Compliance with Opioid Treatment Guidelines for Chronic Non-Cancer Pain (CNCP) in Primary Care at a Veterans Affairs Medical Center (VAMC)

Prevalence of problematic pharmaceutical opioid use in patients with chronic non-cancer pain: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Chronic non-cancer pain (CNCP) is one of the most common causes of disability globally. Opioid prescribing to treat CNCP remains widespread, despite limited evidence of long-term clinical benefit and evidence of harm such as problematic pharmaceutical opioid use (POU) and overdose. The study aimed to measure the prevalence of POU in CNCP patients treated with opioid analgesics.

METHOD

A comprehensive systematic literature review and meta-analysis was undertaken using MEDLINE, Embase and PsycINFO databases from inception to 27 January 2021. We included studies from all settings with participants aged ≥ 12 with non-cancer pain of ≥ 3 months duration, treated with opioid analgesics. We excluded case-control studies, as they cannot be used to generate prevalence estimates. POU was defined using four categories: dependence and opioid use disorder (D&OUD), signs and symptoms of D&OUD (S&S), aberrant behaviour (AB) and at risk of D&OUD. We used a random-effects multi-level meta-analytical model. We evaluated inconsistency using the I2 statistic and explored heterogeneity using subgroup analyses and meta-regressions.

RESULTS

A total of 148 studies were included with > 4.3 million participants; 1% of studies were classified as high risk of bias. The pooled prevalence was 9.3% [95% confidence interval (CI) = 5.7-14.8%; I2 = 99.9%] for D&OUD, 29.6% (95% CI = 22.1-38.3%, I2 = 99.3%) for S&S and 22% (95% CI = 17.4-27.3%, I2 = 99.8%) for AB. The prevalence of those at risk of D&OUD was 12.4% (95% CI = 4.3-30.7%, I2 = 99.6%). Prevalence was affected by study setting, study design and diagnostic tool. Due to the high heterogeneity, the findings should be interpreted with caution.

CONCLUSIONS

Problematic pharmaceutical opioid use appears to be common in chronic pain patients treated with opioid analgesics, with nearly one in 10 experiencing dependence and opioid use disorder, one in three showing signs and symptoms of dependence and opioid use disorder and one in five showing aberrant behaviour.

Methods for pragmatic randomized clinical trials of pain therapies: IMMPACT statement

ABSTRACT

Pragmatic, randomized, controlled trials hold the potential to directly inform clinical decision making and health policy regarding the treatment of people experiencing pain. Pragmatic trials are designed to replicate or are embedded within routine clinical care and are increasingly valued to bridge the gap between trial research and clinical practice, especially in multidimensional conditions, such as pain and in nonpharmacological intervention research. To maximize the potential of pragmatic trials in pain research, the careful consideration of each methodological decision is required. Trials aligned with routine practice pose several challenges, such as determining and enrolling appropriate study participants, deciding on the appropriate level of flexibility in treatment delivery, integrating information on concomitant treatments and adherence, and choosing comparator conditions and outcome measures. Ensuring data quality in real-world clinical settings is another challenging goal. Furthermore, current trials in the field would benefit from analysis methods that allow for a differentiated understanding of effects across patient subgroups and improved reporting of methods and context, which is required to assess the generalizability of findings. At the same time, a range of novel methodological approaches provide opportunities for enhanced efficiency and relevance of pragmatic trials to stakeholders and clinical decision making. In this study, best-practice considerations for these and other concerns in pragmatic trials of pain treatments are offered and a number of promising solutions discussed. The basis of these recommendations was an Initiative on Methods, Measurement, and Pain Assessment in Clinical Trials (IMMPACT) meeting organized by the Analgesic, Anesthetic, and Addiction Clinical Trial Translations, Innovations, Opportunities, and Networks.

Are we ready for conformance checking in healthcare? Measuring adherence to clinical guidelines: A scoping systematic literature review

Clinical guidelines are recommendations of how to diagnose, treat, and manage a patient's medical condition. Health organizations must measure adherence to clinical guidelines to enhance the quality of service, but due to the complexity of the medical environment, there is no simple way of measuring adherence to clinical guidelines. This scoping review will systematically assess the criteria used to measure adherence to clinical guidelines in the past 20 years and explore the suitability of using process mining techniques. We will use a workflow protocol based on declarative and temporal constraints to translate the narrative text rules in the publications into a high-level process model. This approach will enable us to explore the main patterns and gaps identified when measuring adherence to clinical guidelines and how they affect the adoption of process mining techniques. The main contributions of this paper are a) a comprehensive analysis of the criteria used for measuring adherence, considering a diverse set of medical conditions b) a framework that will classify the level of complexity of the rules used to measure adherence based on declarative and temporal constraints c) list of key trends and gaps identified in the literature and how they relate to the use of process mining techniques in healthcare.

Prevalence of Problematic Use of Opioids in Patients with Chronic Noncancer Pain: A Systematic Review with Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Opioid prescription for chronic noncancer pain is associated with problematic use. We aimed to review and summarize the evidence on the prevalence of problematic use of opioids in adults with chronic noncancer pain and investigate whether the prevalence rates were changing over time.

