Tapering Long-term Opioid Therapy in Chronic Noncancer Pain: Evidence and Recommendations for Everyday Practice

Chronic Opioid Use After Implementation of Oregon's Medicaid Back Pain Policy

INTRODUCTION

In 2016, Oregon developed an innovative policy to improve care for Medicaid patients with back pain. The objective of this study was to identify the factors associated with dose reduction and discontinuation among Medicaid patients using chronic opioid therapy after implementation of this policy.

METHODS

Using Medicaid administrative claims data, this was a retrospective cohort of patients on chronic stable opioid therapy between July and December 2016. Outcomes assessed were (1) 30% reduction in opioid dose and (2) an absolute discontinuation between January and December 2017. Multivariable logistic regressions evaluated the association between dose reduction outcomes and clinical and demographic factors.

RESULTS

Of 4,643 Medicaid patients on chronic opioid therapy, 3,853 (83%) had a dose reduction, and 651 (14%) discontinued opioids; patients with back pain were more likely to have a dose reduction (AOR=1.19; 95% CI=1.01, 1.41). Factors associated with discontinuation included having a mental health diagnosis (AOR=1.30; 95% CI=1.08, 1.56), substance use disorder (AOR=1.90; 95% CI=1.41, 2.56), opioid use disorder (AOR=1.55; 95% CI=1.21, 1.99), and receipt of buprenorphine (AOR=2.82; 95% CI=1.30, 6.15). Discontinuation was less likely in Black patients (AOR=0.50; 95% CI=0.29, 0.85), in older age groups, and in those with a higher opioid dose at baseline.

CONCLUSIONS

Most Medicaid beneficiaries had a dose reduction after implementation of Oregon's back pain policy. Opioid discontinuation was associated with factors that suggest that providers pursue this strategy for patients at higher overdose risk.

Examining Racial/Ethnic Differences in Patterns of Opioid Prescribing: Results from an Urban Safety-Net Healthcare System

Prescription opioids still account for a large proportion of overdose deaths and contribute to opioid use dependence (OUD). Studies earlier in the epidemic suggest clinicians were less likely to prescribe opioids to racial/ethnic minorities. As OUD-related deaths have increased disproportionately amongst minority populations, it is essential to understand racial/ethnic differences in opioid prescribing patterns to inform culturally sensitive mitigation efforts. The purpose of this study is to estimate racial/ethnic differences in opioid medication use among patients prescribed opioids. Using electronic health records and a retrospective cohort study design, we estimated multivariable hazard models and generalized linear models, assessing racial/ethnic differences in OUD diagnosis, number of opioid prescriptions, receiving only one opioid prescription, and receiving ≥18 opioid prescriptions. Study population (N=22,201) consisted of adult patients (≥18years), with ≥3 primary care visits (ensuring healthcare system linkage), ≥1 opioid prescription, who did not have an OUD diagnoses prior to the first opioid prescription during the 32-month study period. Relative to racial/ethnic minority patients, White patients, in both unadjusted and adjusted analyses, had a greater number of opioid prescriptions filled, a higher proportion received ≥18 opioid prescriptions, and a greater hazard of having an OUD diagnosis subsequent to receiving an opioid prescription (all groups p<0.001). Although opioid prescribing rates have declined nationally, our findings suggest White patients still experience a high volume of opioid prescriptions and greater risk of OUD diagnosis. Racial/ethnic minorities are less likely to receive follow-up pain medications, which may signal low care quality. Identifying provider bias in pain management of racial/ethnic minorities could inform interventions seeking balance between adequate pain treatment and risk of opioid misuse/abuse.

Chronic opioid pain treatment converted to buprenorphine: A case series using a 3-step low-dose incremental dosing guideline

We report a 30-case series from the Pain Management Center at the Massachusetts General Hospital where we have applied a guideline to convert chronic treatment for pain from full agonist opioids (FAO) to buprenorphine (BUP). Of the patients, 24 (80 percent) elected to continue BUP over FAO. Five conversions were stopped for side effects (fatigue) and/or lack of sufficient pain reduction. One patient elected not to participate on the day that the conversion was to begin. There were no major adverse events. We conclude that conversion to BUP should be considered as an alternative to treat patients on chronic opioids for pain.

Patient Experiences and Clinical Outcomes in a Multidisciplinary Perioperative Transitional Pain Service

Siloed pain management across the perioperative period increases the risk of chronic opioid use and impedes postoperative recovery. Transitional perioperative pain services (TPSs) are innovative care models that coordinate multidisciplinary perioperative pain management to mitigate risks of chronic postoperative pain and opioid use. The objective of this study was to examine patients' experiences with and quality of recovery after participation in a TPS. Qualitative interviews were conducted with 26 patients from The Johns Hopkins Personalized Pain Program (PPP) an average of 33 months after their first PPP visit. A qualitative content analysis of the interview data showed that participants (1) valued pain expectation setting, individualized care, a trusting patient-physician relationship, and shared decision-making; (2) perceived psychiatric treatment of co-occurring depression, anxiety, and maladaptive behaviors as critical to recovery; and (3) successfully sustained opioid tapers and experienced improved functioning after PPP discharge. Areas for improved patient-centered care included increased patient education, specifically about the program, continuity of care with pain specialists while tapering opioids, and addressing the health determinants that impede access to pain care. The positive patient experiences and sustained clinical benefits for high-risk complex surgical patient support further efforts to implement and adapt similar models of perioperative pain care.

Patients' perspectives on tapering programmes for prescription opioid use disorder: a qualitative study

OBJECTIVES

Approximately 10% of chronic pain patients who receive opioids develop an opioid use disorder (OUD). Tapering programmes for these patients show high drop-out rates. Insight into chronic pain patients' experiences with tapering programmes for prescription OUD could help improve such programmes. Therefore, we investigated the perspectives of chronic pain patients with prescription OUD to identify facilitators and barriers to initiate and complete a specialised OUD tapering programme.

DESIGN

A qualitative study using semi-structured interviews on experiences with initiation and completion of opioid tapering was audio recorded, transcribed and subject to directed content analysis.

SETTING

This study was conducted in two facilities with specialised opioid tapering programmes in the Netherlands.

PARTICIPANTS

Twenty-five adults with chronic pain undergoing treatment for prescription OUD participated.

RESULTS

Participants indicated that tapering is a personal process, where willingness and motivation to taper, perceived (medical) support and pain coping strategies have an impact on the tapering outcome. The opportunity to join a medical-assisted tapering programme, shared decision-making regarding tapering pace, tapering location, and receiving medical and psychological support facilitated completion of an opioid tapering programme.

CONCLUSIONS

According to patients, a successful treatment of prescription OUD requires a patient-centred approach that combines personal treatment goals with shared decision-making on opioid tapering. Referral to a specialised tapering programme that incorporates opioid rotation, non-judgmental attitudes, and psychological support can create a safe and supportive environment, fostering successful tapering and recovery.

Deprescribing Strategies for Opioids and Benzodiazepines with Emphasis on Concurrent Use: A Scoping Review

While the Food and Drug Administration's black-box warnings caution against concurrent opioid and benzodiazepine (OPI-BZD) use, there is little guidance on how to deprescribe these medications. This scoping review analyzes the available opioid and/or benzodiazepine deprescribing strategies from the PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, Scopus, and Cochrane Library databases (01/1995-08/2020) and the gray literature. We identified 39 original research studies (opioids: n = 5, benzodiazepines: n = 31, concurrent use: n = 3) and 26 guidelines (opioids: n = 16, benzodiazepines: n = 11, concurrent use: n = 0). Among the three studies deprescribing concurrent use (success rates of 21-100%), two evaluated a 3-week rehabilitation program, and one assessed a 24-week primary care intervention for veterans. Initial opioid dose deprescribing rates ranged from (1) 10-20%/weekday followed by 2.5-10%/weekday over three weeks to (2) 10-25%/1-4 weeks. Initial benzodiazepine dose deprescribing rates ranged from (1) patient-specific reductions over three weeks to (2) 50% dose reduction for 2-4 weeks, followed by 2-8 weeks of dose maintenance and then a 25% reduction biweekly. Among the 26 guidelines identified, 22 highlighted the risks of co-prescribing OPI-BZD, and 4 provided conflicting recommendations on the OPI-BZD deprescribing sequence. Thirty-five states' websites provided resources for opioid deprescription and three states' websites had benzodiazepine deprescribing recommendations. Further studies are needed to better guide OPI-BZD deprescription.

What is "Opioid Stewardship"? An Overview of Current Definitions and Proposal for a Universally Acceptable Definition

Introduction

Opioid stewardship has been widely used to promote rational use, monitoring and discontinuation of opioid therapy; however, its definition and scope of practice remain unclear.

Objective

To synthesize definitions of opioid stewardship proposed by clinical practice guidelines and professional societies, and to offer a proposal for a universally acceptable definition.

Methods

Systematic literature searches were performed (earliest records to May 2022) in six databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, APA PsycINFO, Scopus, and CENTRAL) and grey sources guidelines development bodies and professional societies through Google. The conventional but widely applied content analysis and word frequencies were used to analyze the definitions and scope of practice.

