Frequency of unsafe storage, use, and disposal practices of opioids among cancer patients presenting to the emergency department

Cancer pain patients do not successfully handle opioids

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate patterns of opioid handling as well as their associated -variables.

DESIGN

A transversal study.

SETTING

Institutional care.

PARTICIPANTS

One hundred cancer pain patients aged 18 and above at diagnosis.

INTERVENTIONS

Open and dichotomous questions related to opioid handling and a depression-anxiety scale.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S)

The percentage of patients who properly handled opioids.

RESULTS

Of those surveyed, 42.1 percent of patients reported receiving opioid storage instructions, 73 percent did not receive any instructions related to proper opioid return/disposal, and 39 percent wrongly discarded them. The mean of patients with anxiety symptoms was 6.95 and of depression symptoms was 8.19. The Hebrew Version of the Hospital and Anxiety Scale total mean was 15.1. A significant relationship among patients with poor disposal habits was also found.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite being aware of opioid's danger, patients' attitudes evidenced a poor safety responsibility. We believe that this might be due to the high percentage of disinformation and the influence of psychological symptoms on patients' decision-making.

Opioid Use and Disposal Patterns of Emergency Department Patients

Introduction

To date, there is limited literature to guide emergency providers (EPs) on the proper dosing of prescription opioids. Our study aims to assess the self-reported opioid use, storage, and disposal practices of patients presenting to the emergency department (ED) with acute pain.

Methods

This prospective cohort study employed a validated, cross-sectional survey of subjects identified using electronic medical records. The survey link was e-mailed to a continuous sample of eligible participants 3-4 weeks following ED discharge. Nonrespondents were surveyed through telephone after 1 week. We used descriptive and nonparametric statistics to report survey results.

Results

Of 500 eligible subjects, 97 completed the questionnaire. Only 28% of respondents reported that they took all of the prescribed pills. Of the remaining responses, 20% stated that they did not take any pills, 33% took about one-fourth, 7.2% took about half, and 12.4% took about three-fourths of the pills. Among those who did not take any pills, 42% filled the prescription. Most (71.2%) reported storing their leftover pills; among those who stored their pills, less than one-fourth (23.8%) used a locked storage location.

Conclusions

Our findings suggest that less than one-third of patients who receive prescriptions in the ED for acute pain use all of their prescribed pills, suggesting that many patients are unnecessarily prescribed opioids for acute conditions. The findings of this study also suggest that many patients with unused prescription opioids do not practice safe storage or proper disposal of leftover pills. This represents a potential opportunity for EPs to improve medication safety by educating patients on proper storage and disposal practices. Limitations include low response rate and the use of self-reporting.

Opioid Disposal Practices of Patients with Life-Limiting Cancers in an Outpatient Palliative Care Clinic: A Cross-Sectional Study

Background: Patients with life-limiting cancers are commonly prescribed opioids to manage pain, dyspnea, and cough. Proper prescription opioid disposal is essential to prevent poisonings and deaths. Objective: We examined opioid disposal practices of patients referred to a Canadian outpatient palliative care clinic (OPCC). The primary objective was to determine the prevalence of OPCC patients who did not routinely dispose their opioids. The secondary objectives were to examine their methods of opioid disposal and to identify patient characteristics associated with routine disposal of opioids. Design and Setting: This cross-sectional study involved a retrospective chart review of new, adult patients who were seen in a Canadian OPCC (September 2018-August 2019) and completed a survey about opioid-related constructs: source of prescriptions, use, storage, disposal, and knowledge about associated harms. Results: Among the 122 study participants, half (58/111, 52.3%) reported that they did not routinely dispose their opioids. The most common method of disposal was by giving them to pharmacists (69/88, 78.4%). Cannabis use (odds ratio [OR]: 3.7, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.1-11.8) and neuropathic medication use (OR: 3.0, 95% CI: 1.2-7.2) were positively associated with routine disposal of opioids. Conversely, reports of an increased amount of opioid use in the past six months were negatively associated with routine disposal of opioids (OR: 0.38, 95% CI: 0.16-0.88). Conclusion: The high prevalence of people with life-limiting illnesses who do not routinely dispose their opioids requires increased attention. Interventions, such as education, are needed to reduce medication waste and opioid-related harms.

