Do patients know they are on pain medication agreements? Results from a sample of high-risk patients on chronic opioid therapy

Impacts of social determinants of health on chronic opioid therapy for chronic non-cancer pain

Aim: We aimed to investigate the association between social determinants of health and chronic opioid therapy. Materials & methods: We conducted a retrospective analysis of electronic health records from five family medicine and internal medicine clinics in Oregon in 2020 and 2021. Our outcome variable was whether a patient was receiving chronic opioid therapy for chronic non-cancer pain. Our variables of interest included financial difficulty, insurance types, transportation barriers, currently married or living with a partner and organizations participation. Results: Our results showed that patients with financial difficulty were more likely to have chronic opioid therapy (OR: 2.69; 95% CI: 1.14, 6.33). Conclusion: Addressing patients' social determinants of health disadvantages is important for optimizing pain management.

Redesigning Opioid Pain Agreements to Promote Patient-Centered Care

This Viewpoint discusses opioid pain agreements to promote patient-centered care.

Primary care management of Long-Term opioid therapy

The United States underwent massive expansion in opioid prescribing from 1990-2010, followed by opioid stewardship initiatives and reduced prescribing. Opioids are no longer considered first-line therapy for most chronic pain conditions and clinicians should first seek alternatives in most circumstances. Patients who have been treated with opioids long-term should be managed differently, sometimes even continued on opioids due to physiologic changes wrought by long-term opioid therapy and documented risks of discontinuation. When providing long-term opioid therapy, clinicians should document opioid stewardship measures, including assessments, consents, medication reconciliation, and offering naloxone, along with the rationale to continue opioid therapy. Clinicians should screen regularly for opioid use disorder and arrange for or directly provide treatment. In particular, buprenorphine can be highly useful for co-morbid pain and opioid use disorder. Addressing other substance use disorders, as well as preventive health related to substance use, should be a priority in patients with opioid use disorder. Patient-centered practices, such as shared decision-making and attending to related facets of a patient's life that influence health outcomes, should be implemented at all points of care.Key messagesAlthough opioids are no longer considered first-line therapy for most chronic pain, management of patients already taking long-term opioid therapy must be individualised.Documentation of opioid stewardship measures can help to organise opioid prescribing and protect clinicians from regulatory scrutiny.Management of resultant opioid use disorder should include provision of medications, most often buprenorphine, and several additional screening and preventive measures.

Evaluating the Effects of Opioid Prescribing Policies on Patient Outcomes in a Safety-net Primary Care Clinic

BACKGROUND

After decades of liberal opioid prescribing, multiple efforts have been made to reduce reliance upon opioids in clinical care. Little is known about the effects of opioid prescribing policies on outcomes beyond opioid prescribing.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the combined effects of multiple opioid prescribing policies implemented in a safety-net primary care clinic in San Francisco, CA, in 2013-2014.

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study and conditional difference-in-differences analysis of nonrandomized clinic-level policies.

PATIENTS

273 patients prescribed opioids for chronic non-cancer pain in 2013 at either the treated (n=151) or control clinic (n=122) recruited and interviewed in 2017-2018.

INTERVENTIONS

Policies establishing standard protocols for dispensing opioid refills and conducting urine toxicology testing, and a new committee facilitating opioid treatment decisions for complex patient cases.

MAIN MEASURES

Opioid prescription (active prescription, mean dose in morphine milligram equivalents [MME]) from electronic medical charts, and heroin and opioid analgesics not prescribed to the patient (any use, use frequency) from a retrospective interview.

KEY RESULTS

The interventions were associated with a reduction in mean prescribed opioid dose in the first three post-policy years (year 1 conditional difference-in-differences estimate: -52.0 MME [95% confidence interval: -109.9, -10.6]; year 2: -106.2 MME [-195.0, -34.6]; year 3: -98.6 MME [-198.7, -23.9]; year 4: -72.6 MME [-160.4, 3.6]). Estimates suggest a possible positive association between the interventions and non-prescribed opioid analgesic use (year 3: 5.2 absolute percentage points [-0.1, 11.2]) and use frequency (year 3: 0.21 ordinal frequency scale points [0.00, 0.47]) in the third post-policy year.

CONCLUSIONS

Clinic-level opioid prescribing policies were associated with reduced dose, although the control clinic achieved similar reductions by the fourth post-policy year, and the policies may have been associated with increased non-prescribed opioid analgesic use. Clinicians should balance the urgency to reduce opioid prescribing with potential harms from rapid change.

