study of perceptions and experiences with palliative care (PC) at an outpatient cancer center, we examined communication around symptom management throughout cancer care, and pain and its management emerged as particularly salient. The objective of this article is to describe, from the perspectives of patients, caregivers, and oncology health care professionals, the role of PC in navigating the complicated dynamics of pain management amidst the opioid crisis.

METHODS

A qualitative descriptive study with grounded theory components was designed to investigate experiences with and perceptions of specialist PC and symptom management, including pain. Interviews were audiorecorded and transcribed, and focused coding identified themes related to pain and pain management from all three perspectives.

RESULTS

About 44 patients, caregivers, and non-PC health care professionals completed interviews. Patients with cancer and their caregivers had many concerns about pain management and were specifically concerned about opioid use and stigma. For patients, PC improved pain management and helped to destigmatize appropriate pain management. Oncology clinicians reported that partnering with PC facilitated complex pain management and also provided moral support around difficult opioid recommendations for patients.

CONCLUSION

PC offers the potential to uniquely support both patients and other oncology professionals in optimally navigating the complexity around pain management for cancer care in the midst of the opioid crisis.

Characterizing Pain Experiences: African American Patients With Multiple Myeloma Taking Around-the-Clock Opioids

BACKGROUND

Despite known disparities by race, studies to date have not focused on pain characterization among African American patients with multiple myeloma.

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to characterize the pain experience, beliefs about pain and pain control, and additional symptoms among African American patients with multiple myeloma taking around-the-clock opioids.

METHODS

This study employed secondary analysis of baseline data from a completed longitudinal study of opioid adherence. Descriptive statistics were used to characterize the sample, pain experience, beliefs regarding pain and pain control, and related symptoms.

FINDINGS

Participants (N = 34) experienced everyday pain and additional symptoms, and half experienced depression. Pain management barriers included dislike of pills, fear of addiction, and bothersome side effects from pain and medication. Additional larger studies can incorporate multilevel factors contributing to high symptom burden.

African American Patients With Multiple Myeloma: Optimizing Care to Decrease Racial Disparities

The incidence of multiple myeloma in African Americans is two to three times higher than in other ethnicities and is the leading hematologic malignancy in African Americans. Despite the high incidence of multiple myeloma in African American individuals, a vast majority experience delays in diagnosis and reduced usage of effective therapies, including stem cell transplantation, as well as low participation in clinical trials. Racial disparities, social and financial health disparities, and barriers to earlier access to care can lead to poorer patient outcomes. There are also unique characteristics in the disease manifestation in African Americans with multiple myeloma that are imperative for oncology nurses to understand and recognize to provide optimal care.

Patient Trade-Offs Related to Analgesic Use for Cancer Pain: A MaxDiff Analysis Study

PURPOSE

Many patients with cancer pain deviate from prescribed analgesic regimens. Our aim was to elicit the trade-offs patients make based on their beliefs about analgesic use and rank utilities (importance scores) using maximum difference (MaxDiff) scaling. We also investigated if there were unique clusters of patients based on their analgesic beliefs.

METHODS

This was a secondary analysis of a three-month, prospective observational study. Patients (N = 207) were self-identified African Americans and Whites, >18 years, diagnosed with multiple myeloma or solid tumor, and were prescribed at least one around-the-clock analgesic for cancer pain. MaxDiff analysis allowed us to identify patients utilities. Second, a cluster analysis assisted in ranking how analgesic beliefs differed by groups. Third, clusters were described by comparing key sociodemographic and clinical variables.

RESULTS

Participants' beliefs were a significant factor in choices related to analgesic use (chi-square = 498.145, p < .0001). The belief, 'Pain meds keep you from knowing what is going on in your body', had the highest patient endorsement. Two distinct clusters of patients based on analgesic beliefs were identified; 'knowing body' was ranked as top priority for both clusters. The belief that cancer patients become addicted to analgesics was moderately important for both clusters. Severity of side effects was the only key variable significantly different between clusters (p = .043).

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings support tailored pain management interventions that attend to individual beliefs about cancer pain and analgesic use. Future research should explore the relationship between analgesic utilities, actual analgesic taking behaviors, and how they impact patients' cancer pain outcomes.