The medication self-management work system of patients and informal carers from a human factors & ergonomics perspective: A scoping review protocol

Background: Healthcare is increasingly delivered closer to the patients' homes, which increases the level of responsibility that patients and informal carers take for managing their medication-taking, although this is associated with hazards. Medication self-management has been conceptualised as work taking place in non-formal settings ( e.g., households), which are complex systems. Human factors and ergonomics (HFE) models provide a framework for studying such systems. The Systems Engineering Initiative for Patient Safety (SEIPS) is one framework that considers work system elements and how they interact with each other to shape processes that lead to outcomes ( e.g., safety). Given the increasing amount of diverse research on patient and carer work and on system-shaping factors, the objectives of this review are to: (i) identify available evidence in a structured and systems-oriented way, (ii) explore approaches that have been applied and (iii) highlight research gaps. Methods: An evidence-informed patient, public and carer involvement (PPCI) approach will be implemented at all post-protocol stages to ensure the relevance, uptake and translation of the scoping review. The review will systematically search MEDLINE, Embase, PsycInfo, CINAHL and Web of Science to identify relevant qualitative studies. The methodological approach will be guided by Johanna Briggs Institute methodology and will be reported according to the PRISMA-ScR standards. Data charting and qualitative content analysis directed by SEIPS will explore how the work system and its constituting elements have been described in the literature and identify specific gaps and opportunities for future research. Borrowing from realist approaches, included studies will be assessed in terms of richness and relevance to our review question. Discussion: Strengths of this scoping review include PPCI and a converging focus on medication safety, medication self-management and HFE. Ultimately, this approach will advance our understanding of this complex system and guide opportunities to broaden and strengthen the evidence base.

Efficacy of a password-protected, pill-dispensing device with mail return capacity to enhance disposal of unused opioids after cancer surgery

BACKGROUND

Opioid misuse is a public health crisis, and unused postoperative opioids are an important source. Although 70% of pills prescribed go unused, only 9% are discarded. This study evaluated whether an inexpensive pill-dispensing device with mail return capacity could enhance disposal of unused opioids after cancer surgery.

METHODS

A prospective pilot study was conducted among adult patients who underwent major cancer-related surgery. Patients received opioid prescriptions in a mechanical device (Addinex) linked to a smartphone application (app). The app provided passwords on a prescriber-defined schedule. Patients could enter a password into the device and receive a pill if the prescribed time had elapsed. Patients were instructed to return the device and any unused pills in a disposal mailer. The primary end point was feasibility of device return, defined as ≥50% of patients returning the device within 6 weeks of surgery. Also explored was total pill use and return as well as patient satisfaction.

RESULTS

Among 30 patients enrolled, the majority (n = 24, 80%) returned the device, and 17 (57%) returned it within 6 weeks of surgery. In total, 567 opioid pills were prescribed and 170 (30%) were used. Of 397 excess pills, 332 (84% of unused pills, 59% of all pills prescribed) were disposed of by mail. Among 19 patients who obtained opioids from the device, most (n = 14, 74%) felt the benefits of the device justified the added steps involved.

CONCLUSIONS

Use of an inexpensive pill-dispensing device with mail return capacity is a feasible strategy to enhance disposal of unused postoperative opioids.

Cancer pain during an epidemic and a pandemic

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

As our global population ages, cancer has become more prevalent. Thankfully, oncologic treatments are highly effective, leading to significantly improved rates of long-term survival. However, many of these therapies are associated with persistent pain syndromes. Clinicians caring for people with cancer must understand how the influence of the current epidemic of opioid misuse and the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic have complicated cancer pain management. Creative solutions can emerge from this knowledge.

RECENT FINDINGS

Persistent pain due to cancer and its treatment can be managed through multimodal care, although efforts to mitigate the opioid misuse epidemic have created challenges in access to appropriate treatment. Isolation measures associated with the COVID-19 pandemic have limited access to nonpharmacologic therapies, such as physical therapy, and have exacerbated mental health disorders, including anxiety and depression.

SUMMARY

Cancer pain treatment requires more nuanced assessment and treatment decisions as patients live longer. Societal factors multiply existing challenges to cancer pain relief. Research is needed to support safe and effective therapies.

