Why is urine drug testing not used more often in practice?

Clinician Response to Aberrant Urine Drug Test Results of Patients Prescribed Opioid Therapy for Chronic Pain

OBJECTIVE

Urine drug testing (UDT) is recommended for patients who are prescribed opioid medications, but little is known about the various strategies clinicians use to respond to aberrant UDT results. We sought to examine changes in opioid prescribing and implementation of other risk reduction activities following an aberrant UDT.

METHODS

In a national cohort of Veterans Affairs patients with new initiations of opioid therapy through 2013, we identified a random sample of 100 patients who had aberrant positive UDTs (results positive for nonprescribed/illicit substance), 100 who had aberrant negative UDTs (results negative for prescribed opioid), and 100 who had expected UDT results. We examined medical record data for opioid prescribing changes and risk reduction strategies in the 12 months following UDT.

RESULTS

Following an aberrant UDT, 17.5% of clinicians documented planning to discontinue or change the opioid dose and 52.5% initiated another strategy to reduce opioid-related risk. In multivariate analyses, variables associated with a planned change in opioid prescription status were having an aberrant positive UDT (odds ratio [OR], 30.77; 95% confidence interval [CI], 5.92-160.10) and higher prescription opioid dose (OR, 1.01; 95% CI, 1.01-1.02). The only variable associated with implementation of other risk reduction activities was having an aberrant positive UDT (OR, 0.29; 95% CI, 0.16-0.55).

DISCUSSION

The majority of clinicians enacted some type of opioid prescribing or other change to reduce risk following an aberrant UDT, and the action depended on whether the result was an aberrant positive or aberrant negative UDT. Experimental studies are needed to develop and test strategies for managing aberrant UDT results.

Research methods and baseline findings of the improving the safety of opioid therapy (ISOT) cluster-randomized trial

There are adverse effects associated with long-term opioid therapy (LTOT) for chronic pain and clinicians infrequently adhere to opioid treatment guideline recommendations for reducing risk and mitigating opioid-related harms. The primary goal of the Improving the Safety of Opioid Therapy (ISOT) intervention is to reduce harms related to prescription opioids. Secondary aims focus on enhancing the clinician-patient relationship and not having a negative impact on pain-related outcomes (to be examined through a non-inferiority analysis). The study is a cluster-randomized trial and the 44 primary care providers (PCPs) who enrolled were randomized to receive either (1) a two-hour educational workshop about a patient-centered approach to opioid therapy or (2) the educational workshop plus a collaborative care intervention delivered by a nurse care manager (NCM). Patients were assigned to the same condition as their treating PCP. ISOT was based on the chronic care model and includes patient and provider activation, outcomes monitoring, and feedback to the PCP over 12 months. The NCM conducted a baseline assessment with intervention patients, tracked opioid-related behaviors and outcomes, and provided decision support to the opioid-prescribing clinician about opioid safety. Between June 2016 and October 2018, 293 veterans who were prescribed LTOT for chronic pain were enrolled, completed a baseline assessment, and assigned to a treatment condition. Participants were enrolled for 12 months. Masked assessments were conducted with participants at baseline, 6-months, and 12-months. This manuscript describes study rationale, research methods, and baseline findings.

Attributes, Attitudes, and Practices of Clinicians Concerned with Opioid Prescribing

Background

Many clinicians who prescribe opioids for chronic noncancer pain (CNCP) express concerns about opioid misuse, addiction, and physiological dependence. We evaluated the association between the degree of clinician concerns (highly vs less concerned), clinician attributes, other attitudes and beliefs, and opioid prescribing practices.

Methods

A web-based survey of clinicians at a multispecialty medical practice.

Results

Compared with less concerned clinicians, clinicians highly concerned with opioid misuse, addiction, and physiological dependence were more confident prescribing opioids (risk ratio [RR] = 1.34, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.08–1.67) but were more reluctant to do so (RR = 1.13, 95% CI = 1.03–1.25). They were more likely to report screening patients for substance use disorder (RR = 1.18, 95% CI = 1.01–1.37) and to discontinue prescribing opioids to a patient due to aberrant opioid use behaviors (RR = 1.30, 95% CI = 1.13–1.50). They were also less likely to prescribe benzodiazepines and opioids concurrently (RR = 0.40, 95% CI = 0.25–0.65). Highly concerned clinicians were more likely to work in clinics which engage in “best practices” for opioid prescribing requiring urine drug screening (RR = 4.65, 95% CI = 2.51–8.61), prescription monitoring program review (RR = 2.90, 95% CI = 1.84–4.56), controlled substance agreements (RR = 4.88, 95% CI = 2.64–9.03), and other practices. Controlling for clinician concern, prescribing practices were also associated with clinician confidence, reluctance, and satisfaction.

Conclusions

Highly concerned clinicians are more confident but more reluctant to prescribe opioids. Controlling for clinician concern, confidence in care and reluctance to prescribe opioids were associated with more conservative prescribing practices.

d-Ribose as a Contributor to Glycated Haemoglobin

Glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) is the most important marker of hyperglycaemia in diabetes mellitus. We show that d-ribose reacts with haemoglobin, thus yielding HbA1c. Using mass spectrometry, we detected glycation of haemoglobin with d-ribose produces 10 carboxylmethyllysines (CMLs). The first-order rate constant of fructosamine formation for d-ribose was approximately 60 times higher than that for d-glucose at the initial stage. Zucker Diabetic Fatty (ZDF) rat, a common model for type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), had high levels of d-ribose and HbA1c, accompanied by a decrease of transketolase (TK) in the liver. The administration of benfotiamine, an activator of TK, significantly decreased d-ribose followed by a decline in HbA1c. In clinical investigation, T2DM patients with high HbA1c had a high level of urine d-ribose, though the level of their urine d-glucose was low. That is, d-ribose contributes to HbA1c, which prompts future studies to further explore whether d-ribose plays a role in the pathophysiological mechanism of T2DM.