Fear of analgesic side effects predicts preference for acupuncture: a cross-sectional study of cancer patients with pain in the USA

PURPOSE

Approximately one in two cancer patients globally are under-treated for pain. Opioids and other analgesics represent the mainstay of cancer pain management; however, barriers to their use are well-documented. We evaluated whether acupuncture would be a preferable treatment option among cancer patients with attitudinal barriers to pharmacological pain management.

METHODS

We conducted a cross-sectional survey of cancer patients at a tertiary urban cancer center and eleven suburban/rural hospitals in the Northeastern United States. We assessed attitudinal barriers to pharmacological pain management with the Barriers Questionnaire (BQ-13). The BQ-13 consists of two subscales: pain management beliefs and analgesic side effects. We also asked patients whether they prefer acupuncture, analgesics, or have no preference between these two modalities for pain management. Covariates included sociodemographics, clinical characteristics, and attitudes/beliefs about acupuncture. We used logistic regression to examine the association between attitudinal barriers and acupuncture preference.

RESULTS

Among 628 patients, 197 (31.4%) preferred acupuncture for pain management, 146 (23.3%) preferred analgesics, and 285 (45.4%) had no preference. The highest reported attitudinal barriers were fear of addiction and fear of analgesic-associated constipation and nausea. Adjusting for covariates, we found that attitudinal barriers related to fear of analgesic side effects were significantly associated with acupuncture preference (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] 1.45, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.17-1.81), but barriers related to pain management beliefs were not (AOR 1.17, 95% CI 0.91-1.51). Attitudes/beliefs about acupuncture (i.e., greater expected benefits, fewer perceived barriers, and more positive social norms) and female gender also predicted acupuncture preference, whereas race and educational status did not.

CONCLUSION

Acupuncture may be a preferable treatment option among cancer patients at risk of inadequately controlled pain due to fear of analgesic side effects. Evidence-based integration of acupuncture and analgesics, guided by patient treatment preferences, represents an essential aspect of patient-centered care and has potential to address unmet cancer pain management needs.

Healthcare Decision-Making of African-American Patients: Comparing Positivist and Postmodern Approaches to Care

Healthcare decision-making (HCDM) may be a potentially challenging time for any person. When considered against the backdrop of being a minority, experiencing disparate care based on racial bias, and confronting the implications of advanced serious illness, the practices and processes of HCDM become increasingly complex. The purpose of this paper is to consider the HCDM of African-American patients with advanced serious illness through the lens of positivism and postmodernism and to make the argument that postmodern nursing is the ideal ethical and equitable approach to HCDM. Postmodernism reengages nurses to consider HCDM of African-American patients with advanced serious illness as an individualized, contextualized, whole-person process, requiring all ways of knowing. A postmodern nursing approach may promote sustainable and human-centered health interventions that will reposition an often marginalized group to the center of practice, policy, and research progress.

Relationships between patient-related attitudinal barriers, analgesic adherence and pain relief in Chinese cancer inpatients

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to evaluate patient-related attitudinal barriers and identify associated factors in Chinese cancer inpatients receiving opioids and to explore relationships between patient-related attitudinal barriers, analgesic adherence and pain relief.

METHODS

A cross-sectional study was conducted. A total of 146 participants completed face-to-face surveys, including information about demographics, the Barriers Questionnaire-Chinese (BQ-C), analgesic adherence, average pain and breakthrough pain in the past 24 h. The Mann-Whitney U test and Kruskal-Wallis test were performed to test the differences in the attitudinal barrier scores between the adherence and nonadherence groups, the complete and incomplete pain relief groups and the groups based on demographics.

RESULTS

The majority of participants in this study were men (67.8%), over half of all participants were less than 60 years old, gastrointestinal cancer (47.3%) was the most common diagnosis and 59 (40.4%) acquired comprehensive pain education from the last discharge guidance procedure. The total BQ-C mean (SD) score was 1.61 ± 0.94. A total of 87 (59.6%) patients with cancer pain were completely relieved. Most of the patients (73.3%) completely took analgesics by orders. There was no significant difference in the total BQ-C score between the adherence group and the nonadherence group (P > 0.05), but the difference was significant between the complete pain relief group and the incomplete pain relief group (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

The findings of this study support unsatisfactory pain management and moderate analgesic adherence for Chinese inpatients. It is suggested that patient-related attitudinal barriers do not play an undermining role in pain management by negatively affecting patients' analgesic adherence. Conversely, patients' beliefs are more likely to be shaped by under treatment rather than as a cause.