Factors Associated with Pain Treatment Satisfaction Among Patients with Chronic Non-Cancer Pain and Substance Use

INTRODUCTION

A better understanding of pain treatment satisfaction in patients with chronic noncancer pain (CNCP) and substance use is needed, especially as opioid prescribing policies are changing. We sought to identify factors associated with pain treatment satisfaction in individuals with CNCP on recent opioid therapy and prior or active substance use.

METHODS

An exploratory cross-sectional analysis using baseline data from a cohort study of 300 adults with CNCP receiving >20 morphine milligram equivalents of opioids for ≥3 of the preceding 12 months and prior or active substance use. Participants completed interviews, clinical assessments, urine drug screening, and medical chart review.

RESULTS

Participants were predominantly middle-aged (mean age 57.5 years), Black (44%), and cisgender men (60%). One-third (33%) had high, 28% moderate, and 39% low pain treatment satisfaction. Post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), tobacco use, past-year opioid discontinuation, and higher average pain scores were associated with lower satisfaction. HIV and prescription cannabis use were associated with higher satisfaction.

CONCLUSIONS

The relationship between PTSD and tobacco use with lower satisfaction should be explored to augment pain outcomes. Higher satisfaction among individuals with HIV and prescription cannabis use presents potential research areas to guide CNCP management and reduce reliance on opioid therapies.

Opioid Treatment Agreements and Patient Accountability

Opioid treatment agreements are written agreements between physicians and patients enumerating the risks associated with opioid medications along with the requirements that patients must meet to receive these medications on an ongoing basis. The choice to use such agreements goes beyond the standard informed consent process and has a distinctive symbolic significance. Specifically, it suggests that physicians regard it as important to hold their patients accountable for adhering to various protocols regarding the use of their opioid medications. After laying out a taxonomy of accountability relations between physicians and patients, I argue that opioid treatment agreements are justifiable for physicians to use in their provision of care only if they improve patient or public health outcomes, which has yet to be demonstrated.

A National Survey on Patient Provider Agreements When Prescribing Opioids for Chronic Pain

BACKGROUND

Many national guidelines recommend the use of patient provider agreements (PPAs) when prescribing opioids for chronic pain. There are no standards for PPA content, readability, or administration processes.

OBJECTIVE

Conduct a national survey of providers who use PPAs to describe the process of administering them, assess views on their utility, and obtain PPAs to evaluate thematic content and readability.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional electronic survey and request for PPAs.

PARTICIPANTS

Registrants for the Safer/Competent Opioid Prescribing Education (SCOPE of Pain) Program between March 2013 and June 2017.

MAIN MEASURES

Respondents' reports on how PPAs are administered and views on their usefulness. A sample of PPAs assessed for themes and readability.

KEY RESULTS

Using a convenience sample of 62,530 SCOPE of Pain registrants, we obtained a cohort of 430 individuals from 43 states who use PPAs. The majority of respondents worked in primary care (64%) and pain (18%) specialties. Reviewing PPAs with patients was primarily done by prescribers (80%), and the average perceived time to administer PPAs was 13 min. Although 66% of respondents thought PPAs were "often" or "always" worth the effort, only 28% considered them "often" or "always" effective in reducing opioid misuse. The PPA reading burden surpassed recommended patient education standards, with only 2.5% at or below fifth-grade reading level. PPAs focused more on rules and consequences of patients' non-compliance than on a shared treatment plan.

CONCLUSIONS

Most respondents perceive patient provider agreements (PPAs) as time-consuming and minimally effective in reducing opioid misuse yet still view them as valuable. PPAs are written far above recommended reading levels and serve primarily to convey consequences of non-compliance. Because PPAs are recommended by national safer opioid prescribing guidelines as a risk mitigation strategy, it would be beneficial to develop a standard PPA and study its effectiveness.

Emergency Department Utilization Among People Living With HIV on Chronic Opioid Therapy

Chronic pain among people with HIV (PWH) is a driving factor of emergency department (ED) utilization, and it is often treated with chronic opioid therapy (COT). We conducted a cross-sectional analysis of a prospective observational cohort of PWH on COT at 2 hospital-based clinics to determine whether COT-specific factors are associated with ED utilization among PWH. The primary outcome was an ED visit within 12 months after study enrollment. We used stepwise logistic regression including age, gender, opioid duration, hepatitis C, depression, prior ED visits, and Charlson comorbidity index. Of 153 study participants, n = 69 (45%) had an ED visit; 25% of ED visits were pain-related. High dose opioids, benzodiazepine co-prescribing, and lack of opioid treatment agreements were not associated with ED utilization, but prior ED visits (p = 0.002), depression (p = 0.001) and higher Charlson comorbidity score (p = 0.003) were associated with ED utilization. COT-specific factors were not associated with increased ED utilization among PWH.

