Time-scheduled vs. pain-contingent opioid dosing in chronic opioid therapy

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.

Intravenous Patient-Controlled Analgesia Versus Oral Opioid to Maintain Analgesia for Severe Cancer Pain: A Randomized Phase II Trial

BACKGROUND

Optimal analgesic maintenance for severe cancer pain is unknown. This study evaluated the efficacy and safety of intravenous patient-controlled analgesia (IPCA) with continuous infusion plus rescue dose or bolus-only dose versus conventional oral extended-release morphine as a background dose with normal-release morphine as a rescue dose to maintain analgesia in patients with severe cancer pain after successful opioid titration.

METHODS

Patients with persistent severe cancer pain (≥7 at rest on the 11-point numeric rating scale [NRS]) were randomly assigned to 1 of 3 treatment arms: (A1) IPCA hydromorphone with bolus-only dose where dosage was 10% to 20% of the total equianalgesic over the previous 24 hours (TEOP24H) administered as needed, (A2) IPCA hydromorphone with continuous infusion where dose per hour was the TEOP24H divided by 24 and bolus dosage for breakthrough pain was 10% to 20% of the TEOP24H, and (B) oral extended-release morphine based on TEOP24H/2 × 75% (because of incomplete cross-tolerance) every 12 hours plus normal-release morphine based on TEOP24H × 10% to 20% for breakthrough pain. After randomization, patients underwent IPCA hydromorphone titration for 24 hours to achieve pain control before beginning their assigned treatment. The primary endpoint was NRS over days 1 to 3.

RESULTS

A total of 95 patients from 9 oncology study sites underwent randomization: 30 into arm A1, 32 into arm A2, and 33 into arm B. Arm B produced a significantly higher NRS over days 1 to 3 compared with arm A1 or A2 (P<.001). Daily NRS from day 1 to day 6 and patient satisfaction scores on day 3 and day 6 were worse in arm B. Median equivalent-morphine consumption increase was significantly lower in A1 (P=.024) among the 3 arms. No severe adverse event occurred in any arm.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with oral morphine maintenance, IPCA hydromorphone for analgesia maintenance improves control of severe cancer pain after successful titration. Furthermore, IPCA hydromorphone without continuous infusion may consume less opioid.

A scoping review of the diurnal variation in the intensity of neuropathic pain

BACKGROUND

Recent studies suggest that neuropathic pain exhibit a daily diurnal pattern with peak levels usually in the late afternoon to evening and trough in the morning hours, although literature on this topic has been sparse. This scoping review examines current evidence on the chronobiology of neuropathic pain in both animal models and in humans with neuropathic pain.

METHOD

Literature search was conducted on major medical databases for relevant articles on chronobiology of neuropathic pain in both animal models and in humans with neuropathic pain. Data extracted include details of specific animal models or specific neuropathic pain conditions in humans, methods and timing of assessing pain severity, and specific findings of diurnal variation in pain intensity or its surrogate markers.

RESULTS

Thirteen animal and eight human studies published between 1976 to 2020 were included in the analysis. Seven out of 13 animal studies reported specific diurnal variation in pain intensity, with five of the seven studies reporting a trend towards increased sensitivity to mechanical allodynia or thermal hyperalgesia in the late light to dark phase. All eight studies on human subjects reported a diurnal variation in the intensity of neuropathic pain where there was an increase in pain intensity through the day with peaks in late evening and early night hours.

CONCLUSIONS

Studies included in this review demonstrated a diurnal variation in the pattern of neuropathic pain that is distinct from the pattern for nociceptive pain. These findings have implications for potential therapeutic strategies for neuropathic pain.

Regular dosing compared with as-needed dosing of opioids for management of chronic cancer pain: systematic review and meta-analysis

Opioids are the recommended form of analgesia for patients with persistent cancer pain, and regular dosing "by the clock" is advocated in many international guidelines on cancer pain management. The development of sustained-release opioid preparations has made regular dosing easier for patients. However, patients report that the intensity and impact of their cancer pain varies considerably day to day, and many try to find a trade-off between acceptable pain control and impact of cognitive (and other) adverse effects on daily activities. In acute care settings, (eg, postoperative) as-needed dosing and other opioid-sparing approaches have resulted in better patient outcomes compared with regular dosing. The aim of this study was to determine whether regular dosing of opioids was superior to as-needed dosing for persistent cancer pain. We systematically searched for randomised controlled trials that directly compared pain outcomes from regular dosing of opioids with as-needed dosing in adult cancer patients. We identified 4347 records, 25 randomised controlled trials meet the inclusion criteria, 9 were included in the review, and 7 of these included in meta-analysis. We found no clear evidence demonstrating superiority of regular dosing of opioids compared with as-needed dosing in persistent cancer pain, and regular dosing was associated with significantly higher total opioid doses. There was, however, a paucity of trials directly answering this question, and low-quality evidence limits the conclusions that can be drawn. It is clear that further high-quality clinical trials are needed to answer this question and to guide clinical practice.