Both Race and Insurance Type Independently Predict the Selection of Oral Opioids Prescribed to Cancer Outpatients

BACKGROUND

Previous research suggests that racial disparities in patients' reported analgesic adverse effects are partially mediated by the type of opioid prescribed to African Americans despite the presence of certain comorbidities, such as renal disease.

AIMS

We aimed to identify independent predictors of the type of opioid prescribed to cancer outpatients and determine if race and chronic kidney disease independently predict prescription type, adjusting for relevant sociodemographic and clinical confounders.

DESIGN

We conducted a secondary analysis of a 3-month observational study.

SETTING

Outpatient oncology clinics of an academic medical center.

PARTICIPANTS/SUBJECTS

Patients were older than 18 years of age, self-identified as African American or White, and had an analgesic prescription for cancer pain.

METHODS

Cancer patients (N = 241) were recruited from outpatient oncology clinics within a large mid-Atlantic healthcare system.

RESULTS

Consistent with published literature, most patients (75.5%) were prescribed either morphine or oxycodone preparations as oral opioid therapy for cancer pain. When compared with Whites, African Americans were significantly more likely to be prescribed morphine (33% vs 14%) and less likely to be prescribed oxycodone (38% vs 64%) (p < .001). The estimated odds for African Americans to receive morphine were 2.573 times that for Whites (95% confidence interval 1.077-6.134) after controlling for insurance type, income, and pain levels. In addition, the presence of private health insurance was negatively associated with the prescription of morphine and positively associated with prescription of oxycodone in separate multivariable models. The presence of chronic kidney disease did not predict type of analgesic prescribed.

CONCLUSIONS

Both race and insurance type independently predict type of opioid selection for cancer outpatients. Larger clinical studies are needed to fully understand the sources and clinical consequences of racial differences in opioid selection for cancer pain.

Factors Associated with Black Cancer Patients' Ability to Obtain Their Opioid Prescriptions at the Pharmacy

Background: Black cancer patients experience pain. Barriers to opioid medications for pain may include geographic factors. This study examines neighborhood factors associated with difficulties receiving prescription opioids from pharmacies for black cancer patients. Design: A secondary data analysis of a study on opioid adherence was used to examine neighborhood-level and individual factors related to difficulties filling prescriptions for opioids. Setting/Subjects: Patients being treated for cancer pain with opioids (n = 104) were recruited. All self-identified as black, were 21 years or older, had cancer diagnoses, and had been prescribed extended release opioids. Measurements: A seven-item survey to identify problems filling opioids was completed by 98 participants along with a nine-item scale to assess perceived neighborhood characteristics. Scales of neighborhood amenities and neglect were created from the perceived neighborhood characteristics scale using principal components analysis. The 2009-2013 American Community Survey data were used to estimate the census tract percentage of non-Hispanic black residents, residents ≥25 years of age without a high school degree or equivalent, and households earning below the federal poverty level within the past 12 months. Results: Nearly 51% reported problems getting their opioids filled: 28% had to wait days and 24% had to return to the pharmacy multiple times. The main theme identified in analysis of an open-ended question was pharmacies not stocking medication. Neighborhood locations that rated higher on the amenities scale were protective for pharmacies sufficiently stocking opioids. Conclusions: Additional research on pharmacies sufficiently stocking opioid pain and neighborhood perceptions is warranted.

Improving Functional Status in African Americans With Cancer Pain: A Randomized Clinical Trial

OBJECTIVES

To determine the efficacy of the Power Over Pain-Coaching (POP-C) intervention to improve functional status among African American outpatients with cancer pain.
.

SAMPLE & SETTING

310 African American patients were recruited from an urban comprehensive cancer center. The study took place in the patients' homes.
.

METHODS & VARIABLES

A two-group randomized design with repeated measures was used. Data were analyzed with linear mixed effects regression analysis and structural equation change score models. Variables were pain, pain-related distress, functional status, perceived control over pain, and the following antecedents to control.

RESULTS

Functional status was improved in POP-C participants relative to control group participants (p < 0.05). Distress also was differentially decreased (p < 0.05). Pain intensity ratings decreased significantly in all patients (p < 0.05). The largest intervention effects were observed in the living with pain component. 
.

IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING

Perceived control over pain was strongly related to functional status and is amenable to interventions using the POP-C intervention components described in this article.

