A primary care, multi-disciplinary disease management program for opioid-treated patients with chronic non-cancer pain and a high burden of psychiatric comorbidity

Characterising pharmacists' interventions in chronic non-cancer pain care: a scoping review

BACKGROUND

Chronic non-cancer pain may affect up to 51% of the general population. Pharmacist interventions have shown promise in enhancing patient safety and outcomes. However, our understanding of the scope of pharmacists' interventions remains incomplete.

AIM

Our goal was to characterise pharmacists' interventions for the management of chronic non-cancer pain.

METHOD

Medline, Embase, PsycINFO via Ovid, CINAHL via EBSCO databases and the Cochrane Library were systematically searched. Abstracts and full texts were independently screened by two reviewers. Data were extracted by one reviewer, and validated by the second. Outcomes of studies were charted using the dimensions of the Initiative on Methods, Measurement, and Pain Assessment in Clinical Trials (IMMPACT).

RESULTS

Forty-eight reports were included. Interventions ensuring appropriate drug prescription occurred in 37 (79%) studies. Patient education and healthcare professional education were reported in 28 (60%) and 5 (11%) studies, respectively. Therapy monitoring occurred in 17 (36%) studies. Interventions regularly involved interprofessional collaboration. A median of 75% of reported outcome domains improved due to pharmacist interventions, especially patient disposition (adherence), medication safety and satisfaction with therapy.

CONCLUSION

Pharmacists' interventions enhanced the management of chronic non-cancer pain. Underreported outcome domains and interventions, such as medication management, merit further investigation.

Patient contracts for chronic medical conditions: Scoping review

OBJECTIVE

To describe how and why patient contracts are used for the management of chronic medical conditions.

DATA SOURCES

A scoping review was conducted in the following databases: MEDLINE, Embase, AMED, PsycInfo, Cochrane Library, CINAHL, and Nursing & Allied Health. Literature from 1997 to 2017 was included.

STUDY SELECTION

Articles were included if they were written in English and described the implementation of a patient contract by a health care provider for the management of a chronic condition. Articles had to present an outcome as a result of using the contract or an intervention that included the contract.

SYNTHESIS

Of the 7528 articles found in the original search, 76 met the inclusion criteria for the final review. Multiple study types were included. Extensive variety in contract elements, target populations, clinical settings, and cointerventions was found. Purposes for initiating contracts included behaviour change and skill development, including goal development and problem solving; altering beliefs and knowledge, including motivation and perceived self-efficacy; improving interpersonal relationships and role clarification; improving quality and process of chronic care; and altering objective and subjective health indices. How contracts were developed, implemented, and assessed was inconsistently described.

CONCLUSION

More research is required to determine whether the use of contracts is accomplishing their intended purposes. Questions remain regarding their rationale, development, and implementation.

What Influences Outcomes From Inpatient Multidisciplinary Pain Management Programs?: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

Although inpatient multidisciplinary pain management programs (PMPs) are effective for chronic pain, not all patients benefit equally and there is limited evidence regarding predictors of outcome. This meta-analysis aimed to identify patient or program characteristics associated with outcomes from inpatient PMPs, and to examine the time course of effects following discharge.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Medline, EBSCO, and Scopus were searched to identify articles reporting outcomes from inpatient multidisciplinary PMPs. Information was extracted on study design, participant and program characteristics, and outcomes. Effect sizes were computed for pain, physical function, depression, anxiety, and mental health outcomes. Study-level predictors of outcome were investigated with moderator analyses and meta-regression. A risk of bias assessment and sensitivity analyses were conducted and the GRADE criteria for prognostic studies were applied to assess confidence in findings.

RESULTS

In all, 85 studies (111 cohorts; 15,255 participants) were included. Three quarters of studies demonstrated low risk of bias. Larger effect sizes (for at least 1 outcome measure) occurred in studies where participants had more severe pain (greater intensity/longer duration), participants with alcohol or drug problems were not excluded, samples comprised mixed pain conditions, and programs included a cognitive component and/or a passive therapy component. Effect sizes for pain and physical function were maintained at follow-up, but effect sizes for depression and anxiety declined over time.

DISCUSSION

Inpatient multidisciplinary PMPs may be well suited to patients with severe or long-lasting pain. Programs should adopt broad patient inclusion criteria, and outcomes were similar for programs based on cognitive-behavioral versus mindfulness/acceptance-based therapies.

Opioid medicines management in primary care settings: A scoping review of quantitative studies of pharmacist activities

To undertake a scoping review of pharmacist activities in opioid medicines management in primary care settings, including those developed or led by pharmacists, or in which pharmacists were members of broader multidisciplinary teams, and to collate the activities, models of care and settings, and reported outcomes. The bibliographic databases MEDLINE, EMBASE, International Pharmaceutical Abstracts, CINAHL, SCOPUS and Web of Science were searched. Studies with quantitative evaluation and published in English were eligible. Participants were patients with any pain category or an opioid use disorder, and healthcare providers. Studies originating in hospitals or involving supply functions were not included. Screening of literature and data charting of results were undertaken by two researchers. The 51 studies included in the scoping review occurred in primary care settings collated into four categories: general practice or primary care clinics, healthcare organisations, community pharmacies and outreach services. Studies were primarily of opioid use in chronic, noncancer pain. Other indications were opioid use disorder, cancer and dental pain. Pharmacist activities targeted risk mitigation, patient and provider education and broader, strategic approaches. Patient-related outcomes included reduced opioid load, improved functionality and symptom management, enhanced access to services and medication-assisted treatments, and engagement in risk-mitigation strategies. Behaviour change of providers was demonstrated. The review has identified the significant contribution that pharmacists working in primary care settings can make to minimise harm from opioids. Strategies implemented in isolation have the potential to further reduce adverse clinical outcomes with greater collaboration and coordination, such as opioid stewardship.

