Practices, Perceptions, and Concerns of Primary Care Physicians About Opioid Dependence Associated with the Treatment of Chronic Pain

Buprenorphine misinformation and willingness to treat patients with opioid use disorder among primary care-aligned health care professionals

BACKGROUND

Buprenorphine is a highly effective medication for opioid use disorder that is underused by health care professionals (HCPs). Medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD) misinformation may be an important barrier to buprenorphine access, but most implementation strategies have aimed to reduce negative attitudes towards patients with opioid use disorder (OUD) rather than misinformation specific to buprenorphine use. In this study, we assessed the degree to which HCPs endorsed misinformation related to buprenorphine, and whether this is associated with willingness to provide care to patients with OUD.

METHODS

In September-December of 2022, we surveyed HCPs practicing in Ohio (n = 409). Our primary outcomes included a previously validated 5-item measure of HCP willingness to treat patients with OUD, and three other measures of willingness. Our key independent variable was a study-developed 5-item measure of endorsement of misinformation related to buprenorphine, which assessed beliefs in buprenorphine's efficacy in managing withdrawal symptoms and reducing overdose deaths as well as beliefs about the role of buprenorphine in achieving remission. We computed descriptive and bivariable statistics and fit regression models predicting each outcome of interest.

RESULTS

On average, HCPs scored 2.34 out of 5.00 (SD = 0.80) on the composite measure of buprenorphine misinformation. 48.41% of participants endorsed at least one piece of misinformation. The most endorsed items were that buprenorphine is ineffective at reducing overdose deaths (M = 2.75, SD =0 .98), and that its use substitutes one drug for another (M = 2.41, SD = 1.25). HCP endorsement of buprenorphine misinformation significantly and negatively predicted willingness to work with patients with OUD (b = - 0.34; 95% CI - 0.46, - 0.21); intentions to increase time spent with this patient population (b = - 0.36; 95% CI - 5.86, - 1.28); receipt of an X-waiver (OR = 0.54, 95% CI 0.38, 0.77); and intention to get an X-waiver (OR: 0.56; 95% CI: 0.33-0.94).

CONCLUSIONS

Misinformation is common among HCPs and associated with lower willingness to treat patients with OUD. Implementation strategies to increase MOUD use among HCPs should specifically counter misinformation related to buprenorphine.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinicaltrials.gov, NCT05505227. Registered 17 August 2022, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT05505227.

Chronic scrotal content pain: the experiences of patients undergoing microsurgical spermatic cord denervation

Background

Chronic scrotal content pain, sometimes referred to as chronic orchialgia, is a common urological condition that gives rise to persistent and often severe painful stimuli to the scrotum and surrounding structures. Despite its relative commonality, accounting for over 2% of urological visits, chronic scrotal content pain is complex to manage and patients may be required to access multiple providers and undergo invasive procedures, including microsurgical spermatic cord denervation (MSCD) surgery.

Objective

The objective of this study was to understand the experiences and perspectives of persons with chronic scrotal content pain and accessing MSCD surgery.

Design

An exploratory qualitative design, guided by interpretive description and integrated knowledge translation, was adopted.

Methods

We conducted in-depth qualitative interviews with six patients with chronic scrotal content pain who underwent MSCD surgery in a surgical center in Western Canada. Data were analyzed thematically.

Results

Analysis of the study data resulted in three core themes: living with chronic scrotal content pain, quality of life, and MSCD procedure and outcomes. We highlight the debilitating nature of pain and the broad impacts upon health, quality of life, and social functioning. Participants described how MSCD surgery offered an effective solution for persistent and debilitating pain. For the participants, MSCD surgery offered hope and the chance to regain their normality.

Conclusion

For those with chronic scrotal content pain, access to a pain specialist, along with the adoption of a biopsychosocial approach to pain and early access to MSCD surgery, may improve patient experiences and outcomes. Considering the high prevalence of urological pain, greater interdisciplinary care is needed in order to support more effective and timely management.

Framework for opioid stigma in cancer pain

ABSTRACT

Millions of patients with cancer pain are treated with prescription opioids each year. However, efforts to mitigate the ongoing opioid crisis result in unintended consequences with opioid pain management, including opioid stigma. Emerging research indicates that opioid stigma is problematic in patients with cancer, but few studies have examined contributors to and impacts of opioid stigma in this population. To guide future research in this area, we propose a conceptual framework-the opioid stigma framework (OSF)-with which to understand and improve opioid stigma in patients with cancer pain. Development of the OSF was guided by a literature review of stigma in health-related conditions, adaptation of the existing Health Stigma and Discrimination Framework, a topical review of challenges related to opioid cancer pain management, and author expertise in cancer, pain, and opioid prescribing. The proposed OSF highlights 5 domains: (1) contributors to opioid stigma, or factors that increase the likelihood that a patient will experience opioid stigma; (2) intersecting stigmas, or the convergence of multiple stigmatized identities within a patient; (3) stigma manifestations, or the ways opioid stigma is manifested in patients, clinicians, and the community; (4) proximal outcomes, or the immediate consequences of opioid stigma in patients; and (5) long-term impacts in patients. The OSF provides 2 main avenues to facilitate future research: (1) providing a framework to explore the mechanisms that underlie opioid stigma and its impact on cancer pain management and (2) supporting the development of targeted, tailored interventions to eliminate opioid stigma.

A focus on the future of opioid prescribing: implementation of a virtual opioid and pain management module for medical students

BACKGROUND

The United States opioid epidemic is a devastating public health crisis fueled in part by physician prescribing. While the next generation of prescribers is crucial to the trajectory of the epidemic, medical school curricula designated to prepare students for opioid prescribing (OP) and pain management is often underdeveloped. In response to this deficit, we aimed to investigate the impact of an online opioid and pain management (OPM) educational intervention on fourth-year medical student knowledge, attitudes, and perceived competence.

METHODS

Graduating students completing their final year of medical education at Sidney Kimmel Medical College of Thomas Jefferson University were sent an e-mail invitation to complete a virtual OPM module. The module consisted of eight interactive patient cases that introduced topics through a case-based learning system, challenging students to make decisions and answer knowledge questions about the patient care process. An identical pre- and posttest were built into the module to measure general and case-specific learning objectives, with responses subsequently analyzed using the Wilcoxon matched-pairs signed-rank test.

RESULTS

Forty-three students (19% response rate) completed the module. All median posttest responses ranked significantly higher than paired median pretest responses (p <  0.05). Comparing the paired overall student baseline score to module completion, median posttest ranks (Mdn = 206, IQR = 25) were significantly higher than median pretest ranks (Mdn = 150, IQR = 24) (p <  0.001). Regarding paired median Perceived Competence Scale metrics specifically, perceived student confidence, capability, and ability in opioid management increased from "disagree" (2) to "agree" (4) (p <  0.001), and student ability to meet the challenge of opioid management increased from "neither agree nor disagree" (3) to "agree" (4) (p <  0.001). Additionally, while 77% of students reported receiving OP training in medical school, 21% reported no history of prior training.