Patient Patterns and Perspectives on Using Opioid Regimens for Chronic Cancer Pain

CONTEXT

With increasing attention to the undertreatment of cancer pain in parallel with concerns about opioid misuse, little is known about how patients with advanced cancer adhere to opioid regimens for chronic cancer pain.

OBJECTIVES

We explored patient approaches to managing chronic cancer pain with long-acting opioids.

METHODS

In a multimethods study at an academic medical center, adult patients with chronic cancer pain (n = 17) used electronic pill caps to record adherence to prescribed long-acting opioid regimens. After eight weeks, patients viewed their adherence records and completed a semistructured interview about their opioid use. With a framework approach, we coded interview data (Kappa >0.95) and identified themes in how patients perceived and used opioids to manage cancer pain.

RESULTS

Patients (59% female; 94% non-Hispanic white; median age = 65 years) felt grateful about pain benefit from opioids yet concerned about opioid side effects and addiction/tolerance. Main reasons for nonadherence included both intentional decisions (e.g., skipping doses) and unintentional barriers (e.g., missing doses due to inconsistent sleep schedules). Overall, patients set their own opioid adherence goals and developed routines to achieve them. Residual pain varied and was not consistently linked with opioid adherence.

CONCLUSION

Patients commonly felt conflicted about using prescribed long-acting opioids to manage cancer pain due to concurrent perceptions of their risks and benefits, and they set their own parameters for opioid-taking practices. Intentional and unintentional deviations from prescribed opioid schedules highlight the need to enhance adherence communication, education, and counseling, to optimize the use of long-acting opioids as a component of cancer pain management.

The Influence of Patient Race and Activation on Pain Management in Advanced Lung Cancer: a Randomized Field Experiment

BACKGROUND

Pain management racial disparities exist, yet it is unclear whether disparities exist in pain management in advanced cancer.

OBJECTIVE

To examine the effect of race on physicians' pain assessment and treatment in advanced lung cancer and the moderating effect of patient activation.

DESIGN

Randomized field experiment. Physicians consented to see two unannounced standardized patients (SPs) over 18 months. SPs portrayed 4 identical roles-a 62-year-old man with advanced lung cancer and uncontrolled pain-differing by race (black or white) and role (activated or typical). Activated SPs asked questions, interrupted when necessary, made requests, and expressed opinions.

PARTICIPANTS

Ninety-six primary care physicians (PCPs) and oncologists from small cities, and suburban and rural areas of New York, Indiana, and Michigan. Physicians' mean age was 52 years (SD = 27.17), 59% male, and 64% white.

MAIN MEASURES

Opioids prescribed (or not), total daily opioid doses (in oral morphine equivalents), guideline-concordant pain management, and pain assessment.

KEY RESULTS

SPs completed 181 covertly audio-recorded visits that had complete data for the model covariates. Physicians detected SPs in 15% of visits. Physicians prescribed opioids in 71% of visits; 38% received guideline-concordant doses. Neither race nor activation was associated with total opioid dose or guideline-concordant pain management, and there were no interaction effects (p > 0.05). Activation, but not race, was associated with improved pain assessment (ẞ, 0.46, 95% CI 0.18, 0.74). In post hoc analyses, oncologists (but not PCPs) were less likely to prescribe opioids to black SPs (OR 0.24, 95% CI 0.07, 0.81).

CONCLUSIONS

Neither race nor activation was associated with opioid prescribing; activation was associated with better pain assessment. In post hoc analyses, oncologists were less likely to prescribe opioids to black male SPs than white male SPs; PCPs had no racial disparities. In general, physicians may be under-prescribing opioids for cancer pain.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT01501006.

Factors Related to Adherence to Opioids in Black Patients With Cancer Pain

CONTEXT

Cancer pain relief is often inadequate because of poor adherence to pain medication, especially for black patients.

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this study is to describe factors related to adherence to around-the-clock opioids among 110 black patients being treated for cancer pain.

METHODS

Sociodemographic, clinical, symptoms, and social support data were collected at baseline; pain and adherence data were collected at 30 days. Associations between these variables and opioid adherence measured by Medication Event Monitoring System were estimated using multiple regression.

