Perioperative Management of Buprenorphine at an Urban Academic Medical Center

INTRODUCTION

Buprenorphine is a partial mu opioid receptor agonist with high affinity to its receptor, which raises concerns of blocking or displacing full opioid agonists when used during the perioperative period of surgical patients. However, buprenorphine itself has high analgesic potency and discontinuing buprenorphine may lead to suboptimal pain control and risk for opioid use disorder relapse. There is limited data for the continuation of buprenorphine perioperatively.

METHODS

This study is a retrospective cohort study of adult surgical patients taking buprenorphine for opioid use disorder at an urban, teaching, level 1 trauma center. Patients were split into two groups based on whether buprenorphine was continued (n = 46) or held (n = 28) within the first 48 h after surgery.

RESULTS

Those who had buprenorphine continued in the first 48 h postoperatively required half the dose of nonbuprenorphine opioids compared to those who had buprenorphine held (113.25 versus 255.75 oral morphine equivalents, P = 0.0040). Both groups had a similar level of analgesia and incidence of adverse events. Nearly all patients who continued buprenorphine in the first 48 h postoperatively were discharged on this agent, while only half of patients who had buprenorphine held were restarted on it at discharge (92.68% versus 56.52%, P = 0.0013).

CONCLUSIONS

This present study found lower nonbuprenorphine opioid requirements in patients with continued versus held perioperative buprenorphine use with no difference in degree of analgesia.

A retrospective analysis of perioperative medications for opioid-use disorder and tapering additional postsurgical opioids via a transitional pain service

AIMS

To investigate perioperative opioid requirements in patients on methadone or buprenorphine as medication for opioid-use disorder (MOUD) who attended a transitional pain clinic (Personalized Pain Program, PPP).

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study assessed adults on MOUD with surgery and attendance at the Johns Hopkins PPP between 2017 and 2022. Daily non-MOUD opioid use over 6 time-points was evaluated with regression models controlling for days since surgery. The time to complete non-MOUD opioid taper was analysed by accelerated failure time and Kaplan-Meier models.

RESULTS

Fifty patients (28 on methadone, 22 on buprenorphine) were included with a median age of 44.3 years, 54% male, 62% Caucasian and 54% unemployed. MOUD inpatient administration occurred in 92.8% of patients on preoperative methadone but only in 36.3% of patients on preoperative buprenorphine. Non-MOUD opioid use decreased over time postoperatively (β = -0.54, P < .001) with a median decrease of 90 mg morphine equivalents (MME) between the first and last PPP visit, resulting in 46% tapered off by PPP completion. Older age and duration in PPP were associated with lower MME, while mental health conditions, longer hospital stays and higher discharge opioid prescriptions were associated with higher MME. The average time to non-MOUD opioid taper was 1.79× longer in patients on buprenorphine (P = .026), 2.75× in males (P = .023), 4.66× with mental health conditions (P < .001), 2.37× with chronic pain (P = .031) and 3.51× if on preoperative non-MOUD opioids; however, higher initial MOUD level decreased time to taper (P = .001).

CONCLUSIONS

Postoperative opioid tapering utilizing a transitional pain service is possible in patients on MOUD.

Post-operative pain control in patients on buprenorphine or methadone for opioid use disorder

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to determine whether there is a difference in pain scores and opioid consumption after elective surgery in patients maintained on methadone or buprenorphine for opioid use disorder (OUD). Additionally, we investigated the impact of continuing or discontinuing methadone or buprenorphine on post-operative pain outcomes.

DESIGN

A single-center retrospective cohort study.

SETTING

Tertiary care medical center.

PATIENTS AND PARTICIPANTS

Adults aged 18 years or older with OUD maintained on buprenorphine or methadone who underwent elective surgery between January 1, 2017, and January 1, 2021.

INTERVENTIONS

Patients were identified through electronic medical records, and demographic and clinical data were collected.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcome was opioid consumption at 24 hours post-operatively, measured in milligram morphine equivalents. The secondary outcome was opioid consumption and pain scores up to 72 hours post-operatively, assessed using a numeric rating scale.

RESULTS

This study included 366 patients (64 percent on buprenorphine and 36 percent on methadone). Opioid utilization significantly increased when buprenorphine was not administered post-operatively. Both groups exhibited comparable total opioid consumption during the post-operative period. In the buprenorphine cohort, pain scores differed significantly based on the receipt of medications for OUD post-operatively.

CONCLUSIONS

This study reinforces existing evidence supporting the continuation of medications for opioid use disorder, specifically buprenorphine and methadone, during the perioperative period. Dissemination of guideline recommendations is essential to ensure optimal post-operative pain management for this patient population.

Buprenorphine for Chronic Pain Management: a Narrative Review

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The aim of this review is to educate healthcare professionals regarding buprenorphine for the use of opioid use disorder (OUD) as well as for chronic pain management. This review provides physicians and practitioners with updated information regarding the distinct characteristics and intricacies of prescribing buprenorphine.

RECENT FINDINGS

Buprenorphine is approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for acute pain, chronic pain, opioid use disorder (OUD), and opioid dependence. When compared to most other opioids, buprenorphine offers superior patient tolerability, an excellent half-life, and minimal respiratory depression. Buprenorphine does have notable side effects as well as pharmacokinetic properties that require special attention, especially if patients require future surgical interventions. Many physicians are not trained to initiate or manage patients on buprenorphine. However, buprenorphine offers a potentially safer alternative for medication management for patients who require chronic opioid therapy for pain or have OUD. This review provides updated information on buprenorphine for both chronic pain and OUD.

Current State of Perioperative Buprenorphine Management-A National Provider Survey

OBJECTIVES

Buprenorphine maintenance for opioid use disorder (OUD) can present potential challenges for acute postoperative pain management. Provider practice and consistency of buprenorphine management strategies within institutions are unknown. This study aims to identify how providers nationwide manage patients on buprenorphine when they present for elective surgery.

METHODS

A prospective survey of anesthesiologists was performed nationwide between November 2021 and March 2022. Survey respondents were selected from academic institutions identified using public databases and were also distributed to online social media platforms where members are required to verify medical licensure and hospital affiliation. Survey results were calculated and interpreted as the percentage rate of response.

RESULTS

Survey invitations were sent to 190 institutions and returned 54 responses (28% response rate). An additional 12 completed surveys were obtained from online social media distribution resulting in 66 responses. Only 36% of respondents reported an established protocol for perioperative management of buprenorphine at their institution. Regarding consistency of buprenorphine management within institutions, the majority of respondents endorsed buprenorphine continuation without dose reduction in procedures where minimal pain was anticipated. However, there was a large discrepancy in buprenorphine management for surgeries with moderate-severe pain. Perioperative dosing frequency of buprenorphine was also inconsistent.