Chronic Opioid Therapy: A Scoping Literature Review on Evolving Clinical and Scientific Definitions

The management of chronic noncancer pain (CNCP) with chronic opioid therapy (COT) is controversial. There is a lack of consensus on how COT is defined resulting in unclear clinical guidance. This scoping review identifies and evaluates evolving COT definitions throughout the published clinical and scientific literature. Databases searched included PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science. A total of 227 studies were identified from 8,866 studies published between January 2000 and July 2019. COT definitions were classified by pain population of application and specific dosage/duration definition parameters, with results reported according to PRISMA-ScR. Approximately half of studies defined COT as "days' supply duration >90 days" and 9.3% defined as ">120 days' supply," with other days' supply cut-off points (>30, >60, or >70) each appearing in <5% of total studies. COT was defined by number of prescriptions in 63 studies, with 16.3% and 11.0% using number of initiations or refills, respectively. Few studies explicitly distinguished acute treatment and COT. Episode duration/dosage criteria was used in 90 studies, with 7.5% by Morphine Milligram Equivalents + days' supply and 32.2% by other "episode" combination definitions. COT definitions were applied in musculoskeletal CNCP (60.8%) most often, and typically in adults aged 18 to 64 (69.6%). The usage of ">90 days' supply" COT definitions increased from 3.2 publications/year before 2016 to 20.7 publications/year after 2016. An increasing proportion of studies define COT as ">90 days' supply." The most recent literature trends toward shorter duration criteria, suggesting that contemporary COT definitions are increasingly conservative. PERSPECTIVE: This study summarized the most common, current definition criteria for chronic opioid therapy (COT) and recommends adoption of consistent definition criteria to be utilized in practice and research. The most recent literature trends toward shorter duration criteria overall, suggesting that COT definition criteria are increasingly stringent.

The evaluating prescription opioid changes in veterans (EPOCH) study: Design, survey response, and baseline characteristics

In the United States (US), long-term opioid therapy has been commonly prescribed for chronic pain. Since recognition of the opioid overdose epidemic, clinical practice guidelines have recommended tapering long-term opioids to reduced doses or discontinuation. The Effects of Prescription Opioid Changes for veterans (EPOCH) study is a national population-based prospective observational study of US Veterans Health Administration primary care patients designed to assess effects of evolving opioid prescribing practice on patients treated with long-term opioids for chronic pain. A stratified random sampling design was used to identify a survey sample from the target population of patients treated with opioid analgesics for ≥ 6 months. Demographic, diagnostic, visit, and pharmacy dispensing data were extracted from existing datasets. A 2016 mixed-mode mail and telephone survey collected patient-reported data, including the main patient-reported outcomes of pain-related function (Brief Pain Inventory interference; BPI-I scores 0–10, higher scores = worse) and health-related quality of life. Data on survey participants and non-participants were analyzed to assess potential nonresponse bias. Weights were used to account for design. Linear regression models were used to assess cross-sectional associations of opioid treatment with patient-reported measures. Of 14,160 patients contacted, 9253 (65.4%) completed the survey. Participants were older than non-participants (63.9 ± 10.6 vs. 59.6 ± 13.0 years). The mean number of bothersome pain locations was 6.8 (SE 0.04). Effectiveness of pain treatment and quality of pain care were rated fair or poor by 56.1% and 45.3%, respectively. The opioid daily dosage range was 1.6 to 1038.2 mg, with mean = 50.6 mg (SE 1.1) and median = 30.9 mg (IQR 40.7). Among the 73.2% of patients who did not receive long-acting opioids, the mean daily dosage was 30.4 mg (SE 0.6) and mean BPI-I was 6.4 (SE 00.4). Among patients who received long-acting opioids, the mean daily dosage was 106.2 mg (SE 2.8) and mean BPI-I was 6.8 (SE 0.07). Higher daily dosage was associated with worse pain-related function and quality of life among patients without long-acting opioids, but not among patients with long-acting opioids. Future analyses will use follow-up data to examine effects of opioid dose reduction and discontinuation on patient outcomes.

Pragmatic Opioid Use in Painful Diabetic Neuropathy

The management of painful diabetic neuropathy poses a tough clinical challenge. Although opioid analgesics are considered as second- or third-line agents in the management of moderate-to-severe neuropathic pain, prescription of opioids for this indication is higher than expected. This narrative review is a recommendation on how to ensure pragmatic use of opioids for those with painful diabetic neuropathy while avoiding complications such as opioid overdose, opioid diversion and the development of opioid-use disorder. Risk mitigation strategies at the level of the clinician include periodic assessment and documentation of clinical details, treatment history and psychosocial status. Using a multimodal approach to pain management, medication counselling, adherence monitoring programmes, evidence-based opioid dosing strategies and empowering patients to make treatment decisions are effective strategies in reducing risk associated with prolonged opioid use. At the organisational and policy level, using prescription drug monitoring programmes, carrying out periodic opioid utilisation reviews and providing training to patients and physicians on safe opioid use are useful, implementable strategies.

Learning and Unlearning of Pain

This review provides an overview of learning mechanisms and memory aspects for the development of chronic pain. Pain can be influenced in important ways by an individual's personality, by family, and by the sociocultural environment in which they live. Therefore, learning mechanisms can explain why pain experience and pain behavior can increase or decrease. Linking pain with positive consequences or removing negative consequences can contribute significantly to the chronification of pain. We will provide an overview of treatment options that use the characteristics of extinction. Operant extinction training and cognitive behavioral approaches show promising results for the treatment of chronic pain.

Alcohol and Drug Use and Aberrant Drug-Related Behavior Among Patients on Chronic Opioid Therapy

OBJECTIVE

To better identify individuals on chronic opioid therapy (COT) at high risk for aberrant-drug related behavior (ADRB). We examine whether patients with low level alcohol and drug use have similar characteristics to those with alcohol and drug disorders. We then examined the relationship of alcohol and drug use to ADRBs among COT patients.