RESULTS

Mean age was 56 (±10.1), the majority were women (63%) and college educated (56%). Mean pain severity at baseline equaled 4.6 (±2.3). Mean dose adherence was 60% (±28.5), while mean schedule adherence was 33.0% (±31.0). In adjusted analysis, 26% of the variance in dose adherence was explained by recent chemotherapy, changes in pain, concerns about nausea, and doctors' focus on cure versus pain control (P<0.001); 27% of the variance in schedule adherence was explained by recent chemotherapy, changes in pain, symptom burden, and concerns about doctors focus on cure versus pain control (P<0.001).

CONCLUSION

Findings confirm pain medication adherence is poor and pain was not well relieved. Multiple factors influence adherence to around-the-clock opioids. Clinicians need to partner with patients by providing a personalized pain treatment plan including an in-depth assessment of treatment choices and adherence.

A Systematic Review: Mindfulness Intervention for Cancer-Related Pain

Moderate-to-severe pain is a common problem experienced by patients with cancer. Although analgesic drugs are effective, adverse side effects are common and some analgesic drugs are addictive. Nonpharmacological treatment may be a way to treat cancer pain without causing negative side effects. Mindfulness is used as an effective nonpharmacological treatment to improve quality of life (QoL) and to address psychological problems including distress, anxiety, stress, and depression. However, the effect of mindfulness on pain severity has not been sufficiently investigated. Therefore, a systematic review was undertaken to describe the effectiveness of mindfulness interventions for pain and its underlying pathophysiologic mechanisms. The search was conducted in PubMed, Ovid MEDLINE, and CINAHL and included only empirical studies published from 2008 to 2017. Search terms included mindfulness, mindfulness-based intervention, meditation, cancer, pain, and cancer-related pain. Six studies met the search criteria. These studies tested several types of intervention including mindfulness-based stress reduction, mindfulness-based cognitive therapy, meditation with massage, and mindful awareness practices. Study outcomes include improved pain severity, anxiety, stress, depression, and QoL. However, most studies reviewed were conducted in the United States and Denmark. Further research is needed to test culturally appropriate mindfulness interventions to reduce pain.

A nationwide survey of adherence to analgesic drugs among cancer patients in Taiwan: prevalence, determinants, and impact on quality of life

PURPOSE

Poor adherence to analgesic drugs is one of the most common barriers to adequate pain management. This prospective, cross-sectional, patient-oriented observational study aimed to explore the adherence rate, clinical factors, and impact of adherence to analgesic drugs on the quality of life (QoL) among cancer outpatients in Taiwan.

METHODS

Eight hundred ninety-seven consecutive adult outpatients with cancer who had reported tumor pain and received regular analgesic drug treatment were enrolled from 16 medical centers across Taiwan. The Brief Pain Inventory was used to assess pain intensity and QoL. Morisky's four-item medication adherence scale was used to assess adherence to analgesic drugs. Clinical factors possibly associated with good adherence to analgesic drugs were analyzed using multivariate logistic regression analyses.

RESULTS

Of the 897 patients, 26.9% met criteria for the good, 35.5% for the moderate, and 37.6% for the poor adherence groups. The good adherence group had significantly better QoL outcomes than the moderate and poor adherence groups (all p < 0.05). Age ≥ 50 years, head and neck or hematological malignancies, cancer-related pain, patients who agreed or strongly agreed that the side effects of analgesic drugs were tolerable, and patients who disagreed or strongly disagreed that the dosing schedule could be flexibly self-adjusted to deal with the actual pain were predictors of good adherence to analgesic drugs.

CONCLUSIONS

Awareness of the clinical factors associated with adherence to analgesic drugs may help clinicians to identify cancer patients at a greater risk of non-adherence, reinforce optimal pain management, and improve the QoL by enhancing adherence to pain medications.

Behavioral Pain Intervention for Hospice and Palliative Care Patients: An Integrative Review

Despite the advances in pain management, achieving optimal pain control in hospice and palliative care is challenging. Patient/caregiver's lack of pain management knowledge, poor pain reporting, and poor adherence to pain management regimens are all associated with inadequate pain control. The purpose of this integrated review is to examine behavioral interventions designed for patients and caregivers to improve pain control in hospice and palliative care settings. Ten studies were identified through a database search. Seven of the 10 studies found significant improvement in at least 1 pain marker. Of the 7 studies that looked at changes in pain knowledge, 5 had significant improvements in at least 1 knowledge subscale. The 2 studies that looked at adherence to pain management found significant improvements. One limitation of the reviewed studies was that the delivery of them would not be efficient across all health-care settings, and, as a consequence, more technologically sophisticated delivery methods are needed. Therefore, while it is clear from the review that effective pain management interventions have been developed for hospice and palliative care patients, it is also clear that future research needs to focus on providing these same interventions through a more technologically sophisticated delivery method.