CONCLUSIONS

The majority of institutions surveyed do not have an established protocol for perioperative buprenorphine management. In addition, there is provider variability in buprenorphine dosing for procedures with moderate-severe pain. This study highlights the need for dissemination of consensus guidelines for buprenorphine management.

Acute Pain Management for Patients Maintained on Sublingual Buprenorphine as Medication for Opioid Use Disorder

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to compare morphine milligram equivalent (MME) requirements for acute pain management between patients admitted for medical or surgical diagnoses with opioid use disorder (OUD) who receive >12 mg of sublingual buprenorphine daily compared with those who receive ≤12 mg/d.

DESIGN

This study was performed via retrospective chart review.

SETTING

This study evaluated patient encounters between January 2017 and November 2021 from a single-center community teaching hospital in Lancaster, PA.

METHODS

Patients were assessed according to daily dose of buprenorphine received while admitted (>12 mg/d vs ≤12 mg/d); patients who had buprenorphine held were included within the ≤12 mg/d study group. The primary outcome evaluated daily average MME requirements over the entirety of hospital length of stay. Key secondary outcomes were total MME requirements and daily average pain scores.

SUBJECTS

Key inclusion criteria were sublingual buprenorphine therapy for at least 1 month prior to admission, presence of an acute pain diagnosis during hospital stay, and history of OUD.

RESULTS

Seventy-eight (78) patients were included for analysis. Daily average MME requirements were similar between patients who received buprenorphine >12 mg/d and ≤12 mg/d (median, 7.5 vs 10.6; P = 0.350). Total MME and daily average pain scores were similar between study groups.

CONCLUSIONS

For OUD patients in need of acute pain management, the continuation of sublingual buprenorphine throughout hospitalization at a daily dose of >12 mg/d compared with ≤12 mg/d did not confer a significant difference in daily average MME requirements.

Postoperative buprenorphine continuation in stabilized buprenorphine patients: A population cohort study

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Sudden discontinuation of buprenorphine in the treatment of opioid use disorder can increase the risk of subsequent relapse and overdose. Little is known about buprenorphine use in the perioperative period. The aim of this study was to determine the rate of buprenorphine continuation after hospital discharge following surgery and factors associated with continuation.

DESIGN

A population-based retrospective cohort study was conducted using administrative data from Ontario, Canada, between 2012 and 2018. The cohort included individuals on continuous buprenorphine prior to surgery. Logistic regression modeling was used to estimate the association of buprenorphine continuation with demographic, opioid agonist treatment, surgical and health service use factors.

SETTING

Administrative databases from Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences (ICES) were used, which capture the Ontario, Canada, population. The data sets describe physician billing, monitoring of controlled substances and hospital discharges.

PARTICIPANTS

Adults (≥ 18 years, n = 2176) had received a buprenorphine/naloxone product continuously for at least 60 days for the treatment of opioid use disorder and subsequently underwent a surgical procedure.

MEASUREMENTS

Continuation (versus discontinuation) of buprenorphine prescriptions in the 14 days after surgical discharge was recommended. Exposures included demographic, comorbidity, opioid agonist treatment, surgical and health service use characteristics.

FINDINGS

About 176 (8.1%) of the 2176 patients discontinued buprenorphine after surgery. Inpatient surgery (versus ambulatory) was associated with reduced odds of continuation, with an unadjusted odds ratio (OR) of 0.17 [95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.12-0.25] and an adjusted OR of 0.16 (95% CI = 0.11-0.23) after accounting for age, sex, rural residence, neighborhood income quintile, Charlson comorbidity index, psychiatric hospitalizations in the past 5 years and recent dispensed supply of buprenorphine (number needed to harm of 6.6).

CONCLUSIONS

In Ontario, Canada, from 2012 to 2018, most patients receiving continuous preoperative buprenorphine therapy continued buprenorphine use after surgery. Inpatient surgery was a strong predictor of discontinuation compared with ambulatory procedures.

Caring for Our Patients With Opioid Use Disorder in the Perioperative Period: A Guide for the Anesthesiologist

Opioid use disorder (OUD) is a rising public health crisis, impacting millions of individuals and families worldwide. Anesthesiologists can play a key role in improving morbidity and mortality around the time of surgery by informing perioperative teams and guiding evidence-based care and access to life-saving treatment for patients with active OUD or in recovery. This article serves as an educational resource for the anesthesiologist caring for patients with OUD and is the second in a series of articles published in Anesthesia & Analgesia on the anesthetic and analgesic management of patients with substance use disorders. The article is divided into 4 sections: (1) background to OUD, treatment principles, and the anesthesiologist; (2) perioperative considerations for patients prescribed medications for OUD (MOUD); (3) perioperative considerations for patients with active, untreated OUD; and (4) nonopioid and nonpharmacologic principles of multimodal perioperative pain management for patients with untreated, active OUD, or in recovery. The article concludes with a stepwise approach for the anesthesiologist to support OUD treatment and recovery. The anesthesiologist is an important leader of the perioperative team to promote these suggested best practices and help save lives.

Patients' experiences with continuation or discontinuation of buprenorphine before painful procedures: A brief report

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Patients with opioid use disorder may be asked by their clinicians to discontinue maintenance buprenorphine treatment before surgical operations due to concerns that buprenorphine will interfere with acute pain management. However, discontinuation of buprenorphine may not be well tolerated or safe for all patients. We, therefore, administered a survey to better understand the experiences of patients on buprenorphine treatment who had previously undergone painful procedures and had their buprenorphine maintenance treatment either continued or discontinued before the procedure.

METHODS

After this study received institutional review board approval, patients were invited to participate if they were being prescribed sublingual buprenorphine for treatment of opioid use disorder and had also previously undergone a painful procedure requiring treatment with full agonist opioids. Patients who were eligible and agreed to participate (n = 32) then completed a survey of basic demographics; medical, psychiatric, and substance use histories; and their experience and satisfaction with the treatment of pain and substance use in the perioperative period, including whether buprenorphine was continued or discontinued before their procedure.

RESULTS

Compared with patients whose home dose of buprenorphine was continued (n = 15), patients whose buprenorphine was discontinued preoperatively (n = 17) reported less satisfaction with pain management and were more likely to be prescribed full agonist opioids upon discharge.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS

Consistent with prior studies, these survey findings suggest that discontinuation of buprenorphine before painful surgeries may be associated with poorer clinical outcomes.

SCIENTIFIC SIGNIFICANCE

This survey study adds patients' perspective to a growing body of scientific literature suggesting that discontinuation of maintenance buprenorphine treatment before painful procedures may decrease patient satisfaction and increase clinical risk.

