The New "Opioid Crisis": Scientific Bias, Media Attention, and Potential Harms for Patients with Refractory Dyspnea

Opioid drug use in emergency and adverse outcomes among patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a multicenter observational study

There is still debate as to the safety of non-palliative opioid administration to chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) patients punctually treated for an acute complaint. All patients over 40 presenting at two university hospital emergency departments (Montréal Qc, Grenoble Fr) from March 2008 to September 2014 with dyspnea, abdominal pain or trauma were retrieved, and COPD patients were selected. Our primary endpoint was a composite criterion including invasive ventilation and death. Comparisons between visits in which opioid drugs were prescribed and those without opioids were performed using an inverse probability of treatment and censoring weight (IPTCW) estimator to adjust for baseline confounders. A survival weighted Cox model was used. 7799 visits by COPD patients were identified, corresponding to 4173 unique patients. Opioid drug prescription was reported in 1317 (16.9%) visits. After applying IPCTW weighting, opioid prescription was found to be associated with the composite criterion of poor clinical outcomes (HR = 4.73 (2.94; 7.61), p < 0.01). When taken separately, this association remained significant for invasive ventilation and death, but not for NIV. All sensitivity analyses confirmed the association, except for patients with trauma or abdominal pain as the main complaint. This excess risk is observed whatever the route of administration.

Holistic services for people with advanced disease and chronic or refractory breathlessness: a mixed-methods evidence synthesis

Background

Breathlessness is a common and distressing symptom of many advanced diseases, affecting around 2 million people in the UK. Breathlessness increases with disease progression and often becomes chronic or refractory. Breathlessness-triggered services that integrate holistic assessment and specialist palliative care input as part of a multiprofessional approach have been developed for this group, offering tailored interventions to support self-management and reduce distress.

Objectives

The aim was to synthesise evidence on holistic breathlessness services for people with advanced disease and chronic or refractory breathlessness. The objectives were to describe the structure, organisation and delivery of services, determine clinical effectiveness, cost-effectiveness and acceptability, identify predictors of treatment response, and elicit stakeholders’ evidence-based priorities for clinical practice, policy and research.

Design

The mixed-methods evidence synthesis comprised three components: (1) a systematic review to determine the clinical effectiveness, cost-effectiveness and acceptability of holistic breathlessness services; (2) a secondary analysis of pooled individual data from three trials to determine predictors of clinical response; and (3) a transparent expert consultation (TEC), comprising a stakeholder workshop and an online consensus survey, to identify stakeholders’ priorities.

Results

Thirty-seven papers reporting on 18 holistic breathlessness services were included in the systematic review. Most studies enrolled people with thoracic cancer, were delivered over 4–6 weeks, and included breathing training, relaxation techniques and psychological support. Meta-analysis demonstrated significant reductions in the Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) distress due to breathlessness, significant reductions in the Hospital Anxiety and Depressions Scale (HADS) depression scores, and non-significant reductions in the Chronic Respiratory Disease Questionnaire (CRQ) mastery and HADS anxiety, favouring the intervention. Recipients valued education, self-management interventions, and expertise of the staff in breathlessness and person-centred care. Evidence for cost-effectiveness was limited and inconclusive. The responder analysis (n = 259) revealed baseline CRQ mastery and NRS distress to be strong predictors of the response to breathlessness services assessed by these same measures, and no significant influence from baseline breathlessness intensity, patient diagnosis, lung function, health status, anxiety or depression. The TEC elicited 34 priorities from stakeholders. Seven priorities received high agreement and consensus, reflecting stakeholders’ (n = 74) views that services should be person-centred and multiprofessional, share their breathlessness management skills with others, and recognise the roles and support needs of informal carers.

Limitations

The evidence synthesis draws predominantly from UK services and may not be generalisable to other settings. Some meta-analyses were restricted by reporting biases and statistical heterogeneity.

Conclusions

Despite heterogeneity in composition and delivery, holistic breathlessness services are highly valued by recipients and can lead to significant improvements in the distress caused by breathlessness and depression. Outcomes of improved mastery and reduced distress caused by breathlessness are not influenced by patient diagnosis, lung function or health status. Stakeholders highlighted the need for improved access to person-centred, multiprofessional breathlessness services and support for informal carers.

Future work

Our research suggests that key therapeutic components of holistic breathlessness services be considered in clinical practice and models of delivery and educational strategies to address stakeholders’ priorities tested.

Study registration

This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42017057508.