Results

After removing duplicates, 449 articles were retrieved (439 databases and registers and 11 from other sources), 19 of which included a definition of "opioids stewardship". A total of 12 themes was identified in the definitions, including 1) improvement or appropriateness of prescribing opioids use, 2) mitigation of risk from opioids, 3) monitoring opioid use, 4) evaluation of opioid use, 5) judicious opioid use, 6) appropriateness of opioid disposal, 7) identification and treatment of opioid use disorder, 8) reduction in mortality associated with opioid overdoses, 9) appropriate procurement practices, 10) appropriate storage, 11) promoting better communications between patients and prescribers including education provision and 12) patient-centered decision-making.

Conclusion

Opioid stewardship is inconsistently defined across professional and research literature. While there is a greater focus on appropriateness and need for improvement of prescribing and monitoring of opioid use, the importance of communications between patients and prescribers, and patient involvement in both prescribing and deprescribing decision-making remains sparse. A comprehensive definition has been proposed as part of the work. There is a need to develop and validate the proposed definition and scope of practice to promote rationale for opioid prescribing, use and attainment of favourable outcomes through international consensus involving practitioners, researchers, and patients.

Feasibility study of a Behavioural Intervention for Opioid Reduction (BIOR) for patients with chronic non-cancer pain in primary care: a protocol

INTRODUCTION

Around 30%-50% of adults suffer moderate to severe chronic pain not caused by cancer. Significant numbers are treated with opioids which over time may cease to be effective and produce side effects (eg, nausea, drowsiness and constipation). Stopping taking opioids abruptly can cause unpleasant withdrawal effects. Tapering in small steps is recommended, though some patients might struggle and need support, particularly if they have limited access to pain management alternatives. Awareness of the potential risks as well as benefits of tapering should be explored with patients.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

A randomised controlled pilot feasibility study to investigate the effectiveness and feasibility of reducing high doses of opioids through a tapering protocol, education and support in primary care. Working with NHS Knowsley Place, we will identify patients taking 50 mg or above morphine equivalent dose of opioids per day to be randomly allocated to either the tapering group or tapering with support group. At an initial joint appointment with a pain consultant and General Practitioner (GP) GP tapering will be discussed and negotiated. Both groups will have their opioid reduced by 10% per week. The taper with support group will have access to additional support, including motivational counselling, realistic goal setting and a toolkit of resources to promote self-management. Some patients will successfully reduce their dose each week. For others, this may be more difficult, and the tapering reduction will be adjusted to 10% per fortnight. We assess opioid use, pain and quality of life in both groups at the start and end of the study to determine which intervention works best to support people with chronic pain who wish to stop taking opioids.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The Behavioural Intervention for Opioid Reduction feasibility study has been granted full approval by Liverpool Central Research Ethics Committee on 7 April 2022 (22/NW/0047). The current protocol version is V.1.1, date 6 July 2022. Results will be published in peer-reviewed journals and disseminated to patient stakeholders in a lay summary report available on the project website and in participating GP surgeries.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ISRCTN 30201337.

Appropriate use of tapentadol: focus on the optimal tapering strategy

OBJECTIVE

Due to its opioid and non-opioid mechanism of action, tapentadol is considered an atypical opioid with improved gastrointestinal tolerability versus traditional opioids. As for all opioid analgesics it is important to understand how to discontinue a treatment when it is not needed anymore. The aim of this article was to provide an overview of opioid therapy in non-cancer pain, with a specific focus on tapering of tapentadol in patients with chronic non-cancer pain, and suggestions on how to achieve tapering.

METHODS

Studies for this narrative review were identified via PubMed using a structured search strategy, focusing on management of chronic non-cancer pain with opioids, and the efficacy, tolerability, and pharmacology of tapentadol prolonged release. Publications were limited to English-language articles published within the last ∼10 years.

RESULTS

The review discusses the use and discontinuation of opioids in general, as well clinical data on discontinuation of tapentadol specifically. We provide a flow chart, which can be used by clinicians in the context of their own clinical experience to appropriately taper tapentadol in patients with chronic non-cancer pain. The flow chart can be easily tailored to individual patient characteristics, duration of tapentadol treatment, response to progressive dosage reduction, and likelihood of withdrawal symptom occurrence.

CONCLUSIONS

While tapentadol is associated with a low frequency of opioid withdrawal symptoms after abrupt discontinuation, use of a tapering strategy is prudent. Tapering strategies developed for opioids in general can potentially be safely individualized in tapentadol-treated patients, although research on tapering strategies for tapentadol is required.

Acute Pain Management Pearls: A Focused Review for the Hospital Clinician

Acute pain management is a challenging area encountered by inpatient clinicians every day. While patient care is increasingly complex and costly in this realm, the availability of applicable specialists is waning. This narrative review seeks to support diverse hospital-based healthcare providers in refining and updating their acute pain management knowledge base through clinical pearls and point-of-care resources. Practical guidance is provided for the design and adjustment of inpatient multimodal analgesic regimens, including conventional and burgeoning non-opioid and opioid therapies. The importance of customized care plans for patients with preexisting opioid tolerance, chronic pain, or opioid use disorder is emphasized, and current recommendations for inpatient management of associated chronic therapies are discussed. References to best available guidelines and literature are offered for further exploration. Improved clinician attention and more developed skill sets related to acute pain management could significantly benefit hospitalized patient outcomes and healthcare resource utilization.

CDC Clinical Practice Guideline for Prescribing Opioids for Pain - United States, 2022

This guideline provides recommendations for clinicians providing pain care, including those prescribing opioids, for outpatients aged ≥18 years. It updates the CDC Guideline for Prescribing Opioids for Chronic Pain - United States, 2016 (MMWR Recomm Rep 2016;65[No. RR-1]:1-49) and includes recommendations for managing acute (duration of <1 month), subacute (duration of 1-3 months), and chronic (duration of >3 months) pain. The recommendations do not apply to pain related to sickle cell disease or cancer or to patients receiving palliative or end-of-life care. The guideline addresses the following four areas: 1) determining whether or not to initiate opioids for pain, 2) selecting opioids and determining opioid dosages, 3) deciding duration of initial opioid prescription and conducting follow-up, and 4) assessing risk and addressing potential harms of opioid use. CDC developed the guideline using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) framework. Recommendations are based on systematic reviews of the scientific evidence and reflect considerations of benefits and harms, patient and clinician values and preferences, and resource allocation. CDC obtained input from the Board of Scientific Counselors of the National Center for Injury Prevention and Control (a federally chartered advisory committee), the public, and peer reviewers. CDC recommends that persons with pain receive appropriate pain treatment, with careful consideration of the benefits and risks of all treatment options in the context of the patient's circumstances. Recommendations should not be applied as inflexible standards of care across patient populations. This clinical practice guideline is intended to improve communication between clinicians and patients about the benefits and risks of pain treatments, including opioid therapy; improve the effectiveness and safety of pain treatment; mitigate pain; improve function and quality of life for patients with pain; and reduce risks associated with opioid pain therapy, including opioid use disorder, overdose, and death.

Opioid Dose Trajectories and Associations With Mortality, Opioid Use Disorder, Continued Opioid Therapy, and Health Plan Disenrollment

IMPORTANCE

Uncertainty remains about the longer-term benefits and harms of different opioid management strategies, such as tapering and dose escalation. For instance, opioid tapering could help patients reduce opioid exposure to prevent opioid use disorder, but patients may also seek care elsewhere and engage in nonprescribed opioid use.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the association between opioid dose trajectories observed in practice and patient outcomes.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This retrospective cohort study was conducted in 3 health systems in Colorado and Wisconsin. The study population included patients receiving long-term opioid therapy between 50 and 200 morphine milligram equivalents between August 1, 2014, and July 31, 2017. Follow-up ended on December 31, 2019. Data were analyzed from January 2020 to August 2022.

EXPOSURES

Group-based trajectory modeling identified 5 dosing trajectories over 1 year: 1 decreasing, 1 high-dose increasing, and 3 stable.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Primary outcomes assessed after the trajectory period were 1-year all-cause mortality, incident opioid use disorder, continued opioid therapy at 1 year, and health plan disenrollment. Associations were tested using Cox proportional hazards regression and log-binomial models, adjusting for baseline covariates.

RESULTS

A total of 3913 patients (mean [SD] age, 59.2 [14.4] years; 2767 White non-Hispanic [70.7%]; 2237 female patients [57.2%]) were included in the study. Compared with stable trajectories, the decreasing dose trajectory was negatively associated with opioid use disorder (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 0.40; 95% CI, 0.29-0.55) and continued opioid therapy (site 1: adjusted relative risk [aRR], 0.39; 95% CI, 0.34-0.44), but was positively associated with health plan disenrollment (aHR, 1.66; 95% CI, 1.24-2.22). The decreasing trajectory was not associated with mortality (aHR, 1.28; 95% CI, 0.87-1.86). In contrast, the high-dose increasing trajectory was positively associated with mortality (aHR, 2.19; 95% CI, 1.44-3.32) and opioid use disorder (aHR, 1.81; 95% CI, 1.39-2.37) but was not associated with disenrollment (aHR, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.56-1.42) or continued opioid therapy (site 1: aRR, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.94-1.03).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

In this cohort study, decreasing opioid dose was associated with reduced risk of opioid use disorder and continued opioid therapy but increased risk of disenrollment compared with stable dosing, whereas the high-dose increasing trajectory was associated with an increased risk of mortality and opioid use disorder. These findings can inform opioid management decision-making.