Pharmacist-led intervention on chronic pain management: A systematic review and meta-analysis

AIMS

Pharmacists have been contributing to the management of chronic pain, ensuring the quality use of medicine. However, there is diversity in the interventions provided by pharmacists and their impact.

METHODS

Six electronic databases were searched from inception until June 2020 for articles published in English examining the intervention provided by the pharmacist in chronic pain management. Studies investigating the impact of pharmacist intervention individually or multidisciplinary teams including pharmacists for chronic pain management were included.

RESULTS

Fourteen studies (2365 participants) were included in the current review. Six studies were randomized controlled trials while the remainder were observational studies in which pharmacists provided intervention individually or in collaboration with other healthcare professionals. Medication review was the most common intervention provided by the pharmacist. The pooled analysis found that pharmacist-led interventions reduced the pain intensity (-0.22; 95% confidence interval [CI]: -0.35 to -0.09; moderate certainty) among participants with chronic pain. Opiate stewardship provided by pharmacists was effective; however, mixed results were noted on the impact of the intervention on physical functioning, anxiety, depression and quality of life. Pharmacist intervention was more expensive than treatment as usual.

CONCLUSIONS

Pharmacists contribute substantially to chronic pain management, ensuring the quality use of medicine, resulting in reduced pain intensity. Further studies with rigorous design are needed to measure the impact of pharmacist-provided intervention individually or in a multidisciplinary team on the economic benefit and other health outcomes.

Role of pharmacists in optimising opioid therapy for chronic non-malignant pain; A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Opioid optimisation is a global issue in Chronic Non-malignant Pain (CNMP) management.

OBJECTIVE

This systematic review aims to assess the effectiveness of interventions delivered by pharmacists in outpatient clinical settings, community pharmacies and primary care services in optimising opioid therapy for people with CNMP and to explore stakeholders' opinions about role of pharmacists in optimising opioid therapy.

METHODS

We conducted searches in PubMed, CINAHL, Psych Info, EMBASE, ISI Web of Science and Conference Proceedings and International Pharmaceutical Abstracts. All studies where pharmacists in outpatient clinical settings, community pharmacies and patient care services helped in optimisation of opioids in the treatment of CNMP as individuals or part of a team were included. Authors followed the 27-item PRISMA guidelines and the review was registered in PROSPERO. All authors were involved in screening and selection of studies and included studies between January 1990-June 2020. Studies not published in English language and participants with cancer pain were excluded. All the included studies were descriptively synthesized.

RESULTS

Fourteen studies were included in the final data synthesis of this review and the total number of participants in all studies was 1175. Interventions by pharmacists were successful in decreasing opioid dose in 4 studies and improved patient opioid safety in 5 studies. Stakeholders considered that the role of pharmacists in optimisation of opioid therapy for people with CNMP can be promising and should be further developed.

CONCLUSION

This systematic review gives an overview of pharmacist intervention feasibility, stakeholders' opinions and possible benefits on opioid optimisation in people with CNMP in outpatient clinical settings, community pharmacies and primary care settings. However, further research is warranted, which can guide the development of new policies and guidelines for the utilisation of pharmacists to promote opioid safety in people using prescription opioids for CNMP management.

Interventions to optimize prescribed medicines and reduce their misuse in chronic non-malignant pain: a systematic review

Purpose

Sub-optimal opioid prescribing and use is viewed as a major contributor to the growing opioid crisis. This study aims to systematically review the nature, process and outcomes of interventions to optimize prescribed medicines and reduce their misuse in chronic non-malignant pain (CNMP) with a particular focus on minimizing misuse of opiates.

Methods

A systematic review of literature was undertaken. Search of literature using Medline, EMBASE and CINAHL databases from 2000 onwards was conducted. Screening and selection, data extraction and risk of bias assessments were undertaken by two independent reviewers. Narrative synthesis of the data was conducted.

Results

A total of 21 studies were included in the review, of which three were RCTs. Interventions included clinical (e.g. urine drug testing, opioid treatment contract, pill count), behavioural (e.g. electrical diaries about craving), cognitive behavioural treatment and/or educational interventions for patients and healthcare providers delivered as a single or as a multi-component intervention. Medication optimization outcomes included aspects of misuse, abuse, aberrant drug behaviour, adherence and non-adherence. Although all evaluations showed improvement in medication optimization outcomes, multi-component interventions were more likely to consider and to have shown improvement in clinical outcomes such as pain intensity, quality of life, psychological states and functional improvement compared to single-component interventions.

Conclusions

A well-structured CNMP management programme to promote medicines optimization should include multi-component interventions delivered by a multidisciplinary team of healthcare professionals and target both healthcare professionals and patients. There was heterogeneity in definitions applied and interventions evaluated. There is a need for the development of clear and consistent terminology and measurement criteria to facilitate better comparisons of research evidence.

Supplementary Information

The online version of this article (10.1007/s00228-020-03026-4) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

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

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

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.

Short-Acting Opioids Are Associated with Comparable Analgesia to Long-Acting Opioids in Patients with Chronic Osteoarthritis with a Reduced Opioid Equivalence Dosing

Setting

There are no studies that exist within the primary care setting that address optimal opioid therapy in osteoarthritis patients. In light of the recently released US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention guidelines on opioid use in chronic noncancer pain, there is a pressing need to better characterize the effectiveness of long- and short-acting opioids.

Objective

To examine the effectiveness of short-acting opioids (SAO) vs long-acting opioids (LAO) and combination therapies (SAO and LAO) for treating chronic osteoarthritis pain in a retrospective trial.