METHODS

The sample was 972 randomly selected COT patients (age 21-80 years old) from a large health system in Northern California, USA, and interviewed in 2009. Logistic regression models were used to model the dependent variables of: alcohol use, illicit drug use, alcohol disorders, illicit drug disorders, and ADRBs.

RESULTS

The odds of daily/weekly alcohol use were lower for those with a high daily opioid dose (120+ mg/day vs. <20 mg/day) (OR = 0.32, p < 0.010). Illicit drug disorders were associated with depression (OR = 2.31, p < .001) and being on a high daily opioid dose (OR = 5.51, p < .01). Participants with illicit drug use had higher odds of giving (OR = 2.57, p < 0.01) and receiving opioids from friends or family (OR = 3.25, p < 0.001), but disorder diagnoses were not associated with ADRBs.

CONCLUSIONS

Findings reinforce that illicit drug use should be of high concern to clinicians prescribing opioids, and suggest it should be considered separately from alcohol use and alcohol disorders in the evaluation of ADRBs. Frequent alcohol use is low, but not uncommon, and suggests a need to discuss specific issues regarding safe use of opioids among persons who use alcohol that may differ from their risk of drug use.

Health care resource use and cost differences by opioid therapy type among chronic noncancer pain patients

The study assessed 12-month chronic pain (CP)-related health care utilization and costs among chronic noncancer pain (CNCP) patients who initiated various long-term opioid treatments. Treatments included monotherapy with long-acting opioids (mono-LAOs), mono-therapy with short-acting opioids (mono-SAOs), both LAOs and SAOs (combination), and opioid therapy initiated with SAO or LAO and switched to the other class (switch). Using MarketScan^® claims databases (2006–2012), we identified CNCP patients with ≥90 days opioid supply after pain diagnosis and continuous enrollment 12 months before pain diagnosis (baseline period) and 12 months after opioid start (post-index period). Outcomes included CP-related health care utilization and costs. Among CNCP patients (n=21,203), the cohort distribution was 74% mono-SAOs, 22% combination, 2% mono-LAOs, and 2% switch. During follow-up, the average daily morphine equivalent dose was highest in mono-LAO patients (96.4 mg) compared with combination patients (89.8 mg), switch patients (64.3 mg), and mono-SAO patients (36.2 mg). After adjusting for baseline differences, the mono-LAO cohort had lower total CP-related costs ($4,933) compared with the mono-SAO ($8,604), switch ($10,470), and combination ($15,190) cohorts (all: P<0.05). Mono-LAO patients had greater CP-related prescription costs but lower medical costs than the other cohorts during the follow-up period, including lower CP-related hospitalizations (1% vs 11%–20%), emergency department visits (4% vs 11%–18%), and diagnostic radiology use (21% vs 54%–61%) (all: P<0.001). Use of pain-related medications and other treatment modalities was also significantly lower in the mono-LAO cohort relative to the other cohorts. CNCP patients using long-term monotherapy with LAOs had the lowest CP-related total health care costs in the 12 months after opioid initiation compared with mono-SAO, switch, or combination patients despite higher opioid daily doses and higher prescription costs. Future research accounting for severity and duration of pain would aid in determining the optimal long-term opioid regimen for CNCP patients.

Interchangeability, Safety and Efficacy of Modified-Release Drug Formulations in the USA: The Case of Opioid and Other Nervous System Drugs

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Modified-release drugs may provide clinical advantages compared to immediate-release forms and improve convenience to the patient and health outcomes. Concerns have been raised regarding interchangeability, efficacy, and safety of modified-release formulations. This study analyses all US Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved modified-release formulations and market trends, and illustrates how bioequivalence and safety of generic modified-release products compare to their respective brand name drugs and other generic drugs with different formulation design characteristics. This study also examines major concerns related to modified-release formulations: safety of opioids and bioequivalence of generic bupropion and methylphenidate.

METHODS

Study data were derived from the FDA electronic versions of the FDA's Orange Book (OB) and the FDA safety communications web page. Medicare Part D utilization and expenditures data were extracted from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid.

RESULTS

In May 2015, 276 (11.9 %) of the 2325 active ingredients and fixed-dose combinations listed in the FDA's Orange Book had at least one modified-release form approved by the FDA. The number of approvals increased over time; 52.5 % of modified releases were approved in the period 2000-May 2015. The FDA required a risk evaluation and mitigation strategy (REMS) to ensure that the benefits of extended-release opioids outweighed its risks of overdose and abuse. The REMS involved 16 new drug applications and 25 abbreviated new drug applications.

CONCLUSIONS

The FDA addressed interchangeability problems with generic modified-release alternatives of bupropion and methylphenidate including lack of bioequivalence, reduced efficacy, and increased incidence of adverse events. Systematic post-marketing surveillance studies are needed to assess differences in safety, interchangeability, and efficacy of drugs with modified- and immediate-release formulations.

Chronic opioid therapy in long-term cancer survivors

PURPOSE

Long-term cancer survivors develop special health issues and specific needs. Chronic pain, whether the consequence of their cancer or as a side effect of treatment, is one of their most prevalent concerns.

METHODS

We conducted a review of the English-language literature on long-term cancer survivorship and chronic opioid therapy, with the objective of determining the efficacy, safety and tolerability in this group of patients. Practical management recommendations are made on the basis of this review.

