Nonconsensual Dose Reduction Mandates are Not Justified Clinically or Ethically: An Analysis

Improving Access to Care for Patients Taking Opioids for Chronic Pain: Recommendations from a Modified Delphi Panel in Michigan

Purpose

About 5-8 million US patients take long-term opioid therapy for chronic pain. In the context of policies and guidelines instituted to reduce inappropriate opioid prescribing, abrupt discontinuations in opioid prescriptions have increased and many primary care clinics will not prescribe opioids for new patients, reducing access to care. This may result in uncontrolled pain and other negative outcomes, such as transition to illicit opioids. The objective of this study was to generate policy, intervention, and research recommendations to improve access to care for these patients.

Participants and Methods

We conducted a RAND/UCLA Modified Delphi, consisting of workshops, background videos and reading materials, and moderated web-based panel discussions held September 2020-January 2021. The panel consisted of 24 individuals from across Michigan, identified via expert nomination and snowball recruitment, including clinical providers, health science researchers, state-level policymakers and regulators, care coordination experts, patient advocates, payor representatives, and community and public health experts. The panel proposed intervention, policy, and research recommendations, scored the feasibility, impact, and importance of each on a 9-point scale, and ranked all recommendations by implementation priority.

Results

The panel produced 11 final recommendations across three themes: reimbursement reform, provider education, and reducing racial inequities in care. The 3 reimbursement-focused recommendations were highest ranked (theme average = 4.2/11), including the two top-ranked recommendations: increasing reimbursement for time needed to treat complex chronic pain (ranked #1/11) and bundling payment for multimodal pain care (#2/11). Four provider education recommendations ranked slightly lower (theme average = 6.2/11) and included clarifying the spectrum of opioid dependence and training providers on multimodal treatments. Four recommendations addressed racial inequities (theme average = 7.2/11), such as standardizing pain management protocols to reduce treatment disparities.

Conclusion

Panelists indicated reimbursement should incentivize traditionally lower-paying evidence-based pain care, but multiple strategies may be needed to meaningfully expand access.

The effect of state policies on rates of high-risk prescribing of an initial opioid analgesic

BACKGROUND

Multiple state policies, such as prescription drug monitoring programs (PDMPs) and duration limits, have been implemented to decrease high-risk opioid prescribing. Studies demonstrate that many policies decrease certain opioid prescribing behaviors, but few examine their intended effects on the targeted high-risk prescribing practices, nor disentangle the effects of concurrent state or federal policies likely to influence those practices.

METHODS

Forty-one million initial prescriptions for new opioid episodes from 2007 to 2018 were identified using national pharmacy claims. We identified high-risk initial prescriptions, defined as >7 days' supply, average daily MME >90, or concurrent with benzodiazepines and estimated three multivariable logistic regression models to assess the association between policies and outcomes controlling for patient, prescriber, and county characteristics.

RESULTS

Initial prescriptions for >7 days declined from 23.8% in 2007 to 14.9% in 2018, associated with mandatory and interoperable PDMPs and prescription duration limits but not other policies examined. Initial prescriptions with daily MME > 90 declined from 13.2% to 1.9%, associated with pain management clinic laws but not consistently with other policies. Initial prescriptions concurrent with benzodiazepines declined only modestly from 6.9% to 6.5%, associated with pain management clinic laws but not other policies examined.

CONCLUSIONS

The opioid policy environment has changed rapidly with a range of different policies being implemented addressing high-risk prescribing. PDMP laws mandating prescriber use and pain clinic laws both appear efficacious but decrease different types of high-risk opioid prescribing. New policies should be considered in light of the prevalence of the problem being addressed.

Chronic Pain and Opioid Prescribing: Three Ways for Navigating Complexity at the Clinical‒Population Health Interface

Clinically focused interventions for people living with pain, such as health professional education, clinical decision support systems, prescription drug monitoring programs, and multidisciplinary care to support opioid tapering, have all been promoted as important solutions to the North American opioid crisis. Yet none have so far delivered substantive beneficial opioid-related population health outcomes. In fact, while total opioid prescribing has leveled off or reduced in many jurisdictions, population-level harms from opioids have continued to increase dramatically. We attribute this failure partly to a poor recognition of the epistemic and ethical complexities at the interface of clinical and population health. We draw on a framework of knowledge networks in wicked problems to identify 3 strategies to help navigate these complexities: (1) designing and evaluating clinically focused interventions as complex interventions, (2) reformulating evidence to make population health dynamics apparent, and (3) appealing to the inseparability of facts and values to support decision-making in uncertainty. We advocate that applying these strategies will better equip clinically focused interventions as complements to structural and public health interventions to achieve the desired beneficial population health effects. (Am J Public Health. 2022;112(S1):S56-S65. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2021.306500).