Relationship between prescribed opioids, pain management satisfaction, and pain intensity in oncology outpatients

BACKGROUND

Pain is the most severe and commonest symptom for patients with cancer. Patients' pain management satisfaction is an essential indicator of quality care and further affects their willingness to seek care.

PURPOSE

This study aimed to examine the correlations between patients' prescribed opioids, pain management satisfaction, and pain intensity.

METHODS

This study adopted a cross-sectional correlation design, recruited a total of 123 patients with cancer pain through convenience sampling, and used two research scales, namely the Chinese version of the Pain Treatment Satisfaction Scale and the Brief Pain Inventory-Short Form.

RESULTS

The findings indicated that the correlations of prescribed opioid dosage with pain management satisfaction (r =  - .10, p > .05) and pain intensity (worst pain, least pain, average pain, and pain right now; r =  - .05 to .01, p > .05) were nonsignificant. The correlations of pain management satisfaction with pain intensity (r = .24 to .32, p < .01), pain interference (r = .32, p < .01), and pain relief (r =  - .25, p < .01) were all significant, but that with the worst pain (r = .06, p > .05) was nonsignificant.

CONCLUSIONS

Medical professionals providing cancer pain management should focus on medicines strategies and individuals' pain relief requirements. In particular, patients with the worst pain require extra investigations into their needs, and their satisfaction with their level of pain should be further evaluated.

Medication Use and Storage, and Their Potential Risks in US Households

Background: Medications stored in US households may pose risks to vulnerable populations and the environment, potentially increasing societal costs. Research regarding these aspects is scant, and interventions like medication reuse may alleviate negative consequences. The purpose of this study was to describe medications stored in US households, gauge their potential risk to minors (under 18 years of age), pets, and the environment, and estimate potential costs of unused medications. Methods: A survey of 220 US Qualtrics panel members was completed regarding medications stored at home. Published literature guided data coding for risks to minors, pets, and the environment and for estimating potential costs of unused medications. Results: Of the 192 households who provided usable and complete data, 154 (80%) reported storing a medication at home. Most medications were taken daily for chronic diseases. The majority of households with residents or guests who are minors and those with pets reported storing medications with a high risk of poisoning in easily accessible areas such as counters. Regarding risk to the aquatic environment, 46% of the medications had published data regarding this risk. For those with published data, 42% presented a level of significant risk to the aquatic environment. Unused medications stored at home had an estimated potential cost of $98 million at a national level. Implications/Conclusions: Medications stored at home may pose risks to vulnerable populations and the environment. More research regarding medications stored in households and their risks is required to develop innovative interventions such as medication reuse to prevent any potential harm.

The potential for diversion of prescribed opioids among orthopaedic patients: Results of an anonymous patient survey

INTRODUCTION

Diversion of prescription opioid medication is a contributor to the opioid epidemic. Safe handling practices can reduce the risk of diversion. We aimed to understand: 1) if orthopaedic patients received instructions on how to safely handle opioids, 2) their typical storage/disposal practices, and 3) their willingness to participate in an opioid disposal program (ODP).

METHODS

Cross-sectional study of adult orthopaedic patients who completed an anonymous survey on current or past prescription opioid use, instruction on handling, storage and disposal practices, presence of children in the household, and willingness to participate in an ODP. Frequencies and percentages of responses were computed, both overall and stratified by possession of unused opioids.

RESULTS

569 respondents who reported either current or past prescription opioid use were analyzed. 44% reported receiving storage instructions and 56% reported receiving disposal instructions from a health care provider. Many respondents indicated unsafe handling practices: possessing unused opioids (34%), using unsafe storage methods (90%), and using unsafe disposal methods (34%). Respondents with unused opioids were less likely to report receiving handling instructions or using safe handling methods, and 47% of this group reported having minors or young adults in the household. Respondents who received storage and disposal instructions were more likely to report safe storage and disposal methods. Seventy-four percent of respondents reported that they would participate in an ODP.

CONCLUSION

While many orthopaedic patients report inadequate education on safe opioid handling and using unsafe handling practices, findings suggest targeted education is associated with better behaviours. However, patients are willing to safely dispose of unused medication if provided a convenient option. These findings suggest a need to address patient knowledge and behavior regarding opioid handling to reduce the risk of opioid diversion.