Pain Agreements and Time-to-Event Analysis of Substance Misuse in a Primary Care Chronic Pain Program

BACKGROUND

Types and correlates of pain medication agreement (PMA) violations in the primary care setting have not been analyzed.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis was completed to examine patient characteristics and correlates of PMA violations, a proxy for substance misuse, over a 15-year period in an outpatient General Medicine Pain Service within the Division of General Medicine and Clinical Epidemiology, Department of Medicine, School of Medicine, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. Patients who signed the PMA were managed for chronic pain from 2002 through 2017 (N = 1,210). The incidence of PMA violations was measured over a 15-year span. Substance misuse was defined a priori in the study as urine toxicology screen positive for illicit or nonprescribed controlled substances, patient engagement in prescription alteration, doctor-shopping, or diversion.

RESULTS

Most patients received a prescription for a controlled substance (77.4%). During enrollment, 488 (40.3%) patients had one or more violations of their PMA. One-third (33.4%) of pain service patients had a violation within 365 days of signing the agreement. Active tobacco smokers had double the incidence of agreement violation within the first 30 days of enrollment. Almost one-half (49.8%) of violations were due to inconsistent use of controlled substances. Patients with any prior DWI/DUI or drug-related offense had a significantly increased rate of substance misuse (P < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

PMA violations were common among a population of patients managed for chronic nonmalignant pain. Universal opioid prescribing precautions, including PMAs, require further investigation to assess their roles in mitigating the potential patient and societal harms associated with opioid prescribing.

Pain Management in Patients with Serious Illness

Managing pain in patients with serious illness can be complex. However, pain is often a prominent symptom in patients with malignant and nonmalignant serious illness and providers have to be adept at balancing effective pain management and safety. Clinicians should start with a standard pain assessment that lays important groundwork for developing a tailored multimodal approach to pain management. It is important to identify physical causes of pain and also existential causes. Opioids are not always appropriate but are still an important tool for managing pain. Basic opioid management and safe practices are essential when managing this population.

Beneficial opioid management strategies: A review of the evidence for the use of opioid treatment agreements

Background: The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and American Society of Interventional Pain Physicians (ASIPP) guidelines recommend opioid treatment agreements to reduce the misuse and abuse of opioids, but evidence of their effectiveness has not been well-established. This controversy has led to their varied use in primary care settings. The purpose of this review is to collect studies that assess the value of opioid treatment agreements and associated opioid misuse outcomes in patients with chronic non-cancer pain. Methods: This study used a modified preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) approach which is organized by five distinct elements or steps: beginning with a clearly formulated question, using the question to develop clear inclusion criteria to identify relevant studies, using an approach to appraise the studies or a subset of the studies, summarizing the evidence using an explicit methodology, and interpreting the findings of the review. Results: Of 283 articles identified, six eligible studies were evaluated and assessed for quality. The study design, setting, and participants varied across the studies evaluated, and the methods of measuring primary and secondary outcomes were also diverse across all studies. One study was a randomized clinical trial (RCT), four studies were retrospective cohort studies (RCS), and one study was a prospective cohort study (PCS). The design, methods, and indication for misuse of these studies contributed to quality scores of very low for one study, low for four studies, and moderate for one study. Conclusion: This systematic review shows weak evidence to support the effectiveness of patient prescriber agreements in the reduction and mitigation of opioid misuse and abuse. Further research is needed to determine if these agreements are beneficial as an opioid management strategy.

Guidelines for Monitoring Patients Using Opioid Therapy

Opioid-related morbidity and mortality have increased to epidemic proportions over the past 20 years. Gynecologists play an integral role in addressing this epidemic through management of patients with pain, specifically through prescribing and monitoring practices. Practical recommendations are provided for clinicians caring for noncancer patients on chronic opioid therapy. Recommendations are largely based on national consensus guidelines with a focus on frequency and content of follow-up, identification of high risk behaviors, and reassessment of goals of treatment.