Patient-Reported Outcomes and Opioid Use by Outpatient Cancer Patients

The Memorial Sloan Kettering Pain Registry contains patient characteristics, treatments, and outcomes for a prospective cohort of 1,534 chronic pain cancer patients who were seen at outpatient pain service clinics. Average pain intensity (Brief Pain Inventory) was reported as mild by 24.6% of patients, moderate by 41.5%, and severe by 33.9%. The patient's report of average percent pain relief and health state (EuroQOL 5 dimensions) was inversely related to average pain intensity category, whereas measures of pain interference, number of worst pain locations, and physical and psychological distress were directly related to pain intensity category. Eighty-six percent of patients received an opioid at 1 or more clinic encounters. Regression analysis revealed that male sex or being younger (65 years of age or younger) was associated with a greater likelihood of an opioid ordered. Male sex nearly doubled the likelihood of a higher dose being ordered than female sex. Bivariate analysis found that patients receiving opioids reported significantly more pain relief than no-opioid patients. However, patients receiving opioids had higher pain interference scores, lower index of health state, and more physical distress than no-opioid patients Our results identify the need to consider opioid use and dosage when attempting to understand patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and factors affecting pain management.

PERSPECTIVE

This report describes the results of the analyses of PROs and patient-related electronic health record data collected under standard of care from cancer patients at outpatient pain management clinics of Anesthesiology and Palliative Care at the Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center. Consideration of sex and age as predictors of opioid use is critical in attempting to understand PROs and their relationship to pain management.

Global cancer pain management: a systematic review comparing trials in Africa, Europe and North America

AIM

Despite the rise in cancer survivorship, few reviews have examined the quality of studies of cancer pain management and practices around the globe. With a void in trials spanning multiple geographical settings, this review evaluates the quality of cancer trials across three continents.

MATERIALS & METHODS

A literature review and search of established databases was conducted to identify eligible studies. The Cochrane method, the Jadad Score and a cancer pain-specific ad hoc tool were used to evaluate quality of studies.

RESULTS

Eighteen studies representing a total of 4693 individuals were included in the review. Study quality correlated positively with study sample size and palliative care index. Trials in all three continents were prone to use opioids for pain management, whereas trials in Europe and North America utilized other adjuvant therapies such as antidepressants and steroids.

CONCLUSION

This review underscores the need for better multidimensional quality assessment tools for cancer pain trials.

Culturally Responsive Pain Management for Black Older Adults

HOW TO OBTAIN CONTACT HOURS BY READING THIS ARTICLE INSTRUCTIONS XX contact hours will be awarded by Villanova University College of Nursing upon successful completion of this activity. A contact hour is a unit of measurement that denotes 60 minutes of an organized learning activity. This is a learner-based activity. Villanova University College of Nursing does not require submission of your answers to the quiz. A contact hour certificate will be awarded once you register, pay the registration fee, and complete the evaluation form online at http://goo.gl/gMfXaf. To obtain contact hours you must: 1. Read the article, "XXXX XXXX XXXXXX XXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXX XXX XXXX XX" found on pages XX-XX, carefully noting any tables and other illustrative materials that are included to enhance your knowledge and understanding of the content. Be sure to keep track of the amount of time (number of minutes) you spend reading the article and completing the quiz. 2. Read and answer each question on the quiz. After completing all of the questions, compare your answers to those provided within this issue. If you have incorrect answers, return to the article for further study. 3. Go to the Villanova website listed above to register for contact hour credit. You will be asked to provide your name; contact information; and a VISA, MasterCard, or Discover card number for payment of the $20.00 fee. Once you complete the online evaluation, a certificate will be automatically generated. This activity is valid for continuing education credit until MONTH XX, 20XX. CONTACT HOURS This activity is co-provided by Villanova University College of Nursing and SLACK Incorporated. Villanova University College of Nursing is accredited as a provider of continuing nursing education by the American Nurses Credentialing Center's Commission on Accreditation. ACTIVITY OBJECTIVES 1. XXX 2. XXX DISCLOSURE STATEMENT Neither the planners nor the author have any conflicts of interest to disclose. The management of pain for Black older adults has received inadequate attention by health care professionals despite evidence of greater pain intensity, depressive symptoms, and functional disability compared with White American older adults. Pain management for this population may be significantly improved with more careful attention to the provision of culturally responsive care. As professionals concerned with the optimization of health and reduction of suffering throughout the lifespan, nurses have an ethical, moral, and professional responsibility to provide culturally responsive care to the populations they serve-particularly when clear disparities in health exist. By considering how culture affects important health beliefs, values, preferences, and customs, and integrating this understanding into practice, quality of life is likely to be improved. [Journal of Gerontological Nursing, xx(x), xx-xx.].