RESULTS

Pain syndromes encountered in the long-term cancer survivors are diverse. Opioid receptor pathways possess complex and pleiotropic functions and continuous over-activation may lead to de novo endocrinopathies, immunosuppression, neurocognitive impairment, or cell cycle disturbances with potential clinical connotations. However, there are insufficient data to support evidence-based decision making with respect to patient selection, doses, administration, monitoring and follow-up. Data about long-term treatment effectiveness and safety are limited and often aggravated by the overlapping of several diseases prevalent among long-term cancer survivors, as well as chronic opiate-induced toxicity.

CONCLUSIONS

Chronic opioid therapy is frequent in long-term cancer survivors, and may negatively affect the immune system, and produce health problems such as endocrinopathies, osteoporosis, neurological or cardiopulmonary effects, alterations of cell cycle kinetics, abuse and addiction. This review highlights the need for specialized teams to treat chronic pain in long-term cancer survivors from an integrative perspective.

Impact of chronobiology on neuropathic pain treatment

Inflammatory pain exhibits circadian rhythmicity. Recently, a distinct diurnal pattern has been described for peripheral neuropathic conditions. This diurnal variation has several implications: advancing understanding of chronobiology may facilitate identification of new and improved treatments; developing pain-contingent strategies that maximize treatment at times of the day associated with highest pain intensity may provide optimal pain relief as well as minimize treatment-related adverse effects (e.g., daytime cognitive dysfunction); and consideration of the impact of chronobiology on pain measurement may lead to improvements in analgesic study design that will maximize assay sensitivity of clinical trials. Recent and ongoing chronobiology studies are thus expected to advance knowledge and treatment of neuropathic pain.

Safety concerns with long-term opioid use

INTRODUCTION

The benefits of opioid therapy must be balanced by any adverse effects. In recent years, prescription opioids have been increasingly prescribed, but have also been associated with increased abuse, overdose and death.

AREAS COVERED

This review will categorize the common risks of opioid administration. Recognized adverse effects of opioid therapy include constipation, tolerance, endocrinopathies, sleep disorders, cognitive effects, respiratory depression, overdose and addiction. Studies have shown that there is increased risk of overdose and death with higher daily opioid doses, particularly above a morphine equivalent oral daily dose of 100 milligrams. Extended-release/long acting (ER/LA) opioid formulations may be beneficial for the compliant patient, yet may expose a higher risk for abuse if used inappropriately since each tablet carries a larger dose of medication.

EXPERT OPINION

Prospective, controlled one-year trials are needed to establish the efficacy and safety profile of chronic opioid therapy. In addition to the well known side effects of chronic opioid therapy, the influence and serious effect of opioids on sleep and central sleep apnea is only recently being investigated. The lowest possible daily opioid must be used to manage chronic pain, and all clinicians should be cautious in the use of daily morphine equivalent doses above 50-100 milligrams.

CDC Guideline for Prescribing Opioids for Chronic Pain - United States, 2016

This guideline provides recommendations for primary care clinicians who are prescribing opioids for chronic pain outside of active cancer treatment, palliative care, and end-of-life care. The guideline addresses 1) when to initiate or continue opioids for chronic pain; 2) opioid selection, dosage, duration, follow-up, and discontinuation; and 3) assessing risk and addressing harms of opioid use. CDC developed the guideline using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) framework, and recommendations are made on the basis of a systematic review of the scientific evidence while considering benefits and harms, values and preferences, and resource allocation. CDC obtained input from experts, stakeholders, the public, peer reviewers, and a federally chartered advisory committee. It is important that patients receive appropriate pain treatment with careful consideration of the benefits and risks of treatment options. This guideline is intended to improve communication between clinicians and patients about the risks and benefits of opioid therapy for chronic pain, improve the safety and effectiveness of pain treatment, and reduce the risks associated with long-term opioid therapy, including opioid use disorder, overdose, and death. CDC has provided a checklist for prescribing opioids for chronic pain (http://stacks.cdc.gov/view/cdc/38025) as well as a website (http://www.cdc.gov/drugoverdose/prescribingresources.html) with additional tools to guide clinicians in implementing the recommendations.

Opioid Medication Practices Observed in Chronic Pain Patients Presenting for All-Causes to Emergency Departments: Prevalence and Impact on Health Care Outcomes

BACKGROUND

Chronic pain is a significant health problem that affects an estimated 100 million American adults (aged ≥ 18 years). Chronic pain affects more individuals than heart disease, stroke, diabetes, and cancer combined. Chronic pain sufferers cost up to $635 billion annually in medical treatment and lost productivity. Opioids are commonly used to treat chronic pain, but their metabolic interactions with concurrently prescribed medications for concomitant disease burdens can affect potency and efficacy of pain therapy. Additionally, misuse of short-acting opioids (SAOs) for chronic pain versus breakthrough pain can create gaps in pain relief. These potentially suboptimal prescribing practices may contribute to the high economic impact associated with chronic pain. 

OBJECTIVE

To examine the prevalence of suboptimal opioid therapy and the associated health care costs resulting from these prescribing practices in real-world patients presenting for all-causes to the emergency department (ED). 

METHODS

This retrospective observational database cohort analysis used the linked Premier-Optum database and included patients with ED visits from 2006 to 2010 having ≥ 60 days supply of opioids in the 75 days prior to the visit. Suboptimal prescribing practices were identified as patients with (a) drug-drug exposures (DDEs), defined as cytochrome P-450 (CYP-450)-metabolized opioids prescribed concurrently with CYP-450 inhibitors or inducers and/or (b) monotherapy with SAOs. Comorbid conditions and principal diagnoses were documented. Readmission rates to the ED and hospital within 72 hours as well as ≤ 30, ≤ 45, ≤ 60, and ≤ 90 days were computed. Total costs for health care were calculated, and reimbursement rates were normalized using 2011 Medicare severity diagnosis-related group (MS-DRG) and CPT-4 information. Nonparametric bootstrapping to adjust for patient comorbidities was applied to cost data.