A Before and After Analysis of Health Care Utilization by Patients Enrolled in Opioid Controlled Substance Agreements for Chronic Noncancer Pain

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the impact of opioid controlled substance agreements (CSAs) enrollment on health care utilization.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We retrospectively evaluated health care utilization changes among 772 patients receiving long-term opioid therapy for chronic noncancer pain enrolled in a CSA between July 1, 2015, and December 31, 2015. We ascertained patient characteristics and utilization 12 months before and after CSA enrollment. Decreased utilization was defined as a decrease of 1 or more hospitalizations or emergency department visits and 3 or more outpatient primary and specialty care visits. Multivariate modeling assessed demographic characteristics associated with utilization changes.

RESULTS

The 772 patients enrolled in an opioid CSA during the study period had a mean ± SD age of 63.5±14.9 years and were predominantly female, white, and married. The CSA enrollment was associated with decreased outpatient primary care visits (odds ratio [OR], 0.16; 95% CI, 0.14-0.19) and increased diagnostic radiology services (OR, 1.22; 95% CI, 1.02-1.47). After CSA enrollment, patients with greater comorbidity (Charlson Comorbidity Index score >3) were more likely to have reduced hospitalizations (adjusted OR, 2.8; 95% CI, 1.3-6.0; P=.008), reduced outpatient primary care visits (adjusted OR, 2.0; 95% CI, 1.2-3.2; P=.005), and reduced specialty care visits (adjusted OR, 2.0; 95% CI, 1.2-3.3; P=.006).

CONCLUSION

For patients receiving long-term opioid therapy for chronic noncancer pain, CSA enrollment is associated with reductions in primary care visits and increased radiologic service utilization. Patients with greater comorbidity were more likely to have reductions in hospitalizations, outpatient primary care visits, and outpatient specialty clinic visits after CSA enrollment. The observational nature of the study does not allow the conclusion that CSA implementation is the primary reason for these observed changes.

Controlled Substance Agreements for Opioids in a Primary Care Practice

BACKGROUND

Opioids are widely prescribed for chronic non cancer pain (CNCP). Controlled substance agreements (CSAs) are intended to increase adherence and mitigate risk with opioid prescribing. We evaluated the demographic characteristics of and opioid dosing for patients with CNCP enrolled in CSAs in a primary care practice.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective cohort study of 1066 patients enrolled in CSAs between May 9, 2013 and August 15, 2016 for CNCP in a Midwest primary care practice.

RESULTS

Patients were prescribed an average of 40.8 (SD ± 57.0) morphine milligram equivalents per day (MME/day), and 21.5% of patients were receiving ≥50 MME/day and 9.7% were receiving ≥90 MME/day. Patients who were younger in age (≥ 65 vs. < 65 years, P < 0.0001), male gender (P = 0.0001), and used tobacco (P = 0.0002) received significantly higher MME/day. Patients with more co-morbidities (Charlson Comorbidity Index, CCI) received higher MME/day (CCI > 3 vs. CCI ≤ 3, P = 0.03), and reported higher average pain (CCI > 3 mean 5.8 [SD ± 2.1] vs. CCI ≤ 3 mean 5.3 [SD ± 2.0], P = 0.0011). Patients on an identified tapering plan (6.9%) had higher MME/day than patients not on a tapering plan (P = 0.0002).

CONCLUSIONS

CSAs present an opportunity to engage patients taking higher doses of opioids in discussions about opioid safety, appropriate dosing and tapering. CSAs could be leveraged to develop a population health management approach to the care of patients with CNCP.

Using health information technology to improve adherence to opioid prescribing guidelines in primary care

Objective:

To evaluate the impact of a clinical dashboard for opioid analgesic management on opioid prescribing and adherence to opioid practice guidelines in primary care.

Methods:

A pre/postimplementation evaluation using electronic health record (EHR) data from patients receiving chronic opioid therapy (COT) between April 1, 2011 and March 31, 2013. Measures include annual proportions of COT patients who received urine drug testing, signed an opioid treatment agreement, had a documented assessment of pain-related functional status, and had at least 1 visit with a behavioral health provider.

Results:

Adherence to several opioid prescribing guidelines improved in the postimplementation year compared with the preimplementation year: (1) the proportions of COT patients with a signed opioid treatment agreement and urine drug testing increased from 49% to 63% and 66% to 86%, respectively. The proportion of COT patients with a documented assessment of functional status increased from 33% to 46% and those with a behavioral health visit increased from 24% to 28%. However, there was a small decline in the proportion of patients prescribed COT from 3.4% to 3.1%.

Discussion:

Implementation of an opioid dashboard led to increased adherence to certain opioid practice guidelines and a decline in COT. This may be attributable to more efficient team-based pain management facilitated by the dashboard and increased transparency of opioid prescription practices. Health Information Technology solutions such as clinical dashboards can increase adherence to practice guidelines.