Salient concerns in using analgesia for cancer pain among outpatients: A cluster analysis study

AIM

To identify unique clusters of patients based on their concerns in using analgesia for cancer pain and predictors of the cluster membership.

METHODS

This was a 3-mo prospective observational study (n = 207). Patients were included if they were adults (≥ 18 years), diagnosed with solid tumors or multiple myelomas, and had at least one prescription of around-the-clock pain medication for cancer or cancer-treatment-related pain. Patients were recruited from two outpatient medical oncology clinics within a large health system in Philadelphia. A choice-based conjoint (CBC) analysis experiment was used to elicit analgesic treatment preferences (utilities). Patients employed trade-offs based on five analgesic attributes (percent relief from analgesics, type of analgesic, type of side-effects, severity of side-effects, out of pocket cost). Patients were clustered based on CBC utilities using novel adaptive statistical methods. Multiple logistic regression was used to identify predictors of cluster membership.

RESULTS

The analyses found 4 unique clusters: Most patients made trade-offs based on the expectation of pain relief (cluster 1, 41%). For a subset, the main underlying concern was type of analgesic prescribed, i.e., opioid vs non-opioid (cluster 2, 11%) and type of analgesic side effects (cluster 4, 21%), respectively. About one in four made trade-offs based on multiple concerns simultaneously including pain relief, type of side effects, and severity of side effects (cluster 3, 28%). In multivariable analysis, to identify predictors of cluster membership, clinical and socioeconomic factors (education, health literacy, income, social support) rather than analgesic attitudes and beliefs were found important; only the belief, i.e., pain medications can mask changes in health or keep you from knowing what is going on in your body was found significant in predicting two of the four clusters [cluster 1 (-); cluster 4 (+)].

CONCLUSION

Most patients appear to be driven by a single salient concern in using analgesia for cancer pain. Addressing these concerns, perhaps through real time clinical assessments, may improve patients’ analgesic adherence patterns and cancer pain outcomes.

Patterns of analgesic adherence predict health care utilization among outpatients with cancer pain

BACKGROUND

Studies in chronic noncancer pain settings have found that opioid use increases health care utilization. Despite the key role of analgesics, specifically opioids, in the setting of cancer pain, there is no literature to our knowledge about the relationship between adherence to prescribed around-the-clock (ATC) analgesics and acute health care utilization (hospitalization) among patients with cancer pain.

PURPOSE

To identify adherence patterns over time for cancer patients taking ATC analgesics for pain, cluster these patterns into adherence types, combine the types into an adherence risk factor for hospitalization, identify other risk factors for hospitalization, and identify risk factors for inconsistent analgesic adherence.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Data from a 3-month prospective observational study of patients diagnosed with solid tumors or multiple myeloma, having cancer-related pain, and having at least one prescription of oral ATC analgesics were collected. Adherence data were collected electronically using the medication event-monitoring system. Analyses were conducted using adaptive modeling methods based on heuristic search through alternative models controlled by likelihood cross-validation scores.

RESULTS

Six adherence types were identified and combined into the risk factor for hospitalization of inconsistent versus consistent adherence over time. Twenty other individually significant risk factors for hospitalization were identified, but inconsistent analgesic adherence was the strongest of these predictors (ie, generating the largest likelihood cross-validation score). These risk factors were adaptively combined into a model for hospitalization based on six pairwise interaction risk factors with exceptional discrimination (ie, area under the receiver-operating-characteristic curve of 0.91). Patients had from zero to five of these risk factors, with an odds ratio of 5.44 (95% confidence interval 3.09-9.58) for hospitalization, with a unit increase in the number of such risk factors.

CONCLUSION

Inconsistent adherence to prescribed ATC analgesics, specifically the interaction of strong opioids and inconsistent adherence, is a strong risk factor for hospitalization among cancer outpatients with pain.