Pharmacologic Pain Management Trends among Adults Hospitalized with Cellulitis: An Evidence-Based Practice Project

BACKGROUND

Nurses commonly administer opioids, following "as needed" order sets, to patients hospitalized for acute pain conditions like cellulitis. Practice guidelines recommend limiting opioid administration for acute pain management. At two hospitals in the Pacific Northwest, an opioid stewardship committee was formed to align with best practice.

AIMS

The main objective was to describe changes to inpatient rates of opioid and non-opioid administration following implementation of evidence-based opioid stewardship efforts.

DESIGN

Observational, retrospective, evidence-based practice project.

SETTINGS

One 200-bed and one 680-bed hospital in Washington State.

PARTICIPANTS/SUBJECTS

Data were included from patients aged 18 years or older hospitalized for cellulitis.

METHODS

Demographic and pain-related data were extracted from the electronic health record (n = 4,523 encounters) guided by the symptom management framework. The proportion of patients receiving opioid or non-opioid medications before and after implementation of evidence-based practice opioid stewardship interventions was calculated descriptively. A logistic regression tested factors related to administration of an opioid medication.

RESULTS

The proportion of patients receiving an opioid decreased following opioid stewardship efforts while those receiving non-opioid analgesics remained stable. Factors significantly influencing inpatient opioid administration were: average inpatient pain score, pre-hospital opioid prescription, length of stay, and year of hospitalization.

CONCLUSIONS

Analgesic administration treating painful, acute cellulitis at two hospitals in the Pacific Northwest included opioid and non-opioid medications. The proportion of patients receiving opioids decreased following best practice opioid stewardship actions. Opportunities may exist for nurses to collaborate with providers to improve inpatient analgesic administration practices.

Prevention, diagnosis, and treatment of opioid use disorder under the supervision of opioid stewardship programs: it's time to act now

The third opium war may have already started, not only due to illicit opioid trafficking from the Golden Crescent and Golden Triangle on the international front but also through indiscriminate opioid prescription and opioid diversion at home. Opioid use disorder (OUD), among unintentional injuries, has become one of the top 4 causes of death in the United States (U.S.). An OUD is defined as a problematic pattern of opioid use resulting in clinically significant impairment or distress, consisting of 2 or more of 11 problems within 1 year, as described by the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual for Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition. Observation of aberrant behaviors of OUD is also helpful for overworked clinicians. For the prevention of OUD, the Opioid Risk Tool and the Current Opioid Misuse Measure are appropriate screening tests before and during opioid administration, respectively. Treatment of OUD consists of 3 opioid-based U.S. Food and Drug Administration-approved medications, including methadone, buprenorphine, and naltrexone, and non-opioid-based symptomatic medications for reducing opioid withdrawal syndromes, such as α2 agonists, β-blockers, antidiarrheals, antiemetics, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, and benzodiazepines. There are at least 6 recommendable guidelines and essential terms related to OUD. Opioid stewardship programs are now critical to promoting appropriate use of opioid medications, improving patient outcomes, and reducing misuse of opioids, influenced by the successful implementation of antimicrobial stewardship programs. Despite the lack of previous motivation, now is the critical time for trying to reduce the risk of OUD.

Association between opioid therapy trajectories and potential opioid-related adverse health events

PURPOSE

We identified associations between membership in seven group-based trajectories based on supply of filled opioid prescriptions and potential opioid-related adverse health events over a 720-day window.

METHODS

We identified two veteran cohorts with chronic non-cancer pain who initiated treatment with long-term opioid therapy between 2008 and 2015, excluding those with prior substance use disorder (n = 373 941) or non-SUD, opioid-related adverse outcome (n = 405 631) diagnoses. Outcomes of interest included opioid use disorder, non-opioid drug use disorder, and alcohol use disorder for the first cohort; or accidents resulting in wounds or injuries, self-inflicted injuries, opioid-related accidents and overdoses, alcohol and non-opioid drug-related accidents and overdoses, and violence-related injuries for the second cohort. Using a cross-sectional design, Veterans were followed until the specific outcome of interest was diagnosed, they died, the study ended, or they were lost to follow up. Accelerated failure time models were estimated for each outcome.

RESULTS

Membership in persistent moderate days covered and persistent modest days covered trajectories was associated with decreased risk of opioid use disorder (Moderate: θ = 0.59, 95%CI:0.54, 0.64; Modest: θ = 0.54, 95%CI:0.50, 0.59) and opioid overdose (Moderate: θ = 0.67,95%CI: 0.57, 0.79; Modest: θ = 0.72, 95%CI:0.61, 0.85) versus higher-utilizing persistent users. Rapid discontinuation was associated with decreased risk of opioid use disorder (θ = 0.86, 95% CI:0.77, 0.95) and opioid overdose (θ = 0.54, 95%CI:0.41, 0.71), but increased risk of alcohol use disorder (θ = 1.07, 95%CI:1.00, 1.15) and other substance use disorders. Delayed discontinuation or delayed reduction was associated with increased risk for most opioid related adverse health events.

CONCLUSION

Persistent use trajectories with low levels of opioid utilization were associated with lower risks of potential opioid-related adverse health events.

American College of Preventive Medicine: Addressing the Opioid Epidemic Through a Prevention Framework

The opioid epidemic has resulted in significant morbidity and mortality in the U.S. Health systems, policymakers, payers, and public health have enacted numerous strategies to reduce the harms of opioids, including opioid use disorder (OUD). Much of this implementation has occurred before the development of OUD‒related comparative effectiveness evidence, which would enable an understanding of the benefits and harms of different approaches. This article from the American College of Preventive Medicine (ACPM) uses a prevention framework to identify the current approaches and make recommendations for addressing the opioid epidemic, encompassing strategies across a primordial, primary, secondary, and tertiary prevention approach. Key primordial prevention strategies include addressing social determinants of health and reducing adverse childhood events. Key primary prevention strategies include supporting the implementation of evidence-based prescribing guidelines, expanding school-based prevention programs, and improving access to behavioral health supports. Key secondary prevention strategies include expanding access to evidence-based medications for opioid use disorder, especially for high-risk populations, including pregnant women, hospitalized patients, and people transitioning out of carceral settings. Key tertiary prevention strategies include the expansion of harm reduction services, including expanding naloxone availability and syringe exchange programs. The ACPM Opioid Workgroup also identifies opportunities for de-implementation, in which historical and current practices may be ineffective or causing harm. De-implementation strategies include reducing inappropriate opioid prescribing; avoiding mandatory one-size-fits-all policies; eliminating barriers to medications for OUD, debunking the myth of detoxification as a primary solo treatment for opioid use disorder; and destigmatizing care practices and policies to better treat people with OUD.

Comparative Effectiveness of Opioid Tapering or Abrupt Discontinuation vs No Dosage Change for Opioid Overdose or Suicide for Patients Receiving Stable Long-term Opioid Therapy

IMPORTANCE

Opioid dosage tapering has emerged as a strategy to reduce harms associated with long-term opioid therapy; however, evidence supporting this approach is limited.

OBJECTIVE

To identify the association of opioid tapering or abrupt discontinuation with opioid overdose and suicide events among patients receiving stable long-term opioid therapy without evidence of opioid misuse.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This comparative effectiveness study with a trial emulation approach used a large US claims data set of individuals with commercial insurance or Medicare Advantage who were aged 18 years or older and receiving stable long-term opioid therapy without evidence of opioid misuse between January 1, 2010, and December 31, 2018. Statistical analysis was performed from January 17, 2020, through November 12, 2021.

INTERVENTIONS

Three opioid dosage strategies: stable dosage, tapering (dosage reduction ≥15%), or abrupt discontinuation.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Time to opioid overdose or suicide event identified from International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision and International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems, Tenth Revision diagnosis codes in medical claims over 11 months of follow-up. Inverse probability weighting was used to adjust for baseline confounders. The primary analysis used an intention-to-treat approach; follow-up after assignment regardless of changes in opioid dose was included. A per-protocol analysis was also conducted, in which episodes were censored for lack of adherence to assigned treatment.

RESULTS

A cohort of 199 836 individuals (45.1% men; mean [SD] age, 56.9 [12.4] years; and 57.6% aged 45-64 years) had 415 123 qualifying, long-term opioid therapy episodes; 87.1% of episodes were considered stable, 11.1% were considered a taper, and 1.8% were considered abrupt discontinuation. The adjusted cumulative incidence of opioid overdose or suicide events 11 months after baseline was 0.96% (95% CI, 0.92%-0.99%) with a stable dosage strategy, 1.10% (95% CI, 0.99%-1.22%) with a tapered dosage strategy, and 1.28% (95% CI, 0.93%-1.38%) with an abrupt discontinuation strategy. The risk difference between a taper and a stable dosage was 0.15% (95% CI, 0.03%-0.26%), and the risk difference between abrupt discontinuation and a stable dosage was 0.33% (95% CI, -0.03% to 0.74%). Results were similar using the per-protocol approach.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

This study identified a small absolute increase in risk of harms associated with opioid tapering compared with a stable opioid dosage. These results do not suggest that policies of mandatory dosage tapering for individuals receiving a stable long-term opioid dosage without evidence of opioid misuse will reduce short-term harm via suicide and overdose.