Assessment tools for problematic opioid use in palliative care: A scoping review

BACKGROUND

Screening for problematic opioid use is increasingly recommended in patients receiving palliative care.

AIM

To identify tools used to assess for the presence or risk of problematic opioid use in palliative care.

DESIGN

Scoping review.

DATA SOURCES

Bibliographic databases (inception to January 31, 2020), reference lists, and grey literature were searched to find primary studies reporting on adults receiving palliative care and prescription opioids to manage symptoms from advanced cancer, neurodegenerative diseases, or end-stage organ diseases; and included tools to assess for problematic opioid use. There were no restrictions based on study design, location, or language.

RESULTS

We identified 42 observational studies (total 14,431 participants) published between 2009 and 2020 that used questionnaires (n = 32) and urine drug tests (n = 21) to assess for problematic opioid use in palliative care, primarily in US (n = 38) and outpatient palliative care settings (n = 36). The questionnaires were Cut down, Annoyed, Guilty, and Eye-opener (CAGE, n = 8), CAGE-Adapted to Include Drugs (CAGE-AID, n = 6), Opioid Risk Tool (n = 9), Screener and Opioid Assessment for Patients with Pain (SOAPP; n = 3), SOAPP-Revised (n = 2), and SOAPP-Short Form (n = 5). Only two studies' primary objectives were to evaluate a questionnaire's psychometric properties in patients receiving palliative care. There was wide variation in how urine drug tests were incorporated into palliative care; frequency of abnormal urine drug test results ranged from 8.6% to 70%.

CONCLUSION

Given the dearth of studies using tools developed or validated specifically for patients receiving palliative care, further research is needed to inform clinical practice and policy regarding problematic opioid use in palliative care.

Storage of Medications: A Survey of Families in the Pediatric Emergency Department

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate caregivers' practice of prescription medication storage, particularly of opioid medications, as well as to provide educational materials to families about the opioid crisis.

METHODS

Caregivers of patients in a pediatric emergency department were asked to participate in a survey about medication storage practices and beliefs, focusing on opioid medications. Data were collected through a survey documenting demographic data along with knowledge and behaviors of medication storage. Brief education about the US opioid crisis and safe storage was provided.

RESULTS

In total, 233 families participated; 3 families declined; 11.5% of caregivers reported storing prescribed medications in a locked or latched place, although most store them "out of reach." Most believed their child or children's friends could not easily access their medications (81.8%). Families who did not keep their medications in locked or latched places had never thought about it (39.7%). In total, 33% of respondents were unaware of the opioid crisis; 87.4% of caregivers said they would use a medication lock box if given one.

CONCLUSIONS

Many caregivers are not aware of the opioid crisis and do not keep opioid medications locked up. Half of the caregivers surveyed stated they "never thought about" locking up medications. Most parents would use a lock box if given to them. This opens the door to further study, education, and interventions.

Appropriate Opioid Use After Spine Surgery: Psychobehavioral Barriers and Patient Knowledge

OBJECTIVE

To identify spine patients' barriers to appropriate postoperative opioid use, comfort with naloxone, knowledge of safe opioid disposal practices, and associated factors.

METHODS

We preoperatively surveyed 174 spine patients about psychobehavioral barriers to appropriate opioid use, comfort with naloxone, and knowledge about opioid disposal. Multivariable logistic regression identified factors associated with barriers and knowledge (α = 0.05).

RESULTS

Common barriers were fear of addiction (71%) and concern about disease progression (43%). Most patients (78%) had neutral/low confidence in the ability of nonopioid medications to control pain; most (57%) felt neutral or uncomfortable with using naloxone; and most (86%) were familiar with safe disposal. Anxiety was associated with fear of distracting the physician (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 3.8; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.1-14) and with lower odds of knowing safe disposal methods (aOR, 0.18; 95% CI, 0.04-0.72). Opioid use during the preceding month was associated with comfort with naloxone (aOR, 4.9; 95% CI, 2.1-12). Patients with a higher educational level had lower odds of reporting fear of distracting the physician (aOR, 0.30; 95% CI, 0.09-0.97), and those with previous postoperative opioid use had lower odds of concern about disease progression (aOR, 0.25; 95% CI, 0.09-0.63) and with a belief in tolerating pain (aOR, 0.34; 95% CI, 0.12-0.95).