CONCLUSION

Implementation of a virtual, interactive module with clinical context is an effective framework for improving the OPM knowledge, attitudes, and perceived competence of fourth-year medical students. This type of intervention may be an important method for standardizing and augmenting the education of future prescribers across multiple institutions.

Clinical Effectiveness of an Outpatient Multidisciplinary Chronic Pain Management Telementoring Service

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to assess the effectiveness of a Pain E-Consult Program (PEP), a multidisciplinary telementoring service based on the Extension for Community Healthcare Outcomes (ECHO) model to reduce opioid use in the outpatient setting.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This was a retrospective matched cohort study conducted in an integrated health care delivery system. Adult patients without cancer and with a 90-day morphine milligram equivalent (MME) ≥30 mg/d between April 1, 2016, and June 30, 2017, were included. Patients whose primary care clinician received the PEP (observation) were compared with usual care (control) patients. Observation patients were matched up to 1:5 to control patients. Outcomes included change in MME and initiation of nonopioid alternative medications. Multivariable regression analyses were performed.

RESULTS

A total of 665 patients were matched: 125 and 540 in the observation and control groups, respectively. Patients were primarily female, white, and Medicare beneficiaries. The observation group had a statistically significantly greater decrease in median MME/day during the 6-month (-7.4 vs. 1.5 mg, P=0.002) and 12-month (-15.1 vs. -2.8 mg, P<0.001) follow-up and rates of ≥20% decrease (6 mo: 41.6% vs. 24.6%, P=0.003; 12 mo: 48.0% vs. 32.6%, P=0.017). There were no differences in the rates of initiation of nonopioid alternative medications.

CONCLUSIONS

A PEP was associated with greater reductions in MME/day compared with usual care despite similar rates of nonopioid alternative medication initiation. A prospective randomized study of this program should be undertaken to confirm these findings.

Development and Initial Evaluation of Psychometric Properties of a Pain Competence Assessment Tool (PCAT)

Competency-based education is now considered the best approach for pain educational programs provided for pre and postgraduate healthcare providers (HCPs). To demonstrate learners' progression, an assessment tool that aligns with this educational approach and targets different HCPs is needed. A Pain Competence Assessment Tool (PCAT) was developed based on the pain management core competencies that align with the International Association for the Study of Pain interprofessional pain curriculum. The PCAT is an online competency-based assessment tool for HCPs that consists of 5 case scenarios followed by 17 key-feature questions. HCPs and trainees completed the PCAT through a series of studies to assess its psychometric properties. The preliminary evaluation suggested that the PCAT had adequate content validity. Apart from 6 questions, the PCAT questions demonstrated homogeneity and acceptable reliability, and substantial stability. No ceiling or floor effect was found. A significant difference was detected between the HCPs' and trainees' scores. The PCAT scores strongly correlated with other variables reflecting different competence levels. The PCAT scores showed significant changes in the baseline scores compared to scores after attending an educational intervention. The PCAT offers a first-of-its-kind tool for assessing HCPs' competence (ie, knowledge and its application) in managing chronic pain. Future research is needed for further validation and adaptation of the PCAT. PERSPECTIVE: The Pain Competence Assessment Tool (PCAT) offers a first-of-its-kind tool for assessing clinicians' core competencies that overlap between different professions and support the clinicians' capacity to successfully manage chronic pain in the real world focusing on the patient-centered perspective rather than the profession-specific perspective.

Are US Plastic Surgery Residents Equipped to Face the Opioid Epidemic? A National Survey

The United States opioid epidemic is among this century’s most profound threats to public health and demands that all physicians consider their role in reversing its trajectory. Previous literature demonstrated that plastic surgery trainees lack vital practices that promote opioid stewardship. However, it is not understood why this practice gap exists. This is a national survey-based study evaluating the availability and effectiveness of opioid education in US plastic surgery programs. A total of 91 residents completed the survey. Our study found that there is an unmet need for practical and comprehensive training regarding safe opioid prescribing among plastic surgery trainees. “Informal training,” defined as the “learn as you go” method, was found to be more common than formal training and considerably more valuable according to trainees. Trainees cited real-world applicability of informal training and that it comes from teachers whom they know and trust as valuable attributes of this type of education. Furthermore, the severity of the opioid epidemic has not translated into improved trainee education, as there was no significant difference in knowledge on safe opioid prescribing practices between junior and senior residents. To change the course of the epidemic, plastic surgery programs need to better train younger generations who believe they are critical stakeholders. This study lays the framework for the “formalization of informal training,” and the creation of practical and efficacious educational initiatives.

Prevalence of chronic pain in opioid-maintained patients using the capture-recapture method: a nationwide population-based study

Few studies all based on classical surveys have provided prevalence estimates of chronic pain (CP) in opioid-maintained patients (OMPs) but often had a limited patient sample size and a great variability in the prevalence estimates. This study sought to assess the prevalence of CP in the exhaustive population of OMPs using the capture-recapture method applied to the French nationwide health care database. Capture-recapture methods are increasingly used to estimate the prevalence of chronic conditions but have never been used in the specific context of CP in OMPs. Three large medical-administrative sources were used: the prescription drug database (A-list), the national hospital discharge database (M-list), and the pain center database (C-list). Between 2015 and 2016, 160,429 OMPs aged 15 years and older were identified and age- and sex-matched with 160,429 non-OMPs. All patients treated with analgesic drugs for ≥6 months (A-list) or diagnosed with CP (M- and C-list) were included. Capture-recapture analyses were performed to yield CP estimates with their 95% confidence intervals using log-linear models. In 2015 to 2016, 12,765 OMPs and 2938 non-OMPs with CP were captured. Most patients were male (67%) in OMPs and non-OMPs; median ages for OMPs and non-OMPs were 46 (interquartile range: 38-51) and 48 (41-53) years, respectively. The CP prevalence estimated in OMPs and non-OMPs ranged from 23.6% (14.9-46.2) to 32.1% (28.6-36.3) and from 7.28% (3.98-18.4) to 9.32% (7.42-12.1), respectively. This first study on CP in the exhaustive population of OMPs using the capture-recapture method demonstrated a high prevalence of CP in OMPs, 3- to 4-fold than in the general population.