DATABASES AND DATA TREATMENT

A systematic review of the literature was undertaken following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement. We systematically searched the literature in the electronic databases MEDLINE, SCOPUS, and Web of Science and studies with adult participants with chronic noncancer pain using opioids with indication of one or more of the following terms about problematic opioid use: abuse, misuse, addiction, dependence, problematic use, and aberrant behavior/use were eligible for data extraction. Meta-analysis was performed to estimate the pooled prevalence rates using a random-effects model, and subanalysis was conducted.

RESULTS

Our search identified a total of 784 potentially relevant studies. After a thorough evaluation, 19 papers, mostly from the United States, were included in our qualitative and quantitative synthesis. The majority of the data came from speciality pain clinics. The estimated prevalence of problematic use of opioids in adults with chronic noncancer pain was 36.3% (95% confidence interval: 27.4 to 45.2%; I²  = 99.64%). Problematic opioid use was mostly identified using the questionnaire method. Thirteen studies (68%) presented a low risk of bias.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study presents an alarming estimate regarding the prevalence of problematic use of opioids among patients with noncancer pain. These results deserve special attention from health care professionals and health authorities.

Validation of the Safer Opioid Prescribing Evaluation Tool (SOPET) for Assessing Adherence to the Centers for Disease Control Opioid Prescribing Guidelines

OBJECTIVE

In response to the opioid epidemic, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention issued guidelines (CDCG) in 2016 for the prescription of opioids for chronic pain. To facilitate research into whether CDCG implementation will lead to reductions in opioid prescribing and improved patient safety, we sought to validate a tool that quantifies CDCG adherence based on clinical documentation.

DESIGN

The Safe Opioid Prescribing Evaluation Tool (SOPET) was developed in four phases as part of a study to improve the implementation of the CDCG in the clinical setting. Four raters with varying levels of clinical experience and expertise were trained to use the SOPET and then used it to evaluate 21 baseline patient encounters. Intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) estimates and their 95% confident intervals (CIs) were calculated for the total SOPET score based on a mean-rating (k = 4), absolute-agreement, two-way random-effects model. For intrarater reliability, two-way mixed-effect models were used.

RESULTS

Inter-rater reliability was good, with an average-measures ICC of 0.82 (95% CI = 0.63-0.92). Intrarater reliability was excellent for the three raters, who were MDs, with average-measures ICCs as follows: 0.92 (95% CI = 0.81-0.97), 0.97 (95% CI = 0.92-0.99), 0.99 (95% CI = 0.99-0.99). However, the intrarater reliability for the non-MD rater was lower 0.69 (95% CI = 0.22-0.88).

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, the SOPET is useful for evaluating implementation of the CDCG in clinical documentation. It is an important first step in the design of future studies assessing whether adherence to the CDCG improves patient safety outcomes.

The Opioid-overdose Reduction Continuum of Care Approach (ORCCA): Evidence-based practices in the HEALing Communities Study

BACKGROUND

The number of opioid-involved overdose deaths in the United States remains a national crisis. The HEALing Communities Study (HCS) will test whether Communities That HEAL (CTH), a community-engaged intervention, can decrease opioid-involved deaths in intervention communities (n = 33), relative to wait-list communities (n = 34), from four states. The CTH intervention seeks to facilitate widespread implementation of three evidence-based practices (EBPs) with the potential to reduce opioid-involved overdose fatalities: overdose education and naloxone distribution (OEND), effective delivery of medication for opioid use disorder (MOUD), and safer opioid analgesic prescribing. A key challenge was delineating an EBP implementation approach useful for all HCS communities.

METHODS

A workgroup composed of EBP experts from HCS research sites used literature reviews and expert consensus to: 1) compile strategies and associated resources for implementing EBPs primarily targeting individuals 18 and older; and 2) determine allowable community flexibility in EBP implementation. The workgroup developed the Opioid-overdose Reduction Continuum of Care Approach (ORCCA) to organize EBP strategies and resources to facilitate EBP implementation.

CONCLUSIONS

The ORCCA includes required and recommended EBP strategies, priority populations, and community settings. Each EBP has a "menu" of strategies from which communities can select and implement with a minimum of five strategies required: one for OEND, three for MOUD, and one for prescription opioid safety. Identification and engagement of high-risk populations in OEND and MOUD is an ORCCArequirement. To ensure CTH has community-wide impact, implementation of at least one EBP strategy is required in healthcare, behavioral health, and criminal justice settings, with communities identifying particular organizations to engage in HCS-facilitated EBP implementation.

Prescription opioid misuse and its correlates among veterans and military in the United States: A systematic literature review

BACKGROUND

Prescription opioid misuse (POM) has become a critical public health issue in the United States (US), with veteran and military population being especially vulnerable to POM. However, limited behavioral interventions have been developed for veterans and military to reduce POM risk due to the lack of an adequate understanding of POM andrelated factors among veterans and military. The current study aims to review and synthesize empirical findings regarding POM and its correlates among US veterans and military.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review of 17 empirical studies (16 quantitative studies and one qualitative study) from 1980 to 2019 that reported POM statistics (e.g., prevalence) and examined correlates of POM in veterans and military.