Methods

Average and lowest pain scores approximately one to two weeks prior to patient appointments were collected and averaged for both SAO and LAO patients who were actively enrolled in a pain clinic at an academic medical center.

Results

There was no statistical difference between reported average and low pain scores for the SAO vs LAO groups (P = 0.201 and P = 0.296, respectively), although the SAO group on average had a significantly lower morphine equivalence (P < 0.001). Various covariates for both groups were tested in an adjusted model to look at trends in the use of nonopioid medications (i.e., acetaminophen, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, antidepressants, and adjunct analgesic agents). No significant differences in pain scores existed when comparing covariates for the SAO vs LAO groups.

Conclusions

The study suggests that in addition to being effective, short-acting opioid medications may also provide a safer and cheaper alternative to long-acting opioid therapies in the treatment of chronic osteoarthritis.

Perspective

This article investigates the effectiveness of short-acting vs long-acting opioids for the treatment of chronic noncancer pain, specifically osteoarthritis. This information could potentially aid practitioners in primary care environments to design equally efficacious and less costly opioid regimens, while simultaneously enhancing patient safety.

Physician-pharmacist collaboration on chronic non-cancer pain management during the opioid crisis: A qualitative interview study

BACKGROUND

Management of chronic non-cancer pain is complex, requiring clinicians to balance pain management with the risk of opioid abuse. The role of ambulatory care pharmacists in chronic pain management is well-established, but little research has explored the feasibility of building collaboration on chronic pain and opioid management between physicians and community pharmacists.

OBJECTIVE

To explore physician and pharmacist perspectives on the opioid crisis and the possibility of physician and community pharmacist collaborations to manage chronic non-cancer pain in the context of the opioid crisis.

METHODS

Semi-structured interviews were performed with a snowball convenience sample 15 physicians and 25 pharmacists in North Carolina between November 2016 and April 2017. Transcribed data were analyzed using applied thematic analysis, and resulting codes were organized into themes and domains which emerged from analysis.

RESULTS

Both physicians and pharmacists described current care deficiencies and steps needed to mitigate opioid abuse and diversion. Physicians discussed the need for additional supports and resources for chronic pain management and regarded positively the role of the community pharmacist in chronic pain management and mitigating opioid abuse. Pharmacists identified cost as the major barrier to implementing new services, and expressed willingness to participate in new chronic pain and opioid interventions.

CONCLUSION

Within the study sample, strong interest exists for collaboration between physicians and community pharmacists. This highlights a potential opportunity to expand care for patients with chronic non-cancer pain.

Are injured workers with higher rehabilitation service utilization less likely to be persistent opioid users? A cross-sectional study

BACKGROUND

Given its role in treating musculoskeletal conditions, rehabilitation medicine may be an important factor in decreasing the use of opioids among injured workers. The primary objective was to determine if increased utilization of rehabilitation services was associated with decreased persistent opioid use among workers' compensation claimants. The secondary objective was to determine the combined association of rehabilitation service utilization and persistent opioid use with days of work lost due to injury.

METHODS

Using Chesapeake Employers' Insurance Company claims data from 2008 to 2016, claimants with at least one filled opioid prescription within 90 days of injury were eligible for inclusion. The primary outcome was persistent opioid use, defined as at least one filled opioid prescription more than 90 days from injury. The secondary outcome was days lost due to injury. The primary variable of interest, rehabilitation service utilization, was quantified based on the number of rehabilitation service claims and grouped into five levels (no utilization, and four quartiles - low, medium, high, very high).

RESULTS

Of the 9596 claimants included, 29% were persistent opioid users. Compared to claimants that did not utilize rehabilitation services, patients with very high rehabilitation utilization were nearly three times more likely (OR: 2.71, 95% CI: 2.28-3.23, p < 0.001) to be persistent opioid users and claimants with low and medium levels of rehabilitation utilization were less likely to be persistent opioid users (low OR: 0.20, 95%: 0.14-0.27, p < 0.001) (medium OR: 0.26, 95% CI: 0.21-0.32, p < 0.001). Compared to claimants that did not utilize rehabilitation services, very high rehabilitation utilization was associated with a 27% increase in days lost due to the injury (95% CI: 21.9-32.3, p < 0.001), while low (- 16.4, 95% CI: -21.3 - -11.5, p < 0.001) and medium (- 11.5, 95% CI: -21.6 - -13.8, p < 0.001) levels of rehabilitation utilization were associated with a decrease in days lost due to injury, adjusting for persistent opioid use.

CONCLUSION

Our analysis of insurance claims data revealed that low to moderate levels of rehabilitation was associated with reduced persistent opioid use and days lost to injury. Very high rehabilitation utilization was associated with increased persistent opioid use and increased time from work.

Prescription Medication Use Among Community-Based U.S. Adults With Chronic Low Back Pain: A Cross-Sectional Population Based Study

Many classes of medications have been evaluated in chronic low back pain (cLBP), however their utilization in the community remains unclear. We examined patterns of prescription medication use among Americans with cLBP in a nationally representative, community-based sample. The Back Pain Survey was administered to a representative sample of U.S. adults aged 20 to 69 years (N = 5,103) during the 2009 to 2010 cycle of the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey. cLBP was defined as self-reported pain in the area between the lower posterior margin of the ribcage and the horizontal gluteal fold on most days for at least 3 months (N = 700). Home-based interviews with pill bottle verification were used to capture commonly prescribed medications for chronic pain. Among the sample of U.S. adults with cLBP aged 20 to 69 years, 36.9% took at least 1 prescription pain medication in the past 30 days; of them, 18.8% used opioids, 9.7% nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, 8.5% muscle relaxants, and 6.9% gabapentin or pregabalin. Nonpain antidepressants and hypnotics were used by 17.8% and 4.7%, respectively. Opioids were used long-term in 76.9% of cases (median = 2 years) and were frequently coadministered with antidepressants, benzodiazepines, or hypnotics. Ninety-four percent of prescription opioids in the cLBP population were used by individuals with less than a college education. Opioids were the most widely used prescription analgesic class in community-based U.S. adults with cLBP and were often coadministered with other central nervous system-active medications. Opioid use was highly prevalent among less educated Americans with cLBP.