Rescue Analgesia for Opioid-Dependent Individuals on Opioid Agonist Treatment during Hospitalization: Adherence to Guideline Treatment

INTRODUCTION

Opioid agonist treatment (OAT) is the first-line treatment for opioid use disorder (OUD). Simultaneously, opioids are essential medicines in acute pain management. The literature is scarce on acute pain management in individuals with OUD, and guidelines are controversial for patients on OAT. We aimed at analyzing rescue analgesia in opioid-dependent individuals on OAT during hospitalization in the University Hospital Basel, Switzerland.

METHODS

Patient hospital records were extracted from the database over 6 months (Jan-Jun) in 2015 and 2018. Of the 3,216 extracted patient records, we identified 255 cases on OAT with full datasets. Rescue analgesia was defined according to established principles of acute pain management, e.g., i) the analgesic agent is identical to the OAT medication, and ii) the opioid agent is dosed above 1/6th morphine equivalent dose of the OAT medication.

RESULTS

The patients were on average 51.3 ± 10.5 years old (range: 22-79 years), of which 64% were men. The most frequent OAT agents were methadone and morphine (34.9% and 34.5%). Rescue analgesia was not documented in 14 cases. Guideline-concordant rescue analgesia was observed in 186 cases (72.9%) and consisted mostly of NSAIDs, including paracetamol (80 cases), and identical agents such as the OAT opioid (70 cases). Guideline-divergent rescue analgesia was observed in 69 (27.1%) cases, predominantly due to an underdosed opioid agent (32 cases), another agent other than the OAT (18 cases), or contraindicated agents (10 cases).

DISCUSSION

Our analysis suggests that rescue analgesia in hospitalized OAT patients was predominantly concordant with guidelines, while divergent prescriptions seemed to follow common principles of pain medicine. Clear guidelines are needed to appropriately treat acute pain in hospitalized OAT patients.

Acute Pain Management in Traumatically Injured Patients With Outpatient Buprenorphine Therapy

INTRODUCTION

Acute pain management is challenging in trauma patients undergoing outpatient buprenorphine therapy at the time of injury due to the high binding affinity of this partial agonist. The purpose of this study was to evaluate acute pain management in admitted trauma patients with discontinued versus continued outpatient buprenorphine therapy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This retrospective study included adult trauma patients admitted to a level-1 trauma center between January 2017 and August 2020 who were receiving buprenorphine prior to admission. Groups were defined as buprenorphine discontinued (BD) or continued (BC) during hospitalization. The primary outcome compared median daily morphine milligram equivalents between groups. Secondary outcomes utilized patient-reported numeric rating scale (NRS) scores to compare incidences of no pain (NRS 0), mild (NRS 1-3), moderate (NRS 4-6), and severe (NRS 7-10) pain.

RESULTS

A total of 57 patients were included (BD 37 [64.9%] and BC 20 [35.1%]). The median (interquartile range) outpatient daily buprenorphine dose was similar between groups (8 [8-16] mg versus 16 [8-16], P = 0.25). Median daily morphine milligram equivalents was significantly higher during admission in the BD group (103.7 [80.7-166] versus 67 [30.8-97.4], P = 0.002). Incidence of no pain (7.1% versus 5.7%, P = 0.283), mild (5.5% versus 4.3%, P = 0.295), moderate (20.2%, 19.8%, P = 0.855), or severe (67.2% versus 70.2%, P = 0.185) pain was similar between BD and BC groups, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Continuation of outpatient buprenorphine therapy in acute trauma patients is associated with decreased daily opioid requirements and similar analgesic efficacy compared to patients with BD. Based on our findings, trauma patients receiving outpatient buprenorphine and not requiring ventilator support may benefit from buprenorphine continuation within 48 h of initial presentation.

Top Ten Tips Palliative Care Clinicians Should Know About Buprenorphine

Pain management in palliative care (PC) is becoming more complex as patients survive longer with life-limiting illnesses and population-wide trends involving opioid misuse become more common in serious illness. Buprenorphine, a generally safe partial mu-opioid receptor agonist, has been shown to be effective for both pain management and opioid use disorder. It is critical that PC clinicians become comfortable with indications for its use, strategies for initiation while understanding risks and benefits. This article, written by a team of PC and addiction-trained specialists, including physicians, nurse practitioners, social workers, and a pharmacist, offers 10 tips to demystify buprenorphine use in serious illness.

Continuing Chronic Buprenorphine Perioperatively is Associated With Reduced Postoperative Opioid Use

INTRODUCTION

Buprenorphine is a frequently used medication for opioid use disorder and misunderstanding buprenorphine's unique pharmacology has historically complicated perioperative analgesia. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the association of perioperative buprenorphine continuation in patients with substance use disorder on perioperative opioid use.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This was a single-center retrospective study at a level 1 trauma academic medical center. Adult patients using outpatient buprenorphine for medication for opioid use disorder admitted with an operating room booking were included. Patients were grouped (continuation, withheld) retrospectively based upon the decision to continue or omit buprenorphine therapy while admitted. The primary outcome of the study was any use of full mu-opioid agonists during days 1-7 of admission. Secondary outcomes included length of stay and average pain scores during days 1-7 of admission.

RESULTS

43.4% of patients in the continuation cohort used no full mu-opioid agonists during days 1-7 compared to 3.1% of patients in the withheld cohort (P < 0.001). No significant difference in median length of stay was noted (4.7 d [2.8-6.6] versus 6.1 d [4.0-8.2], P = 0.36). There was no statistical difference in average pain scores on postoperative days 1 (5.2 versus 6.9, P = 0.82) and 7 (0 versus 0, P = 0.41).

CONCLUSIONS

Perioperative continuation of buprenorphine is associated with reduced use of alternative full mu-opioid agents while admitted without impacting pain scores.

Perioperative Management of Extended-release Buprenorphine

Perioperative management of buprenorphine is increasingly characterized by continuation of buprenorphine throughout the perioperative period while coadministering full agonist opioids for analgesia. Although this "simultaneous strategy" is commonly used for the shorter-acting sublingual buprenorphine formulations, there is little to guide management of the extended-release formulations of buprenorphine. Here we report the perioperative experience of an individual maintained on extended-release buprenorphine who successfully underwent major surgeries utilizing a strategy of performing the surgeries at the time of the next scheduled dose.

Acute Pain Management Pearls: A Focused Review for the Hospital Clinician

Acute pain management is a challenging area encountered by inpatient clinicians every day. While patient care is increasingly complex and costly in this realm, the availability of applicable specialists is waning. This narrative review seeks to support diverse hospital-based healthcare providers in refining and updating their acute pain management knowledge base through clinical pearls and point-of-care resources. Practical guidance is provided for the design and adjustment of inpatient multimodal analgesic regimens, including conventional and burgeoning non-opioid and opioid therapies. The importance of customized care plans for patients with preexisting opioid tolerance, chronic pain, or opioid use disorder is emphasized, and current recommendations for inpatient management of associated chronic therapies are discussed. References to best available guidelines and literature are offered for further exploration. Improved clinician attention and more developed skill sets related to acute pain management could significantly benefit hospitalized patient outcomes and healthcare resource utilization.