RESULTS

Of the 9,214 patients identified with chronic pain, potentially suboptimal medication practices prior to the index ED visit were found for 8,539 (92.6%) patients. These appeared to be corrected in 345 (4.0%) patients before leaving the ED. Of 675 (7.3%) patients without prior DDE or exclusive use of SAOs, 345 (51.1%) patients were discharged with one of these. Of the 8,352 patients who left the ED with DDE or exclusive use of SAOs, 1,525 (18.3%) left with a DDE without exclusive SAO use; 4,812 (57.6%) left with both DDE and exclusive SAO use; and 2,015 (24.1%) left with only exclusive SAO use. Only 862 (9.3%) patients from the entire cohort left the ED without DDE or exclusive SAO use. Patients identified with suboptimal opioid use were aged 50 ± 13.5 years and were predominantly female (64.0%). Hypertension (44.0%), fluid and electrolyte disorders (32.7%), chronic pulmonary disease (22.8%), depression (19.6%), diabetes without chronic complications (16.2%), and drug abuse (15.6%) were the most prevalent comorbid conditions identified. The most prevalent principal diagnoses involved symptoms and signs of ill-defined conditions (36.5%), injury and poisoning (18.2%), and diseases of the musculoskeletal system (13.2%). The majority of revisits to the ED and hospital admissions occurred within 72 hours (73.6%) of the index visit and within 30 days (70%), respectively. When adjusted total costs were compared for all patients whose opioid use included DDE versus those without, a significantly greater cost (P  less than  0.05) was observed at every time period except ≤ 72 hours. Respective mean increases in costs were $581, $689, $773, and $1,275 at 30, 45, 60, and 90 days. Exclusive SAO use with or without DDE resulted in a significant increase (P  less than  0.05) in mean costs at all times: $214 at 72 hours; $836 at 30 days; $1,023 at 45 days; $1,022 at 60 days; and $1,536 at 90 days. 

CONCLUSIONS

This study identified potentially suboptimal opioid prescribing practices in a real-world population presenting for all-causes to the ED. The observed rate of ED revisits and inpatient admissions in these patients was associated with increased health care costs. These findings suggest that the ED has the future potential to serve as an ideal setting to identify and correct such practices, thereby improving patient care and reducing resource use and beneficiary costs.

Opioid therapy in chronic pain

Opioids remain the strongest and most effective analgesics available. The downside is that they are addictive and potentially dangerous. Throughout history, although recognizing the value of opioids in treating serious pain, especially acute pain and pain at the end of life, there has been caution about using opioids to treat chronic pain. This article presents how opioids should be used to treat chronic pain considering recent concerns about their efficacy and safety.

Automated prediction of risk for problem opioid use in a primary care setting

Identification of patients at increased risk for problem opioid use is recommended by chronic opioid therapy (COT) guidelines, but clinical assessment of risks often does not occur on a timely basis. This research assessed whether structured electronic health record (EHR) data could accurately predict subsequent problem opioid use. This research was conducted among 2,752 chronic noncancer pain patients initiating COT (≥70 days' supply of an opioid in a calendar quarter) during 2008 to 2010. Patients were followed through the end of 2012 or until disenrollment from the health plan, whichever was earlier. Baseline risk indicators were derived from structured EHR data for a 2-year period prior to COT initiation. Problem opioid use after COT initiation was assessed by reviewing clinician-documented problem opioid use in EHR clinical notes identified using natural language processing techniques followed by computer-assisted manual review of natural language processing-positive clinical notes. Multivariate analyses in learning and validation samples assessed prediction of subsequent problem opioid use. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (c-statistic) for problem opioid use was .739 (95% confidence interval = .688, .790) in the validation sample. A measure of problem opioid use derived from a simple weighted count of risk indicators was found to be comparably predictive of the natural language processing measure of problem opioid use, with 60% sensitivity and 72% specificity for a weighted count of ≥4 risk indicators.

PERSPECTIVE

An automated surveillance method utilizing baseline risk indicators from structured EHR data was moderately accurate in identifying COT patients who had subsequent problem opioid use.

Costs and Consequences: A Review of Discharge Opioid Prescribing for ongoing Management of Acute Pain

Over recent years there has been a growing need for patients to be sent home from hospital with prescribed opioids for ongoing management of their acute pain. Increasingly complex surgery is being performed on a day-stay or 23-hour-stay basis and inpatients after major surgery and trauma are now discharged at a much earlier stage than in the past. However, prescription of opioids to be self-administered at home is not without risk. In addition to the potential for acute adverse effects, including opioid-induced ventilatory impairment and impairment of driving skills, a review of the literature shows that opioid use continues in some patients for some years after surgery. There are also indications that over-prescription of discharge opioids occur with a significant amount not consumed, resulting in a potentially large pool of unused opioid available for later use by either the patient or others in the community. Concerns about the potential for harm arising from prescription of opioids for ongoing acute pain management after discharge are relatively recent. However, at a time when serious problems resulting from the non-medical use of opioids have reached epidemic proportions in the community, all doctors must be aware of the potential risks and be able to identify and appropriately manage patients where there might be a risk of prolonged opioid use or misuse. Anaesthetists are ideally placed to exercise stewardship over the use of opioids, so that these drugs can maintain their rightful place in the post-discharge analgesic pharmacopoeia.

