Concerns and Help-Seeking Among Patients Using Opioids for Management of Chronic Noncancer Pain

The contribution of pain catastrophizing, depression and anxiety symptoms among patients with persistent pain and opioid misuse behaviours

BACKGROUND

Anxiety, depression and pain catastrophizing are independently associated with risk of opioid misuse in patients with persistent pain but their relationship to current opioid misuse, when considered together, is poorly understood. This study will assess the relative contribution of these modifiable, and distinct psychological constructs to current opioid misuse in patients with persistent pain.

METHODS

One hundred and twenty-seven patients referred to a specialized opioid management clinic for prescription opioid misuse within a tertiary pain service were recruited for this study. The Pain Catastrophizing Scale, Depression, Anxiety and Stress Scales and the Current Opioid Misuse Measure were administered pre-treatment. Pain severity and morphine equivalent dose based on independent registry data were also recorded.

RESULTS

Higher levels of pain catastrophizing, depression, and anxiety were significantly associated with higher current opioid misuse (r = .475, 0.599, and 0.516 respectively, p < .01). Pain severity was significantly associated with pain catastrophizing (r = .301, p < .01). Catastrophizing, depression, and anxiety explained an additional 11.56% of the variance (R2 change = 0.34, p < .01) over and above age, gender, pain severity and morphine equivalent dose. Depression was the only significant variable at Step 2 (β = 0.62, p < .01).

CONCLUSION

Findings show that in a sample of people with persistent pain referred for treatment for opioid misuse, depression contributes over and above that of anxiety and pain catastrophizing. Theoretical and clinical practice implications are presented.

Poppy Seeds Signal Limitations of Urine Drug Testing Protocols

Appropriate care for patients with chronic pain is complex, requiring a thoughtful and holistic approach to pharmacologic intervention, as well as appropriate monitoring when opioids are employed as part of a multimodal regimen. The urine drug test has become an expected standard when longterm opioids are prescribed, but it should be remembered that this test is not intended to be punitive. It is ordered to promote patient safety (Dowell et al., 2022). Recent literature and events surrounding the effect of poppy seeds on urine drug test results have drawn attention to the risks of misinterpreting this test (Bloch, 2023; Lewis et al., 2021; Reisfield et al., 2023; Temple, 2023). Misinterpretation of urine drug tests creates a potential for unfounded accusations from health care workers toward patients, thus, undermining therapeutic relationships and intensifying stigma. Such circumstances may also preclude chances to offer patients needed interventions. Therefore, a valuable opportunity exists for nurses to mitigate untoward consequences by developing a robust understanding of urine drug testing, destigmatizing chronic pain and opioid use, advocating for patients, and enacting change at both an individual and a systems-level.

Treatment-seeking behaviour among people with opioid use disorder in the high-income countries: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Objectives

To determine treatment seeking behaviour in those with opioid use disorder (OUD) in the high-income countries.

Methods

Five databases were searched in November 2019 for quantitative studies that reported OUD treatment seeking behaviour. Data analysis involved determining an overall pooled proportion estimate of treatment seeking behaviour for the two base groups, lifetime treatment and past 12-month or less treatment using the IVhet effect model. Subgroup analysis included heroin OUD, prescription OUD and general OUD. The sensitivity analysis included removal of outliers, separating adults and adolescents and the metaXL sensitivity analysis (studies are excluded if outside the pooled proportion confidence interval of the base case). Systematic review Prospero database registration number [CRD42020159531].

Results

There were 13 quantitative studies included in the systematic review, with all studies being from the United States of America (USA). IVhet models showed that 40% (95% CI: 23%, 58%) and 21% (95% CI: 16%, 26%) sought treatment in their lifetime and past 12 months respectively. Sub-group analysis found that lifetime treatment seeking for prescription OUD, 29% (95% CI: 27%, 31%), was less than for heroin plus combined OUD, 54% (95% CI: 26%, 82%). Most of the pooled results had high heterogeneity statistics except for results of lifetime treatment seeking for prescription OUD and past 12-month treatment seeking for prescription OUD.

Conclusion

All included studies in this meta-analysis were from the USA and indicate modest levels of treatment seeking for those with OUD. In particular, this review found that in the USA one in five people with OUD sought OUD treatment in the previous 12 months and two in five people with OUD sought OUD treatment in their lifetime. Further research is urgently required to explore the barriers and facilitators that can improve this low treatment seeking in those with OUD.