The Medicinal Cannabis Treatment Agreement: Providing Information to Chronic Pain Patients Through a Written Document

AIM

Pain practitioners would seem to have an obligation to understand and inform their patients on key issues of the evidence base on cannabinoid therapeutics. One way to fulfill this obligation might be to borrow from concepts developed in the prescription of opioids: the use of a written agreement to describe and minimize risks. Regrettably, the widespread adoption of opioids was undertaken while harmful effects were minimized; obviously, no one wants to repeat this misstep.

OBJECTIVE

This article describes a method of educating patients in a manner analogous to other treatment agreements.

BACKGROUND

Surveys have demonstrated that pain is the most common indication for medical use of cannabis. As more individuals gain access to this botanical product through state ballot initiatives and legislative mandate, the pain specialist is likely to be confronted by patients either seeking such treatment where permitted, or otherwise inquiring about its potential benefits and harms, and alternative pharmaceuticals containing cannabinoids.

METHODS

PubMed searches were conducted using the following keywords: cannabis guidelines, harmful effects of cannabis, medical marijuana, medicinal cannabis, opioid cannabis interaction, cannabis dependence and cannabis abuse

RESULTS

: The authors selected individual tenets a medicinal cannabis patient would be asked to review and acknowledge via signature.

CONCLUSIONS

Undoubtedly, the knowledge base concerning risks will be an iterative process as we learn more about the long-term use of medicinal cannabis. But we should start the process now so that patients may be instructed about our current conception of what the use of medicinal cannabis entails.

Validation of a brief Opioid Compliance Checklist for patients with chronic pain

There has been a need for a brief assessment tool to determine compliance with use of prescribed opioids for pain. The purpose of this study was to develop and begin the validation of a brief and simple compliance checklist (Opioid Compliance Checklist [OCC]) for chronic pain patients prescribed long-term opioid therapy. A review of the literature of opioid therapy agreements led to a 12-item OCC that was repeatedly administered to 157 patients who were taking opioids for chronic pain and followed for 6 months. Validation of the OCC was conducted by identifying those patients exhibiting aberrant drug-related behavior as determined by any of the following: positive urine toxicology screen, a positive score on the Prescription Drug Use Questionnaire interview or Current Opioid Misuse Measure, and/or ratings by staff on the Addiction Behavior Checklist. Of the original 12 items, 5 OCC items appeared to best predict subsequent aberrant behaviors based on multivariate logistic regression analyses (cross-validated area under the receiver operating characteristic curve = .67). Although further testing is needed, these results suggest that the OCC is an easy-to-use, promising measure in monitoring opioid adherence among persons with chronic pain.

PERSPECTIVE

This study presents validation of a brief 5-item compliance checklist for use with chronic pain patients prescribed long-term opioid therapy. This measure asks patients about aberrant drug-related behavior over the past month, and any positive response indicates problems with adherence with opioids. Further cross-validation testing is needed.

It made my life a little easier: primary care providers' beliefs and attitudes about using opioid treatment agreements

OBJECTIVE

To understand primary care providers (PCPs)' experiences, beliefs, and attitudes about using opioid treatment agreements (OTAs) for patients with chronic pain.

DESIGN

Qualitative research study.

PARTICIPANTS

Twenty-eight internists and family medicine physicians at two health centers.

APPROACH

Semistructured telephone interviews, informed by the Integrative Model of Behavioral Prediction. Themes were analyzed using a Grounded Theory approach, and similarities and differences in themes were examined among OTA adopters, nonadopters, and selective adopters.

RESULTS

Participants were 64 percent female and 68 percent white, and practiced for a mean of 9.5 years. Adoption of OTAs varied: seven were adopters, five were nonadopters, and 16 were selective adopters. OTA adoption reflected PCPs' beliefs and attitudes in the following three thematic categories: 1) perceived effect of OTA use on the therapeutic alliance, 2) beliefs about the utility of OTAs for patients or providers, and 3) perception of patients' risk for opioid misuse. PCPs commonly believed that OTAs were useful for physician self-protection, but few believed that they prevent opioid misuse. Selective adopters expressed ambivalent beliefs and made decisions about OTA use for individual patients based on both observed data and a subjective sense of each patient's risk for misuse.

CONCLUSIONS

Substantial variability in PCP use of OTAs reflects differences in PCP beliefs and attitudes. Research to understand the impact of OTA use on providers, patients, and the therapeutic alliance is urgently needed to guide best practices.