Implementation of a comprehensive hospitalist-led initiative to improve care for patients with opioid use disorder

BACKGROUND

As opioid-related hospitalizations rise, hospitals must be prepared to evaluate and treat patients with opioid use disorder (OUD). We implemented a hospitalist-led program, Project Caring for patients with Opioid Misuse through Evidence-based Treatment (COMET) to address gaps in care for hospitalized patients with OUD.

OBJECTIVE

Implement evidence-based treatment for inpatients with OUD and refer to postdischarge care.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

Project COMET launched in July 2019 at Duke University Hospital (DUH), an academic medical center in Durham, NC.

INTERVENTION, MAIN OUTCOMES, AND MEASURES

We engaged key stakeholders, performed a needs assessment, and secured health system funding. We developed protocols to standardize OUD treatment and employed a social worker to facilitate postdischarge care. Electronic health records were utilized for data analysis.

RESULTS

COMET evaluated 512 patients for OUD during their index hospitalization from July 1, 2019 through June 30, 2021. Seventy-one percent of patients received medication for OUD (MOUD) during admission. Of those who received buprenorphine during admission, 64% received a discharge prescription. Of those who received methadone during admission, 83% of eligible patients were connected to a methadone clinic. Among all patients at DUH with OUD, MOUD use during hospitalization and at discharge increased in the post-COMET period compared to the pre-COMET period (p < .001 for both).

CONCLUSION

Our program is one of the first to demonstrate successful implementation of a hospitalist-led, comprehensive approach to caring for hospitalized patients with OUD and can serve as an example to other institutions seeking to implement life-saving, evidence-based treatment in this population.

Management of Postoperative Pain in Patients Following Spine Surgery: A Narrative Review

Perioperative pain management is a unique challenge in patients undergoing spine surgery due to the increased incidence of both pre-existing chronic pain conditions and chronic postsurgical pain. Peri-operative planning and counseling in spine surgery should involve an interdisciplinary approach that includes consideration of patient-level risk factors, as well as pharmacologic and non-pharmacologic pain management techniques. Consideration of psychological factors and patient focused education as an adjunct to these measures is paramount in developing a personalized perioperative pain management plan. Understanding the currently available body of knowledge surrounding perioperative opioid management, management of opioid use disorder, regional/neuraxial anesthetic techniques, ketamine/lidocaine infusions, non-opioid oral analgesics, and behavioral interventions can be useful in developing a comprehensive, multi-modal treatment plan among patients undergoing spine surgery. Although many of these techniques have proved efficacious in the immediate postoperative period, long-term follow-up is needed to define the impact of such approaches on persistent pain and opioid use. Future techniques involving the use of precision medicine may help identify phenotypic and physiologic characteristics that can identify patients that are most at risk of developing persistent postoperative pain after spine surgery.

Opioid use disorder in anaesthesia and intensive care: Prevention, diagnosis and management

Opioid misuse is common, as is opioid agonist treatment of opioid dependence. Almost 3% of Australians and over 3.5% of those living in New Zealand report misuse of analgesics. Over 50,000 Australians receive opioid agonist treatment with methadone or buprenorphine for management of severe opioid use disorder.The perioperative period is an opportunity to identify pre-existing opioid misuse, and to introduce interventions to reduce the risk of development of opioid use disorder. Challenges of acute perioperative pain management or intensive care management of patients receiving opioid agonist treatment include opioid tolerance and ongoing prescribing of methadone or buprenorphine. There has been some ambiguity about the optimal perioperative management of buprenorphine, a partial agonist at the mu receptor.In this article, a framework to identify emerging opioid misuse problems, identify risk of overdose and to manage the opioid-dependent patient on opioid agonist treatment perioperatively or in the intensive care unit is provided. Diagnostic criteria and risk stratification criteria are presented. Management strategies include trauma-informed care, care planning and care coordination with community practitioners and opioid agonist treatment providers. Continuing methadone or buprenorphine perioperatively with additional opioid and non-opioid analgesia is generally recommended. Increased opioid agonist treatment doses may be required on discharge. An algorithm for decisions about opioid agonist treatment management in the intensive care unit based on the risks of opioid withdrawal and toxicity is considered. Strategies for managing the opioid-dependent patient who is not in treatment are also discussed.

Perioperative Buprenorphine Management: A Multidisciplinary Approach

Buprenorphine formulations (including buprenorphine/naloxone) are effective treatments of pain and opioid use disorder (OUD). Historically, perioperative management of patients prescribed buprenorphine involved abstinence from buprenorphine sufficient to allow for unrestricted mu-opioid receptor availability to full agonist opioid (FAO) treatment. Evidence is mounting that a multimodal analgesic strategy, including simultaneous administration of buprenorphine and FAO, nonopioid adjuncts such as acetaminophen and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, and regional anesthesia, is a safe and effective perioperative strategy for the patient prescribed long-term buprenorphine treatment of OUD. This strategy will likely simplify management and more seamlessly provide continuous buprenorphine treatment of OUD after hospital discharge.

Expert Panel Consensus on Management of Advanced Cancer-Related Pain in Individuals With Opioid Use Disorder

IMPORTANCE

Opioid use disorder (OUD) is an important comorbidity in individuals with advanced cancer, in whom pain is common. Full-agonist opioid medications are the cornerstone of cancer pain management, but the existing literature does not address how to manage cancer pain in patients with OUD.

OBJECTIVE

To conduct an expert panel to develop consensus on the appropriateness of management of cancer pain in individuals with co-occurring advanced cancer and OUD.

EVIDENCE REVIEW

A 3-round modified Delphi process was completed from August to October 2020 with 2 cases: patient with advanced cancer, pain, and OUD treated with buprenorphine-naloxone or methadone. Participants rated management strategies in round 1, discussed results in round 2, and provided final responses in round 3. ExpertLens, an online approach to conducting modified Delphi panels, was used. Participants were experts in palliative care, addiction, or both, recruited by email from palliative care and addiction-focused professional groups, lists from prior studies, and snowball sampling. Data analysis was performed from November 2020 to July 2021.

FINDINGS

Of 120 experts (median age, 40-49 years), most were White (78 participants [94%]), female (74 participants [62%]), and held MD or DO degrees (115 participants [96%]); 84 (70%) participated in all rounds. For a patient with OUD taking buprenorphine-naloxone, it was deemed appropriate to continue buprenorphine-naloxone with thrice-daily dosing. Continuing buprenorphine-naloxone and adding a full-agonist opioid was deemed to be appropriate for patients with a prognosis of weeks to months and of uncertain appropriateness for patients with a prognosis of months to years. For a patient with OUD taking methadone dispensed at a methadone clinic, it was deemed appropriate to take over prescribing and dose twice or thrice daily. Continuing methadone daily while adding another full-agonist opioid was deemed appropriate for patients with a prognosis of weeks to months and of uncertain appropriateness for those with a prognosis of months to years.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

The findings of this qualitative study provide urgently needed, consensus-based guidance for clinicians and highlight critical research and policy gaps needed to facilitate implementation.