RESULTS

The prevalence of POM in veterans and military ranged from 6.9%-77.9% varying by study samples, individual POM behaviors, and recalled time periods. Several factors were identified to be associated with POM in veterans and military. These factors included socio-demographic factors (age, race/ethnicity, education, relationship status, and military status), pain-related factors (pain symptoms, severity, interference, and cognitions), other physical factors (e.g., common illness), opioid-medication-related factors (receipt of opioid medications and quantity of opioid medications), behavioral factors (substance use disorder, alcohol use, cigarette use, and other prescription drug use), and psychological factors (psychiatric symptoms and cognitive factors).

CONCLUSIONS

POM was prevalent in veterans and military and could be potentially influenced by multiple psycho-behavioral factors. Future research guided by a theoretical framework is warranted to examine psycho-behavioral influences on POM and their mechanisms and to inform effective psychosocial POM interventions in veterans and military.

Examining the Effect of a Whole Health Primary Care Pain Education and Opioid Monitoring Program on Implementation of VA/DoD-Recommended Guidelines for Long-term Opioid Therapy in a Primary Care Chronic Pain Population

OBJECTIVE

To describe the core elements of a Whole Health Primary Care Pain Education and Opioid Monitoring Program (PC-POP) and examine its effectiveness at increasing adherence to six of the Veteran Affairs/Department of Defense (VA/DoD) recommended guidelines for long-term opioid therapy (LOT) among chronic noncancer patients seen in primary care (i.e., urine drug screens [UDS], prescription drug monitoring program [PDMP] queries, informed consent, naloxone education/prescriptions, morphine equivalent daily dose [MEDD], and referrals to nonpharmacological pain interventions).

DESIGN/METHODS

A within-subjects comparison of outcomes was conducted between pre- and post-PC-POP enrollees (N = 25), as was a a between-subjects comparison to a comparison group (N = 25) utilizing a six-month range post-index date of 10/1/2018 (i.e., between-subjects comparison at Time 2).

SUBJECTS

A convenience sample of adult veterans with chronic noncancer pain receiving opioid therapy consecutively for the past three months in primary care.

RESULTS

Results showed increased concordance with VA/DoD guidelines among those enrolled in the PC-POP, characterized by increased documentation of urine drug screens, prescription drug monitoring program queries, informed consent, naloxone education/prescriptions, and a decrease in MEDD among patients enrolled in the PC-POP.

CONCLUSIONS

The PC-POP shows promise for increasing guideline-concordant care for providers working in primary care.

A Survey of Glaucoma Surgery Practice Patterns in the Veterans Health Administration

INTRODUCTION

Glaucoma surgical practice patterns are not well described in the United States (US). This study aims to evaluate the indications for and potential barriers to glaucoma surgery in the Veterans Health Administration (VHA).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

An anonymous 10-question survey using REDCap (Nashville, TN) software was sent by mail (with web link) and email to ophthalmology chiefs at the 86 academically affiliated Veterans Affairs Medical Centers (VAMCs). Academic-affiliated VAMCs were selected because of their patient range and role in ophthalmic education. Non-responders received two reminder e-mails and two phone calls; the survey was closed after 6 weeks. The data were analyzed using descriptive statistics.

RESULTS

The response rate was 45% (39/86). Most respondents (92%) worked in an integrated eye clinic with both ophthalmology and optometry services. Almost half of the respondents (49%; 19/39) believed that laser trabeculoplasty (LTP) was an option for initial glaucoma therapy. Noncompliance was a commonly reported indication for LTP (95%), tube shunt procedures (65%), micro-invasive glaucoma surgery (59%), and trabeculectomy (48.7%). One third of the respondents believed that there were delays in glaucoma care. The respondents noted that significant barriers in access to surgery included lack of transportation (69%), scheduling challenges (62%), and delayed referral (62%).

CONCLUSION

This survey of glaucoma surgery practice patterns highlights the growing role of LTP and suggests that non-compliance and access remain significant barriers to glaucoma surgical care within the VHA.

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.

Utilizing a Faculty Development Program to Promote Safer Opioid Prescribing for Chronic Pain in Internal Medicine Resident Practices

OBJECTIVE

To implement a skills-based faculty development program (FDP) to improve Internal Medicine faculty's clinical skills and resident teaching about safe opioid prescribing.

DESIGN

An FDP for Internal Medicine attendings that included a one-hour didactic presentation followed immediately by an Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE) that focused on assessing and managing opioid misuse risk, opioid treatment outcomes (benefits and harms), and aberrant opioid use behaviors. The evaluation compared pre- and three-months-post-FDP changes in faculty's safe opioid prescribing knowledge, attitudes, confidence (clinical and teaching), and self-reported resident teaching.