Pain in cancer survivors

Pain is a common problem in cancer survivors, especially in the first few years after treatment. In the longer term, approximately 5% to 10% of survivors have chronic severe pain that interferes with functioning. The prevalence is much higher in certain subpopulations, such as breast cancer survivors. All cancer treatment modalities have the potential to cause pain. Currently, the approach to managing pain in cancer survivors is similar to that for chronic cancer-related pain, pharmacotherapy being the principal treatment modality. Although it may be appropriate to continue strong opioids in survivors with moderate to severe pain, most pain problems in cancer survivors will not require them. Moreover, because more than 40% of cancer survivors now live longer than 10 years, there is growing concern about the long-term adverse effects of opioids and the risks of misuse, abuse, and overdose in the nonpatient population. As with chronic nonmalignant pain, multimodal interventions that incorporate nonpharmacologic therapies should be part of the treatment strategy for pain in cancer survivors, prescribed with the aim of restoring functionality, not just providing comfort. For patients with complex pain issues, multidisciplinary programs should be used, if available. New or worsening pain in a cancer survivor must be evaluated to determine whether the cause is recurrent disease or a second malignancy. This article focuses on patients with a history of cancer who are beyond the acute diagnosis and treatment phase and on common treatment-related pain etiologies. The benefits and harms of the various pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic options for pain management in this setting are reviewed.

Long- or short-acting opioids for chronic non-malignant pain? A qualitative systematic review

In selected patients with chronic non-malignant pain, chronic opioid therapy is indicated. Published guidelines recommend long-acting over short-acting opioids in these patients. The aim of this systematic review was to investigate whether long-acting opioids in chronic non-malignant pain are superior to short-acting opioids in pain relief, physical function, sleep quality, quality of life or adverse events. This review was performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement. PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched for relevant trials up to July 2012. Reference lists of included trials and relevant reviews were in addition searched by hand. Of the 1168 identified publications, 6 randomised trials evaluating efficacy and safety filled the criteria for inclusion. None of them found a significantly better pain relief, significantly less consumption of rescue analgesia, improved quality of sleep or improved physical function from long-acting opioids. None of the trials investigated quality of life. None of the trials investigated adverse events properly nor addiction, tolerance or hyperalgesia. Three trials in healthy volunteers with a recreational drug use, found no difference in abuse potential between long- and short-acting opioids. While long term, comparative data are lacking, there is fair evidence from short-term trials that long-acting opioids provide equal pain relief compared with short-acting opioids. Contrary to several guidelines, there is no evidence supporting long-acting opioids superiority to short-acting ones in improving functional outcomes, reducing side effects or addiction.

Patterns of care and side effects for patients prescribed methadone for treatment of chronic pain

OBJECTIVES

This manuscript evaluates physician monitoring practices and incidence of cardiac side effects following initiation of methadone for treatment of chronic pain as compared to patients who began treatment for chronic pain with morphine sustained release (SR).

DESIGN

We retrospectively reviewed medical record data on all new initiations of methadone and compared results of physician monitoring practices to patients with new initiations of morphine SR. A standardized chart tool was used to capture clinical data. Data related to health service utilization and clinical diagnoses were obtained from the VA clinical information system.

SETTING

A single VA Medical Center in the Pacific Northwest.

PATIENTS

Chronic pain patients prescribed methadone (n=92) or morphine (n=90) in the calendar year 2008.

RESULTS

There was no difference between patients prescribed methadone versus patients prescribed morphine SR in the likelihood of receiving an electrocardiogram (ECG) prior to initiating medication (53 percent versus 54 percent) or in the year after opioid initiation (37 percent versus 40 percent). The two groups also did not differ in rates of developing prolonged rate-corrected (QTc) intervals (>450 ms) (11 percent versus 17 percent). Seventy-two percent of all patients discontinued their long-acting opioid regimens before 90 days due to adverse effects or insufficient pain relief.

CONCLUSION

Despite recommendations for standardized assessment and cardiac risk monitoring, few patients prescribed methadone received an ECG, and this occurred at a rate that did not differ from patients prescribed morphine SR. Patients discontinued both medications at high rates. Further research is needed to evaluate the clinical significance of QTc prolongation in patients treated with methadone.

Long-term use of opioids for complex chronic pain

Increased opioid prescribing for back pain and other chronic musculoskeletal pain conditions has been accompanied by dramatic increases in prescription-opioid addiction and fatal overdose. Opioid-related risks appear to increase with dose. Although short-term randomised trials of opioids for chronic pain have found modest analgesic benefits (a one-third reduction in pain intensity on average), the long-term safety and effectiveness of opioids for chronic musculoskeletal pain remains unknown. Given the lack of large, long-term randomised trials, recent epidemiologic data suggest the need for caution when considering long-term use of opioids to manage chronic musculoskeletal pain, particularly at higher dosage levels. Principles for achieving more selective and cautious use of opioids for chronic musculoskeletal pain are proposed.

Scheduled analgesic regimen improves rehabilitation after hip fracture surgery

BACKGROUND

Postoperative pain often is the limiting factor in the rehabilitation of patients after hip fracture surgery.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

We compared an approach using scheduled analgesic dosing with as-needed analgesic dosing in patients after hip fracture surgery, to compare these approaches in terms of (1) resting and dynamic pain intensity, (2) postoperative patient mobility, and (3) functional end points.