PERSPECTIVE

Because prescription opioid use is an issue of national concern, we examined pain-related prescription medication use in community-dwelling U.S. adults with cLBP. Opioids were the most common prescription pain medication, typically used long-term, in combination with other central nervous system-active agents, and disproportionately among individuals with less than a college education.

A systematic review of strategies to improve appropriate use of opioids and to reduce opioid use disorder and deaths from prescription opioids

Background

Abuse of prescription opioids is a serious problem in North America.

Aims

The aim of this study was to conduct a systematic review of peer-reviewed and grey literature to examine existing strategies aimed at improving the appropriate use of prescription opioids and/or reducing the misuse, abuse, and diversion of these drugs.

Methods

The following electronic databases were searched to September 2015 without language restrictions: MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, and CINAHL; the grey literature was searched to May 2014. Reference lists of retrieved papers were also searched. Studies were eligible if a strategy was implemented and its impact on at least one of the primary outcomes of interest (appropriate prescription opioid use; misuse, abuse, opioid use disorder, diversion; overdose) was measured. Standardized, prepiloted forms were used for relevance screening, quality appraisal, and data extraction.

Results

A total of 65 studies that assessed 66 distinct strategies were identified. Due to the heterogeneity of the strategies, a qualitative synthesis was conducted. Many studies combined more than one type of strategy and measured various types of outcomes. The strategies with most promising results involved education, clinical practices, collaborations, prescription monitoring programs, public campaigns, opioid substitution programs, and naloxone distribution. We also found strategies that had some unintended consequences after implementation.

Conclusions

Our review identified successful strategies that have been implemented and evaluated in various jurisdictions. There is a need to replicate and disseminate these strategies where the problem of prescription opioid misuse and abuse has taken a toll on society.

Effectiveness of Models Used to Deliver Multimodal Care for Chronic Musculoskeletal Pain: a Rapid Evidence Review

BACKGROUND

Primary care providers (PCPs) face many system- and patient-level challenges in providing multimodal care for patients with complex chronic pain as recommended in some pain management guidelines. Several models have been developed to improve the delivery of multimodal chronic pain care. These models vary in their key components, and work is needed to identify which have the strongest evidence of clinically-important improvements in pain and function. Our objective was to determine which primary care-based multimodal chronic pain care models provide clinically relevant benefits, define key elements of these models, and identify patients who are most likely to benefit.

METHODS

To identify studies, we searched MEDLINE® (1996 to October 2016), CINAHL, reference lists, and numerous other sources and consulted with experts. We used predefined criteria for study selection, data abstraction, internal validity assessment, and strength of evidence grading.

RESULTS

We identified nine models, evaluated in mostly randomized controlled trials (RCTs). The RCTs included 3816 individuals primarily from the USA. The most common pain location was the back. Five models primarily coupling a decision-support component-most commonly algorithm-guided treatment and/or stepped care-with proactive ongoing treatment monitoring have the best evidence of providing clinically relevant improvement in pain intensity and pain-related function over 9 to 12 months (NNT range, 4 to 13) and variable improvement in quality of life, depression, anxiety, and sleep. The strength of the evidence was generally low, as each model was only supported by a single RCT with imprecise findings.

DISCUSSION

Multimodal chronic pain care delivery models coupling decision support with proactive treatment monitoring consistently provide clinically relevant improvement in pain and function. Wider implementation of these models should be accompanied by further evaluation of clinical and implementation effectiveness.

Pharmacoepidemiologic analyses of opioid use among OEF/OIF/OND veterans

Pharmacoepidemiologic analysis found that OEF/OIF/OND veterans have high rates of opioid use, characterized by moderate dose intensity and long treatment duration.

There is a great deal of concern about opioid use in veterans, particularly those who served in Afghanistan (OEF) and Iraq (OIF and OND). The current study provides a detailed pharmacoepidemiologic analysis of opioid use among OEF/OIF/OND veterans from FY09 to FY12. Data from 3 data repositories from the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) were used to describe demographic, clinical, and medication characteristics associated with opioid use among OEF/OIF/OND veterans and among those with TBI. Logistic regression models were used to identify risks associated with chronic opioid use in FY12. Approximately 23% of all OEF/OIF/OND veterans and 35% of those with TBI received any opioid medications. Most received moderate doses ranging from 26 to 30 mg morphine equivalent dose daily. Median days of opioid use for all OEF/OIF/OND veterans were 30 to 40 days. Factors associated with chronic use in both groups included young age, male sex, white race, being married, and living in rural areas. A diagnosis of PTSD (odds ratio [OR] = 1.22, P < 0.0001), major depressive disorder (OR = 1.14, P < 0.0001), and tobacco use disorder (OR = 1.18, P < 0.0001) were strongly associated with chronic opioid use. Back pain was also strongly associated with chronic use (OR = 2.50, P < 0.0001). As pain severity increased the odds of chronic opioid use also increased: mild pain (OR = 3.76, P < 0.0001), moderate pain (OR = 6.80, P < 0.0001), and severe pain (OR = 8.49, P < 0.0001). Opioid use among OEF/OIF/OND veterans is characterized by moderate doses that are used over relatively long periods of time by a minority of veterans.