RESULTS

The 25 Internal Medicine faculty participants had a mean of 13 years in clinical practice, including 10 years precepting residents. During the three months post-FDP, faculty treated a mean of 22 patients with chronic pain on long-term opioids and precepted a mean of seven residents caring for patients on long-term opioids. At three months post-FDP, there were significant improvements in correct responses to knowledge questions (68% to 79% P = 0.008), "high-level" confidence in safer opioid prescribing clinical practice (43.5% to 82.6% P = 0.007) and resident teaching (45.8% to 83.3%, P = 0.007), and improvements in alignment of desired attitudes toward safer opioid prescribing. There were nonsignificant increases in self-reported safe opioid prescribing resident teaching.

CONCLUSIONS

A skills-based faculty development program that includes a lecture followed by an OSCE can improve Internal Medicine faculty safe opioid prescribing knowledge, attitudes, and clinical and teaching confidence. Improving resident teaching may require additional training in safe opioid prescribing teaching skills.

Effective Chronic Pain Management and Responsible Opioid Prescribing: Aligning a Resident Workshop to a Protocol for Improved Outcomes

INTRODUCTION

Effective chronic pain management is a core competency of internal medicine. Opioid use in the United States, both therapeutic and nonmedical in origin, has dramatically increased, as has the number of deaths due to opioid overdose. Despite this, formal training in pain management and responsible opioid prescribing is lacking for internal medicine residents.

METHODS

Our educational workshop for PGY 1-PGY 3 internal medicine residents was designed to provide a functional knowledge base and improve motivation to change behaviors in chronic pain management and responsible opioid prescribing. A secondary aim was to align our intervention with our new clinic opioid-prescribing protocol with the goal of increasing the adoption of opioid risk-reduction strategies in our resident clinic, specifically, use of urine drug screening (UDS). We collected data using pre- and postsession knowledge and motivation to change questionnaires as well as pre- and postintervention data regarding UDS in our ambulatory clinic.

RESULTS

Sixty-three residents participated in a workshop session. Based on pre- to posttest results, medical knowledge of principles of responsible opioid prescribing increased overall (p = .01). Most residents reported high motivation to change behaviors around management of chronic pain and opioid prescribing. There was also a significant postintervention ordering of UDS in patients on long-term opioid therapy.

DISCUSSION

Our workshop resulted in a short-term improvement in knowledge of principles of responsible opioid prescribing, a significant motivation to change behaviors, and increased adoption of opioid risk-reduction strategies in our resident clinic.

Improving Adherence to Long-term Opioid Therapy Guidelines to Reduce Opioid Misuse in Primary Care: A Cluster-Randomized Clinical Trial

IMPORTANCE

Prescription opioid misuse is a national crisis. Few interventions have improved adherence to opioid-prescribing guidelines.

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether a multicomponent intervention, Transforming Opioid Prescribing in Primary Care (TOPCARE; http://mytopcare.org/), improves guideline adherence while decreasing opioid misuse risk.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

Cluster-randomized clinical trial among 53 primary care clinicians (PCCs) and their 985 patients receiving long-term opioid therapy for pain. The study was conducted from January 2014 to March 2016 in 4 safety-net primary care practices.

INTERVENTIONS

Intervention PCCs received nurse care management, an electronic registry, 1-on-1 academic detailing, and electronic decision tools for safe opioid prescribing. Control PCCs received electronic decision tools only.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Primary outcomes included documentation of guideline-concordant care (both a patient-PCC agreement in the electronic health record and at least 1 urine drug test [UDT]) over 12 months and 2 or more early opioid refills. Secondary outcomes included opioid dose reduction (ie, 10% decrease in morphine-equivalent daily dose [MEDD] at trial end) and opioid treatment discontinuation. Adjusted outcomes controlled for differing baseline patient characteristics: substance use diagnosis, mental health diagnoses, and language.

RESULTS

Of the 985 participating patients, 519 were men, and 466 were women (mean [SD] patient age, 54.7 [11.5] years). Patients received a mean (SD) MEDD of 57.8 (78.5) mg. At 1 year, intervention patients were more likely than controls to receive guideline-concordant care (65.9% vs 37.8%; P < .001; adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 6.0; 95% CI, 3.6-10.2), to have a patient-PCC agreement (of the 376 without an agreement at baseline, 53.8% vs 6.0%; P < .001; AOR, 11.9; 95% CI, 4.4-32.2), and to undergo at least 1 UDT (74.6% vs 57.9%; P < .001; AOR, 3.0; 95% CI, 1.8-5.0). There was no difference in odds of early refill receipt between groups (20.7% vs 20.1%; AOR, 1.1; 95% CI, 0.7-1.8). Intervention patients were more likely than controls to have either a 10% dose reduction or opioid treatment discontinuation (AOR, 1.6; 95% CI, 1.3-2.1; P < .001). In adjusted analyses, intervention patients had a mean (SE) MEDD 6.8 (1.6) mg lower than controls (P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

A multicomponent intervention improved guideline-concordant care but did not decrease early opioid refills.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01909076.