METHODS

We conducted a prospective cohort study of 400 patients who underwent surgical treatment of hip fractures at our hospital. The groups were formed sequentially, such that the first 200 patients formed the intervention group (treated with scheduled analgesic intake for the first 3 weeks after surgery), and the next 200 patients were the control group (treated using a protocol of analgesic administration on request). Resting and dynamic pain intensity, mobility, and functional performance were compared between the two analgesic protocols.

RESULTS

As expected, analgesic consumption was lower in the control group (tramadol doses, 27 versus 63; paracetamol doses, 29 versus 63). Despite the large difference in the amounts of analgesics consumed, resting and dynamic pain intensity showed improvement in each group and there was no difference between groups in terms of postoperative pain. However, there was a positive correlation between functional outcomes and analgesic consumption in the control group. The intervention group achieved higher functional performance on discharge (elderly mobility scale, 11 versus 8; functional independence measure, 88 versus 79). On discharge, fewer patients in the intervention group were wheelchair ambulators (3 versus 32), meaning more patients in the intervention group were able to walk.

CONCLUSIONS

The study showed that a scheduled analgesic intake can improve the functional outcomes of patients with geriatric hip fractures after surgery.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level II, therapeutic study. See the guidelines for authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

[Potentially addictive drugs on reimbursable prescription for chronic severe pain]

BACKGROUND

Changes in the Norwegian drug reimbursement system in 2008 included the establishment of a new reimbursement code (-71) which authorises coverage of expenditures for potentially addictive drugs in patients with severe, predominantly non-malignant, chronic pain. This reform has hitherto not been evaluated.

MATERIAL AND METHOD

We assessed national data on drug reimbursements in accordance with code -71 for the period 2008-2011, and anonymised copies of all confirmation letters granting reimbursements according to code -71 in Central Norway (three counties) for 2010. Approximately 1300 individual applicants' gender and age, diagnosis, potentially addictive drug applied for, drug dose, and identity and specialty of the prescribing physician, were recorded.

RESULTS

From the time of establishment, reimbursement code -71 has been utilised by an increasing number of individuals, encompassing close to 10,000 subjects in 3rd quarter 2011. Almost one-third of the approved applications were for pregabalin, and the rest were for various opioids. The diagnoses were most often derived from the musculoskeletal and nervous systems, and were often nonspecific. A considerable number of treatment regimens were not in accordance with current principles for the management of chronic non-malignant pain, and drug doses were at times remarkably high.

INTERPRETATION

Aspects of this drug reimbursement regulation should be closely monitored, and may be in need of changes.

Opioid and chronic non-cancer pain

Although, opioids are advocated in various guidelines their use for chronic non-cancer pain is controversial because evidence of long term benefit is weak. The potential for serious adverse effects and local regulations promote caution in both the prescribers and users. However, opioids have a place in the management of chronic non-cancer pain in carefully selected patients with regular monitoring and as a part of the multimodal therapy. It is important for the treating physician to be up-to-date with this form of therapy, in order to have the necessary confidence to prescribe opioids and manage adverse effects. The common adverse effects should be treated promptly to improve patient compliance. We believe that opioid therapy in low doses is beneficial to some patients. It should not be denied but carefully considered on case by case basis.

Correlates of prescription opioid initiation and long-term opioid use in veterans with persistent pain

OBJECTIVES

Little is known about how opioid prescriptions for chronic pain are initiated. We sought to describe patterns of prescription opioid initiation, identify correlates of opioid initiation, and examine correlates of receipt of chronic opioid therapy (COT) among veterans with persistent noncancer pain.

METHODS

Using Veterans Affairs administrative data, we identified 5961 veterans from the Pacific Northwest with persistent elevated pain intensity scores who had not been prescribed opioids in the prior 12 months. We compared veterans not prescribed opioids over the subsequent 12 months with those prescribed any opioid and to those prescribed COT (>90 consecutive days).

RESULTS

During the study year, 35% of the sample received an opioid prescription and 5% received COT. Most first opioid prescriptions were written by primary care clinicians. Veterans prescribed COT were younger, had greater pain intensity, and high rates of psychiatric and substance use disorders compared with veterans in the other 2 groups. Among patients receiving COT, 29% were prescribed long-acting opioids, 37% received 1 or more urine drug screens, and 24% were prescribed benzodiazepines. Adjusting for age, sex, and baseline pain intensity, major depression [odds ratio 1.24 (1.10-1.39); 1.48 (1.14-1.93)], and nicotine dependence [1.34 (1.17-1.53); 2.02 (1.53-2.67)] were associated with receiving any opioid prescription and with COT, respectively.

DISCUSSION

Opioid initiations are common among veterans with persistent pain, but most veterans are not prescribed opioids long-term. Psychiatric disorders and substance use disorders are associated with receiving COT. Many Veterans receiving COT are concurrently prescribed benzodiazepines and many do not receive urine drug screening; additional study regarding practices that optimize safety of COT in this population is indicated.

Opioid use patterns and association with pain severity and mental health functioning in chronic pain patients

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to explore the relationship between patterns of opioid use, pain severity, and pain-related mental health in chronic pain patients prescribed opioids.

DESIGN

The study was designed as a one-time patient interview with structured pain and opioid use assessments.

SETTING

The study was set in a tertiary care medical center in the United States Department of Veterans Affairs. PATIENTS.  Study participants were primary care patients with a pain condition for greater than 6 months who received at least one prescription for an opioid in the prior 12 months.