Management of surgical patients on opioid replacement therapy: An audit of current practice

Patients on opioid replacement therapy hospitalised with acute pain represent a clinical challenge and have poorer perioperative outcomes. There is limited evidence relating to acute pain management of this complex cohort. The primary objectives of this retrospective audit was to establish the number of patients who are admitted on opioid replacement therapy with an acute pain condition under surgical services and evaluate the management of these patients to determine consistency of pain management practices. Secondarily, we aimed to evaluate the documentation of opioid replacement therapy in clinical notes to determine adherence to operational protocols and record clinically relevant outcomes including infection or postoperative complication rates. Forty-four episodes of care for buprenorphine patients and 19 episodes of care for methadone patients were included. There was significant variability in inpatient opioid prescribing, including practice of dose modification, and there was high utilisation of additional opioids, although agent choice varied. Multimodal analgesia was utilised, especially following acute pain service review. There was an 11% readmission rate for complications of the initial presentation. Documentation at transitions of care was poor. There is a need for further clinical studies into specific acute pain management strategies, and their effect on clinically relevant outcomes, to guide consistent management practices.

Opioid-induced analgesia among persons with opioid use disorder receiving methadone or buprenorphine: A systematic review of experimental pain studies

BACKGROUND

Treating acute pain among persons with opioid use disorder (OUD) on opioid agonist therapy (OAT) is complex, and the therapeutic benefits of opioids remain unclear when weighted against their abuse potential and respiratory depressant effects.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review of experimental pain studies examining opioid-induced analgesia among persons with OUD on OAT. We searched multiple databases from inception to July 30, 2021. Study quality was assessed by previously established validity measures.

RESULTS

Nine studies were identified, with a total of 225 participants, of whom 63% were male, and 37% were female. Six studies included methadone-maintained persons with OUD; four studies included buprenorphine-maintained persons with OUD; and three studies included healthy persons as comparison groups. Either additional doses of OAT or other opioids - morphine, oxycodone, hydromorphone, or remifentanil - were administered. In seven studies, persons with OUD on OAT did not experience analgesia, despite receiving opioid doses up to 20 times greater than those clinically used to treat severe pain among the opioid naïve. Conversely, in two studies, high-potency opioids did produce analgesia, albeit with greater abuse potential. Notably, persons with OUD on OAT remained vulnerable to respiratory depression.

CONCLUSIONS

Although persons with OUD on OAT can derive analgesic effects from opioids, high-potency compounds may be required to achieve clinically significant pain relief. Further, persons with OUD on OAT may remain vulnerable to opioid-induced abuse potential and respiratory depression. Together, these finding have clinical, methodological, and mechanistic implications for the treatment of acute pain in the context of OAT.

Buprenorphine management in the perioperative period: educational review and recommendations from a multisociety expert panel

BACKGROUND

The past two decades have witnessed an epidemic of opioid use disorder (OUD) in the USA, resulting in catastrophic loss of life secondary to opioid overdoses. Medication treatment of opioid use disorder (MOUD) is effective, yet barriers to care continue to result in a large proportion of untreated individuals. Optimal analgesia can be obtained in patients with MOUD within the perioperative period. Anesthesiologists and pain physicians can recommend and consider initiating MOUD in patients with suspected OUD at the point of care; this can serve as a bridge to comprehensive treatment and ultimately save lives.

METHODS

The Board of Directors of the American Society of Regional Anesthesia and Pain Medicine, American Society of Anesthesiologists, American Academy of Pain Medicine, American Society of Addiction Medicine and American Society of Health System Pharmacists approved the creation of a Multisociety Working Group on Opioid Use Disorder, representing the fields of pain medicine, addiction, and pharmacy health sciences. An extensive literature search was performed by members of the working group. Multiple study types were included and reviewed for quality. A modified Delphi process was used to assess the literature and expert opinion for each topic, with 100% consensus being achieved on the statements and each recommendation. The consensus statements were then graded by the committee members using the United States Preventive Services Task Force grading of evidence guidelines. In addition to the consensus recommendations, a narrative overview of buprenorphine, including pharmacology and legal statutes, was performed.

RESULTS

Two core topics were identified for the development of recommendations with >75% consensus as the goal for consensus; however, the working group achieved 100% consensus on both topics. Specific topics included (1) providing recommendations to aid physicians in the management of patients receiving buprenorphine for MOUD in the perioperative setting and (2) providing recommendations to aid physicians in the initiation of buprenorphine in patients with suspected OUD in the perioperative setting.

CONCLUSIONS

To decrease the risk of OUD recurrence, buprenorphine should not be routinely discontinued in the perioperative setting. Buprenorphine can be initiated in untreated patients with OUD and acute pain in the perioperative setting to decrease the risk of opioid recurrence and death from overdose.

The opioid epidemic from the acute care hospital front line

Prescription opioid use has risen steeply for over two decades, driven primarily by advocacy for better management of chronic non-cancer pain, but also by poor opioid stewardship in the management of acute pain. Inappropriate prescribing, among other things, contributed to the opioid 'epidemic' and striking increases in patient harm. It has also seen a greater proportion of opioid-tolerant patients presenting to acute care hospitals. Effective and safe management of acute pain in opioid-tolerant patients can be challenging, with higher risks of opioid-induced ventilatory impairment and persistent post-discharge opioid use compared with opioid-naive patients. There are also increased risks of some less well known adverse postoperative outcomes including infection, earlier revision rates after major joint arthroplasty and spinal fusion, longer hospital stays, higher re-admission rates and increased healthcare costs. Increasingly, opioid-free/opioid-sparing techniques have been advocated as ways to reduce patient harm. However, good evidence for these remains lacking and opioids will continue to play an important role in the management of acute pain in many patients.Better opioid stewardship with consideration of preoperative opioid weaning in some patients, assessment of patient function rather than relying on pain scores alone to assess adequacy of analgesia, prescription of immediate release opioids only and evidence-based use of analgesic adjuvants are important. Post-discharge opioid prescribing should be contingent on an assessment of patient risk, with short-term only use of opioids. In partnership with pharmacists, nursing staff, other medical specialists, general practitioners and patients, anaesthetists remain ideally positioned to be involved in opioid stewardship in the acute care setting.