What do providers want to know about opioid prescribing? A qualitative analysis of their questions

BACKGROUND

In 2012, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) responded to the opioid crisis with a Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy, requiring manufacturers of extended-release/long-acting opioids to fund continuing medical education based on the "FDA Blueprint for Prescriber Education." Topics in the Blueprint are "Assessing Patients for Treatment," "Initiating Therapy, Modifying Dosing, and Discontinuing Use," "Managing Therapy," "Counseling Patients and Caregivers about Safe Use," "General Drug Information," and "Specific Drug Information." Based on the FDA Blueprint, Boston University School of Medicine's "Safe and Competent Opioid Prescribing Education" (SCOPE of Pain) offers live trainings for physicians and other prescribers. During trainings, participants submit written questions about the curriculum and/or their clinical experiences.

METHODS

The objective was to compare themes that arose from questions asked by SCOPE of Pain participants with content of the FDA Blueprint in order to evaluate how well the Blueprint answers prescribers' concerns. The authors conducted qualitative analyses of all 1309 questions submitted by participants in 29 trainings across 16 states from May 2013 to May 2015, using conventional content analysis to code the questions. Themes that emerged from participants' questions were then compared with the Blueprint.

RESULTS

Most themes fell into the topic categories of the Blueprint. Five main themes diverged: Participants sought information on (1) safe alternatives to opioids, (2) overcoming barriers to safe opioid prescribing, (3) government regulations of opioid prescribing, (4) the role of marijuana in opioid prescribing, and (5) maintaining a positive provider-patient relationship while prescribing opioids.

CONCLUSIONS

In addition to learning the mechanics of safe opioid prescribing, providers want to understand government regulations and effective patient communication skills. Aware of the limitations of opioids in managing chronic pain, providers seek advice on alternatives therapies. Future updates to the FDA Blueprint and other educational guidelines on opioid prescribing should address providers' additional questions.

Association of provider opioid prescribing practices and the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services hierarchical condition category score: A retrospective examination of correlation between the volume of provider-prescribed opioid medications and provider panel complexity

OBJECTIVE

Opioids are being prescribed at increasing rates in primary care practices, and among individual providers there is significant variability in opioid prescribing. Primary care practices also vary significantly in complexity of their patients, ranging from healthy patients to those with multiple comorbidities. Our objective was to examine individual primary care providers for an association between their opioid prescribing and the complexity/risk of their panel of patients (a panel of patients is a group of patients whose medical care is the responsibility of a specific healthcare provider or care team).

METHODS

We retrospectively examined 12 months of opioid prescription data from a primary care practice. We obtained counts of opioids prescribed by providers in the Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota primary care practice. For patients paneled (assigned) to family medicine and internal medicine, we used the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services hierarchical condition category patient risk score as a measure of patient complexity. After adjusting the opioid counts for panel patient count (to get opioid counts per patient), we used linear regression analysis to determine the correlation between the hierarchical condition category risk and the amount of opioid prescribed by individual providers.

RESULTS

Among our combined 103 primary care providers, opioid unit counts prescribed per patient were highly correlated with the providers' hierarchical condition category panel risk score (r² = 0.54). After excluding three outliers, r² was 0.74. With and without the outliers, the correlation was very significant (p < 0.0001). Subgroup analysis of panels with hierarchical condition category ⩽ 0.45 showed no correlation of opioid prescribing volume with hierarchical condition category (r² < 0.02; p = 0.32). Provider panels with hierarchical condition category > 0.45 showed significant correlation with hierarchical condition category (r² = 0.26; p = 0.001).

CONCLUSION

When examining differences in primary care providers' opioid prescribing practices, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services endorsed risk score (the hierarchical condition category score) can help adjust for population differences of a provider's patients.

SCOPE of Pain: An Evaluation of an Opioid Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy Continuing Education Program

OBJECTIVE

Due to the high prevalence of prescription opioid misuse, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) mandated a Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy (REMS) requiring manufacturers of extended-release/long-acting (ER/LA) opioid analgesics to fund continuing education based on a FDA Blueprint. This article describes the Safe and Competent Opioid Prescribing Education (SCOPE of Pain) program, an ER/LA opioid analgesic REMS program, and its impact on clinician knowledge, confidence, attitudes, and self-reported clinical practice.

METHOD

Participants of the 3-h SCOPE of Pain training completed pre-, immediate post- and 2-month post-assessments.

SUBJECTS

The primary target group (n = 2,850), and a subset (n = 476) who completed a 2-month post-assessment, consisted of clinicians licensed to prescribe ER/LA opioid analgesics, who care for patients with chronic pain and who completed the 3-h training between February 28, 2013 and June 13, 2014.

RESULTS

Immediately post-program, there was a significant increase in correct responses to knowledge questions (60% to 84%, P ≤ 0.02) and 87% of participants planned to make practice changes. At 2-months post-program, there continued to be a significant increase in correct responses to knowledge questions (60% to 69%, P ≤ 0.03) and 67% reported increased confidence in applying safe opioid prescribing care and 86% reported implementing practice changes. There was also an improvement in alignment of desired attitudes toward safe opioid prescribing.