CONCLUSIONS

Many spine patients report barriers to appropriate postoperative opioid use and are neutral or uncomfortable with naloxone. Some are unfamiliar with safe disposal. Associated factors include anxiety, lack of recent opioid use, and no previous postoperative use.

Confirmed Medication Diversion in Hospice Care: Qualitative Findings From a National Sample of Agencies

CONTEXT

The nonmedical use of prescribed medications is a major public health concern in the U.S. Medications prescribed to hospice patients for pain management may be at risk of being diverted to be sold or used illicitly.

OBJECTIVES

Use responses from hospice agency representatives to explore the details of confirmed cases of medication diversion in the hospice setting.

METHODS

This is a qualitative descriptive study based on responses from hospice agency representatives with surveys completed by phone or online. Template analysis was used to describe the context of confirmed diversion, specifically 1) means of how the diversion was confirmed, 2) clues/red flags, 3) who diverted, and 4) agency responses to the confirmed diversion.

RESULTS

A total of n = 112 open-ended responses were analyzed. Respondents reported multiple ways in which medication diversion was confirmed, such as drug screening, witnessed firsthand by staff, and an overdose. Clues/red flags included reluctance to allow medication monitoring, family discord, and higher medication doses being requested. Those who diverted medications included informal caregiver/family member, family friend, and facility staff. Agency responses to diversion included limiting the supply of medication, restricting access to the medication, and increasing staff visit frequency.

CONCLUSION

Good clinical practice and vigilance may help agencies detect medication diversion. Moreover, diversion prevention techniques should not harmfully impact quality of patient care.

Medications disposal and medications storage in Jordan: A cross-sectional study

AIMS

Many concerns arise from the improper disposal of medications, which is associated with a negative impact on health and wildlife. The majority of the consumers of pharmaceutical products remain unaware of the procedures of disposal of unused or expired medicines. This study aimed to explore the practices of Jordanian individuals regarding the disposal and storage of unused or expired medications.

METHODS

A cross-sectional study was conducted in Jordan for the period between July and November 2019 of patients who reported having unused, leftover or expired medications in their homes. The questionnaire tool was constructed based on a number of studies concerning medication recycling and international guidelines about correct and safe disposal of expired, unwanted or unused medication.

RESULTS

A total of 1092 participants were included in the study. Their mean age was 32.4 (SD = 13.6) years and 56.8% (n = 620) were males. More than half of the participants (58.1%, n = 634) reported that they had unused, leftover or expired medications in their homes. The bedroom, kitchen and store room were the three most commonly reported places for the storage of unused, leftover or expired medications. The pharmacist was the main source for information regarding the storage of medications. The three most common reasons reported by the participants regarding having unused/leftover medications at home were change or discontinuation by the doctor (29.4%), self-discontinuation as the illness symptoms improved or resolved (28.2%) and forgetfulness (25.1%).

CONCLUSION

A high percentage of the Jordanian population improperly handles their unused, leftover or expired medications. More restrictions are needed on the prescribing and dispensing of medications by the authorities concerned and there is a need to establish public guidelines regarding the use and correct disposal of pharmaceuticals.

Who Is Keeping Their Unused Opioids and Why?

OBJECTIVE

To better understand patients' reasoning for keeping unused opioid pills.

METHODS

As part of a larger study, patients were asked their plans for their unused opioids. Responses were categorized as "dispose," "keep," and "don't know." Baseline characteristics were compared between the "keep" and "dispose" groups. Verbatim responses categorized as "keep" were analyzed qualitatively using a team-based inductive approach with constant comparison across cases.

RESULTS

One hundred patients planned to dispose of their pills; 117 planned to keep them. There were no differences in demographics between the groups. Among patients who planned to keep their pills, the mean age was 43 years and 47% were male. Analysis revealed four categories of patient responses: 1) plans to keep their pills "just in case," with reference to a medical condition (e.g., kidney stone); 2) plans to keep pills "just in case" without reference to any medical condition; 3) plans to dispose in delayed fashion (e.g., after pill expiration) or unsure of how to dispose; and 4) no identified plans, yet intended to keep pills. In this sample, there were no differences in characteristics of those reporting planning to keep vs dispose of pills; however, there were diverse reasons for keeping opioids.