"The lesser of two evils": a framework analysis of consumers' perspectives on opioid deprescribing and the development of opioid deprescribing guidelines

ABSTRACT

Deprescribing opioids has been identified as an intervention to mitigate opioid harm; however, it is often challenging to implement interventions and communicate deprescribing decisions to consumers. The development of opioid deprescribing guidelines may provide guidance and support on when and how to reduce or cease opioids in routine care. This study aimed to explore the perspectives of opioid consumers on opioid deprescribing and determine factors to be considered in the development of opioid deprescribing guidelines. A purposive sample of 20 consumers using opioids for pain was recruited. Semistructured interviews were conducted, audio recorded, and transcribed verbatim. Inductive thematic analysis was undertaken, followed by a framework analysis informed by Bandura's Social Cognitive Theory. Behavioral, cognitive, and environmental factors influence consumers' attitudes and actions regarding opioid deprescribing. Significant barriers to opioid deprescribing were identified, including fears of pain and withdrawal effects, opioid-related stigma, and perceived inadequacies of the healthcare system. Improved communication between healthcare professionals and consumers regarding expectations of deprescribing and goals of care, as well as the provision of greater opportunities for consumer engagement in decision making were identified as avenues to improve the success of opioid deprescribing. For opioid deprescribing guidelines to be effective and achieve the intended goal of optimizing opioid use, consumers need to feel empowered to engage in opioid reduction or cessation. The findings of this study may facilitate a patient-centred approach for practitioners and guideline developers in creating recommendations and interventions to enable opioid deprescribing through targeting behavioral change.

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

INTRODUCTION

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Evaluation of Chronic, Noncancer Pain Management Initiative in a Multidisciplinary Pain Clinic

BACKGROUND

Chronic pain management is a major challenge for primary care providers (PCPs). PCPs manage many patients with chronic pain and other comorbidities including mental health problems like post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and depression. Chronic pain and opioid problems are a national crisis, particularly among veterans (U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, 2019). There are many veterans with chronic non-cancer pain who are being treated with opioids. Chronic opioid use has contributed to an epidemic of opioid-related adverse events (VA, 2017). Opioids not only result in poor pain control, but have associated risks such as misuse, overdose, and diversion which may be fatal (Frieden & Houry, 2016).

AIMS

The aim of this project was to evaluate chronic non-cancer pain management of veterans using an advanced practice registered nurse (APRN)-led multidisciplinary team approach to incorporate non-opioid and non-pharmacologic modalities to affect self-reported pain and use of prescribed opioids.

METHODS

A retrospective quality improvement (QI) project was conducted in the multidisciplinary pain (MDP) clinic. The APRN used a biopsychosocial approach for chronic pain management guided by the Plan, Do, Study, Act (PDSA) cycle framework. Thirty-four patients who were utilizing opioids for pain management were included using convenience sampling from the MDP clinic. The APRN educated and treated patients with non-opioid medications and non-pharmacolog therapies. A 10-point pain scale and morphine equivalent daily dose (MEDD) were utilized pre- and post-intervention to evaluate the MDP clinic.

RESULTS

Participants were predominantly male (91.8%), with a mean age of 63.18 ± 15.39 years, and 36.4% of whom were retired. Only 20.6% of the participants reported the use of opioids for <12 months. Low back pain (93%) was the most common pain location. The mean baseline MEDD was 41.04 and the post tapered MEDD was 23.05; this revealed a significant decline in MEDD (p < .0001). A decline was also found between pre- and post-pain scores (ranges 0-8). There was a significant reported decline in pain scores with a baseline of 6.11 to post tapering pain of 3.1 (t = 4.99, df = 28, p < .0001). Participants preferred non-opioid medications 94% and non-pharmacologic therapy 86%, like physical therapy, yoga, and acupuncture. Fifty-one percent of patients were referred for injections and 46% were referred to primary care behavior health, which includes pain school, sleep hygiene classes, and cognitive behavior therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

APRNs are in a key position to assess and treat patients based on current evidence while facilitating opioid titration. This initiative highlights that safe tapering of opioids is possible when utilizing a multidisciplinary approach for chronic pain management. Findings support the use of non-pharmacologic and non-opioid therapy for chronic pain management which can result in reduced patient-reported pain. Further research is warranted to examine both pharmacologic (non-opioid) and non-pharmacologic strategies that promote pain management while tapering opioids.