CONCLUSIONS

The SCOPE of Pain program improved knowledge, attitudes, confidence, and self-reported clinical practice in safe opioid prescribing. This national REMS program holds potential to improve the safe use of opioids for the treatment of chronic pain.

Improving Residents' Safe Opioid Prescribing for Chronic Pain Using an Objective Structured Clinical Examination

BACKGROUND

Internal medicine residents care for a sizable number of patients with chronic pain. Programs need educational strategies to promote safe opioid prescribing.

OBJECTIVE

To describe a safe opioid prescribing education program utilizing an objective structured clinical examination (OSCE) and report the resulting impact on residents' knowledge, confidence, and self-reported practices.

METHODS

Using a quasi-experimental design, 39 internal medicine residents from an urban academic medical center were assigned to 1 of 4 groups: 1-hour lecture only, lecture followed by immediate OSCE, lecture followed by 4-month delayed OSCE, and control. Safe opioid prescribing knowledge, confidence, and self-reported practices were assessed at baseline and at 8 months.

RESULTS

At 8 months, knowledge, confidence, and self-reported practices improved in the control and in all 3 intervention groups. The immediate OSCE group had the greatest improvements in combined confidence scores within group (0.74, P = .01) compared to controls (0.52, P = .05), using a 5-point scale. This group also had the greatest improvement in self-reported practice changes (1.04, P = .04), while other groups showed nonsignificant improvements-delayed OSCE (0.43, P = .44), lecture only (0.66, P = .24), and control (0.43, P = .19).

CONCLUSIONS

Safe opioid prescribing education that includes a lecture immediately followed by an OSCE had an impact on residents' confidence and self-reported practices greater than those for delayed OSCE or lecture only groups. There was no difference in knowledge improvement among the groups. Lecture followed by an OSCE was highly regarded by residents, but required additional resources.

Endogenous opiates and behavior: 2014

This paper is the thirty-seventh consecutive installment of the annual review of research concerning the endogenous opioid system. It summarizes papers published during 2014 that studied the behavioral effects of molecular, pharmacological and genetic manipulation of opioid peptides, opioid receptors, opioid agonists and opioid antagonists. The particular topics that continue to be covered include the molecular-biochemical effects and neurochemical localization studies of endogenous opioids and their receptors related to behavior (endogenous opioids and receptors), and the roles of these opioid peptides and receptors in pain and analgesia (pain and analgesia); stress and social status (human studies); tolerance and dependence (opioid mediation of other analgesic responses); learning and memory (stress and social status); eating and drinking (stress-induced analgesia); alcohol and drugs of abuse (emotional responses in opioid-mediated behaviors); sexual activity and hormones, pregnancy, development and endocrinology (opioid involvement in stress response regulation); mental illness and mood (tolerance and dependence); seizures and neurologic disorders (learning and memory); electrical-related activity and neurophysiology (opiates and conditioned place preferences (CPP)); general activity and locomotion (eating and drinking); gastrointestinal, renal and hepatic functions (alcohol and drugs of abuse); cardiovascular responses (opiates and ethanol); respiration and thermoregulation (opiates and THC); and immunological responses (opiates and stimulants). This paper is the thirty-seventh consecutive installment of the annual review of research concerning the endogenous opioid system. It summarizes papers published during 2014 that studied the behavioral effects of molecular, pharmacological and genetic manipulation of opioid peptides, opioid receptors, opioid agonists and opioid antagonists. The particular topics that continue to be covered include the molecular-biochemical effects and neurochemical localization studies of endogenous opioids and their receptors related to behavior (endogenous opioids and receptors), and the roles of these opioid peptides and receptors in pain and analgesia (pain and analgesia); stress and social status (human studies); tolerance and dependence (opioid mediation of other analgesic responses); learning and memory (stress and social status); eating and drinking (stress-induced analgesia); alcohol and drugs of abuse (emotional responses in opioid-mediated behaviors); sexual activity and hormones, pregnancy, development and endocrinology (opioid involvement in stress response regulation); mental illness and mood (tolerance and dependence); seizures and neurologic disorders (learning and memory); electrical-related activity and neurophysiology (opiates and conditioned place preferences (CPP)); general activity and locomotion (eating and drinking); gastrointestinal, renal and hepatic functions (alcohol and drugs of abuse); cardiovascular responses (opiates and ethanol); respiration and thermoregulation (opiates and THC); and immunological responses (opiates and stimulants).

Rates of opioid misuse, abuse, and addiction in chronic pain: a systematic review and data synthesis

Opioid use in chronic pain treatment is complex, as patients may derive both benefit and harm. Identification of individuals currently using opioids in a problematic way is important given the substantial recent increases in prescription rates and consequent increases in morbidity and mortality. The present review provides updated and expanded information regarding rates of problematic opioid use in chronic pain. Because previous reviews have indicated substantial variability in this literature, several steps were taken to enhance precision and utility. First, problematic use was coded using explicitly defined terms, referring to different patterns of use (ie, misuse, abuse, and addiction). Second, average prevalence rates were calculated and weighted by sample size and study quality. Third, the influence of differences in study methodology was examined. In total, data from 38 studies were included. Rates of problematic use were quite broad, ranging from <1% to 81% across studies. Across most calculations, rates of misuse averaged between 21% and 29% (range, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 13%-38%). Rates of addiction averaged between 8% and 12% (range, 95% CI: 3%-17%). Abuse was reported in only a single study. Only 1 difference emerged when study methods were examined, where rates of addiction were lower in studies that identified prevalence assessment as a primary, rather than secondary, objective. Although significant variability remains in this literature, this review provides guidance regarding possible average rates of opioid misuse and addiction and also highlights areas in need of further clarification.