Prevalence and Characteristics of Chronic Pain in Buprenorphine and Methadone-Maintained Patients

Chronic pain and substance use disorders frequently co-occur. Indeed, chronic pain is highly prevalent, affecting 23-68% of patients receiving opioid agonist treatments (OAT) worldwide. The majority of available estimates come from American studies, but data are still lacking in Europe. We aim to provide European estimates of the prevalence of chronic pain in patients receiving OAT using French data, since France is the first European country in terms of number of patients with OAT. The secondary objectives were to characterize the features and management of chronic pain, as well identify associated risk factors. We conducted a multicenter, cross-sectional study, recruiting patients treated either with buprenorphine or methadone in 19 French addiction centers, from May to July 2016. All participants had to complete a semi-directed questionnaire that collected sociodemographic and medical data, pain characteristics, and licit or illicit drug consumption. In total, 509 patients were included. The prevalence of chronic pain was estimated at 33.2% (95% CI: 29.1-37.3). Compared to non-chronic pain patients, chronic pain patients were older (38.4 vs. 36.1 years, p = 0.006), were more unemployed (66 vs. 52%, p = 0.003), had more psychiatric comorbidities (50 vs. 39%, p = 0.02), and split their OAT for pain management more frequently (24 vs. 7%, p = 0.009). Pain intensity was moderate or severe in 75% of chronic pain patients. Among patients with chronic pain, 15.4% were not prescribed, and did not self-medicate with, any analgesic drugs, 52.1% were prescribed analgesics (non-opioid analgesics, 76.3%; codeine, tramadol, opium, 27.2%; and morphine, fentanyl, oxycodone, 11.8%), and 32.5% exclusively self-medicated with analgesics. Moreover, 20.1% of patients with chronic pain also used illicit drugs for pain relief. On multivariate analysis, variables that remained significantly associated with chronic pain were age [OR = 1.03 (95% CI: 1.00-1.05], p = 0.02], anxiety [OR = 1.52 (1.15-2.02), p = 0.003], and depression [OR = 1.25 (1.00-1.55), p = 0.05]. Chronic pain is a highly prevalent condition in patients receiving OAT, and its appropriate management remains uncertain, since insufficient relief and frequent additional self-medications with analgesics or illicit drugs were reported by these patients. Increased awareness among caregivers is urgently needed regarding a systematic and careful assessment, along with an adequate management of chronic pain in patients receiving OAT.

Improving Residency Education on Chronic Pain and Opioid Use Disorder: Evaluation of CDC Guideline-Based Education

Background: National surveys show that primary care physicians feel responsible for addressing the opioid epidemic. They feel their training in managing chronic pain and addiction was insufficient, and commonly endorse the need for more residency training in these areas. However, residency training in these areas remains low, with a lack of faculty expertise and time as the most commonly cited barriers for improvement. Objective: To evaluate the feasibility of an educational program for chronic pain management and addiction that does not rely on faculty expertise or additional time, and assess resident opioid-prescribing practices and confidence in managing chronic pain after its implementation. Methods: A 16-week educational curriculum was incorporated into existing residency didactics. Internal medicine residents attended six educational sessions in 2016 over a 16-week period and implemented a protocol based on CDC Guidelines for Prescribing Opioids for Chronic Pain. Surveys were completed pre- and post-intervention. Results: Implementation of this educational intervention was feasible. Surveys showed improvement in resident confidence in detecting and managing addiction and improved prescribing practices and adherence to CDC recommendations. Conclusion: This pilot study demonstrates that increasing residency education in managing chronic pain and opioid use disorder is feasible, and no longer needs to be postponed due to lack of time or faculty expertise.

Development of an Instrument to Assess the Perceived Effectiveness of Academic Detailing

INTRODUCTION

Academic detailing (AD) is an effective, evidence-based education outreach method of promoting clinician behavior change. Detailer feedback is important for program evaluation but is rarely systematically collected. The study's objective was to develop a measure capturing the detailer's perception of the effectiveness of an AD program.

METHODS

A six-item measure with a five-level scale was initially developed from the literature review and expert panel consultation. Item constructs were usefulness, acceptability, feasibility, relevance, effectiveness of communication, and readiness to change. The measure was piloted, refined, and tested during an opioid-focused AD program that included two visits. The instrument structure was evaluated using exploratory factor analysis, measure reliability was assessed using item-item correlation (rho), corrected item-total correlation, Cronbach alpha (α), and item response theory.

RESULTS

The initial six-item instrument demonstrated unidimensionality. The Cronbach α for the measure was 0.74 (visit 1) and 0.79 (visit 2); one item (relevance) was redundant (α = 0.73 and 0.79 when deleted) and therefore dropped. Items related to usefulness, acceptability, and readiness to change displayed high item-item correlation (rho ≥ 0.50) and contributed the most information and seemed to operate as a single scale (ie, "likelihood to change") based on item response theory analysis. Items related to feasibility and communication were slightly different constructs and should be reported separately.

DISCUSSION

The five-item detailer assessment of visit effectiveness (the "DAVE") instrument provides a standardized approach to assess AD. Further study of its validity and broader use in other programs and educational outreach activities is encouraged.

Outcomes of a novel office-based opioid treatment program in an internal medicine resident continuity practice

BACKGROUND

The integration of opioid use disorder (OUD) care and competencies in graduate medical education training is needed. Previous research shows improvements in knowledge, attitudes, and practices after exposure to OUD care. Few studies report outcomes for patients with OUD in resident physician continuity practices.

METHODS

A novel internal office-based opioid treatment (OBOT) program was initiated in a resident continuity clinic. Surveys of resident and staff knowledge and attitudes of OBOT were administered at baseline and 4 months. A retrospective chart review of the 15-month OBOT clinic obtained patient characteristics and outcomes.

RESULTS

Twelve patients with OUD were seen in the OBOT clinic. Seven patients (58%) were retained in care at the end of the study period for a range of 9-15 months. Eight patients demonstrated a good clinical response. Surveys of residents and staff at 4 months were unchanged from baseline showing persistent lack of comfort in caring for patients with OUD.

CONCLUSIONS

OBOT can be successfully integrated into resident continuity practices with positive patient outcomes. Improvement in resident and staff attitudes toward OBOT were not observed and likely require direct and frequent exposure to OUD care to increase acceptance.

The Association of Preoperative Opioid Usage With Patient-Reported Outcomes, Adverse Events, and Return to Work After Lumbar Fusion: Analysis From the Michigan Spine Surgery Improvement Collaborative (MSSIC)

BACKGROUND

It is important to delineate the relationship between opioid use and spine surgery outcomes.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the association between preoperative opioid usage and postoperative adverse events, patient satisfaction, return to work, and improvement in Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) in patients undergoing lumbar fusion procedures by using 2-yr data from a prospective spine registry.