ORIGINS OF THE OPIOID CRISIS AND ITS ENDURING IMPACTS

Overdose deaths involving opioids have increased dramatically since the 1990s, leading to the worst drug overdose epidemic in U.S. history, but there is limited empirical evidence about the initial causes. In this article, we examine the role of the 1996 introduction and marketing of OxyContin as a potential leading cause of the opioid crisis. We leverage cross-state variation in exposure to OxyContin's introduction due to a state policy that substantially limited the drug's early entry and marketing in select states. Recently unsealed court documents involving Purdue Pharma show that state-based triplicate prescription programs posed a major obstacle to sales of OxyContin and suggest that less marketing was targeted to states with these programs. We find that OxyContin distribution was more than 50% lower in "triplicate states" in the years after the drug's launch. Although triplicate states had higher rates of overdose deaths prior to 1996, this relationship flipped shortly after the launch and triplicate states saw substantially slower growth in overdose deaths, continuing even 20 years after OxyContin's introduction. Our results show that the introduction and marketing of OxyContin explain a substantial share of overdose deaths over the past two decades.

Dose tapering, increases, and discontinuity among patients on long-term high-dose opioid therapy in the United States, 2017-2019

BACKGROUND

While reduced exposure to prescription opioids may decrease risks, including overdose and opioid use disorder, abrupt tapering or discontinuation may pose new risks.

OBJECTIVES

To examine potentially unsafe tapering and discontinuation among dosage changes in opioid prescriptions dispensed to US patients on high-dose long-term opioid therapy.

DESIGN

Longitudinal observational study of adults (≥18 years) on stable high-dose (≥50 oral morphine milligram equivalents [MME] daily dosage) long-term opioid therapy during a 180-day baseline and a 360-day follow-up using all-payer pharmaceutical claims data, 2017-2019.

MEASURES

Dosage tapering, increases, and/or stability during follow-up; sustained dosage stability, reductions, or discontinuation at the end of follow-up; and tapering rate. Patients could experience more than one outcome during follow-up.

RESULTS

Among 595,078 patients receiving high-dose long-term opioid therapy in the sample, 26.7% experienced sustained dosage reductions and 9.3% experienced discontinuation. Among patients experiencing tapering, 62.0% experienced maximum taper rates between > 10-40% reductions per month and 36.1% experienced monthly rates ≥ 40%. Among patients with mean baseline daily dosages ≥ 150 MME, 47.7% experienced a maximum taper rate ≥ 40% per month. Relative to baseline, 19.7% of patients experiencing tapering had long-term dosage reductions ≥ 40% per month at the end of follow-up.

IMPLICATIONS

Dosage changes for patients on high-dose long-term opioid therapy may warrant special attention, particularly over shorter intervals, to understand how potentially sudden tapering and discontinuation can be reduced while emphasizing patient safety and shared decision-making. Rapid discontinuation of opioids can increase risk of adverse outcomes including opioid withdrawal.

Rapid Discontinuation of Chronic, High-Dose Opioid Treatment for Pain: Prevalence and Associated Factors

PURPOSE

To examine the prevalence of rapid discontinuation of chronic, high-dose opioid analgesic treatment, and identify associated patient, clinician, and community factors.

METHODS

Using 2017-2018 retail pharmacy claims data from IQVIA, we identified chronic, high-dose opioid analgesic treatment episodes discontinued during these years and determined the percent of episodes meeting criteria for rapid discontinuation. We used multivariable logistic regression to estimate the probability of rapid discontinuation, conditional on having a discontinued chronic, high-dose opioid treatment episode, as a function of patient, provider, and county characteristics.

RESULTS

We identified 810,120 new, chronic, high-dose opioid treatment episodes discontinued in 2017 or 2018, of which 72.0% (n=583,415) were rapidly discontinued. Rapid discontinuation was significantly more likely among Medicare (aOR 1.14, 95% CI 1.12 to 1.15) and Medicaid enrollees (aOR 1.03, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.05) compared to the commercially insured; in counties with higher fatal overdose rates (aOR 1.03, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.04) compared to counties with the lowest fatal overdose rates; and in counties with a higher percentage of non-white residents (aOR 1.21 for counties in the highest quartile relative to the lowest, 95% CI 1.19 to 1.24). Likelihood of rapid discontinuation also varied by prescriber specialty.

CONCLUSIONS

Most chronic, high-dose opioid treatment episodes that ended in 2017 or 2018 were discontinued more rapidly than recommended by clinical guidelines, raising concerns about adverse patient outcomes. Our findings highlight the need to understand what drives discontinuation and to inform safer opioid tapering and discontinuation practices.

Efficacy of interventions to reduce long term opioid treatment for chronic non-cancer pain: systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To review interventions to reduce long term opioid treatment in people with chronic non-cancer pain, considering efficacy on dose reduction and discontinuation, pain, function, quality of life, withdrawal symptoms, substance use, and adverse events.

DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials and non-randomised studies of interventions.

DATA SOURCES

Medline, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL, and the Cochrane Library searched from inception to July 2021. Reference lists and previous reviews were also searched and experts were contacted.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR STUDY SELECTION

Original research in English. Case reports and cross sectional studies were excluded.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Two authors independently selected studies, extracted data, and used the Cochrane risk-of-bias tools for randomised and non-randomised studies (RoB 2 and ROBINS-I). Authors grouped interventions into five categories (pain self-management, complementary and alternative medicine, pharmacological and biomedical devices and interventions, opioid replacement treatment, and deprescription methods), estimated pooled effects using random effects meta-analytical models, and appraised the certainty of evidence using GRADE (grading of recommendations, assessment, development, and evaluation).

RESULTS

Of 166 studies meeting inclusion criteria, 130 (78%) were considered at critical risk of bias and were excluded from the evidence synthesis. Of the 36 included studies, few had comparable treatment arms and sample sizes were generally small. Consequently, the certainty of the evidence was low or very low for more than 90% (41/44) of GRADE outcomes, including for all non-opioid patient outcomes. Despite these limitations, evidence of moderate certainty indicated that interventions to support prescribers' adherence to guidelines increased the likelihood of patients discontinuing opioid treatment (adjusted odds ratio 1.5, 95% confidence interval 1.0 to 2.1), and that these prescriber interventions as well as pain self-management programmes reduced opioid dose more than controls (intervention v control, mean difference -6.8 mg (standard error 1.6) daily oral morphine equivalent, P<0.001; pain programme v control, -14.31 mg daily oral morphine equivalent, 95% confidence interval -21.57 to -7.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Evidence on the reduction of long term opioid treatment for chronic pain continues to be constrained by poor study methodology. Of particular concern is the lack of evidence relating to possible harms. Agreed standards for designing and reporting studies on the reduction of opioid treatment are urgently needed.

REVIEW REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD42020140943.

How Would You Treat This Patient With Acute and Chronic Pain From Sickle Cell Disease? : Grand Rounds Discussion From Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center

Sickle cell disease is prevalent in large numbers of patients in the United States and has a significant global impact. Its complications span numerous organs and lead to reduced life expectancy. Acute and chronic sickle cell pain is a common cause of patient suffering. The American Society of Hematology published updated guidelines on management of acute and chronic pain from sickle cell disease in 2019. Several of the recommendations are conditional and leave specific decisions to the treating physician. These include conditional recommendations about the use of ketamine for acute pain and the initiation and discontinuation of long-term opioid therapy for chronic pain. Here, 2 hematologists discuss these guidelines and make contrasting recommendations for the management of acute and chronic pain for a patient with sickle cell disease.

Perioperative Opioids, the Opioid Crisis, and the Anesthesiologist

This review summarizes current evidence related to perioperative opioid prescription fulfillment and use and discusses the role of personalized anesthesia care in mitigating opioid-related harms without compromising analgesia.

Development and testing of an opioid tapering self-management intervention for chronic pain: I-WOTCH

OBJECTIVES

To describe the design, development and pilot of a multicomponent intervention aimed at supporting withdrawal of opioids for people with chronic non-malignant pain for future evaluation in the Improving the Wellbeing of people with Opioid Treated CHronic pain (I-WOTCH) randomised controlled trial.

DESIGN

The I-WOTCH intervention draws on previous literature and collaboration with stakeholders (patient and public involvement). Intervention mapping and development activities of Behaviour Change Taxonomy are described.

SETTING

The intervention development was conducted by a multidisciplinary team with clinical, academic and service user perspectives. The team had expertise in the development and testing of complex health behaviour interventions, opioid tapering and pain management in primary and secondary care, I.T programming, and software development-to develop an opioid tapering App.