Opioids: Clinical Practice, Monitoring, and Medicolegal Considerations

Background

In the past decade, opioid use in the general population of the US has increased dramatically. Concomitantly, opioid-related morbidity and mortality have also risen steeply. The causes of opioid over-prescribing are multifactorial, with pressure from medical agencies, patients, aggressive patient-directed marketing, and use of patient surveys as an evaluation tool to unduly influence medical providers' decision-making. Providers also have significant concerns regarding scrutiny from their medical board and exposure to medicolegal liability.

Content

To provide the basis for best practice recommendations, several aspects of modern opioid prescribing practice require review. The practicing clinician should be aware of: (a) the pervasiveness of current opioid prescribing within the US; (b) the availability and applicability of clinical tools used to assess patient risk; (c) the new guidelines designed to facilitate appropriate and safe medical use of opioids; (d) the incorporation of clinical tools and best documentation practices to reduce medicolegal exposure.

Summary

On completion of this review, the reader should be able to recognize the magnitude of the problem of opioid over-prescribing in the US and identify several patient risk factors for opioid misuse, abuse, and/or diversion. Specifically, better familiarity with the recently published CDC guidelines for opioid prescribing will help ensure the adoption of best-use practices that maximize therapeutic efficacy while attenuating the possibility of harm to patients. A thorough review of the legal principles and risk-mitigation strategies relevant to opioid prescribing will also lessen the clinician's exposure to medicolegal liability.

Defining Team Effort Involved in Patient Care from the Primary Care Physician's Perspective

BACKGROUND

A better understanding of the attributes of patients who require more effort to manage may improve risk adjustment approaches and lead to more efficient resource allocation, improved patient care and health outcomes, and reduced burnout in primary care clinicians.

OBJECTIVE

To identify and characterize high-effort patients from the physician's perspective.

DESIGN

Cohort study.

PARTICIPANTS

Ninety-nine primary care physicians in an academic primary care network.

MAIN MEASURES

From a list of 100 randomly selected patients in their panels, PCPs identified patients who required a high level of team-based effort and patients they considered complex. For high-effort patients, PCPs indicated which factors influenced their decision: medical/care coordination, behavioral health, and/or socioeconomic factors. We examined differences in patient characteristics based on PCP-defined effort and complexity.

KEY RESULTS

Among 9594 eligible patients, PCPs classified 2277 (23.7 %) as high-effort and 2676 (27.9 %) as complex. Behavioral health issues were the major driver of effort in younger patients, while medical/care coordination issues predominated in older patients. Compared to low-effort patients, high-effort patients were significantly (P < 0.01 for all) more likely to have higher rates of medical (e.g. 23.2 % vs. 6.3 % for diabetes) and behavioral health problems (e.g. 9.8 % vs. 2.9 % for substance use disorder), more frequent primary care visits (10.9 vs. 6.0 visits), and higher acute care utilization rates (25.8 % vs. 7.7 % for emergency department [ED] visits and 15.0 % vs. 3.9 % for hospitalization). Almost one in five (18 %) patients who were considered high-effort were not deemed complex by the same PCPs.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients defined as high-effort by their primary care physicians, not all of whom were medically complex, appear to have a high burden of psychosocial issues that may not be accounted for in current chronic disease-focused risk adjustment approaches.

[Long-term opioid therapy in chronic noncancer pain. A systematic review and meta-analysis of efficacy, tolerability and safety in open-label extension trials with study duration of at least 26 weeks]

BACKGROUND

The efficacy and safety of long-term (≥ 6 months) opioid therapy (LtOT) in chronic noncancer pain (CNCP) is under debate. A systematic review with meta-analysis of the efficacy and harms of opioids in open-label extension studies of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) has not been conducted until now.

METHODS

We screened MEDLINE and clinicaltrials.gov (through to December 2013), as well as reference sections of systematic reviews of long-term RCTs of opioids in CNCP. We included open-label extension trials with a study duration ≥ 26 weeks of RCTs of ≥ 2 weeks duration. Using a random effects model, pooled estimates of event rates for categorical data and standardized mean differences (SMD) for continuous variables were calculated.

RESULTS

We included 11 open-label extension studies with 2445 participants with nociceptive (low back, osteoarthritis) and neuropathic (radicular, polyneuropathy) pain. Median study duration was 26 (range 26-108) weeks. Four studies tested oxycodone, two studies tramadol and buprenorphine; hydromorphone, morphine, oxymorphone and tapentadol were each tested in one study. Of the patients randomized at baseline, 28.5 % (95 % confidence interval, CI, 17.9-39.2 %) finished the open-label period; 53.5 % (95 % CI 38.1-68.2 %) of patients entering the open-label period finished the open-label period. In sum, the total loss was 71.5 % (95 % CI 60.9-83.1 %) of all patients primarily included into the RCT. A total of 4.9 % (95 % CI 2.9-8.2 %) of patients dropped out due lack of efficacy; 16.8 % (95 % CI 11.0-24.8 %) dropped out to due adverse events (AE) in the open-label period and 0.08 % (95 % CI 0.001-0.05 %) of patients died during the open-label period. Only one study systematically assessed aberrant drug behavior of the patients: 5.7 % (95 % CI 3.4-9.6 %) showed aberrant drug behavior in the opinion of the investigators and 2.6 % (95 % CI 1.2-5.8 %) were judged to show aberrant drug behavior by independent expert assessment. There was no significant change (p = 0.50) in pain intensity between the end of the randomized period and the end of open-label phase (SMD 0.19 [- 0.03, 0.41]; six studies with 1360 participants).