METHODS

Preoperative opioid chronicity from 8693 lumbar fusion patients was defined as opioid-naïve (no usage), new users (&lt;6 wk), short-term users (6 wk-3 mo), intermediate-term users (3-6 mo), and chronic users (&gt;6 mo). Multivariate generalized estimating equation models were constructed.

RESULTS

All comparisons were to opioid-naïve patients. Chronic opioid users showed less satisfaction with their procedure at 90 d (Relative Risk (RR) 0.95, P = .001), 1 yr (RR 0.89, P = .001), and 2 yr (RR 0.89, P = .005). New opioid users were more likely to show improvement in ODI at 90 d (RR 1.25, P &lt; .001), 1 yr (RR 1.17, P &lt; .001), and 2 yr (RR 1.19, P = .002). Short-term opioid users were more likely to show ODI improvement at 90 d (RR 1.25, P &lt; .001). Chronic opioid users were less likely to show ODI improvement at 90 d (RR 0.90, P = .004), 1 yr (RR 0.85, P &lt; .001), and 2 yr (RR 0.80, P = .003). Chronic opioid users were less likely to return to work at 90 d (RR 0.80, P &lt; .001).

CONCLUSION

In lumbar fusion patients and when compared to opioid-naïve patients, new opioid users were more likely and chronic opioid users less likely to have improved ODI scores 2 yr after surgery. Chronic opioid users are less likely to be satisfied with their procedure 2 yr after surgery and less likely to return to work at 90 d. Preoperative opioid counseling is advised.

Postoperative Analgesic Requirement and Pain Perceptions after Nonaerodigestive Head and Neck Surgery

OBJECTIVES

Little data exist on associations between patient factors and postoperative analgesic requirement after head and neck (H&N) surgeries. Such information is important for optimizing postoperative care considering concerns regarding opioid misuse. We analyzed factors associated with narcotic use and pain perception following H&N surgery sparing the upper aerodigestive tract.

STUDY DESIGN

Prospective cohort.

SETTING

Tertiary referral center.

SUBJECTS AND METHODS

From May to October 2017, data were collected for patients undergoing nonaerodigestive H&N procedures requiring hospitalization. Patients completed a preoperative survey querying chronic pain history, narcotic usage, and postoperative pain expectation. Demographics, surgical data, postoperative narcotic use defined by morphine milligram equivalents (MME), pain scores, and Overall Benefit of Analgesia Score (OBAS) were analyzed.

RESULTS

Seventy-six patients, 44 (57.9%) females and 32 (42.1%) males with a mean age of 54.0 years, met inclusion criteria. The most common procedures were parotidectomy (27.6%) and total thyroidectomy (19.7%). Average cumulative 24-hour postoperative MME and calculated MME per hospital day (MME/HD, cumulative MME for hospitalization divided by length of stay) were 40.5 ± 30.6 and 60.8 ± 60.1, respectively. Average pain score throughout the initial 24 hours after surgery was 3.7/10 ± 2.0. Female sex and prior chronic pain diagnosis were associated with higher OBAS after multivariate linear adjustments.

CONCLUSION

Postoperative narcotic requirement in nonaerodigestive H&N surgery is overall low. Female sex and prior chronic pain diagnosis may be associated with higher postoperative OBAS, a validated assessment of pain and opioid-related side effects. This study may serve as a comparison for future studies evaluating narcotic-sparing analgesia and pain perception in nonaerodigestive H&N surgery.

Opioids Use and Abuse: Prescription Practice, Attitude, and Beliefs among Doctors of Karachi

Background

Opioid analgesics, also known as narcotics, are medicinal drugs used primarily for the management of pain secondary to any type of cancer, severe injury or surgery. Due to the ease of availability, opioids are commonly abused. In 2015, reported deaths exceeded 33,000 Americans from opioid overdose. A survey in 2013 revealed nearly 1.6 million Pakistanis abusing prescription opioids for non-medical needs. Although commonly prescribed by primary care physicians, most of them are diffident to stand by all the recommended strategies to reduce the incidence of opioid abuse.

Methods

A cross-sectional study was conducted during the period of August through October 2018. A sample size of 365 was determined using a 95% confidence interval at a degree of precision of 5%. A 22-item questionnaire was given to doctors with at least two years practicing experience either from a private or a public healthcare setup. Doctors who had never prescribed opioids were excluded from the study. Out of the eligible participants, 15 refused to take part in the survey, and the co-operation rate was recorded as 95.8%. Collected data were analyzed using statistical package for social science (SPSS) version 22 for Windows. Frequencies, percentages, mean, standard deviation, and chi-square were used to explore the variables. The statistical significance level was considered at p < 0.5.

Results

Opioids were reported to be used mainly for treating acute pain (40.5%), chronic pain (24.7%) and both acute and chronic (34.8%). A minority of doctors (29%) screened their patients for opioid addiction. A significant association (p = 0.000) between the frequency of opioid prescription and prior screening for depression was determined. Surprisingly, only 23.2% clinicians frequently screened their patients for depression before prescribing opioids. The rate of counselling regarding drug tapering was found to be 71.6%. A majority, i.e., 88%, of the respondents anticipated the misuse of opioids they prescribe whereas 74% also held a belief that patients self-medicate their untreated pain. Participants reported addiction (54%) as the most common reason for abuse followed by the role of pharmaceutical companies (43%) and pharmacies (41%). About 80.2% clinicians believed that patients addicted to opioids could get well and return to their daily routine.

Conclusion

The rising opioid epidemic is a major concern for doctors prescribing opioids. Adaptation of medical school curricula and appropriate training can equip doctors for better management of patients requiring opioids. This includes the screening of patients using standard risk assessment tools for opioid abuse leading to a more controlled opioid prescription practice. Dissemination of these tools will boost doctors' confidence and may help in reducing morbidity and mortality from opioid abuse.

Opioid addiction, diversion, and abuse in chronic and cancer pain

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The primary cause of overdose death in the United States is related to pharmaceutical opioids. A few particular populations that struggle with adverse outcomes related to opioid abuse are those in palliative care, those with chronic pain, and those receiving pain treatments secondary to cancer or chemotherapy.

RECENT FINDINGS

There have been massive efforts to decrease the use of opioid abuse in patient care in a gestalt manner, but palliative care provides unique challenges in applying these reduction tactics used by other specialties.

SUMMARY

We explore behavioral interventions, provider education, alternative pain management techniques, postmarketing surveillance, and abuse-deterrent formulas as emerging methods to counteract opioid abuse in these populations.