CONCLUSIONS

This manuscript describes a sample of patients who kept their unused opioids and presents qualitative data detailing their personal reasoning for keeping the unused pills. Awareness of the range of motivations underpinning this behavior may inform the development of tailored education and risk communication messages to improve opioid disposal.

Household medication safety practices during the COVID-19 pandemic: a descriptive qualitative study protocol

INTRODUCTION

Those who are staying at home and reducing contact with other people during the COVID-19 pandemic are likely to be at greater risk of medication-related problems than the general population. This study aims to explore household medication practices by and for this population, identify practices that benefit or jeopardise medication safety and develop best practice guidance about household medication safety practices during a pandemic, grounded in individual experiences.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This is a descriptive qualitative study using semistructured interviews, by telephone or video call. People who have been advised to 'cocoon'/'shield' and/or are aged 70 years or over and using at least one long-term medication, or their caregivers, will be eligible for inclusion. We will recruit 100 patient/carer participants: 50 from the UK and 50 from Ireland. Recruitment will be supported by our patient and public involvement (PPI) partners, personal networks and social media. Individual participant consent will be sought, and interviews audio/video recorded and/or detailed notes made. A constructivist interpretivist approach to data analysis will involve use of the constant comparative method to organise the data, along with inductive analysis. From this, we will iteratively develop best practice guidance about household medication safety practices during a pandemic from the patient's/carer's perspective.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This study has Trinity College Dublin, University of Limerick and University College London ethics approvals. We plan to disseminate our findings via presentations at relevant patient/public, professional, academic and scientific meetings, and for publication in peer-reviewed journals. We will create a list of helpful strategies that participants have reported and share this with participants, PPI partners and on social media.

State Legislation to Prevent Diversion of Opioids in Hospice Programs: A Deeper Look Into Ohio Law

The problem of opioid diversion and its contribution to the opioid epidemic are well known nationally, existing even within hospice care. Proper disposal of opioids may be a critical factor in reducing diversion. In 2014, Ohio implemented legislation requiring a hospice employee to destroy or witness disposal of all unused opioids within a patient's plan of care. The purpose of this study was to determine the impact of Ohio Revised Code 3712.062 on hospice programs' policies and procedures to prevent opioid diversion in the home. Directors of Ohio-licensed hospices were surveyed to assess the percentage of programs with a written policy in place for disposal of opioids and to calculate a compliance score based on responses to survey questions assessing compliance with legislation components. Fifty-two surveys were completed (39.4%). All survey respondents reported having a written policy in place. A 95.5% average compliance score was calculated, with the largest disparity occurring with timing of opioid disposal. While Ohio Revised Code 3712.062 requires opioid disposal at the time of patient's death or when no longer needed by the patient, only 84% of respondents report disposing opioids upon discontinuation. Overall, a high compliance rate was seen among hospice programs indicating such regulation is manageable to meet.

Patterns of Storage, Use, and Disposal of Prescription Opioids by Young Adults with Cancer

Studies have demonstrated that adults with cancer and parents of children with cancer do not use and store prescription opioids safely. Most YAs (135/146, 92%) unsafely stored opioids. Fifty-two of 146 patients (36%) unsafely used, and 16 of 146 patients (11%) unsafely disposed of opioids. YAs with hematologic malignancies (p < 0.05) were more likely to use opioids safely compared with YAs with other types of malignancies. More research is necessary to understand the scope of this issue. Our data suggest that universal educational interventions regarding the safe storage, use, and disposal of opioids are justified for YAs.

Patterns of Storage, Use, and Disposal of Prescription Opioids by Parents of Children With Cancer

CONTEXT

Multiple studies have demonstrated that adults do not store prescription opioids safely. Increased prescription opioid rates have led to an increased incidence of opioid poisonings in children and adolescents.

OBJECTIVES

We investigated whether parents practiced safe storage, use, and disposal techniques of opioids that were prescribed to their child with cancer-related pain.

METHODS

We conducted a prospective cross-sectional survey of parents whose children were prescribed opioids and asked them about their patterns of storage, use, and disposal of prescription opioids.