CONCLUSION

Only a minority of patients selected for opioid therapy at randomization finished the long-term open-label study. However, sustained effects of pain reduction could be demonstrated in these patients. LtOT can be considered in carefully selected and monitored CNCP patients who experience clinically meaningful pain reduction with at least tolerable AE in short-term opioid therapy. The English full-text version of this article is freely available at SpringerLink (under "Supplementary Material").

Assessment of Alcohol-Induced Dose Dumping with a Hydrocodone Bitartrate Extended-Release Tablet Formulated with CIMA(®) Abuse Deterrence Technology

BACKGROUND

Greater drug content requirements for extended-release (ER) opioids necessitate greater protection against dose dumping. Hydrocodone ER employs the CIMA(®) Abuse-Deterrence Technology platform, which provides resistance against rapid release of the active moiety when the tablet is manipulated or taken with alcohol.

OBJECTIVE

Assess effects of alcohol on hydrocodone ER pharmacokinetics.

STUDY DESIGN

Open-label, crossover (January 25-April 30, 2010).

SETTING

Single center.

PARTICIPANTS

Forty healthy adults.

INTERVENTION

Subjects received all four treatments in a randomized manner (separated by a minimum 5-day washout): hydrocodone ER 15 mg with 240 mL water and 240 mL orange juice containing 4, 20, and 40% alcohol in a fasted state. Naltrexone was administered to minimize opioid-related adverse events.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE

Effect of alcohol on pharmacokinetics of hydrocodone ER assessed by comparing systemic exposure [maximum plasma drug concentration (Cmax) and area under the plasma drug concentration-versus-time curve from time 0 to infinity (AUC0-∞)] after administration with alcohol or with water.

RESULTS

Geometric means ratios of hydrocodone ER with 4, 20, and 40% alcohol relative to water were 1.05, 1.09, and 1.14, respectively, for Cmax and 1.07, 1.13, and 1.17, respectively, for AUC0-∞. All 90% confidence intervals for these geometric means ratios fell within the limits of 0.8 and 1.25. Increasing alcohol concentrations did not notably affect systemic exposure but were associated with increased adverse events.

CONCLUSIONS

Hydrocodone ER tablets were resistant to dose dumping when administered with alcohol in healthy subjects based on similar systemic exposures observed across all treatments.

Nonmedical Prescription Opioid Use and DSM-5 Nonmedical Prescription Opioid Use Disorder in the United States

OBJECTIVE

The authors present 12-month and lifetime prevalence, correlates, psychiatric comorbidity, and treatment of nonmedical prescription opioid use (NMPOU) and DSM-5 NMPOU disorder (NMPOUD).

METHODS

Data were derived from the 2012-2013 National Epidemiologic Survey on Alcohol and Related Conditions-III (NESARC-III) (N = 36,309).

RESULTS

Prevalences of 12-month and lifetime NMPOU were 4.1% and 11.3%, exceeding rates in the 2001-2002 NESARC (1.8%, 4.7%). Twelve-month and lifetime rates of DSM-5 NMPOUD were 0.9% and 2.1%. NESARC-III DSM-IV NMPOUD rates (0.8%, 2.9%) were greater than those observed in the 2001-2002 NESARC (0.4% and 1.4%). Rates of NMPOU were greater among men, but no sex differential was observed for NMPOUD. Prevalences of NMPOU and NMPOUD were generally greater among 18- to 64-year-old individuals, whites, and Native Americans, and individuals with lower socioeconomic status. Associations were observed between 12-month and lifetime NMPOU and NMPOUD and other drug use disorders, posttraumatic stress disorder, and borderline, schizotypal, and antisocial personality disorders; persistent depression and major depressive disorder (for NMPOU); and bipolar I disorder (for NMPOUD). Only 5.5% and 17.7% of individuals with 12-month NMPOU and NMPOUD were ever treated.

CONCLUSIONS

NMPOU and NMPOUD have considerably increased over the past decade, are associated with a broad array of risk factors and comorbidities, and largely go untreated in the United States. More information on the determinants, characteristics, and outcomes of NMPOU and NMPOUD is needed to support evidence-based interventions and prevention.

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.

The Economic Impact of Opioid Use in the Management of Chronic Nonmalignant Pain

Chronic nonmalignant pain (CNMP), defined as persistent pain that is not attributable to a potentially life-limiting condition and has a duration of at least 3 months, is widespread in the United States. Moderate-to-severe CNMP often is treated with opioid analgesics, and there is ongoing debate regarding appropriate allocation of opioids to treat CNMP because long-term treatment can result in problematic side effects, drug misuse, or abuse leading to detrimental medical, social, and economic consequences. Furthermore, therapeutic strategies arising from concerns about the misuse of opioids may impede the treatment of patients who require strong analgesics for adequate pain relief. While current CNMP management includes nonpharmacologic and pharmacologic approaches, including acetaminophen, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, and opioids, there is debate regarding the risk-benefit profile of opioids for chronic pain treatment. Mitigation of opioid misuse and abuse and proper administration of opioid analgesics must be balanced against providing appropriate analgesia. To accomplish this, managed care policies could implement guidelines that focus on evaluating risk characteristics for opioid misuse and abuse, use opioid dose-sparing strategies, and encourage the use of alternative analgesics or nonpharmacologic therapy when appropriate. The purpose of this review is to examine challenges and costs associated with CNMP management using opioids and to summarize alternative therapeutic approaches.