Comorbid chronic pain and opioid use disorder: literature review and potential treatment innovations

Chronic pain (CP) and opioid use disorder (OUD) remain challenging complex public health concerns. This is an updated review on the relationship between CP and OUD and the use of stepped care models for assessment and management of this vulnerable population. A literature search was conducted from 2008 to the present in PubMed, Embase, and PsycInfo using the terms pain or chronic pain and opioid-related disorders, opiate, methadone, buprenorphine, naltrexone, opioid abuse, opioid misuse, opioid dependen*, heroin addict, heroin abuse, heroin misuse, heroin dependen*, or analgesic opioids, and stepped care, integrated services, multidisciplinary treatment, or reinforcement-based treatment. Evidenced-based data exists on the feasibility, implementation, and efficacy of stepped care models in primary care settings for the management of CP and opioid use. Although these studies did not enroll participants with OUD, they included a sub-set of patients at risk for the development of OUD. There remains a dearth of treatment options for those with comorbid CP and OUD. Future research is needed to explore the aetiology and impact of CP and OUD, and greater emphasis is needed to improve access to comprehensive pain and substance use programmes for high-risk individuals.

Duration of opioid prescriptions predicts incident nonmedical use of prescription opioids among U.S. veterans receiving medical care

BACKGROUND/AIMS

Although nonmedical use of prescription opioids (NMUPO) is a public health problem, few studies have examined the new-onset NMUPO in clinical populations. We estimated NMUPO incidence among veterans in medical care who had received prescription opioid medication and examined correlates of new-onset NMUPO.

DESIGN

Prospective cohort study.

SETTING

Veterans Health Administration primary care and infectious disease clinics in Atlanta, Baltimore, Bronx, Houston, Los Angeles, Manhattan, Pittsburgh, and Washington, DC.

PARTICIPANTS

Patients enrolled in the Veterans Aging Cohort Study wave 3 (2005-2007) who received prescription opioids in the previous year and without lifetime NMUPO were followed at waves 4 and 5 (2008-2011).

MEASUREMENTS

Cox proportional hazards regression was used to examine the relationship between duration of prescription opioid receipt and incident NMUPO, adjusting for demographics, alcohol and tobacco use, substance use disorders, psychiatric and medical diagnoses, and medication-related characteristics.

FINDINGS

Among eligible participants (n = 815), the median age was 52 (IQR = 47-58) and 498 (59.8%) were Black; 122 (15.0%) reported new-onset NMUPO, for an incidence rate of 5.0 per 100 person-years. In a multivariable Cox model, compared to <30 days, receipt of prescription opioids for 30-180 days (adjusted hazard ratio [AHR] = 1.65 95% CI: 1.06, 2.58) or >180 days (AHR = 1.99, 95% CI: 1.21, 3.29) was associated with incident NMUPO.

CONCLUSIONS

Duration of prescription opioid receipt is a risk factor for incident NMUPO among veterans receiving medical care. Providers who prescribe opioids should monitor for NMUPO, especially among those with a longer duration of opioid therapy.

Communication between pharmacists and primary care physicians in the midst of a U.S. opioid crisis

BACKGROUND

Effective communication between prescribers of opioids and community pharmacists can contribute to maximizing appropriate pain management and reducing opioid misuse and diversion. While much of the education and training available on reducing opioid misuse and diversion stresses the importance of interprofessional communication between prescribers and pharmacists, few studies have been explored those communication patterns directly.

OBJECTIVE

The objectives of this manuscript are to present and explore key emergent themes from a qualitative study around the nature, frequency, and content of communication between primary care physicians (PCPs) and pharmacists focusing on opioids.

METHODS

Interviews were conducted with 48 PCPs and 60 community pharmacists across four states in the U.S.: Washington, Idaho, Kentucky and Arkansas.

RESULTS

Convergent results from both samples indicated that the content of communication usually centers on questions of dosing, timing of the prescription, and/or evidence of potential misuse/diversion. When communication was focused on relaying information about a patient and/or clarifying questions around the prescription, it appeared positive for both parties. Results also indicated that close physical proximity between PCPs and dispensing pharmacists contributed to more positive and useful communication, especially when the clinics and pharmacies were part of the same healthcare system. Many pharmacists reported hesitancy in "questioning" a physician's judgement, which appeared related to commonly held beliefs of both pharmacists and physicians about the respective roles of each in providing patient care. Pharmacists reported difficulty in reaching PCPs for discussion, while PCPs reported it was easy to reach pharmacists.

CONCLUSIONS

Physician and pharmacist communication around opioids can be mutually beneficial. When prescribers and pharmacists are co-located, higher levels of trust and teamwork are reported, which in turn seems to be related to more open and positive communication. Additional research is needed to identify interventions to increase mutually-valued communication that improves the quality of decision-making around opioids.

Determining the Initiation of Opiate Misuse Resulting in Opioid Use Disorder in Pregnant Women

The aim of this study was to explore the "opiate misuse footprint" made by obstetrics and gynecology physicians in prescribing opioid medications for postpartum pain control that led to opioid misuse and opioid use disorder. Data were collected using intake information and anonymous surveys administered to pregnant women at local methadone clinics in Indianapolis, Indiana, in 2016-2017. Results from this study revealed that 40% of the 33 participants stated that the first drug they became addicted to was prescription opioids; 71% stated that the first opiate they became addicted to was a prescription pain medication. Prescription opioids were mainly obtained from emergency medicine physicians and friends. Reported use of opioids within the past four months was high, with the most commonly used drugs being methadone (57.6%) and heroin (42.4%). A majority of participants also endorsed a history of sexual and physical abuse, recent incarceration, and mental health disorders. As a large number of pregnant women with opioid use disorder reported their initial drug of misuse as prescription pain medications, it is important to avoid overprescribing opioids in reproductive-age women.

A Prospective Evaluation of Patient-Reported Opioid Utilization After Nonoperative Treatment of Fractures and Dislocations

BACKGROUND

Prescription of opioid analgesics is currently a common practice to relieve pain for musculoskeletal injuries in many regions of the world, especially in the United States and Canada. However, overprescription may underlie opioid misuse. Details on the utilization of prescribed opioids after nonoperative treatment of fractures and dislocations and whether consumption is related to injury location are unknown.

METHODS

A total of 1,513 consecutive patients in China who underwent nonoperative treatment of a fracture and/or dislocation and who were prescribed opioids were studied over a 3-month period. Demographic information, alcohol consumption, smoking status, injury location, volume of prescription, and consumption patterns were recorded and were summarized.