Quantifying prescribed high dose opioids in the community and risk of overdose

Background

Opioid prescribing for a range of health issues is increasing globally. The risk of fatal and non-fatal overdose is increased among people prescribed strong opioids: in high doses in the context of polypharmacy (the use of multiple medications at the same time), especially with other sedatives; and among people with multiple morbidities including cardiorespiratory, hepatic and renal conditions. This study described and quantified the prescribing of strong opioids, comorbidities and other overdose risk factors among those prescribed strong opioids, and factors associated with high/very high opioid dosage in a regional health authority in Scotland as part of a wider service improvement exercise.

Methods

Participating practices ran searches to identify patients prescribed strong opioids and their characteristics, polypharmacy, and other overdose risk factors. Data were anonymised before being analysed at practice and patient-level. Morphine Equivalent Doses were calculated for patients based on drug/dose information and classed as Low/Medium/High/Very High. Descriptive statistics were generated on the strong opioid patient population and overdose risk factors. The relationship between the prescribing of strong opioids and practice/patient-level factors was investigated using linear and logistic regression models.

Results

Eighty-five percent (46/54) of GP practices participated. 12.4% (42,382/341,240) of individuals in participating practices were prescribed opioids and, of these, one third (14,079/42,382) were prescribed strong opioids. The most common comorbidities and overdose risk factors among strong opioid recipients were pain (67.2%), cardiovascular disease (43.2%), and mental health problems (39.3%). There was a positive significant relationship between level of social deprivation among practice caseload and level of strong opioid prescribing (p < 0.001). People prescribed strong opioids tended to be older (mean 59.7 years) and female (8638, 61.4%) and, among a subset of patients, age, gender and opioid drug class were significantly associated with prescribing of High/Very High doses.

Conclusions

Our findings have identified a large population at potential risk of prescription opioid overdose. There is a need to explore pragmatic models of tailored interventions which may reduce the risk of overdose within this group and clinical practice may need to be tightened to minimise overdose risk for individuals prescribed high dose opioids.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12889-021-11162-4.

Brief Psychological Interventions for Reducing Prescription Opioid Use, Related Harm, and Pain Intensity in Patients With Chronic Pain: A Systematic Review and Assessment of Patient Interest

OBJECTIVES

Brief psychological interventions (BPIs) have demonstrated effectiveness in reducing substance use and related harm. No systematic review has examined their potential to reduce or prevent prescription opioid use or related harm, and/or pain intensity in opioid-using patients with chronic noncancer pain (CNCP). Recognizing the importance of patient preferences in evidence-based practice, we also sought to assess patient interest in BPIs.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A systematic review of studies published between 1980 and 2020 was conducted using 5 databases. Eligible treatment studies included patients ≥18 years old, with CNCP, and who were using prescription opioids. An adjunctive study independent of our review was also undertaken in 188 prescription opioid-using patients (77% female; Mage=49 y) diagnosed with CNCP. Patients completed pain-related questionnaires online and indicated if they would consider BPI treatment options.

RESULTS

The review identified 6 studies. Given the heterogeneity across studies, a meta-analysis was not conducted. A narrative review found that all of the 6 studies demonstrated some evidence for BPI effectiveness for reducing opioid use or related harms; these were assessed as having mostly low methodological quality. Mixed support for the effect on pain intensity was found in 1 study. Despite the inconclusive findings and heterogenous studies identified in the review, 92% of patients in our survey reported interest in receiving a BPI.

DISCUSSION

In combination, these findings highlight the inconsistency between patient demand and the availability of evidence for BPIs targeting opioid use, related harm, and pain intensity. Future work should examine the effectiveness of BPIs in higher quality studies.

Testing the boundaries: Self-medicated testosterone replacement and why it is practised

BACKGROUND

Testosterone is used therapeutically in medical settings. Non-prescribed testosterone use is typically illegal, described as 'enhancement' or 'doping', and considered a problem. However, research has found that some non-prescribed testosterone use may be therapeutic (i.e. self-medication). Little is known about testosterone self-medication. It has been noted among individuals who use image and performance enhancing drugs (IPEDs), but never systematically explored.