Effective strategy for improving health care outcomes: Multidisciplinary care in cerebral infarction patients

Multidisciplinary teams provide effective patient treatment strategies. South Korea expanded its health program recently to include multidisciplinary treatment. This study characterized the relationship between multidisciplinary care and mortality within 30 days after hospitalization in cerebral infarction patients. We used the National Health Insurance claim data (n = 63,895) from 120 hospitals during 2010-2013 to analyze readmission within 30 days after hospitalization for cerebral infarction. We performed χ(2) tests, analysis of variance and multilevel modeling to investigate the associations between multidisciplinary care and death within 30 days after hospitalization for stroke. Deaths within 30 days of hospitalization due to cerebral infarction was 3.0% (n = 1898/63,895). Multidisciplinary care was associated with lower risk of death within 30 days in inpatients with cerebral infarction (odds ratio: 0.84, 95% confidence interval: 0.72-0.99). Patients treated by a greater number of specialists had lower risk of death within 30 days of hospitalization. Additional analyses showed that such associations varied by the combination of specialists (i.e., neurologist and neurosurgeon). In conclusion, death rates within 30 days of hospitalization for cerebral infarction were lower in hospitals with multidisciplinary care. Our findings certainly suggest that a high number of both neurosurgeon and neurologist is not always an effective alternative in managing stroke inpatients, and emphasize the importance of an optimal combination in the same number of hospital staffing.

Tapering Long-term Opioid Therapy in Chronic Noncancer Pain: Evidence and Recommendations for Everyday Practice

Increasing concern about the risks and limited evidence supporting the therapeutic benefit of long-term opioid therapy for chronic noncancer pain are leading prescribers to consider discontinuing the use of opioids. In addition to overt addiction or diversion, the presence of adverse effects, diminishing analgesia, reduced function and quality of life, or the absence of progress toward functional goals can justify an attempt at weaning patients from long-term opioid therapy. However, discontinuing opioid therapy is often hindered by patients' psychiatric comorbidities and poor coping skills, as well as the lack of formal guidelines for the prescribers. The aim of this article is to review the existing literature and formulate recommendations for practitioners aiming to discontinue long-term opioid therapy. Specifically, this review aims to answer the following questions: What is an optimal opioid tapering regimen? How can the risks involved in a taper be managed? What are the alternatives to an opioid taper? A PubMed literature search was conducted using the keywords chronic pain combined with opioid withdrawal, taper, wean and detoxification. Six hundred ninety-five documents were identified and screened; 117 were deemed directly relevant and are included. On the base of this literature review, this article proposes evidence-based recommendations and expert-based suggestions for clinical practice. Furthermore, areas of lack of evidence are identified, providing opportunities for further research.

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.

Animal models for opioid addiction drug discovery

INTRODUCTION

Since ancient times, the opium poppy has been used in a variety of settings, including pain management. Natural and synthetic derivatives of opium are commonly used in medicine today and include drugs, such as morphine, codeine, hydromorphone and oxycodone. Although excellent at inhibiting pain, these narcotics often produce a state of euphoria leading to misuse and abuse by the general population, particularly in young adults. The misuse of prescription opiates has continually increased over the past 10 years despite associated negative outcomes, resulting in opiate psychological dependence, withdrawal and relapse.

AREAS COVERED

This paper briefly refers to the history of opiate use and the modern challenges associated with chronic exposure. The authors present the prevalence of addiction and misuse of prescription opiates and discuss some of the opiate-associated effects. This includes activation of reward circuitry and compensatory receptor mechanisms. Finally, the authors provide a review on neuroadaptive changes that manifest during opiate dependence, withdrawal and relapse in animal models.

EXPERT OPINION

In spite of the various methods available to treat opiate addiction, there is still a huge unmet need for its management, including the creative design of novel, non-addictive pain medications. The authors believe that multifunctional compounds or combinations of compounds that inhibit pain pathways, whereas not activating the reward pathways, will begin to subdue the opiate addiction endemic.

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.

Opioid maintenance, weaning and detoxification techniques: where we have been, where we are now and what the future holds

SUMMARY Medically supervised opioid withdrawal is a complex and constantly evolving exercise in multimodal therapy that draws from the expertise of a variety of clinical specialties. Acute substitution and weaning has been performed utilizing opioid agonists, partial agonists (e.g., buprenorphine), mixed agonist/antagonists (e.g., Suboxone®), and α2 adrenergic agonists. While thousands of patients are being treated with these 'classic' opioid-withdrawal techniques, traditional treatment approaches are being challenged by the emergence of innovative techniques based on an understanding of the neurochemistry of addiction. Pharmacotherapy with controlled withdrawal is currently the most reliable method of opioid detoxification, but, as translational medicine continues to advance and genomic markers for opioid sensitivity and dependence are identified, the future shows great potential for growth and change.

Opioid therapy for chronic pain in the United States: promises and perils

Opioid therapy offers the promise of reducing the burden of chronic pain in not just individual patients, but among the broad population of patients with chronic pain. Randomized trials have demonstrated that opioid therapy for up to 12-16weeks is superior to placebo, but have not addressed longer-term use. In the United States, opioid sales have quadrupled during 2000-2010, with parallel increases in opioid accidental overdose deaths and substance abuse admissions. Clinical use of long-term opioid therapy is characterized by a pattern of adverse selection, where high-risk patients are prescribed high-risk opioid regimens. This adverse selection may link these trends in use, abuse, and overdose. Long-term opioid therapy appears to be associated with iatrogenic harm to the patients who receive the prescriptions and to the general population. The United States has, in effect, conducted an experiment of population-wide treatment of chronic pain with long-term opioid therapy. The population-wide benefits have been hard to demonstrate, but the harms are now well demonstrated.

Days with pain and substance use disorders: is there an association?

OBJECTIVES

We investigated possible associations between pain frequency and the 5 most common substance use disorders: alcohol abuse/dependence, cocaine abuse/dependence, methamphetamine abuse/dependence, opioid abuse/dependence, and marijuana abuse/dependence.