OUTCOME MEASURES

The Prescription Drug Use Questionnaire was used to assess patterns of opioid use. The Pain Outcomes Questionnaire was used to assess pain-related functioning.

RESULTS

Symptomatic use of opioid medication (e.g., taking an opioid in response to increased pain) was more common than scheduled (i.e., taking an opioid at regular times) or strategic use of opioid medication (e.g., taking an opioid specifically to engage in activities). Symptomatic use of opioids was associated with poorer pain-related mental health, after controlling for pain duration and pain-related physical functioning. Use of opioids in a scheduled pattern was associated with better pain-related mental health. Patients rarely reported that they used opioids strategically to facilitate functional activities.

CONCLUSIONS

The patterns in which patients use their opioid medications are associated with their psychological functioning. This is consistent with theory regarding the potential impact of reinforcing effects of opioid medication on functional outcomes. Interventions to encourage strategic or scheduled opioid use warrant investigation as methods to improve pain outcomes with opioids.

"Safe and effective when used as directed": the case of chronic use of opioid analgesics

Opioid analgesics have been used increasingly over the past 20 years for the management of chronic non-cancer pain in the USA under the assumption that they were safe and effective when used as directed. The accuracy of that assumption has not been tested against accumulated evidence. The safety of opioids used on a long-term basis has not been tested in clinical trials. Epidemiologic evidence from examinations of such use in the general population indicates that the risk of overdose increases in a dose-response manner. Such evidence also suggests increased risk of fractures and acute myocardial infarctions among elderly users of opioids for chronic pain. Experimental evidence supports short-term use of opioids, but trials of long-term use for chronic pain have not been conducted. Epidemiologic evidence suggests that long-term use does not result in improvement in function or quality of life while being associated with significant dropout rates and a high prevalence of adverse drug effects. Substantial fractions of patients are not using opioid analgesics as directed, while millions of US residents are using them without a prescription for nonmedical reasons. A prudent treatment approach consistent with the available evidence would be to reserve chronic opioid therapy for serious pain-related problems for which the effectiveness of opioids has been demonstrated and for patients whose use as directed is assured through close monitoring and for whom an explicit, informed calculation has been made that the benefits of opioids outweigh the risks.

Applying standardized drug terminologies to observational healthcare databases: a case study on opioid exposure

Observational healthcare databases represent a valuable resource for health economics, outcomes research, quality of care, drug safety, epidemiology and comparative effectiveness research. The methods used to identify a population for study in an observational healthcare database with the desired drug exposures of interest are complex and not consistent nor apparent in the published literature. Our research evaluates three drug classification systems and their impact on prevalence in the analysis of observational healthcare databases using opioids as a case in point. The standard terminologies compiled in the Observational Medical Outcomes Partnership’s Common Data Model vocabulary were used to facilitate the identification of populations with opioid exposures. This study analyzed three distinct observational healthcare databases and identified patients with at least one exposure to an opioid as defined by drug codes derived through the application of three classification systems. Opioid code sets were created for each of the three classification systems and the number of identified codes was summarized. We estimated the prevalence of opioid exposure in three observational healthcare databases using the three defined code sets. In addition we compared the number of drug codes and distinct ingredients that were identified using these classification systems. We found substantial variation in the prevalence of opioid exposure identified using an individual classification system versus a composite method using multiple classification systems. To ensure transparent and reproducible research publications should include a description of the process used to develop code sets and the complete code set used in studies.

Pharmaceutical treatment patterns for patients with a diagnosis related to chronic pain initiating a slow-release strong opioid treatment in Sweden

Slow-release strong opioids (SRSO) are indicated in patients with severe chronic pain. Side effects, lack of efficacy and risk of dependency limit their use in clinical practice. The aim of this study was to explore prescription patterns of SRSO in Swedish real-world data on patients with a diagnosis related to chronic pain (DRCP). Patient-level data were extracted from the national prescriptions register and a regional register with diagnosis codes. The prescription sequences, switches, co-medications, and strengths over time were analyzed for cancer and noncancer patients. Of 840,000 patients with a DRCP, 16,257 initiated treatment with an SRSO in 2007 to 2008. They were 71 years old on average; 60% were female and 34% had cancer. The most common first prescription was oxycodone (54%) followed by fentanyl (19%), buprenorphine (14%), and morphine (13%). 63% refilled their prescription within 6 months, and 12% switched to another SRSO, most commonly fentanyl. After 3 years, 51% of cancer and 27% of noncancer patients still being in contact with health care remained on any SRSO. Of noncancer patients, 35% had a psychiatric co-medication (SSRI or benzodiazepine). In conclusion, fewer patients remain on SRSO in the long-term in clinical practice than reported in previous clinical trials. Oxycodone is the most common first SRSO prescription and one-third of patients get a prescription indicating psychiatric comorbidity. Our interpretation of these findings are that there is need for better treatment options for these patients, and that more effort is needed to improve treatment guidelines and to ascertain that these guidelines are followed.

Group Health's initiative to avert opioid misuse and overdose among patients with chronic noncancer pain

Increased opioid prescribing for chronic pain that is not due to cancer has been accompanied by large increases in abuse and overdose of prescription opioids. This paper describes how Group Health, a Seattle-based nonprofit health care system, implemented a major initiative to make opioid prescribing safer. In the initiative's first nine months, clinicians developed documented care plans for almost 6,000 patients receiving long-term opioid therapy for chronic pain. Evaluation of the initiative's effects on care processes and trends in adverse events is under way.