PARTICIPANTS

The I-WOTCH trial participants are adults (18 years and over) with chronic non-malignant pain using strong opioids for at least 3 months and on most days in the preceding month.

OUTCOMES

A multicomponent self-management support package to help people using opioids for chronic non-malignant pain reduce opioid use.

INTERVENTIONS AND RESULTS

Receiving information on the impact of long-term opioid use, and potential adverse effects were highlighted as important facilitators in making the decision to reduce opioids. Case studies of those who have successfully stopped taking opioids were also favoured as a facilitator to reduce opioid use. Barriers included the need for a 'trade-off to fill the deficit of the effect of the drug'. The final I-WOTCH intervention consists of an 8-10 week programme incorporating: education; problem-solving; motivation; group and one to one tailored planning; reflection and monitoring. A detailed facilitator manual was developed to promote consistent delivery of the intervention across the UK.

CONCLUSIONS

We describe the development of an opioid reduction intervention package suitable for testing in the I-WOTCH randomised controlled trial.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ISRCTN49470934.

Abrupt Discontinuation From Long-Term Opioid Therapy in Massachusetts, 2015-2018

INTRODUCTION

In response to the opioid overdose crisis, providers were urged to taper and discontinue patients from long-term opioid therapy; however, abrupt discontinuation may lead to poor health outcomes. This study aims to determine abrupt and tapered discontinuation rates and identify the patient and provider characteristics associated with abrupt discontinuation.

METHODS

Data were from the Massachusetts Prescription Monitoring Program, 2015-2018. Patients discontinued from long-term opioid therapy were included in the analysis. Differences between abrupt and tapered discontinuations were identified with bivariate correlations, and variables independently associated with abrupt discontinuation were identified using multivariable Poisson regression analyses. Data were analyzed during 2019-2021.

RESULTS

In total, 277,485 patients experienced 359,320 discontinuations, of which 33.7% (n=120,964) were abrupt. Of all discontinuations, 55.7% were among female patients, and 57.9% were among patients aged >55 years. The ratio of abrupt to tapered discontinuations increased from 1:2.11 in 2015 to 1:1.75 in 2018. In bivariate analysis, prescribers with more patients receiving monthly opioid prescriptions were less likely to abruptly discontinue patients (29.0, IQR=13.9, 55.3 vs 18.8, IQR=5.84, 43.9, p<0.001), as were prescribers who wrote more monthly opioid prescriptions (36.0, IQR=16.8, 70.8 vs 25.4, IQR=7.40, 58.3, p<0.001). Multivariable results indicated that abrupt discontinuation was independently associated with male sex (RR=1.31, 95% CI=1.29, 1.1.32), younger age (RR=0.872, 95% CI=0.869, 0.874), greater distance between patient and prescriber (RR=1.0075, 95% CI=1.0072, 1.0078), and longer long-term opioid therapy duration (RR=1.021, 95% CI=1.021, 1.0122 for every month increase).

CONCLUSIONS

Among all long-term opioid therapy discontinuations, abrupt discontinuation is increasing. Evidence-based approaches to managing and tapering long-term opioid therapy are urgently needed.

Opioid Taper is Associated with Improved Experimental Pain Tolerance in Patients with Chronic Pain: An Observational Study

Introduction

The degree to which opioid-induced hyperalgesia contributes to the pain experience of patients with chronic pain remains relatively undescribed. The objective of this pilot study was to determine if experimental pain responses improve in patients with chronic pain as they undergo a planned opioid taper.

Methods

This was a prospective observational study. Seven patients with chronic neuropathic pain on at least 120 mg morphine equivalents/day were enrolled. The participants were followed over the course of an individualized opioid taper to a lower dose. Measures of experimental pain sensitivity, including indicators of central pain modulation, were collected on a biweekly basis; in addition, measures of function and quality of life were collected monthly. The effect of opioid taper on pain responses and functional outcomes over time were examined using longitudinal mixed-effects regression modeling and general linear regression modeling with regularization as a function of baseline dose, end dose, and taper rate.

Results

In this small sample of patients undergoing highly individualized and variable opioid taper, the opioid taper was significantly associated with improved pain responses to the cold-pressor test, with the pain threshold on average increasing by 1.14 s every 6 weeks (p = 0.0084, 95% confidence interval [CI] for 6-week change 0.3039–2.0178) and pain tolerance on average increasing by 2.87 s every 6 weeks (p = 0.0026, 95% CI for 6-week change 1.02–4.7277). Taper-related changes in central pain modulation were not observed, although conditioned modulation trended toward improvement by the completion of opioid taper. Similarly, no declines in function and quality of life were observed with the opioid taper, suggesting stability despite decreased opioid dose.

Conclusions

Opioid taper was associated with improvements in experimental pain responses without a decline in function and quality of life, suggestive of diminished opioid-induced hyperalgesia in this clinical sample.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT03912298.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40122-021-00348-8.

Educational Intervention for Management of Acute Trauma Pain: A Proof-of-Concept Study in Post-surgical Trauma Patients

OBJECTIVE

Despite years of research and the development of countless awareness campaigns, the number of deaths related to prescription opioid overdose is steadily rising. Often, naive patients undergoing trauma-related surgery are dispensed opioids while in the hospital, resulting in an escalation to long-term opioid misuses. We explored the impact of an educational intervention to modify perceptions of opioid needs at the bedside of trauma inpatients in post-surgery pain management.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Twenty-eight inpatients with acute post-surgical pain completed this proof-of-concept study adopting an educational intervention related to opioids and non-pharmacological strategies in the context of acute post-surgical pain. An education assessment survey was developed to measure pre- and post-education perceptions of opioid needs to manage pain. The survey statements encompassed the patient's perceived needs for opioids and other pharmacological and non-pharmacological therapeutics to manage acute pain. The primary outcome was the change in the patient's perceived need for opioids. The secondary (explorative) outcome was the change in Morphine Milligram Equivalents (MME) used on the day of the educational intervention while inpatients and prescribed at the time of the hospital discharge.

RESULTS

After the educational intervention, patients reported less agreement with the statement, "I think a short course of opioids (less than 5 days) is safe." Moreover, less agreement on using opioids to manage trauma-related pain was positively associated with a significant reduction in opioids prescribed at discharge after the educational intervention. The educational intervention might have effectively helped to cope with acute trauma-related pain while adjusting potential unrealistic expectancies about pain management and, more in general, opioid-related needs.

CONCLUSION

These findings suggest that trauma patients' expectations and understanding of the risks associated with the long-term use of opioids can be modified by a short educational intervention delivered by health providers during the hospitalization. Establishing realistic expectations in managing acute traumatic pain may empower patients with the necessary knowledge to minimize the potential of continuous long-term opioid use, opioid misuse, and the development of post-trauma opioid abuse and/or addiction.

Role of Rehabilitation in Opioid Tapering: A Scoping Review

Purpose: Among industrialized countries, Canada has the second-highest opioid prescribing rate for pain management. Physiotherapy and occupational therapy interventions are potential non-pharmacological alternatives. We undertook a scoping review to explore and summarize the current evidence describing the interventions included or used in physiotherapy and occupational therapy in opioid tapering for individuals with chronic pain. Method: A systematic search of the peer-reviewed health databases was conducted, with data synthesis guided by Arksey and O'Malley's scoping review methodology. Articles were included in the narrative synthesis if (1) interventions within the scope of practice for physiotherapists or occupational therapists were described or these professionals were part of interdisciplinary care and (2) opioid tapering or reduction was addressed. Results: The 39 articles identified included 2 systematic reviews, 9 narrative reviews or commentaries, 2 case reports, 11 uncontrolled cohort studies, 1 cross-sectional study, 5 randomized controlled trials, 4 programme evaluations, and 4 qualitative studies. Of the 28 studies reporting specific outcomes, 25 reported positive outcomes of rehabilitation interventions for opioid tapering. There was greater representation of interventions from physiotherapy than from occupational therapy: few articles contained substantive descriptions (e.g., dosage and duration). Conclusions: The evidence to guide therapists in supporting opioid tapering for people with chronic pain seems to be limited. Further research is needed to establish effectiveness for stand-alone interventions and as part of a comprehensive rehabilitation approach.

Patient outcomes after opioid dose reduction among patients with chronic opioid therapy

ABSTRACT

The net effects of prescribing initiatives that encourage dose reductions are uncertain. We examined whether rapid dose reduction after high-dose chronic opioid therapy (COT) associates with suicide, overdose, or other opioid-related adverse events. This retrospective cohort study included Oregon Medicaid recipients with high-dose COT. Claims were linked with prescription data from the prescription drug monitoring program and death data from vital statistics, 2014 to 2017. Participants were placed into 4 mutually exclusive dose trajectory groups after the high-dose COT period, and Cox proportional hazard models were used to examine the effect of dose changes on patient outcomes in the following year. Of the 14,596 high-dose COT patients, 4191 (28.7%) abruptly discontinued opioid prescriptions, 1648 (11.3%) reduced opioid dose before discontinuing, 6480 (44.4%) had a dose reduction but never discontinued, and 2277 (15.6%) had a stable or increasing dose. Discontinuation, whether abrupt (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 3.63; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.42-9.25) or with dose reduction (aHR 4.47, 95% CI 1.68-11.88) significantly increased risk of suicide compared with those with stable or increasing dose. By contrast, discontinuation or dose reduction reduced the risk of overdose compared with those with a stable or increasing dose (aHR 0.36-0.62, 95% CI 0.20-0.94). Patients with an abrupt discontinuation were more likely to overdose on heroin (vs. prescription opioids) than patients in other groups (P < 0.0001). Our study suggests that patients on COT require careful risk assessment and supportive interventions when considering opioid discontinuation or continuation at a high dose.