APPROACH

This paper describes the findings of a 4-year ethnographic study in online forums and social media groups frequented by people who use IPEDs. It focusses on 31 men who used enhancement doses of testosterone, but who described some of their testosterone use as 'testosterone replacement therapy' (TRT). In particular, it focuses on the 26 (84%) of these individuals who self-medicated TRT. Data was analysed thematically (using NVivo) in order to answer the question: 'how and why is testosterone self-medicated?'. Using Bacchi's (2016) problematization approach to policy analysis, this paper also asks, 'what happens to the 'problem' of non-prescribed testosterone use if such use is therapeutic?'.

FINDINGS

Self-medicated TRT was found to be very similar to TRT as practised in medical contexts. Self-medication was often practised because of an inability to access testosterone through health practitioners (who were either reluctant or unable to prescribe). However, some individuals were found to prefer self-medication because of price, ease of access, reliability of supply, and because health practitioners were perceived as lacking expertise regarding testosterone use.

CONCLUSION

By documenting the therapeutic use of testosterone outside of medical settings, this paper calls into question previous conceptualisations of all illicit testosterone use as 'abuse', and the utility of the repair/enhancement dichotomy as a foundation for discussions of drug use. It suggests that in some cases the problem may not be non-prescribed testosterone use per se, but policies that prevent access to medical treatment.

Acceptability of a primary care-based opioid and pain review service: a mixed-methods evaluation in England

BACKGROUND

Primary care opioid prescribing to treat chronic non-cancer pain (CNCP) has progressively increased despite a lack of evidence for long-term safety and effectiveness. Developing primary care interventions to reduce opioid dependence in patients with CNCP is a public health priority.

AIM

To report the acceptability of the South Gloucestershire pain and opioid review service for patients with CNCP, which aimed to help patients understand their relationship with prescribed opioids and support non-drug-based pain management strategies.

DESIGN AND SETTING

A mixed-methods evaluation was performed on the service, which was based in two GP practices in South Gloucestershire, England, and delivered by project workers.

METHOD

Descriptive data were collected on delivered-within-service and community-based interventions. Twenty-five semi-structured interviews (n = 18 patients, n = 7 service providers) explored experiences of the service.

RESULTS

The enrolment process, person-centred primary care-based delivery, and service content focused on psychological issues underlying CNCP were found to be acceptable to patients and service providers. Patients welcomed having time to discuss their pain, its management, and related psychological issues. Maintaining a long-term approach was desired as CNCP is a complex issue that takes time to address. GPs recommended that funding was needed to ensure they have dedicated time to support a similar service and to ensure that project workers received adequate clinical supervision.

CONCLUSION

This service model was acceptable and may be a useful means to manage patients with CNCP who develop opioid dependence after long-term use of opioids. A randomised controlled trial is needed to formally test the effectiveness of the service.

Withdrawal and Misuse Concerns of Consumers regarding Opioid Analgesic and Anxiolytic, Hypnotic and Sedative Medicines

Opioid analgesic (OA) and anxiolytic, hypnotic and sedative (AHS) medicines use raise community concerns about risks of dependence: dose escalation, unintentional misuse. Objectives: We aimed to identify common consumer OA and AHS information gaps and concerns that led to information seeking from a hotline. Methods: We conducted a retrospective, mixed-method observational study of consumers' OA and AHS-related calls to an Australian national medicines call center (September 2002-30 June 2010). We analyzed these medicines' call characteristics compared to their respective rest of calls (ROC) and thematically explored narratives concerning withdrawal and misuse. Results: Of 123,217 calls, 7,395 (6.0%) involved OA and 7,789 (6.2%) AHS, with consistency between call characteristics. While female middle-aged callers predominated, more males called for these medicines than their complementary ROC. Uncertainty about unresolved OA and AHS concerns led to help-seeking that was consistent over eight years. Main motivations were inadequate information (OA 44.5%; AHS 41.2%), seeking a second opinion (OA 24.2%; AHS 24.2%), worrying symptoms (OA 21.6%; AHS 23.1%), and conflicting information (OA 4.9%; AHS 5.1%). Callers focused on withdrawal and issues related to inadvertent overuse or deliberate misuse (OA 9.2% vs. non-OA ROC 2.9%; AHS 12.6% vs. non-AHS ROC 2.7%). Primary themes were similar for both cohorts: concern about harm or aiming to minimize harm by information seeking, requesting a strategy, or reassurance. Conclusions: Consumers have under-recognized perceptions of harm from OA and AHS use, particularly withdrawal and misuse. Resources based on real world consumer concerns can encourage open dialogue between patients and their prescribers.