Predictors of urine drug testing for patients with chronic pain: Results from a national cohort of U.S. veterans

BACKGROUND

Urine drug testing (UDT) is recommended for all patients who initiate chronic opioid therapy (COT) for the treatment of chronic pain; however, it is infrequently utilized. Some prior research has identified factors that may predict UDT, but studies have been limited. The purpose of this study is to examine the rate and predictors of UDT among a national sample of patients with chronic pain who had new initiations of COT.

METHODS

Administrative data were examined for all veterans receiving medical care at Department of Veterans Affairs medical facilities who had new initiations of chronic opioid therapy (COT) during fiscal year 2011.

RESULTS

Nineteen percent of patients who had new initiations of COT for chronic noncancer pain received UDT within 90 days of starting opioids. In adjusted analyses, patient-level factors that predicted increased likelihood of UDT included male gender (risk ratio [RR] = 1.23, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.02-1.49), Black race (RR = 1.20, 95% CI = 1.06-1.37), divorced/separated marital status (RR = 1.13, 95% CI = 1.02-1.25), higher pain intensity (RR = 1.03, 95% CI = 1.01-1.05), comorbid substance use disorder (RR = 1.42, 95% CI = 1.27-1.60), posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) (RR = 1.14, 95% CI = 1.01-1.29), bipolar disorder or schizophrenia (RR = 1.29, 95% CI = 1.08-1.53), having received UDT prior to initiating opioid therapy (RR = 1.43, 95% CI = 1.26-1.62), and a higher baseline opioid dose (RR = 1.38-1.81, 95% CIs = 1.20-1.58, 1.57-2.09). Age was also associated with UDT, in a nonlinear manner. Several factors were associated with lower likelihood of UDT, including living in a highly rural setting (RR = 0.62, 95% CI = 0.29-0.99), having a VA service-connected disability (RR = 0.85-0.89, 95% CIs = 0.75-0.97, 0.79-0.99), and having a nurse practitioner or physician assistant as one's primary care clinician (RR = 0.72, 95% CI = 0.61-0.85).

CONCLUSIONS

Urine drug testing was conducted with 19% of patients who had new initiations of COT. Factors that predicted UDT were multifaceted and included patient and clinician variables. Multidimensional system-level interventions may be needed to facilitate widespread implementation of UDT.

Are Physicians Safely Prescribing Opioids for Chronic Noncancer Pain? A Systematic Review of Current Evidence

BACKGROUND

With rising prescription of opioid medications for chronic noncancer pain (CNCP) in the past years, opioid abuse and overdose deaths have increased in parallel. To ensure adequate treatment outcomes and reduce the risks linked with the chronic use of opioids, practitioner's adherence to treatment guidelines is essential. This study summarizes published recommendations about the strategies to reduce the risks associated with the chronic use of opioids and evaluates the adherence of physicians to these recommendations.

METHOD

A systematic literature search was undertaken in May 2014 using major databases. Studies were included if they examined the adherence of practitioners with at least one form of opioid risk reduction strategy. Benchmark guidelines cited in these studies were also reviewed.

RESULTS

The search yielded 683 records, 14 of which were found to evaluate adherence of physicians to opioid risk reduction strategies. Nine benchmark guidelines were found. Almost all physicians consider opioid therapy only when other safer approaches have failed and do not prescribe opioids at doses greater than 200 mg/day of morphine equivalent. Unfortunately, less than 50% assess pain intensity using a pain scale; they often consider transdermal fentanyl safe for opioid-naïve patients and fail to discontinue opioids if they were ineffective in relieving patients' pain.

CONCLUSIONS

Substantial practice and knowledge gaps were identified, including the use of pain scales and prescription of transdermal fentanyl in opioid-naïve patients, which have important implications for patient's safety. Guidelines more practical to physicians' settings and further education of physicians are warranted.

What we know, and don't know, about the impact of state policy and systems-level interventions on prescription drug overdose

BACKGROUND

Drug overdose deaths have been rising since the early 1990s and is the leading cause of injury death in the United States. Overdose from prescription opioids constitutes a large proportion of this burden. State policy and systems-level interventions have the potential to impact prescription drug misuse and overdose.

METHODS

We searched the literature to identify evaluations of state policy or systems-level interventions using non-comparative, cross-sectional, before-after, time series, cohort, or comparison group designs or randomized/non-randomized trials. Eligible studies examined intervention effects on provider behavior, patient behavior, and health outcomes.