How Do We Taper and Discontinue Opioids in Cancer Patients? Considerations from the Activities of a Palliative Care Team at a University Hospital

Background: The more the cancer treatments progress, the more the needs increase to taper and discontinue opioids in cancer patients. Furthermore, opioid dependence of cancer survivors has become a bigger problem. However, a safe opioid tapering and discontinuation method has not yet been established in cancer patients.

Objective: To suggest a safe opioid tapering and discontinuation method in cancer patients.

Design: We reviewed opioid type, dose, administration route, administration duration, reason for tapering and discontinuation, and presence/absence of opioid withdrawal symptoms in cancer patients whose opioids needed to be tapered and discontinued.

Setting/Subjects: We recruited cancer patients referred to the palliative care team of Kyoto University Hospital-Japan whose opioids were tapered and discontinued.

Measurements: Opioid withdrawal symptoms were assessed by two physicians, one nurse, and one pharmacist of palliative care team.

Results: Opioids were tapered and discontinued in 25 out of 145 cancer patients (17%). Opioid withdrawal symptoms were observed in 3 of the 25 cases (12%). In withdrawal symptom cases and nonwithdrawal symptom cases, the mean maximum oral morphine-equivalent doses of opioids were 352.0 and 55.7 mg/day, and the mean administration duration of opioid were 82.3 and 28.7 days, respectively. Withdrawal symptoms occurred in patients receiving higher-dose opioids with longer administration duration and their symptoms tended to appear at approximately 10% of the maximum dose.

Conclusions: We suggest that withdrawal symptoms may be prevented by using a two-stage method rather than a monotonous tapering method in cancer patients whose higher-dose opioid with longer administration duration needed to be tapered and discontinued.

A-TAPER: A Framework for Deprescribing Medications effectively

Inappropriate medication use creates avoidable safety issues for older adults. Deprescribing medications that are high risk and/or of minimal benefit is important for reducing morbidity and adverse effects, especially in this population. A variety of deprescribing resources and algorithms are available, but a singular framework to effectively approach and implement the deprescribing of unnecessary medications in practice does not exist. An interprofessional team of pharmacists, geriatricians, and researchers developed a framework to guide providers in deprescribing medications. This framework is represented by the acronym A-TAPER, which stands for Assess medication use, Talk about risks versus benefits, select Alternatives, Plan next steps, Engage patient, and Reduce dose. Within this framework, comprehensive, medication-specific deprescribing toolkits can be created.

A pharmacist-led intervention to improve the management of opioids in a general practice: a qualitative evaluation of participant interviews

Background Opioid prescribing has escalated, particularly long-term in chronic noncancer pain. Innovative models of care have been recommended to augment regulatory and harm-minimisation strategies and to review the safety and benefits of opioids for the individual patient. Medication stewardship and pharmacist integration are evolving approaches for general practice. Aim To explore enablers, barriers, and outcomes of a pharmacist-led intervention to improve opioid management in general practice, from the perspectives of general practitioners (GPs) and practice personnel. Method The study was part of a mixed-methods investigation into a general practice pharmacist pilot. Qualitative data relevant to opioids were analysed. Data from 13 semi-structured interviews were coded, analysed iteratively and thematically, and interpreted conceptually through the framework of Opioid Stewardship fundamentals proposed by the National Quality Forum. Results Seven themes and 14 subthemes aligned with stewardship fundamentals. Participants considered organisational policy, supported by leadership and education, fostered collaboration and consistency and improved practice safety. Patient engagement with individualised resources, 'agreements' and 'having the conversation' with the pharmacist enabled person-centred opioid review and weaning. GPs reported greater accountability and reflection in their practices, in the broader context of opioid prescribing and dilemmas in managing patients transitioning through care. Receiving feedback on practice deprescribing outcomes encouraged participants' ongoing commitment. Patient communication was deemed an early barrier; however, learnings were applied when transferring the model to other high-risk medicines. Conclusion Improved opioid management was enabled through implementing pharmacist-led coordinated stewardship. The findings offer a practical application of guideline advice to individualise opioid deprescribing.

Opioid Taper Practices Among Clinicians

Introduction

Opioid dose tapers are used frequently when cross-titrating from one or more opioids to another or when discontinuing therapy. Currently, there is no universally accepted evidence-based standard of care for this procedure which can leave patients at risk for withdrawal symptoms, inadequate pain control, or elevated suicide risk.

Objective

The objective of this study was to examine practices and rationale among clinicians, to determine if there is a difference among respondents in their comfort level, method and rationale for tapering opioids at various morphine milligram equivalents (MME) and to assess the need for the development of a standard of care.

Methods

Data were derived from an electronic survey developed using SurveyMonkey^®. The survey was disseminated via e-mail listservs, social media, and professional organizations. Data were collected regarding profession, confidence tapering opioids at varying total MME, method and rationale for tapering, and pharmacologic management of withdrawal symptoms. Pearson's Chi squared and Fisher's exact tests were used to assess statistical significance of results.

Results

A total of 149 clinicians completed the survey, physicians, NPs, pharmacists, and PAs accounted for 51%, 20%, 19%, and 10% of participants, respectively. Overall, 55% of the respondents self-identified as pain specialists. There were no statistically significant differences in reported comfort level among the different types of providers. Nearly 50% of participants indicated their rationale for tapering or discontinuing opioids was the 2016 CDC guidelines.

Conclusion

Despite that the majority of providers surveyed self-identified as pain specialists, over 50% were not comfortable tapering opioids at doses greater than 120 MME/day. This observation suggests a need for further education and establishment of consensus guidelines on method and rationale for opioid tapering. Provider motivation for tapering was largely influenced by CDC guidelines based on low quality evidence. This strengthens the argument for the creation of guidelines based on high quality evidence.

Development and field testing of primary care screening tools for harms of long-term opioid therapy continuation and tapering to discontinuation: a study protocol

INTRODUCTION

Despite calls for screening tools to help providers monitor long-term opioid therapy (LTOT) harms, and identify patients likely to experience harms of discontinuation, such screening tools do not yet exist. Current assessment tools are infeasible to use routinely in primary care and focus mainly on behaviours suggestive of opioid use disorder to the exclusion of other potential harms. This paper describes a study protocol to develop two screening tools that comprise one integrated instrument, Screen to Evaluate and Treat (SET). SET1 will indicate if LTOT may be harmful to continue (yes or no), and SET2 will indicate if tapering to discontinue opioids may be harmful to initiate (yes or no). Patients receiving LTOT who screen positive on the SET tools should receive subsequent additional assessment. SET will give providers methods that are feasible to implement routinely to facilitate more intensive and comprehensive monitoring of patients on LTOT and decision-making about discontinuation.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

We will develop the screening tools, SET1 and SET2, concurrently. Tool development will be done in stages: (1) comprehensive literature searches to yield an initial item pool for domains covered by each screening tool; (2) qualitative item analyses using interviews, expert review and cognitive interviewing, with subsequent item revision, to yield draft versions of each tool; and (3) field testing of the draft screening tools to assess internal consistency, test-retest reliability and convergent and discriminant validity.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethical approval was obtained from the Institutional Review Boards of Stanford University and the University of California, San Francisco for the VA Palo Alto Health Care System, and the VA San Francisco Healthcare System, respectively. Findings will be disseminated through peer-reviewed manuscripts and presentations at research conferences.

Shared decision-making approach to taper postoperative opioids in spine surgery patients with preoperative opioid use: a randomized controlled trial

ABSTRACT

Persistent opioid use is common after surgery, and patients with preoperative opioid use represent a major challenge in this regard. The aim of this randomized controlled trial was to determine the effect of a personalized opioid tapering plan vs standard of care in patients with a preoperative opioid use undergoing spine surgery at Aarhus University Hospital, Denmark. Postoperative outcomes included opioid use, pain, contacts with the healthcare system, patient satisfaction, and withdrawal symptoms. Overall, 110 patients were randomized; 55 into the intervention and control groups each. Five patients (proportion = 0.09, 95% confidence interval [CI] [0.04-0.21]) in the intervention group compared with 13 patients (0.25, 95% CI [0.15-0.39]) in the control group were unable to taper opioids to their preoperative consumption 1 month after discharge (P = 0.03) (primary outcome). Likewise, more patients in the intervention group succeeded in tapering opioids to zero 3 months after discharge (37 patients; 0.71, 95% CI [0.57-0.82] vs 23 patients; 0.43, 95% CI [0.30-0.56], P = 0.003). Fewer patients in the intervention group had pain-related contacts to health care the first 2 weeks after discharge (21 patients; 0.40, 95% CI [0.28-0.54] vs 31 patients; 0.60, 95% CI [0.46-0.73], P = 0.04). There was no difference in satisfaction with pain treatment over the first 2 weeks or the incidence of withdrawal symptoms during the first month after discharge. Pain intensity was similar between both groups at all time points. These results suggest that a personalized tapering plan at discharge combined with telephone counselling 1 week after discharge assists patients in postoperative opioid tapering.