RESULTS

The mean number of opioid pills prescribed was 14.7, and the mean patient-reported number of pills consumed was 7.2. Overall, 152 patients (10.0%) reported taking no prescribed opioid analgesics, and 924 patients (61.1%) ceased their prescribed opioids prior to completing the regimen. Injury location, alcohol consumption, and type of fracture or dislocation were all significantly associated with the patient-reported number of opioid pills consumed (p < 0.05). Patients with fracture and/or dislocation of the wrist or forearm (9.4 pills for 3.8 days); ankle, tibia, or fibula (9.3 pills for 3.7 days); or elbow or humerus (9.1 pills for 3.7 days) used more opioid pills compared with patients with injuries at other locations (not exceeding 6.4 pills and 3 days). When compared with patients who had no, low, or moderate daily alcohol consumption, there was more opioid use in patients with high daily alcohol consumption (8.5 pills for 3.4 days) and those with very high daily alcohol consumption (11.3 pills for 4.7 days). Patients with a dislocation and/or displaced fracture reported consuming 8.2 pills for 3.3 days, which was more than the consumption in patients with a nondisplaced fracture (6.2 pills for 2.5 days) and patients with an avulsion fracture (6.2 pills for 2.5 days).

CONCLUSIONS

Surgeons and patients should try to avoid opioids if possible after nonoperatively treated fractures and dislocations. If opioids are used, surgeons should prescribe the smallest dose for the shortest time after considering the injury location and type of fracture or dislocation.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Prognostic Level IV. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

A Predictive Algorithm to Detect Opioid Use Disorder: What Is the Utility in a Primary Care Setting?

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to determine the clinical utility of an algorithm-based decision tool designed to assess risk associated with opioid use in the primary care setting.

METHODS

A prospective, longitudinal study was conducted to assess the utility of precision medicine testing in 1822 patients across 18 family medicine/primary care clinics in the United States. Using the profile, patients were categorized into low, moderate, and high risk for opioid use. Physicians who ordered testing were asked to complete patient evaluations and document their actions, decisions, and perceptions regarding the utility of the precision medicine tests.

RESULTS

Approximately 47% of primary care physicians surveyed used the profile to guide clinical decision-making. These physicians rated the benefit of the profile on patient care an average of 3.6 on a 5-point scale (1 indicating no benefit and 5 indicating significant benefit). Eighty-eight percent of all clinicians surveyed felt the test exhibited some benefit to their patient care. The most frequent utilization for the profile was to guide a change in opioid prescribed. Physicians reported greater benefit of profile utilization for minority patients. Patients whose treatment was guided by the profile had pain levels that were reduced, on average, 2.7 levels on the numeric rating scale.

CONCLUSIONS

The profile provided primary care physicians with a useful tool to stratify the risk of opioid use disorder and was rated as beneficial for decision-making and patient improvement by the majority of physicians surveyed. Physicians reported the profile resulted in greater clinical improvement for minorities, highlighting the objective use of this profile to guide judicial use of opioids in high-risk patients. Significantly, when physicians used the profile to guide treatment decisions, patient-reported pain was greatly reduced.

Chronic Pain Opioid-Maintained Patients Receive Less Analgesic Opioid Prescriptions

Treating pain and opioid use disorder represents a clinical challenge. While most studies that have assessed opioid analgesic use in opioid substitution treatment (OST) patients primarily address opioid analgesic misuse (1, 2), only few studies focused on OST patients assessed the prescription of analgesic opioids for chronic pain. We sought to compare the prevalence of analgesic opioid prescription (AOP) in two groups of chronic non-cancer pain (CNCP) patients: OST patients vs. the general population. This was a population-based cross-sectional study based on the French national healthcare claims database SNIIRAM (Système National d'Informations Inter-Régimes de l'Assurance Maladie) covering over 66 million people (98.8% of the French population). Overall, 67,173 participants ≥15 years old undergoing continuous OST in 2015 ("OST patients" group) were included and age- and gender-matched by means of a 1:1 ratio with 67,173 patients without OST ("control" group). In each group, patients with cancer conditions were excluded and those having received opioid and non-opioid analgesics for at least 3 months were identified (CNCP patients). Compared to control patients, CNCP OST patients received less AOP (47.8 vs. 68.0%, p < 0.0001) and more often non-opioid prescription (52.2 vs. 32.0%, p < 0.0001). In multivariate analysis, CNCP OST patients were 2.7 times less likely to be prescribed analgesic opioids (adjusted odds ratio [OR] = 2.7 [2.42-3.01], p < 0.0001) than control patients. AOP correlated in CNCP OST patients with: age ≤ 40 years old, female gender, low-income status, methadone-maintained treatment, mental health disorder, hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection, and alcohol abuse disorder. Opioid analgesics were less often prescribed in CNCP OST patients. AOP prevalence was 2.7-fold lower than in the general population. Chronic pain management in OST patients needs to be reinforced through additional physician training and a multidisciplinary approach.

Validation of a Screening Risk Index for Serious Prescription Opioid-Induced Respiratory Depression or Overdose in a US Commercial Health Plan Claims Database

Objective

To validate a risk index that estimates the likelihood of overdose or serious opioid-induced respiratory depression (OIRD) among medical users of prescription opioids.

Subjects and Methods

A case-control analysis of 18,365,497 patients with an opioid prescription from 2009 to 2013 in the IMS PharMetrics Plus commercially insured health plan claims database (CIP). An OIRD event occurred in 7,234 cases. Four controls were selected per case. Validity of the Risk Index for Overdose or Serious Opioid-induced Respiratory Depression (RIOSORD), developed previously using Veterans Health Administration (VHA) patient data, was assessed. Multivariable logistic regression was used within the CIP study population to develop a slightly refined RIOSORD. The composition and performance of the CIP-based RIOSORD was evaluated and compared with VHA-based RIOSORD.

Results

VHA-RIOSORD performed well in discriminating OIRD events in CIP (C-statistic = 0.85). Additionally, re-estimation of logistic model coefficients in CIP yielded a 0.90 C-statistic. The resulting comorbidity and pharmacotherapy variables most highly associated with OIRD and retained in the CIP-RIOSORD were largely concordant with VHA-RIOSORD. These variables included neuropsychiatric and cardiopulmonary disorders, impaired drug excretion, opioid characteristics, and concurrent psychoactive medications. The average predicted probability of OIRD ranged from 2% to 83%, with excellent agreement between predicted and observed incidence across risk classes.

Conclusions

RIOSORD had excellent predictive accuracy in a large population of US medical users of prescription opioids, similar to its performance in VHA. This practical risk index is designed to support clinical decision-making for safer opioid prescribing, and its clinical utility should be evaluated prospectively.