RESULTS

Overall study quality is low, with a limited number of time-series or experimental designs. Knowledge and prescribing practices were measured more often than health outcomes (e.g., overdoses). Limitations include lack of baseline data and comparison groups, inadequate statistical testing, small sample sizes, self-reported outcomes, and short-term follow-up. Strategies that reduce inappropriate prescribing and use of multiple providers and focus on overdose response, such as prescription drug monitoring programs, insurer strategies, pain clinic legislation, clinical guidelines, and naloxone distribution programs, are promising. Evidence of improved health outcomes, particularly from safe storage and disposal strategies and patient education, is weak.

CONCLUSIONS

While important efforts are underway to affect prescriber and patient behavior, data on state policy and systems-level interventions are limited and inconsistent. Improving the evidence base is a critical need so states, regulatory agencies, and organizations can make informed choices about policies and practices that will improve prescribing and use, while protecting patient health.

A partnered approach to opioid management, guideline concordant care and the stepped care model of pain management

BACKGROUND

Pain is the most common presenting problem in primary care. Opioid therapy (OT) for chronic pain has increased dramatically over the past decade, as have related negative outcomes. Despite the development and dissemination of policy and clinical practice guidelines for pain management and OT, adoption has been variable. The Veterans Health Administration (VHA) has established a Stepped Care Model of Pain Management (SCM-PM) as an evidence-based framework and single standard of pain care to promote guideline-concordant care, but to date its adoption and related outcomes have not been systematically examined.

OBJECTIVE

Our aim was to examine changes in care for Veterans receiving long-term OT for management of chronic pain over a four-year study period.

DESIGN

As part of a comprehensive implementation evaluation of performance improvements, the current evaluation reports performance improvement outcomes related to pain management and OT over a four-year period.

SUBJECTS

We studied Veterans receiving long-term (90+ consecutive days) OT through primary care.

INTERVENTIONS

We engaged an interdisciplinary clinical-research team to develop and implement a multifaceted performance improvement approach that included interactive educational strategies and other organizational initiatives.

MAIN MEASURES

We measured the proportion of patients receiving long-term OT; use of opioid risk mitigation strategies; referrals to pain-related specialty services; and use of non-opioid analgesics.

KEY RESULTS

The proportion of patients receiving high-dose opioids decreased over four years (27.7 % to 24.7 %). The use of opioid risk mitigation strategies increased significantly. Referrals to physical therapy and chiropractic care and prescriptions for topical analgesics increased significantly, while referrals to the pain medicine specialty clinic decreased.

CONCLUSIONS

We demonstrate improvements in the management of veterans receiving OT that are consistent with the SCM-PM and published practice guidelines. We highlight how partnerships among funders, researchers, clinicians, and administrators contributed to the project's design and implementation, and to the dissemination strategy and future directions for improving opioid management and pain care.

Patterns of opioid use for chronic noncancer pain in the Veterans Health Administration from 2009 to 2011

Although opioids are frequently prescribed for chronic noncancer pain (CNCP) among Veterans Health Administration (VHA) patients, little has been reported on national opioid prescribing patterns in the VHA. Our objective was to better characterize the dosing and duration of opioid therapy for CNCP in the VHA. We analyzed national VHA administrative and pharmacy data for fiscal years 2009 to 2011. For individuals with CNCP diagnoses and any opioid use in the fiscal year, we calculated the distribution of individual mean daily opioid dose, individual total days covered with opioids in a year, and individual total opioid dose in a year. We also investigated the factors associated with being in the top 5% of individuals for total opioid dose in a year, which we term receipt of high-volume opioids. About half of the patients with CNCP received opioids in a given fiscal year. The median daily dose was 21 mg morphine equivalents. Approximately 4.5% had a mean daily dose higher than 120 mg morphine equivalents. The median days covered in a year was 115 to 120 days in these years for those receiving opioids. Fifty-seven percent had at least 90 days covered with opioids per year. Major depression and posttraumatic stress disorder were positively associated with receiving high-volume opioids, but nonopioid substance use disorders were not. Among VHA patients with CNCP, chronic opioid therapy occurs frequently, but for most patients, the average daily dose is modest. Doses and duration of therapy were unchanged from 2009 to 2011.

Denial of urinalysis-confirmed opioid use in prescription opioid dependence

Although research has generally supported the validity of substance use self-reports, some patients deny urine-verified substance use. We examined the prevalence and patterns of denying urinalysis-confirmed opioid use in a sample of prescription opioid dependent patients. We also identified characteristics associated with denial in this population of increasing public health concern. Opioid use self-reports were compared with weekly urinalysis results in a 12-week multi-site treatment study for prescription opioid dependence. Among those who used opioids during the trial (n=246/360), 44.3% (n=109) denied urinalysis-confirmed opioid use, although usually only once (78%). Overall, 22.9% of opioid-positive urine tests (149/650) were denied on self-report. Multivariable analysis found that initially using opioids to relieve pain was associated with denying opioid use. These findings support the use of both self-reports and urine testing in treating prescription opioid dependence.