Effects of opioid rotation to buprenorphine/naloxone on pain, pain thresholds, pain tolerance, and quality of life in patients with chronic pain and opioid use disorder

ABSTRACT

Long-term opioid use in patients with chronic noncancer pain (CNCP) can lead to opioid use disorder (OUD) and has been associated with hyperalgesia and reduced quality of life (QoL). Studies suggest antihyperalgesic properties of buprenorphine, and buprenorphine or naloxone (BuNa) has shown beneficial effects on QoL in patients with OUD without CNCP. This study investigated the added value of BuNa in patients with CNCP with OUD on self-reported pain, pain thresholds, pain tolerance, and QoL. In the current study, 43 outpatients with CNCP and OUD were included for inpatient conversion from full μ-receptor agonist opioids to BuNa. Self-reported pain, pain thresholds, pain tolerance, and QoL were determined at baseline and after 2 months of follow-up, using, respectively, a Visual Analogue Scale (VAS-pain and VAS-QoL), quantitative sensory testing, and EuroQol-5 dimensions. In total, 37 participants completed the protocol, and their data were analyzed. The mean VAS-pain score decreased from 51.3 to 37.2 (27.5%, F = 3.3; P = 0.044), whereas the pressure pain threshold and electric pain threshold or tolerance increased after substitution (F = 7.8; P = 0.005 and F = 44.5; P < 0.001, respectively), as well as QoL (EuroQol-5 dimensions questionnaire: F = 10.4; P = 0.003 and VAS-QoL: F = 4.4; P = 0.043). We found that conversion of full μ-receptor agonists to BuNa, in patients with CNCP with OUD, was accompanied with lower self-reported pain, higher pain thresholds, higher pain tolerance, and improved QoL. Despite several study limitations, these data suggest that BuNa might be of value in patients with CNCP with OUD. Future studies should investigate long-term effects of BuNa in randomized trials.

Beneficial Effects of Opioid Rotation to Buprenorphine/Naloxone on Opioid Misuse, Craving, Mental Health, and Pain Control in Chronic Non-Cancer Pain Patients with Opioid Use Disorder

Patients with chronic non-cancer pain (CNCP) often use opioids for long periods of time. This may lead to opioid use disorder (OUD) and psychiatric symptoms: mainly depression and anxiety. The current study investigated the effect of buprenorphine/naloxone (BuNa) rotation on opioid misuse, craving, psychiatric symptoms and pain in patients with CNCP and OUD. Forty-three participants with CNCP and OUD were converted from a full mu-receptor agonist opioid (mean morphine equivalent dose: 328.3 mg) to BuNa, in an inpatient setting. Opioid misuse, craving, co-occurring psychiatric symptoms, and pain perception were determined at baseline and after a two-month follow-up, using the following self-report questionnaires: Current Opioid Misuse Measurement (COMM), Visual Analog Scale (VAS-craving and VAS-pain) and Depression, Anxiety and Stress Scale (DASS), respectively. VAS-craving and VAS-pain were also determined immediately after conversion. A total of 37 participants completed the protocol. The mean COMM decreased from 17.1 to 6.7 (F = 36.5; p < 0.000), the mean VAS-craving decreased from 39.3 to 5.3 (−86.6%; F = 26.5, p < 0.000), the mean DASS decreased from 12.1 to 6.6 (F = 56.3, p < 0.000), and the mean VAS-pain decreased from 51.3 to 37.2 (−27.4%, F = 3.3; p = 0.043). Rotation to BuNa in patients with CNCP and OUD was accompanied by reductions in (i) opioid misuse, (ii) opioid craving, (iii) the severity of co-occurring psychiatric symptoms, and (iv) self-reported pain. BuNa as opioid agonist treatment may therefore be a beneficial strategy in CNCP patients with OUD. The limited sample size and the observational nature of this study underline the need for the replication of the current findings in large-scale, controlled studies.

Impact of the Opioid Epidemic

In recent years the prescription opioid overdose epidemic has decreased, but has been more than offset by increases in overdose caused by fentanyl and fentanyl analogues. Opioid overdose patients should receive naloxone if they have significant respiratory depression and/or loss of protective airway reflexes. Patients who receive naloxone should be observed for recurrent opioid effects. Patients with opioid overdose may be admitted to the intensive care unit for naloxone infusions, treatment of noncardiogenic pulmonary edema, autonomic instability, or sequelae of hypoxia-ischemia or cardiac arrest. Primary and secondary prevention are important to reduce the number of people with life-threatening opioid overdose.

Pain Experiences of Adults With Sickle Cell Disease and Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation: A Qualitative Study

OBJECTIVE

Despite increasing use of hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) for adults with sickle cell disease (SCD), little is known about pain management experiences throughout this process. The objective of this study was to explore patients' experiences with pain and pain management during and after HSCT for SCD.

METHODS

We conducted a qualitative interview study with 10 patients who underwent HSCT for SCD. We transcribed interviews verbatim and inductively identified codes. We used thematic analysis alongside a constant comparative method to develop and refine a codebook that aided in the identification of themes.

RESULTS

Four key themes emerged. (1) The pain trajectory: patients described a fluctuating course of pain during HSCT, which often extended long afterwards and impacted all aspects of life, particularly affected by pre-HSCT experiences; (2) The role of opioids-a double-edged sword: patients described opioids as reducing pain but insufficiently to balance significant adverse effects and burden; (3) Patient-centered decision making in pain management: patients described insufficient agency in decisions about opioid use and weaning; and (4) Consequences of health-related stigma: patients described experiences with stigma, mainly related to opioid use and weaning, as similar to pre-HSCT.

CONCLUSIONS

From the perspective of patients who have undergone HSCT for SCD, clinicians should use a patient-centered approach, integrating non-opioid approaches into pain management, particularly psychosocial support. As transplant for SCD becomes increasingly available, incorporating patient perspectives may improve health care delivery and overall patient experiences.

Opioid Tapering/Detoxification Protocols, A Compendium: Narrative Review

OBJECTIVES

The opioid epidemic has put pressure on clinicians to taper their chronic pain patients (CPPs) from opioids. This has resulted in rapid or forced tapers and opioid discontinuation. Partially responsible is lack of information on how to taper (tapering protocols).The objectives of this narrative review were then the following: compile all the published opioid tapering/detoxification protocols from the pain/drug rehabilitation/psychiatric literature whether for inpatient or outpatient use; organize these into general types; compare the types for advantages/disadvantages for use by a clinician in an outpatient setting; and answer some commonly asked questions relating to opioid tapering.

METHODS

Relevant references were identified by a search strategy utilizing the terms tapering, tapering protocols, detoxification, detoxification protocols, withdrawal, dependence, addiction, and drug rehabilitation. These were explored with the term opioids. Identified abstract were reviewed for any study relating to the objectives of this review. Those studies were then included in this review. As this is a narrative review, no quality ratings of these references were performed.

RESULTS

Of 1,922 abstracts identified by this search strategy, 301 were reviewed in detail for potential inclusion. Of these, 104 were utilized in this review. Nine types of opioid tapering protocols were identified and compared in tabular form. Twenty-two questions in reference to opioid tapering were addressed.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on this review, the protocol utilizing the opioid of current use is the simplest to use as it requires no rotation to another opioid and thereby avoids rotation errors. It also has behavior advantages.

Rationalisation of long-term high-dose opioids for chronic pain: development of an intervention and conceptual framework

There has been a large increase in the number of prescriptions for opioid drugs in the United Kingdom over the last 20 years or more and the prescribing of opioids in high doses continues to increase. Much opioid prescribing is for chronic non-cancer pain (CNCP) despite serious doubts about the long-term effectiveness of opioids for this indication. Clinical experience is that there are increasing numbers of patients who are on high dosages of opioid drugs over sustained periods which provide limited or no pain relief while having significant negative effects on functioning and quality of life. The aim of this article is to bring readers' attention to some clinical observations of the CNCP population with high doses and to describe an intervention to reduce these doses. Many of these patients have no clinical features of addiction; we suggest that those who show little or no substance misuse behaviours are best understood as a distinct clinical population who have different treatment needs. In order to understand and treat these patients, a model is required which, rather than seeing the problem as lying solely with the patient, focuses on the interaction between the individual and his or her environment and seeks a change in what the patient does every day, rather than a simple, and largely unattainable, goal of symptom elimination. The clinician authors worked together to develop an intervention based upon approaches taken from both pain management and psychiatric practice. A detailed description of this rapid opioid reduction intervention (RORI) is provided along with some preliminary outcome data.

Longitudinal Dose Trajectory Among Patients Tapering Long-Term Opioids

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the dose trajectory of new opioid tapers and estimate the percentage of patients with sustained tapers at long-term follow-up.