Advanced Inpatient Management of Opioid Use Disorder in a Patient Requiring Serial Surgeries

Opioid use disorder has affected many lives across the US. Medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD), including buprenorphine, have been shown to decrease mortality in this patient population. Here we present a case of a 32-year-old woman on buprenorphine/naloxone undergoing multiple surgical operations, whose course included buprenorphine discontinuation, methadone initiation, and buprenorphine re-induction using a novel "microdosing" approach. This report includes a presentation of the case and a discussion of the clinical decision making and relevant literature to give hospitalbased providers a perspective on management of peri-operative patients on MOUD.

An international multidisciplinary consensus statement on the prevention of opioid-related harm in adult surgical patients

This international multidisciplinary consensus statement was developed to provide balanced guidance on the safe peri-operative use of opioids in adults. An international panel of healthcare professionals evaluated the literature relating to postoperative opioid-related harm, including persistent postoperative opioid use; opioid-induced ventilatory impairment; non-medical opioid use; opioid diversion and dependence; and driving under the influence of prescription opioids. Recommended strategies to reduce harm include pre-operative assessment of the risk of persistent postoperative opioid use; use of an assessment of patient function rather than unidimensional pain scores alone to guide adequacy of analgesia; avoidance of long-acting (modified-release and transdermal patches) opioid formulations and combination analgesics; limiting the number of tablets prescribed at discharge; providing deprescribing advice; avoidance of automatic prescription refills; safe disposal of unused medicines; reducing the risk of opioid diversion; and better education of healthcare professionals, patients and carers. This consensus statement provides a framework for better prescribing practices that could help reduce the risk of postoperative opioid-related harm in adults.

Leveraging pharmacists to maintain and extend buprenorphine supply for opioid use disorder amid COVID-19 pandemic

Purpose

Strategies for deploying clinical pharmacists to increase access to buprenorphine in inpatient, outpatient and transitional care, and community practice settings are described.

Summary

Access to medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD) is essential, but patients face many barriers when pursuing treatment and MOUD. The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has compounded the opioid crisis and worsened outcomes by introducing new barriers to MOUD access. Many strategies to ensure continued access to MOUD have been described, but the role of leveraging pharmacists during the opioid/COVID-19 syndemic to improve medication access and outcomes remains underappreciated. Pharmacists, while both qualified and capable of liberalizing access to all forms of MOUD, may have the strongest impact by increasing access to buprenorphine. Herein, we present progressive strategies to maintain and extend buprenorphine access for patients with OUD through deployment of clinical pharmacists, particularly in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, during which access may be further restricted.

Conclusion

Leveraging pharmacists to extend access to MOUD, particularly buprenorphine, remains an underutilized strategy that should be implemented, particularly during the concurrent COVID-19 global pandemic.

Perioperative Pain Management and Opioid Stewardship: A Practical Guide

Surgical procedures are key drivers of pain development and opioid utilization globally. Various organizations have generated guidance on postoperative pain management, enhanced recovery strategies, multimodal analgesic and anesthetic techniques, and postoperative opioid prescribing. Still, comprehensive integration of these recommendations into standard practice at the institutional level remains elusive, and persistent postoperative pain and opioid use pose significant societal burdens. The multitude of guidance publications, many different healthcare providers involved in executing them, evolution of surgical technique, and complexities of perioperative care transitions all represent challenges to process improvement. This review seeks to summarize and integrate key recommendations into a "roadmap" for institutional adoption of perioperative analgesic and opioid optimization strategies. We present a brief review of applicable statistics and definitions as impetus for prioritizing both analgesia and opioid exposure in surgical quality improvement. We then review recommended modalities at each phase of perioperative care. We showcase the value of interprofessional collaboration in implementing and sustaining perioperative performance measures related to pain management and analgesic exposure, including those from the patient perspective. Surgery centers across the globe should adopt an integrated, collaborative approach to the twin goals of optimal pain management and opioid stewardship across the care continuum.

Treating Perioperative and Acute Pain in Patients on Buprenorphine: Narrative Literature Review and Practice Recommendations

Opioid use disorder (OUD), a leading cause of morbidity and mortality in the USA, can be effectively treated with buprenorphine. However, the same pharmacologic properties (e.g., high affinity, partial agonism, long half-life) that make it ideal as a treatment for OUD often cause concern among clinicians that buprenorphine will prevent effective management of acute pain with full agonist opioid analgesics. Because of this concern, many patients are asked to stop buprenorphine preoperatively or at the onset of acute pain, placing them at high risk for both relapse and a difficult transition back to buprenorphine after acute pain has resolved. The purpose of this review is to summarize the existing literature for acute pain and perioperative management in patients treated with buprenorphine for OUD and to provide practical management recommendations for generalist practitioners based on evidence and clinical experience. In short, evidence suggests that sufficient analgesia can be achieved with maintenance of buprenorphine and use of both opioid and non-opioid analgesic options for breakthrough pain. We recommend that clinicians (1) continue buprenorphine in the perioperative or acute pain period for patients with OUD; (2) use a multi-modal analgesic approach; (3) pay attention to care coordination and discharge planning when making an analgesic plan for patients with OUD treated with buprenorphine; and (4) use an individualized approach founded upon shared decision-making. Clinical examples involving mild and severe pain are discussed to highlight important management principles.

Managing Acute Pain in Patients Taking Medication for Opioid Use Disorder: a Rapid Review

BACKGROUND

Managing acute pain in patients with opioid use disorder (OUD) on medication (methadone, buprenorphine, or naltrexone) can be complicated by patients' higher baseline pain sensitivity and need for higher opioid doses to achieve pain relief. This review aims to evaluate the benefits and harms of acute pain management strategies for patients taking OUD medications and whether strategies vary by OUD medication type or cause of acute pain.

METHODS

We systematically searched multiple bibliographic sources until April 2020. One reviewer used prespecified criteria to assess articles for inclusion, extract data, rate study quality, and grade our confidence in the body of evidence, all with second reviewer checking.

RESULTS

We identified 12 observational studies-3 with control groups and 9 without. Two of the studies with control groups suggest that continuing buprenorphine and methadone in OUD patients after surgery may reduce the need for additional opioids and that ineffective pain management in patients taking methadone can result in disengagement in care. A third controlled study found that patients taking OUD medications may need higher doses of additional opioids for pain control, but provided insufficient detail to apply results to clinic practice. The only case study examining naltrexone reported that postoperative pain was managed using tramadol. We have low confidence in these findings as no studies directly addressed our question by comparing pain management strategies and few provided adequate descriptions of the dosage, timing, or rationale for clinical decisions.

DISCUSSION

We lack rigorous evidence on acute pain management in patients taking medication for OUD; however, evidence supports the practice of continuing methadone or buprenorphine for most patients during acute pain episodes. Well-described, prospective studies of adjuvant pain management strategies when OUD medications are continued would add to the existing literature base. Studies on nonopioid treatments are also needed for patients taking naltrexone.

PROTOCOL REGISTRATION

PROSPERO; CRD42019132924.