Funding

The National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Services and Delivery programme. Matthew Maddocks, Wei Gao and Irene J Higginson are supported by the NIHR Collaboration for Leadership in Applied Health Research and Care (CLAHRC) South London; Matthew Maddocks is supported by a NIHR Career Development Fellowship (CDF-2017-009), William D-C Man is supported by the NIHR CLAHRC Northwest London and Irene J Higginson holds a NIHR Emeritus Senior Investigator Award.

Management of Breathlessness in Palliative Care: Inhalers and Dyspnea-A Literature Review

INTRODUCTION

Dyspnea is prominently observed in palliative care (PC). Dyspnea can be multifactorial, primarily caused by obstructive or restrictive lung diseases or secondarily induced by various comorbidities. Numerous interventions exist, with route of administration and efficacy requiring further discussion. Despite opioids being the first line of treatment, their adverse effects lead to reluctance on the side of patients to take them, creating limitations in patient management planning.

OBJECTIVES

This paper reviews and highlights the role of inhalers for dyspnea management in PC.

METHODS

The CINAHL, CENTRAL, and OVID databases were searched for scholarly articles on the role of inhalers in dyspnea management from 1998 to the present. A grey literature Internet search was also performed via Google, the World Health Organization, and CareSearch. Twenty-five articles relevant to the subject at hand were located and summarized. The Cochrane Systematic Reviews of Health Promotion and Public Health Interventions Handbook was consulted for structuring.

RESULT

Isolated bronchodilators can be effective in dyspnea management. However, combination with opioids leads to a 52% reduction of dyspnea, demonstrating efficacy of their combined use. There is a role for conventional inhalers not only in patients afflicted with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, but also in those where obstruction is reversible, and in cases of dyspnea not yet diagnosed.

CONCLUSION

Inhalers can be utilized as adjuvant therapy to opioids, to limit opioid use, augment responses to dyspnea, and/or minimize opioid side effects, especially in opioid-naïve patients. Correct administration can increase the efficacy of short-acting beta-agonists, long-acting beta-agonists, short- and long-acting anticholinergic agents, and inhaled corticosteroids, achieving reduction and alleviation of dyspnea.

Systematic Review of Pain in Clinical Practice Guidelines for Management of COPD: A Case for Including Chronic Pain?

Chronic pain is highly prevalent and more common in people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) than people of similar age/sex in the general population. This systematic review aimed to describe how frequently and in which contexts pain is considered in the clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) for the broad management of COPD. Databases (Medline, Scopus, CiNAHL, EMbase, and clinical guideline) and websites were searched to identify current versions of COPD CPGs published in any language since 2006. Data on the frequency, context, and specific recommendations or strategies for the assessment or management of pain were extracted, collated, and reported descriptively. Of the 41 CPGs (English n = 20) reviewed, 16 (39%) did not mention pain. Within the remaining 25 CPGs, pain was mentioned 67 times (ranging from 1 to 10 mentions in a single CPG). The most frequent contexts for mentioning pain were as a potential side effect of specific pharmacotherapies (22 mentions in 13 CPGs), as part of differential diagnosis (14 mentions in 10 CPGs), and end of life or palliative care management (7 mentions in 6 CPGs). In people with COPD, chronic pain is common; adversely impacts quality of life, mood, breathlessness, and participation in activities of daily living; and warrants consideration within CPGs for COPD.

Mirtazapine for chronic breathlessness? A review of mechanistic insights and therapeutic potential

INTRODUCTION

Chronic breathlessness is a common and distressing symptom of advanced disease with few effective treatments. Central nervous system mechanisms are important in respiratory sensation and control. Consequently, drugs which may modify processing and perception of afferent information in the brain may have a role. Antidepressants have been proposed; however, current evidence is limited. Of potentially suitable antidepressants, mirtazapine is an attractive option given its tolerability profile, low cost, and wide availability, along with additional potential benefits. Areas covered: The paper provides an overview of the physiology of breathlessness, with an emphasis on central mechanisms, particularly the role of fear circuits and the associated neurotransmitters. It provides a potential rationale for how mirtazapine may improve chronic breathlessness and quality of life in patients with advanced disease. The evidence was identified by a literature search performed in PubMed through to October 2018. Expert opinion: Currently, there is insufficient evidence to support the routine use of antidepressants for chronic breathlessness in advanced disease. Mirtazapine is a promising candidate to pursue, with definitive randomized controlled trials required to determine its efficacy and safety in this setting.