RESULTS

Virtually, all parents (106 of 109; 97%) completed the survey. Most parents (95 of 106; 90%) did not store opioids safely. Six of 106 parents (6%) gave their child's opioid pain medication to someone else with pain, and three of 106 parents (3%) personally took some of their child's opioid. Parents who personally took their child's opioid (P = 0.01) or gave it to another person (P < 0.001) were more likely to use opioids unsafely with their child. A minority of parents (22 of 106; 21%) did not use opioids safely in their child. A small number of parents (3 of 22; 14%) did not dispose of opioids safely.

CONCLUSION

Universal education about the safe use and disposal of opioids should be adopted when prescribing opioids. Pediatricians need to maintain vigilance about the nonmedical use of prescription opioid use by parents of children.

Risk Assessment and Monitoring of Patients with Cancer Receiving Opioid Therapy

To provide safe and effective management of cancer pain, a thorough risk assessment is needed when conducting a comprehensive pain evaluation. This information provides the basis for decisions about appropriate pain relief interventions and for measures that can be taken to mitigate the potential for misuse of opioids and other substances.

The primary objective of this article is to assist oncologists and advanced practice prescribers to safely and effectively minimize risk when providing opioids for cancer pain relief. The majority of people with cancer are unlikely to misuse or divert opioid medications, yet the prescriber is often unaware of those who are at risk for these behaviors. To provide skillful pain management to each patient in the oncology setting, while limiting harm to the community, all prescribers must consider the potential for risk of misuse, addiction, or diversion. To minimize this risk to the greatest degree possible, it is imperative to include a thorough risk assessment when conducting a comprehensive pain evaluation. This information is then used to triage pain relief interventions based upon the degree of risk, including whether or not to incorporate opioids into the plan of care. Risk mitigation strategies, incorporating universal precautions, are implemented to assess, monitor, and reduce the potential for opioid misuse. Universal precautions include strategies such as the use of urine toxicology, state prescription drug monitoring programs, and agreements. Ongoing monitoring is conducted with the goal being to identify aberrant behaviors early so that they can be addressed and managed appropriately. Referral to addiction specialists may be warranted when substance use disorder precludes safe use of opioids.

Implications for Practice.

Throughout the trajectory of cancer care, opioid use is often indicated, and, in fact, it may be unethical to limit or prohibit the use of opioids when pain is severe. Oncologists face the significant challenge of providing cancer pain control that is safe and effective, while limiting individual risk for abuse or overdose and keeping the community free of diverted substances. Most oncology providers report inadequate training in chronic pain principles and in managing addiction. Risk assessment and mitigation measures can be incorporated within oncology care to enhance effective pain management while reducing the potential for harm.

Safe Opioid Use, Storage, and Disposal Strategies in Cancer Pain Management

Opioids are required by a majority of patients with advanced cancer. Oncologists and palliative care clinicians are faced with the challenge of safely prescribing opioids in the current environment of an opioid crisis. Many patients with cancer use opioids unsafely, store them in unsecure locations, and do not dispose of unused opioids, leading to increased availability of these opioids for others to misuse. More than 50% of people who misuse opioids obtain the drugs from a friend or relative with or without their consent. Patient and provider education has been shown to improve safe opioid use, promote secure storage, and also increase disposal of unused opioids safely in drug take-back programs that are now widely available. This article highlights the importance of patient education and cautious opioid prescribing in patients with cancer. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: The current opioid crisis makes it challenging to effectively manage cancer pain. Providers play a prominent role in minimizing opioid misuse. Cautious prescribing with limits enforced on the quantity of opioids prescribed, close follow-up, and consistent and frequent provision of opioid education are a must. Evidence points to the impact of patient education in promoting safety around opioid use. Most people who misuse prescription opioids obtain them from family or friends. Storing opioids in the open or not disposing of unused opioids increases the availability of these opioids for misuse by others. The importance of not sharing, always locking up, and disposing of unused and expired opioids must be highlighted as part of the opioid education that must be delivered every time that opioids are prescribed. Information about local drug take-back programs may also help increase disposal of unused opioids.

Number of Unused Medications at the Time of Last Admission: A Prospective Observational Study in a Single Palliative Care Unit

BACKGROUND:

Unused medications (UM) are an important issue, with the waste associated with UM a burden to the health-care system. The aims of this study were to clarify the amount and costs of UM in patients with advanced cancer at the time of their last admission to a palliative care unit and to explore the factors contributing to the cost of UM and how patients dealt with UM.