Perioperative Management of Buprenorphine: Solving the Conundrum

OBJECTIVE

There is no consensus on the optimal perioperative management of patients on buprenorphine (BUP) for opioid use disorder (OUD). This article will review the available literature on BUP and the analgesic efficacy of BUP combined with full mu-opioid agonists and discuss the conflicting management strategies in the context of acute pain and our institution's protocol for the periprocedural management of BUP.

METHODS

We searched published data on BUP periprocedural management from inception through March 2018 without language restrictions. Study selection included publications reporting outcomes on perioperative pain management in OUD patients maintained on BUP.

RESULTS

Our search resulted in four case reports supporting periprocedural discontinuation of BUP and two case series, one secondary observational study, one prospective matched cohort study, and four retrospective cohort studies supporting periprocedural continuation of BUP. No clinical trials were identified.

CONCLUSIONS

Maintaining BUP perioperatively does not lead to worsened clinical outcomes. Patients can receive adequate pain control from mu-opioid agonists while maintained on BUP. Based upon available evidence, we recommend continuing BUP at a reduced dose when indicated to avoid withdrawal symptoms and to facilitate the analgesic efficacy of mu-opioid agonists administered in combination for acute postoperative pain.

Diagnosis and Management of Opioid Use Disorder in Hospitalized Patients

The diagnosis of opioid use disorder (OUD) is often overlooked or inadequately managed during the inpatient admission. When recognized, a common strategy is opioid detoxification, an approach that is often ineffective and can be potentially dangerous because of loss of tolerance and subsequent risk for overdose. Medication for addiction treatment (MAT), including methadone and buprenorphine, is effective and can be dispensed in the hospital for both opioid withdrawal and initiation of maintenance treatment. Hospitalists should be knowledgeable about diagnosing and managing patients with OUD, including how to manage acute pain or MAT during the perioperative setting.

Evidence for Continuing Buprenorphine in the Perioperative Period

OBJECTIVE

Given there are conflicting recommendations for the perioperative management of buprenorphine, we conducted a retrospective cohort study of our surgery patients on buprenorphine whose baseline dose had been preoperatively continued, tapered, or discontinued.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We reviewed charts of patients on buprenorphine who had received elective surgery at Stanford Healthcare from January 1, 2013 to June 30, 2016. Our primary outcome of interest was the change in pain score, defined as mean postoperative pain score-preoperative pain score. We also collected data on patients' tapering procedure and any postoperative nonbuprenorphine opioid requirements.

RESULTS

Out of ∼1200 patients on buprenorphine, 121 had surgery of which 50 were admitted and included in the study. Perioperative continuation of transdermal buprenorphine resulted in a significantly lower change in pain score postoperatively (0.606±0.878) than discontinuation (4.83±1.23, P=0.012). Among sublingual patients, there was no statistically significant difference in the change in pain score between those who were tapered to a nonzero dose versus discontinued (P=0.55). Continuation of sublingual buprenorphine resulted in fewer nonbuprenorphine scheduled opioid prescriptions than its taper or discontinuation (P=0.028). Finally, tapers were performed with great variability in the tapering team and rate of taper.

DISCUSSION

On the basis of our findings, we implemented a policy at our institution for the continuation of perioperative buprenorphine whenever possible. Our work reveals crucial targets for the education of perioperative healthcare providers and the importance of coordination among all perioperative services and providers.

A Practical Approach for the Management of the Mixed Opioid Agonist-Antagonist Buprenorphine During Acute Pain and Surgery

The use of buprenorphine, a mixed opioid agonist-antagonist, for the management of chronic pain and/or opioid use disorder is increasing. As such, medical providers will more frequently encounter patients on this therapy. In this paper, we synthesize existing knowledge (derived through keyword searches using MEDLINE databases) in a novel conceptual framework for patients on buprenorphine presenting with acute pain or for those requiring surgical or invasive procedures. This framework is based on three unique domains: the patient, the features of the acute pain insult, and the environment. We discuss important considerations regarding the unique aspects of buprenorphine formulations and dosing, and we describe the importance of multidisciplinary planning and multimodal analgesic strategies. We also highlight important differences in management strategies based upon the presence or absence of opioid use disorder. All medical providers must be prepared to guide the patient on buprenorphine safely through the acute care episode, which includes adequate treatment of acute pain and avoidance of iatrogenic harm, including both short-term complications (eg, respiratory depression) and long-term complications (eg, relapse to opioid use).

Perioperative Management of Patients on Buprenorphine and Methadone: A Narrative Review

The opioid epidemic has emerged as a major health and social problem over the last few decades. An increasing number of patients with opioid use disorder are presenting for perioperative management. These patients are either on buprenorphine or methadone for the maintenance and treatment of opioid addiction or chronic pain. In the settings of acute pain, the optimal management of patients with opioid use disorder is challenging, and recovery can be jeopardized secondary to the unique pharmacology of these agents. The purpose of this narrative review is to summarize the existing studies on the perioperative management of patients who are using buprenorphine and methadone and provide guidance for the management of patients with opioid use disorder during the perioperative period.

Understanding Buprenorphine for Use in Chronic Pain: Expert Opinion

OBJECTIVE

An expert panel convened to reach a consensus on common misconceptions surrounding buprenorphine, a Schedule III partial µ-opioid receptor agonist indicated for chronic pain. The panel also provided clinical recommendations on the appropriate use of buprenorphine and conversion strategies for switching to buprenorphine from a full µ-opioid receptor agonist for chronic pain management.

METHODS

The consensus panel met on March 25, 2019, to discuss relevant literature and provide recommendations on interpreting buprenorphine as a partial µ-opioid receptor agonist, prescribing buprenorphine before some Schedule II, III, or IV options, perioperative/trauma management of patients taking buprenorphine, and converting patients from a full µ-opioid receptor agonist to buprenorphine.

RESULTS

The panel recommended that buprenorphine's classification as a partial µ-opioid receptor agonist not be clinically translated to mean partial analgesic efficacy. The panel also recommended that buprenorphine be considered before some Schedule II, III, or IV opioids in patients with a favorable risk/benefit profile on the basis of metabolic factors, abuse potential, and tolerability and that buprenorphine be continued during the perioperative/trauma period. In addition, switching patients from a full µ-opioid receptor agonist to buprenorphine should be considered with no weaning period at starting doses that are based on the previous opioid dose.

CONCLUSIONS

These recommendations provide a framework for clinicians to address most clinical scenarios regarding buprenorphine use. The overall consensus of the panel was that buprenorphine is a unique Schedule III opioid with favorable pharmacologic properties and a safety profile that may be desirable for chronic pain management.