A Conceptual Framework for Understanding Unintended Prolonged Opioid Use

An urgent need exists to better understand the transition from short-term opioid use to unintended prolonged opioid use (UPOU). The purpose of this work is to propose a conceptual framework for understanding UPOU that posits the influence of 3 principal domains that include the characteristics of (1) individual patients, (2) the practice environment, and (3) opioid prescribers. Although no standardized method exists for developing a conceptual framework, the process often involves identifying corroborative evidence, leveraging expert opinion to identify factors for inclusion in the framework, and developing a graphic depiction of the relationships between the various factors and the clinical problem of interest. Key patient characteristics potentially associated with UPOU include (1) medical and mental health conditions; (2) pain etiology; (3) individual affective, behavioral, and neurophysiologic reactions to pain and opioids; and (4) sociodemographic factors. Also, UPOU could be influenced by structural and health care policy factors: (1) the practice environment, including the roles of prescribing clinicians, adoption of relevant practice guidelines, and clinician incentives or disincentives, and (2) the regulatory environment. Finally, characteristics inherent to clinicians that could influence prescribing practices include (1) training in pain management and opioid use; (2) personal attitudes, knowledge, and beliefs regarding the risks and benefits of opioids; and (3) professionalism. As the gatekeeper to opioid access, the behavior of prescribing clinicians directly mediates UPOU, with the 3 domains interacting to determine this behavior. This proposed conceptual framework could guide future research on the topic and allow plausible hypothesis-based interventions to reduce UPOU.

Addressing the barriers related with opioid therapy for management of chronic pain in India

India has a high prevalence of chronic disorders which may be associated with persistent pain. Despite the availability of multiple treatment options, chronic pain is largely untreated and contributes to disability and mortality. Medical consumption of opioids remains low due to various barriers that prevent access to opioids for patients and healthcare practitioners. Stringent regulatory provisions outlined in the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (1985) have been major deterrents to adequate opioid use. Although multiple amendments to the act have ensured ease of opioid access for medicinal purposes, concerns such as lack of awareness and prescribing practices and attitudes of physicians/patients still need to be addressed. This review aims to identify these barriers and suggest recommendations to overcome them.

An epidemic of the use, misuse and overdose of opioids and deaths due to overdose, in the United States and Canada

The United States and Canada are in the midst of an epidemic of the use, misuse and overdose of opioids, and deaths related to overdose. This is the direct result of overstatement of the benefits and understatement of the risks of using opioids by advocates and pharmaceutical companies. Massive amounts of prescription opioids entered the community and were often diverted and misused. Most other parts of the world achieve comparable pain relief using fewer opioids.

The misconceptions about opioids that created this epidemic are finding their way around the world. There is particular evidence of the increased prescription of strong opioids in Europe.

Opioids are addictive and dangerous. Evidence is mounting that the best pain relief is obtained through resilience. Opioids are often prescribed when treatments to increase resilience would be more effective.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2017;99-B:856–64.

What do providers want to know about opioid prescribing? A qualitative analysis of their questions

BACKGROUND

In 2012, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) responded to the opioid crisis with a Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy, requiring manufacturers of extended-release/long-acting opioids to fund continuing medical education based on the "FDA Blueprint for Prescriber Education." Topics in the Blueprint are "Assessing Patients for Treatment," "Initiating Therapy, Modifying Dosing, and Discontinuing Use," "Managing Therapy," "Counseling Patients and Caregivers about Safe Use," "General Drug Information," and "Specific Drug Information." Based on the FDA Blueprint, Boston University School of Medicine's "Safe and Competent Opioid Prescribing Education" (SCOPE of Pain) offers live trainings for physicians and other prescribers. During trainings, participants submit written questions about the curriculum and/or their clinical experiences.

METHODS

The objective was to compare themes that arose from questions asked by SCOPE of Pain participants with content of the FDA Blueprint in order to evaluate how well the Blueprint answers prescribers' concerns. The authors conducted qualitative analyses of all 1309 questions submitted by participants in 29 trainings across 16 states from May 2013 to May 2015, using conventional content analysis to code the questions. Themes that emerged from participants' questions were then compared with the Blueprint.

RESULTS

Most themes fell into the topic categories of the Blueprint. Five main themes diverged: Participants sought information on (1) safe alternatives to opioids, (2) overcoming barriers to safe opioid prescribing, (3) government regulations of opioid prescribing, (4) the role of marijuana in opioid prescribing, and (5) maintaining a positive provider-patient relationship while prescribing opioids.

CONCLUSIONS

In addition to learning the mechanics of safe opioid prescribing, providers want to understand government regulations and effective patient communication skills. Aware of the limitations of opioids in managing chronic pain, providers seek advice on alternatives therapies. Future updates to the FDA Blueprint and other educational guidelines on opioid prescribing should address providers' additional questions.

Psychoactive substance use prior to the development of iatrogenic opioid abuse: A descriptive analysis of treatment-seeking opioid abusers

Physicians are frequently thought to be a major source of opioids diverted for non-therapeutic purposes, largely because it is so difficult for them to discern which patients might abuse them. In this study we sought to determine whether those who were first exposed to an opioid through a physician's prescription, and subsequently developed a substance use disorder, had a history of using psychoactive drugs prior to abusing opioids. Patients entering one of 125 drug treatment programs across the country for opioid abuse were asked to provide detailed histories of psychoactive drug use prior to their initial opioid exposure. Nearly half (47.1%, N=4493) indicated they were first exposed to opioids through a prescription from their physician to treat pain. Of these, 94.6% indicated experience with at least one other psychoactive substance (mean=4.55±0.05) prior to, or coincident with, their first exposure to an opioid from a physician. Alcohol (92.9%), nicotine and/or tobacco (89.5%), and marijuana (87.4%) were used by nearly all patients prior to, or coincident with, their first opioid prescription. If one excludes these drugs, 70.1% (N=2913) still reported some psychoactive drug use of licit or illicit stimulants (77.8%), benzodiazepines (59.8%) or hallucinogens (55.2%). Our results indicate that pain patients who developed a substance use disorder were rarely drug naïve prior to receiving their first opioid prescription. Rather, most have an extensive history of psychoactive drug use. As such, physicians should routinely ascertain complete licit and illicit drug histories in patients for whom they prescribe opioids.

Physician continuing education to reduce opioid misuse, abuse, and overdose: Many opportunities, few requirements

BACKGROUND

The opioid overdose epidemic in the United States is driven in large part by inappropriate opioid prescribing. Although most American physicians receive little or no training during medical school regarding evidence-based prescribing, substance use disorders, and pain management, some states require continuing medical education (CME) on these topics. We report the results of a systematic legal analysis of such requirements, together with recommendations for improved physician training.

METHODS

To determine the presence and characteristics of CME requirements in the United States, we systematically collected, reviewed, and coded all laws that require such education as a condition of obtaining or renewing a license to practice medicine. Laws or regulations that mandate one-time or ongoing training in topics designed to reduce overdose risk were further characterized using an iterative protocol

RESULTS

Only five states require all or nearly all physicians to obtain CME on topics such as pain management and controlled substance prescribing, and fewer than half require any physicians to obtain such training.