CDC Guideline for Prescribing Opioids for Chronic Pain--United States, 2016

IMPORTANCE

Primary care clinicians find managing chronic pain challenging. Evidence of long-term efficacy of opioids for chronic pain is limited. Opioid use is associated with serious risks, including opioid use disorder and overdose.

OBJECTIVE

To provide recommendations about opioid prescribing for primary care clinicians treating adult patients with chronic pain outside of active cancer treatment, palliative care, and end-of-life care.

PROCESS

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) updated a 2014 systematic review on effectiveness and risks of opioids and conducted a supplemental review on benefits and harms, values and preferences, and costs. CDC used the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) framework to assess evidence type and determine the recommendation category.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

Evidence consisted of observational studies or randomized clinical trials with notable limitations, characterized as low quality using GRADE methodology. Meta-analysis was not attempted due to the limited number of studies, variability in study designs and clinical heterogeneity, and methodological shortcomings of studies. No study evaluated long-term (≥1 year) benefit of opioids for chronic pain. Opioids were associated with increased risks, including opioid use disorder, overdose, and death, with dose-dependent effects.

RECOMMENDATIONS

There are 12 recommendations. Of primary importance, nonopioid therapy is preferred for treatment of chronic pain. Opioids should be used only when benefits for pain and function are expected to outweigh risks. Before starting opioids, clinicians should establish treatment goals with patients and consider how opioids will be discontinued if benefits do not outweigh risks. When opioids are used, clinicians should prescribe the lowest effective dosage, carefully reassess benefits and risks when considering increasing dosage to 50 morphine milligram equivalents or more per day, and avoid concurrent opioids and benzodiazepines whenever possible. Clinicians should evaluate benefits and harms of continued opioid therapy with patients every 3 months or more frequently and review prescription drug monitoring program data, when available, for high-risk combinations or dosages. For patients with opioid use disorder, clinicians should offer or arrange evidence-based treatment, such as medication-assisted treatment with buprenorphine or methadone.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

The guideline is intended to improve communication about benefits and risks of opioids for chronic pain, improve safety and effectiveness of pain treatment, and reduce risks associated with long-term opioid therapy.

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.

Chronic opioid therapy risk reduction initiative: impact on urine drug testing rates and results

BACKGROUND

In response to epidemic levels of prescription opioid overdose, abuse, and diversion, routine urine drug tests (UDTs) are recommended for patients receiving chronic opioid therapy (COT) for chronic pain. However, UDT ordering for COT patients is inconsistent in primary care, and little is known about how to increase UDT ordering or the impact of increased testing on rates of aberrant results.

OBJECTIVE

To compare rates and results of UDTs for COT patients before versus after implementation of an opioid risk reduction initiative in a large healthcare system.

DESIGN

Pre-post observational study.

PATIENTS

Group Health patients on COT October 2008-September 2009 (N = 4,821), October 2009-September 2010 (N = 5,081), and October 2010-September 2011 (N = 5,498).

INTERVENTION

Multi-faceted opioid risk reduction initiative.

MAIN MEASURES

Annual rates of UDTs and UDT results.

KEY RESULTS

Half of COT patients received at least one UDT in the year after the initiative was implemented, compared to only 7 % 2 years prior. The adjusted odds of COT patients having at least one UDT in the first year of the opioid initiative were almost 16 times (adjusted OR = 15.79; 95 % CI: 13.96-17.87) those 2 years prior. The annual rate of UDT detection of marijuana and illicit drugs did not change (12.6 % after initiative implementation), and largely reflected marijuana use (detected in 11.1 % of all UDTs in the year after initiative implementation). In the year after initiative implementation, 10.7 % of UDTs were negative for opioids.

CONCLUSIONS

The initiative appeared to dramatically increase urine drug testing of COT patients in the healthcare system without impacting rates of aberrant results. The large majority of aberrant results reflected marijuana use or absence of opioids in the urine. The utility of increased urine drug testing for COT patient safety and prevention of diversion remains uncertain.

Utilization management in toxicology

Recent upward trends in the prevalence of abuse of prescription drugs and illicit substances have resulted in increased demands for toxicology testing to support the emergency department and drug treatment in pain management programs. This review will discuss the challenges faced by clinical laboratories to manage the utilization of toxicology tests, particularly those ordered in managing poisoned patients in the emergency department and chronic pain patients on opioid therapy. Optimal utilization of toxicology tests to support the emergency department relies on selecting the appropriate tests for the patient, and the availability of the results in a timely fashion. Two tiers of toxicology testing systems with different requirements for turnaround time will be discussed. In patients with chronic pain urine drug testing, including screening and confirmation testing are used extensively in pain management to monitor patient compliance. A thorough understanding of the performance characteristics of the test methodologies and drug metabolism is a key to making a proper analytical and clinical interpretation of the test results and will contribute to effective utilization of these tests. In addition, the reimbursement system is an important factor in the decision making process for test selection utilization as significant costs can be incurred by both payers and patients. Collaboration, trust, and effective communication among clinicians, patients, and clinical laboratory professionals are essential for effective utilization of toxicology testing.