Swallowing the pill of adverse effects: A qualitative study of patients' and pharmacists' experiences and decision-making regarding the adverse effects of chronic pain medications

Educational needs and preferences of adult patients with acute pain: a mixed-methods systematic review

ABSTRACT

Many patients experience acute pain, which has been associated with numerous negative consequences. Pain education has been proposed as a strategy to improve acute pain management. However, studies report limited effects with educational interventions for acute pain in adults, which can be explained by the underuse of the person-centered approach. Thus, we aimed to systematically review and synthetize current evidence from quantitative, qualitative and mixed-methods studies describing patients' needs and preferences for acute pain education in adults. We searched original studies and gray literature in 7 databases, from January 1990 to October 2023. Methodological quality was assessed with the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. A total of 32 studies were included (n = 1847 patients), two-thirds of which were qualitative studies of high methodological quality. Most of the studies were conducted over the last 15 years in patients with postsurgical and posttraumatic pain, identified as White, with a low level of education. Patients expressed the greatest need for education when it came to what to expect in pain intensity and duration, as well how to take the medication and its associated adverse effects. The most frequently reported educational preferences were for in-person education while involving caregivers and to obtain information first from physicians, then by other professionals. This review has highlighted the needs and preferences to be considered in pain education interventions, which should be embedded in an approach cultivating communication and partnership with patients and their caregivers. The results still need to be confirmed with different patient populations.

Framing Chronic Pain in U.S. News Coverage of the Opioid Epidemic (2012-2022)

Chronic pain, pain persisting longer than six months, afflicts 20% of the U.S. population and is the leading cause of disability. To manage pain, many chronic pain patients (CPPs) and healthcare providers turn to opioids, prescription medications that block pain signals and offer relief. However, in light of the U.S.' ongoing opioid epidemic, CPPs without a history of opioid use disorder (OUD) are facing increased stigma when seeking opioid medication. Further, many have been forced to taper their therapeutic dose due to updated Centers for Disease Control and Prevention prescribing guidelines in 2016 and 2022, with a range of (adverse) outcomes. Though research has explored experiences of chronic pain and OUD independently, few studies have explored how media coverage of the opioid epidemic has shaped representations, and resulting stereotypes, of CPPs. Guided by framing theory, this content analysis examines sources' characterization of CPPs amidst a decade of U.S. news coverage of the opioid epidemic (N = 492). Findings identify four dominant news frames, including two novel frames termed culpability and strategy, and elements (i.e., characters, significant events) that comprise these frames. When discussed, CPPs were ascribed the identity of a drug-seeking addict 82% of the time. Collectively, this study provides insight as to how news media coverage of the opioid epidemic influence(d) public perceptions of chronic pain (patients). Findings offer theoretical and practical implications for media outlets, policymakers, CPPs and healthcare providers, as well as highlighting how use of opioids for pain management does not equate to abuse of opioids.

Opioid-related policy changes: Experiences and perspectives from people who use opioids to manage non-cancer chronic pain

INTRODUCTION

People who use prescription opioids to manage non-cancer chronic pain are particularly vulnerable to opioid-related policy change. This study aims to better understand what prescription opioids provide this population, what concerns they have in the context of new and changing opioid policies, such as the recently implemented prescription drug monitoring program in Victoria, Australia, their experiences of prescription opioid use, chronic pain and what they would like their healthcare to look like.

METHODS

Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 30 people who use opioids to manage chronic non-cancer pain.

RESULTS

Prescription opioids played an important role in supporting quality of life and mental health. However, experiences of stigma and lack of empathy from healthcare providers were common. Participants sought accurate information about their medications and expressed a desire for shared decision-making in healthcare.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION

Prescription opioids can play an important role in pain management as well as social and psychological functioning for people living with non-cancer chronic pain. Opioid-related policy changes to medication availability need to consider the potential impacts that reducing, limiting or discontinuing opioids may have on this population. Including the voices of people who use prescription opioids to manage non-cancer chronic pain in respectful, compassionate and meaningful ways.

'What price do you put on your health?': Medical cannabis, financial toxicity and patient perspectives on medication access in advanced cancer

INTRODUCTION

Following 2016 legislation permitting limited access to cannabis for research and medicinal purposes, the number of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) investigating the effectiveness of medicinal cannabis (MC) on symptom burden relief in cancer contexts has increased in Australia. This study aimed to understand the perceptions, hopes and concerns of people with advanced cancer regarding the future availability and regulation of MC in Australia.

METHODS

This qualitative study draws on semistructured interviews conducted between February 2019 and October 2020 in Brisbane, Australia, as part of an MC RCT substudy. Interviews were undertaken on 48 patients with advanced cancer in palliative care eligible to participate in an MC trial (n = 26 participated in an RCT; n = 2 participated in a pilot study; n = 20 declined). Interviews included a discussion of patients' decision-making regarding trial participation, concerns about MC and perceptions of future availability, including cost. Transcribed interviews were analysed inductively and abductively, informed by constructivist thematic analysis conventions.

RESULTS

Overall, participants supported making MC legally accessible as a prescription-only medication. Fear of financial toxicity, however, compromised this pathway. Steep posttrial costs of accessing MC prompted several people to decline trial participation, and others to predict-if found effective-that many would either access MC through alternative pathways or reduce their prescribed dosage to enable affordable access.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings suggest that-despite a relatively robust universal healthcare system-Australians are potentially vulnerable to and fearful of financial toxicity. Prevalent in the United States, financial toxicity occurs when disadvantaged cancer patients access necessary but expensive medications with lasting consequences: bankruptcy, ongoing anxiety and cancer worry. Interview transcripts indicate that financial fears-and the systems sustaining them-may pose a threat to RCT completion and to equitable access to legal MC. Such findings support calls for embedding qualitative substudies and community partnerships within RCTs, while also suggesting the importance of subsidisation to overcoming injustices.

PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION

A patient advisory committee informed RCT design. This qualitative substudy foregrounds patients' decision-making, perceptions and experiences.