METHODS:

A prospective observational study was conducted in single palliative care unit. Unused medications were classified into 6 categories and the number and cost of UM by category calculated per patient. Patients were classified into 2 cost groups (high and low) based on the total cost of UM, and the number and cost of UM by category were compared between these 2 groups.

RESULTS:

Of 194 consecutive hospitalized patients, data were analyzed for 90. The mean number and cost of UM per patient was 440 and US$301, respectively. Opioids accounted for 47% of the cost of UM. Comparing costs by UM category, the proportion of opioids (51% vs 21%; P < .0001) and oral anticancer drugs (14% vs 3%; P = .02) was higher in the high- than in the low-cost group.

CONCLUSION:

Based on the results of the present study, the estimated annual waste cost of UM for patients with cancer who died in Japan was approximately US$110 million. Interventions to educate patients regarding UM and to eliminate barriers to opioid use may help reduce the cost of UM, particularly opioids and anticancer drugs.

Cancer pain management and the opioid crisis in America: How to preserve hard-earned gains in improving the quality of cancer pain management

Cancer pain remains a feared consequence of the disease and its treatment. Although prevalent, cancer pain can usually be managed through the skillful application of pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic interventions. Unfortunately, access to these therapies has been hampered by interventions designed to contain another serious public health problem: the opioid misuse epidemic. This epidemic and the unintended consequences of efforts to control this outbreak are leading to significant barriers to the provision of cancer pain relief. Oncologists and other professionals treating those with cancer pain will require new knowledge and tools to provide safe and effective pain control while preventing additional cases of substance use disorders (SUDs), helping patients in recovery to maintain sobriety, and guiding those not yet in recovery to seek treatment. How do these 2 serious epidemics intersect and affect oncology practice? First, oncology professionals will need to adopt practices to prevent SUDs by assessing risk and providing safe pain care. Second, oncology practices are likely to see an increased number of patients with a current or past SUD, including opioid misuse. Few guidelines exist for the direct management of pain when opioids may be indicated in these individuals. Third, modified prescribing practices along with the education of patients and families are warranted to prevent the exposure of these medications to unintended persons. Finally, advocacy on behalf of those with cancer pain is imperative to avoid losing access to essential therapies, including opioids, for those who might benefit. Cancer 2018;124:2491-7. © 2018 American Cancer Society.

The development and feasibility of a pharmacy-delivered opioid intervention in the emergency department

OBJECTIVES

To develop a brief intervention and to assess the feasibility of pharmacy-delivered education on opioid safety and overdose prevention in the emergency department.

METHODS

A convenience sample of patients (n = 102) approached between May and June 2016 at a single community-based suburban emergency department located in the Midwest.

RESULTS

The intervention included scripted counseling to be delivered in person and 2 educational brochures. The counseling took approximately 5 minutes, and only 2 patients refused the counseling. All the patients were satisfied with the intervention, and 97.4% of them reported that the counseling improved their knowledge of opioid side effects. The majority of patients thought that their own risk of addiction was significantly less than the general public's risk of addiction when taking opioids.

CONCLUSION

This study provides preliminary evidence that student pharmacists or pharmacists are able to deliver opioid safety and overdose education in the emergency department.

Quality Pain Care for Older Adults in an Era of Suspicion and Scrutiny

In two decades, the pendulum has swung from focusing on the undertreatment of pain by prescribers who fail to use medically necessary opioid agents to an intense focus on overprescribing opioid medications and the harms they cause. Within these two extremes rests the older adult with pain and in need of safe and effective care. Today, health care providers are practicing in an era of scrutiny, with new guidelines and regulations superseding their compassion and clinical judgment about the best treatment options when older adults have pain across the care continuum. Media depicting opioid medications as lethal, unnecessary, and highly addictive that do not distinguish non-medical from therapeutic use or legitimately versus illegally obtained drugs are widely reported. These reports and legislative focus on treating addiction have silenced and further stigmatized older adults with persistent pain. Patients and professionals treating pain need to provide balance of multimodal pain management strategies to safely manage persistent pain based on a comprehensive assessment and personalized approach. [Journal of Gerontological Nursing, 42(12), 31-39.].