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

SETTING

Data from the OptumLabs Data Warehouse® which includes de-identified medical and pharmacy claims and enrollment records for commercial and Medicare Advantage enrollees, representing a diverse mixture of ages, ethnicities, and geographical regions across the United States.

SUBJECTS

Patients prescribed stable, higher-dose opioids for ≥12 months from 2008 to 2018.

METHODS

Tapering was defined as ≥15% relative reduction in average MME/day during any of six overlapping 60-day periods in the initial 7 months of follow-up after the period of stable baseline dosing. Average monthly dose was ascertained during consecutive 60-day periods up to 16 months of follow-up. Linear regression estimated the geometric mean relative dose by tapering status and follow-up duration. Poisson regression estimated the percentage of tapered patients with sustained dose reductions at follow-up and patient-level predictors of failing to sustain tapers.

RESULTS

The sample included 113,618 patients with 203,920 periods of stable baseline dosing (mean follow-up = 13.7 months). Tapering was initiated during 37,170 follow-up periods (18.2%). After taper initiation, patients had a substantial initial mean dose reduction (geometric mean relative dose .73 [95% CI: .72-.74]) that was sustained through 16 months of follow-up; at which point, 69.8% (95% CI: 69.1%-70.4%) of patients who initiated tapers had a relative dose reduction ≥15%, and 14.2% (95% CI: 13.7%-14.7%) had discontinued opioids. Failure to sustain tapers was significantly less likely among patients with overdose events during follow-up (adjusted incidence rate ratio [aIRR]: .56 [95% CI: .48-.67]) and during more recent years (aIRR: .93 per year after 2008 [95% CI: .92-.94]).

CONCLUSIONS

In an insured and Medicare Advantage population, over two-thirds of patients who initiated opioid dose tapering sustained long-term dose reductions, and the likelihood of sustaining tapers increased substantially from 2008 to 2018.

Patient and Provider Acceptability of a Patient Preauthorized Concealed Opioid Reduction

OBJECTIVE

Limited research of how to best taper opioids brings about an ethical and clinical dilemma. Experiments using overt and concealed administration of opioids have demonstrated the benefits of a concealed reduction to eliminate negative expectations and prolong analgesic benefits. This may allow for opioid tapering without significant increases in pain. Based on this, we investigated patient and provider acceptance of a concealed opioid reduction for chronic pain.

METHODS

We conducted a cross-sectional survey via REDcap with 74 patients, who are currently taking or have taken high dose opioids, and 49 providers using a validated questionnaire based on two hypothetical clinical trials comparing a patient preauthorized concealed opioid reduction vs standard tapering.

RESULTS

We found that patients and providers have positive attitudes toward a concealed reduction of opioid dosages. More than 60% of providers and patients surveyed viewed the hypothetical clinical trial as helpful to reduce pain, side effects, and withdrawal symptoms. Sixty-one percent of patients and 77.6% of providers recognized that there would be differences in pain relief depending upon which group the hypothetical participants would be enrolled in.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients and providers appear to understand the benefits of a concealed opioid reduction. Our findings support future randomized controlled trials that compare concealed and overt opioid tapering in patients with chronic pain. More research is needed to understand the difference in attitudes between research and clinical practice and to test the acceptability of a concealed reduction following a participation in an active clinical trial.

Long-term analgesic and opioid prescription after surgery under general or neuraxial anesthesia: A retrospective nationwide sampling study

STUDY OBJECTIVE

Chronic postsurgical pain (CPSP) is a common and underreported but significant outcome following surgery. Pharmacological treatment with analgesics, including non-opioids and opioids, is frequently used. It has been debated whether neuraxial anesthesia can reduce persistent analgesic use. We aimed to survey long-term analgesic prescription after different surgeries under general and neuraxial anesthesia, using a nationwide database.

DESIGN

Retrospective case-control study.

SETTING

This study used data corresponding to the period from 2000 to 2016 from a longitudinal generation tracking database, which includes the claims data of 2 million randomly selected beneficiaries in Taiwan.

PATIENTS

Patients (n = 110,654) who underwent herniorrhaphy, hip/knee replacement, and lower-limb open reduction internal fixation (ORIF) or amputation were enrolled.

INTERVENTIONS

We categorized patients into general or neuraxial anesthesia groups, compared the rates of long-term analgesic prescription between the two groups, and estimated the adjusted odds ratios (aORs) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) using multivariable logistic regression analysis.

MAIN RESULTS

Lower rates of long-term analgesic prescription were noted in patients who underwent herniorrhaphy (3 months post-surgery: aOR, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.84-0.93; 6 months post-surgery: aOR, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.84-0.96), hip replacement (3 months post-surgery: aOR, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.85-0.97), and lower-limb ORIF (3 months post-surgery: aOR, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.88-0.94; 6 months post-surgery: aOR, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.92-0.99) under neuraxial anesthesia than under general anesthesia. Lesser long-term opioid prescription after herniorrhaphy (3 months post-surgery: aOR, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.36-0.75; 6 months post-surgery: aOR, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.42-0.81) and lower-limb ORIF (3 months post-surgery: aOR, 0.55; 95% CI, 0.47-0.65; 6 months post-surgery: aOR, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.56-0.80) was observed under neuraxial anesthesia than under general anesthesia.

CONCLUSIONS

Neuraxial anesthesia may be associated with lower rates of long-term analgesic and opioid prescription after some surgeries, especially herniorrhaphy and lower-limb ORIF.

Cognitive-Affective Transdiagnostic Factors Associated With Vulnerability to Alcohol and Prescription Opioid Use in the Context of Pain

The use of alcohol and prescription opioids is common among people in pain and poses significant public health burdens. This review identifies factors associated with motivation to use alcohol and prescription opioids in the context of pain. Pain-relevant, cognitive-affective, transdiagnostic vulnerability factors-expectancies/motives, pain catastrophizing, pain-related anxiety, distress intolerance, anxiety sensitivity, and perceived interrelations-were selected from theoretical conceptualizations of pain and substance use. Searches conducted in PubMed, PsycINFO, and Embase returned 25 studies that examined associations between identified variables of interest and the use of alcohol and prescription opioids in the context of pain. Consistent with a larger literature on pain and substance use, the studies included in this review demonstrated that people with chronic pain are motivated to use alcohol and opioids in response to negative affect and hold expectancies/motives for coping with pain. Vulnerabilities that engender difficulty managing aversive internal states (distress intolerance and anxiety sensitivity) and maladaptive responses to pain (pain-related anxiety and pain catastrophizing) also were implicated in motivation for alcohol and opioid use. Although one study found that pain-related anxiety was associated with co-use of alcohol and opioids, no studies examined simultaneous use. Future research directions that can explicate causal associations, identify patterns of alcohol and opioid co-use, clarify the role of pain in cessation processes, and inform treatment development are discussed.

mHealth Interventions to Support Prescription Opioid Tapering in Patients With Chronic Pain: Qualitative Study of Patients' Perspectives

BACKGROUND

Patients with chronic pain who are tapering prescription opioids report a need for greater support for coping with symptoms of pain and withdrawal. Mobile health (mHealth) technologies (SMS text messaging- or app-based) have the potential to provide patients with educational, emotional, and motivational support for opioid tapering beyond what is offered by their health care provider. However, it is not known whether patients with chronic pain who are tapering opioids would be willing or able to engage with technology-based support.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to examine patients' use of mobile technologies in health care, interest in using mHealth support, preferences for the form and content of mHealth support, and potential barriers to and facilitators of engagement with mHealth support for opioid tapering.

METHODS

A total of 21 patients (11 women and 10 men; age range 29-83 years) with chronic noncancer pain on long-term opioid therapy who had recently initiated a voluntary opioid taper were recruited from primary and tertiary care clinics in metropolitan and regional Australia for a larger study of patients' experiences of opioid tapering. Participants had been taking prescription opioids for a mean duration of 13 (SD 9.6; range 0.25-30) years at the time of the study. Survey items characterized participants' typical mobile phone use and level of interest in mobile technology-based support for opioid tapering. Semistructured interviews further explored patients' use of mobile technologies and their interest in, preferences for, and perspectives on potential barriers to and facilitators of engagement with mHealth support for opioid tapering. Two researchers collaborated to conduct a thematic analysis of the interview data.

RESULTS

All participants reported owning and using a mobile phone, and most (17/21, 81%) participants reported using mobile apps. The majority of participants expressed interest in SMS text messaging-based (17/21, 81%) and app-based (15/21, 71%) support for opioid tapering. Participants expected that messages delivering both informational and socioemotional support would be helpful. Participants expected that access to technology, mobile reception, internet connectivity, vision impairment, and low self-efficacy for using apps may be barriers to user engagement. Patients expected that continuity of care from their health care provider, flexible message dosing, responsivity, and familiarity with pain self-management strategies would increase user engagement.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this study indicate that patients with chronic noncancer pain may be willing to engage with SMS text messaging-based and app-based mHealth interventions to support opioid tapering. However, the feasibility and acceptability of these interventions may depend on how patients' preferences for functionality, content, and design are addressed.