CONCLUSIONS

While not a replacement for improved education in medical school and post-graduate clinical training, evidence-based CME can help improve provider knowledge and practice. Requiring physicians to obtain CME that accurately presents evidence regarding opioid prescribing and related topics may help reduce opioid-related morbidity and mortality. States and the federal government should also strongly consider requiring such training in medical school and residency.

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.

Opioids for chronic pain: a knowledge assessment of nonpain specialty providers

Introduction

Although the majority of opioids in the US are prescribed by nonpain specialists, these providers often report inadequate training in chronic pain management and opioid prescribing. The extent of health care providers’ knowledge of opioid prescribing for chronic pain has not been well established. The purpose of this study was to assess knowledge about the use of opioids for chronic pain among health care providers seeking pain-focused continuing medical education.

Materials and methods

The study participants (n=131) were recruited at a pain-focused continuing medical education conference for nonpain specialists. Upon commencement of the conference, the KnowPain-50 survey was completed. The survey comprised 50 questions, and 18 questions were related to opioid management. The focus of each opioid question was further categorized as either medicolegal (n=7) or clinical (n=11).

Results

The majority of study participants were male physicians with a mean age of 51.8 years. The proportion of correct responses to the 50-item survey was 72%. The proportion of correct responses to the 32 nonopioid questions was 74%, and the proportion of correct responses to the 18 opioid questions was 69% (P<0.001). Similarly, the proportion of correct responses to the seven medicolegal opioid questions was 74%, and the proportion of correct responses to the eleven clinical opioid questions was 67% (P<0.001).

Conclusion

Health care providers demonstrated gaps in knowledge about the use of opioids for chronic pain. Lower scores on clinically based opioid questions may indicate an opportunity to provide focused educational content about this area of practice. This information could be helpful in designing future educational modules for nonpain providers.

Moving beyond misuse and diversion: the urgent need to consider the role of iatrogenic addiction in the current opioid epidemic

An epidemic of drug overdose deaths has led to calls for programs and policies to limit misuse and diversion of opioid medications. Any parallel call to consider the risk of iatrogenic addiction when treating pain has been muted in comparison. We have moved beyond questions of nonmedical use, abuse, and diversion to highlight the role of prescription opioids in causing addiction even when prescribed and used appropriately. Unfortunately, current evidence is insufficient, and a rapid expansion of longitudinal research is urgently needed to guide clinicians in balancing the need for opioids with the risk of adverse consequences. Meanwhile, medical education should place greater emphasis on the abuse liability of prescription opioids, and providers should endeavor to attenuate risk when possible.

Management of chronic pain with chronic opioid therapy in patients with substance use disorders

Substance use disorders (SUDs), whether active or in remission, are often encountered in patients with chronic nonmalignant pain. Clinicians are challenged when managing chronic pain while facing substance abuse issues during the course of chronic opioid therapy (COT). Further, the interrelated behavioral symptomatology of addiction and chronic pain suggests that if one disorder is untreated, effective treatment of the other in not possible. Incomplete understanding of the overlapping presentations of the two disorders, coupled with insufficient management of both conditions, leads to undertreated pain and premature discharge of SUD patients from pain treatment. In order to achieve pain relief and optimal functionality, both conditions need to be carefully managed. This paper reviews the prevalence of SUDs in chronic pain patents; the overlapping presentation of the two disorders; risk factors and stratification for addiction; identification of addiction in the chronic pain population; and suggestions for treating patients with COT, with an emphasis on relapse prevention. With appropriate assessment and treatment, COT for chronic pain patients with a history of SUD can be successful, leading to improved functionality and quality of life.

Long-term opioid treatment of chronic nonmalignant pain: unproven efficacy and neglected safety?

BACKGROUND

For the past 30 years, opioids have been used to treat chronic nonmalignant pain. This study tests the following hypotheses: (1) there is no strong evidence-based foundation for the conclusion that long-term opioid treatment of chronic nonmalignant pain is effective; and (2) the main problem associated with the safety of such treatment - assessment of the risk of addiction - has been neglected.

METHODS

Scientometric analysis of the articles representing clinical research in this area was performed to assess (1) the quality of presented evidence (type of study); and (2) the duration of the treatment phase. The sufficiency of representation of addiction was assessed by counting the number of articles that represent (1) editorials; (2) articles in the top specialty journals; and (3) articles with titles clearly indicating that the addiction-related safety is involved (topic-in-title articles).

RESULTS

Not a single randomized controlled trial with opioid treatment lasting >3 months was found. All studies with a duration of opioid treatment ≥6 months (n = 16) were conducted without a proper control group. Such studies cannot provide the consistent good-quality evidence necessary for a strong clinical recommendation. There were profound differences in the number of addiction articles related specifically to chronic nonmalignant pain patients and to opioid addiction in general. An inadequate number of chronic pain-related publications were observed with all three types of counted articles: editorials, articles in the top specialty journals, and topic-in-title articles.

CONCLUSION

There is no strong evidence-based foundation for the conclusion that long-term opioid treatment of chronic nonmalignant pain is effective. The above identified signs indicating neglect of addiction associated with the opioid treatment of chronic nonmalignant pain were present.

Buprenorphine/naloxone as a promising therapeutic option for opioid abusing patients with chronic pain: reduction of pain, opioid withdrawal symptoms, and abuse liability of oral oxycodone

Few studies have examined abuse of prescription opioids among individuals with chronic pain under buprenorphine/naloxone (Bup/Nx) maintenance. The current 7-week inpatient study assessed oral oxycodone self-administration by patients with chronic pain who had a history of opioid abuse. Participants (n=25) were transitioned from their preadmission prescribed opioid to Bup/Nx. All of the participants were tested under each of the sublingual Bup/Nx maintenance doses (2/0.5, 8/2 or 16/4 mg) in random order. During each maintenance period, participants could self-administer oxycodone orally (0, 10, 20, 40 or 60 mg prescription opioids) or receive money during laboratory sessions. Drug choice (percentage) was the primary dependent variable. Subjective ratings of clinical pain and withdrawal symptoms also were measured. Mann-Whitney tests compared percentage of drug choice for each active oxycodone dose to placebo. Logistic regression analyses identified correlates of oxycodone preference, defined as 60% or greater choice of oxycodone compared to money. Pain was significantly reduced while participants were maintained on Bup/Nx compared to preadmission ratings. No differences in percentage drug choice were observed between the active oxycodone doses and placebo under each Bup/Nx maintenance dose. However, factors associated with oxycodone preference were lower Bup/Nx maintenance dose, more withdrawal symptoms and more pain. These data suggest that Bup/Nx was effective in reducing pain and supplemental oxycodone use. Importantly, adequate management of pain and withdrawal symptoms by Bup/Nx may reduce oxycodone preference in this population.