Acute Experimental Pain Responses in Methadone- and Buprenorphine/Naloxone-Maintained Patients Administered Additional Opioid or Gabapentin: A Double-Blind Crossover Pilot Study

Objective

The study objective was to identify the analgesic efficacy of three different pharmacological strategies in patients receiving methadone or buprenorphine as opioid agonist treatment (OAT). The three pharmacological approaches, a) increasing maintenance methadone/buprenorphine dose by 30%, b) adding oxycodone, or c) adding a single dose of gabapentin, were compared with a control condition of the participant’s usual OAT dose.

Design

A randomized, controlled, double-blinded, double-dummy, within-subject crossover study.

Subjects

Nine participants on stable doses of methadone and eight participants on stable doses of buprenorphine were recruited.

Setting

An outpatient opioid treatment clinic in inner city Sydney, Australia.

Methods

The cold pressor tolerance test was used to examine experimental pain threshold and tolerance. Ratings of subjective drug effects and safety measures (physiological and cognitive) were assessed.

Results

There was no difference in the primary outcome measures of pain thresholds or tolerance between the conditions examined. Interindividual variability was evident. Differences in some subjective measures were identified, including lower pain recall, lower “bad effects,” and higher global satisfaction in the additional methadone condition. In the buprenorphine arm, increased drug liking and “bad effects” were detected with oxycodone administration, while increased subjective intoxication was identified with gabapentin.

Conclusions

There was no evidence of an objective improvement in analgesia with any condition compared with control. Further research is required to optimize pain management strategies in this population.

Buprenorphine Maintenance Subjects Are Hyperalgesic and Have No Antinociceptive Response to a Very High Morphine Dose

Objective

Acute pain management in opioid-dependent persons is complicated because of tolerance and opioid-induced hyperalgesia. Very high doses of morphine are ineffective in overcoming opioid-induced hyperalgesia and providing antinociception to methadone-maintained patients in an experimental setting. Whether the same occurs in buprenorphine-maintained subjects is unknown.

Design

Randomized double-blind placebo-controlled. Subjects were tested on two occasions, at least five days apart, once with intravenous morphine and once with intravenous saline. Subjects were tested at about the time of putative trough plasma buprenorphine concentrations.

Setting

Ambulatory.

Subjects

Twelve buprenorphine-maintained subjects: once daily sublingual dose (range = 2-22 mg); no dose change for 1.5-12 months. Ten healthy controls.

Methods

Intravenous morphine bolus and infusions administered over two hours to achieve two separate pseudo-steady-state plasma concentrations one hour apart. Pain tolerance was assessed by application of nociceptive stimuli (cold pressor [seconds] and electrical stimulation [volts]). Ten blood samples were collected for assay of plasma morphine, buprenorphine, and norbuprenorphine concentrations until three hours after the end of the last infusion; pain tolerance and respiration rate were measured to coincide with blood sampling times.

Results

Cold pressor responses (seconds): baseline: control 34 ± 6 vs buprenorphine 17 ± 2 (P = 0.009); morphine infusion-end: control 52 ± 11(P = 0.04), buprenorphine 17 ± 2 (P > 0.5); electrical stimulation responses (volts): baseline: control 65 ± 6 vs buprenorphine 53 ± 5 (P = 0.13); infusion-end: control 74 ± 5 (P = 0.007), buprenorphine 53 ± 5 (P > 0.98). Respiratory rate (breaths per minute): baseline: control 17 vs buprenorphine 14 (P = 0.03); infusion-end: control 15 (P = 0.09), buprenorphine 12 (P < 0.01). Infusion-end plasma morphine concentrations (ng/mL): control 23 ± 1, buprenorphine 136 ± 10.

Conclusions

Buprenorphine subjects, compared with controls, were hyperalgesic (cold pressor test), did not experience antinociception, despite high plasma morphine concentrations, and experienced respiratory depression. Clinical implications are discussed.

Perioperative Pain and Addiction Interdisciplinary Network (PAIN) clinical practice advisory for perioperative management of buprenorphine: results of a modified Delphi process

Until recently, the belief that adequate pain management was not achievable while patients remained on buprenorphine was the impetus for the perioperative discontinuation of buprenorphine. We aimed to use an expert consensus Delphi-based survey technique to 1) specify the need for perioperative guidelines in this context and 2) offer a set of recommendations for the perioperative management of these patients. The major recommendation of this practice advisory is to continue buprenorphine therapy in the perioperative period. It is rarely appropriate to reduce the buprenorphine dose irrespective of indication or formulation. If analgesia is inadequate after optimisation of adjunct analgesic therapies, we recommend initiating a full mu agonist while continuing buprenorphine at some dose. The panel believes that before operation, physicians must distinguish between buprenorphine use for chronic pain (weaning/conversion from long-term high-dose opioids) and opioid use disorder (OUD) as the primary indication for buprenorphine therapy. Patients should ideally be discharged on buprenorphine, although not necessarily at their preoperative dose. Depending on analgesic requirements, they may be discharged on a full mu agonist. Overall, long-term buprenorphine treatment retention and harm reduction must be considered during the perioperative period when OUD is a primary diagnosis. The authors recognise that inter-patient variability will require some individualisation of clinical practice advisories. Clinical practice advisories are largely based on lower classes of evidence (level 4, level 5). Further research is required in order to implement meaningful changes in practitioner behaviour for this patient group.

Perioperative Pain and Addiction Interdisciplinary Network (PAIN): protocol of a practice advisory for the perioperative management of buprenorphine using a modified Delphi process

INTRODUCTION

The ongoing opioid epidemic has necessitated increasing prescriptions of buprenorphine, which is an evidence-based treatment for opioid use disorder, and also shown to reduce harms associated with unsafe opioid administration. A systematic review of perioperative management strategies for patients taking buprenorphine concluded that there was little guidance for managing buprenorphine perioperatively. The aim of this project is to develop consensus guidelines on the optimal perioperative management strategies for this group of patients. In this paper, we present the design for a modified Delphi technique that will be used to gain consensus among patients and multidisciplinary experts in addiction, pain, community and perioperative medicine.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

A national panel of experts identified by perioperative, pain and/or addiction systematic review authorship established an international profile in perioperative, pain and/or addiction research, community clinical excellence and by peer referral. A steering group will develop the first round with a list of indications to be rated by the panel of national experts, patients and allied healthcare professionals. In round 1, the expert panel will rate the appropriateness of each individual item and provide additional suggestions for revisions, additions or deletions. The definition of consensus will be set a priori. Consensus will be gauged for both appropriateness and inappropriateness of treatment strategies. Where an agreement is not reached and items are suggested for addition/deletion/modification, round 2 will take place over teleconference in order to obtain consensus.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Institutional research ethics board provided a waiver for this modified Delphi protocol. We plan on developing a national guideline for the management of patients taking buprenorphine in the perioperative period that will be generalisable across three sets of preoperative diagnoses including opioid use disorder and/or co-occurring pain disorders. The findings will be published in peer-reviewed publications and conference presentations.