METHODS

We used data from the Rural Stimulant Study, a longitudinal (7 waves), observational study of at-risk stimulant users (cocaine and methamphetamine) in Arkansas and Kentucky (n=462). In fixed-effects logistic regression models, we regressed our measures of substance use disorders on the number of days with pain in the past 30 days and depression severity.

RESULTS

Time periods when individuals had 1 to 15 days [odds ratio (OR)=1.85, P<0.001] or 16+ days (OR=2.18, P<0.001) with pain in the past 30 days were more likely to have a diagnosis of alcohol abuse/dependence, compared with time periods when individuals had no days with pain. Compared with time periods when individuals had no pain days in the past 30 days, time periods when individuals had 16+ pain days were more likely to have a diagnosis of opioid abuse/dependence (OR=3.32, P=0.02). Number of days with pain was not significantly associated with other substance use disorders.

DISCUSSION

Pain frequency seems to be associated with an increased risk for alcohol abuse/dependence and opioid abuse/dependence in this population, and the magnitude of the association is medium to large. Further research is needed to investigate this in more representative populations and to determine causal relationships.

Co-occurring depression and pain in multiple sclerosis

Depression and pain are highly prevalent among individuals with multiple sclerosis, and they often co-occur. The purpose of this article is to summarize the literature and theory related to the comorbidity of pain and depression and describe how their presence can impact individuals with multiple sclerosis. Additionally, the article discusses how existing treatments of pain and depression could be adapted to address shared mechanisms and overcome barriers to treatment utilization.

Barriers to medical provider support for prescription naloxone as overdose antidote for lay responders

Poisonings are the leading cause of adult injury death in the United States. Over 12 weeks in 2011, 143 key informant interviews were conducted using a structured interview guide in three study sites in New England. This analysis focuses on the 24 interviews with emergency department providers, substance use treatment providers, pain specialists, and generalist/family medicine practitioners. Using an iterative coding process, we analyzed statements regarding support and concern about naloxone prescription for pain patients and drug users. The study's implications and limitations are discussed and future research suggested. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention funded this study.

Attitudes of community pharmacists to antibiotic dispensing and microbial resistance: a qualitative study in Portugal

BACKGROUND

The inappropriate use of antibiotics is considered a main cause of microbial resistance. This is an important public health problem. Community pharmacists have an important role in the management of drugs for outpatients.

OBJECTIVE

Our study sought to explore pharmacists' knowledge, attitudes, perceptions and dispensing habits insofar as to antibiotics and microbial resistance.

SETTING

The study was developed with community pharmacists in the North of Portugal.

METHODS

Qualitative research in the form of focus groups (FG). Focus groups were conducted with 4-7 pharmacists, using a moderator. A topic guide was developed to lead the discussions, which were audio-recorded and transcribed. The study was carried out between December 2010 and March 2011 in the five districts of the Northern Health Region of Portugal (ARS-N). Pharmacists from different regions of each district were invited to participate in the study by an investigator responsible for the study. Participants were informed about the study and that sessions were audio-recorded to facilitate data interpretation. They signed an informed consent form before taking part in the focus groups. The Ethical Committee of ARS-N was informed of this study.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE

Pharmacists' knowledge and perceptions on antibiotic use and microbial resistance, attitudes related to antibiotic dispensing habits, and pharmacists' suggestions to improve antibiotic use.

RESULTS

A total of 6 focus groups were conducted with community pharmacists (n = 32). Attitudes related to the problem of resistance were attributed external responsibility, to patients, to physicians, to other pharmacies, and to veterinary consumption. Some attitudes were identified that could lead to antibiotic dispensing without a prescription. These attitudes are complacency, precaution and external complacency.

CONCLUSIONS

Portuguese pharmacists perceive that antibiotic use and bacterial resistance could be improved, showing a behavioural intention to improve antibiotic dispensing habits.

Pharmaceutical treatment patterns for patients with a diagnosis related to chronic pain initiating a slow-release strong opioid treatment in Sweden

Slow-release strong opioids (SRSO) are indicated in patients with severe chronic pain. Side effects, lack of efficacy and risk of dependency limit their use in clinical practice. The aim of this study was to explore prescription patterns of SRSO in Swedish real-world data on patients with a diagnosis related to chronic pain (DRCP). Patient-level data were extracted from the national prescriptions register and a regional register with diagnosis codes. The prescription sequences, switches, co-medications, and strengths over time were analyzed for cancer and noncancer patients. Of 840,000 patients with a DRCP, 16,257 initiated treatment with an SRSO in 2007 to 2008. They were 71 years old on average; 60% were female and 34% had cancer. The most common first prescription was oxycodone (54%) followed by fentanyl (19%), buprenorphine (14%), and morphine (13%). 63% refilled their prescription within 6 months, and 12% switched to another SRSO, most commonly fentanyl. After 3 years, 51% of cancer and 27% of noncancer patients still being in contact with health care remained on any SRSO. Of noncancer patients, 35% had a psychiatric co-medication (SSRI or benzodiazepine). In conclusion, fewer patients remain on SRSO in the long-term in clinical practice than reported in previous clinical trials. Oxycodone is the most common first SRSO prescription and one-third of patients get a prescription indicating psychiatric comorbidity. Our interpretation of these findings are that there is need for better treatment options for these patients, and that more effort is needed to improve treatment guidelines and to ascertain that these guidelines are followed.

Opioid use and dependence among persons with migraine: results of the AMPP study

OBJECTIVE

To assess the frequency of opioid use for acute migraine treatment and characterize use groups by sociodemographics, health-care resource utilization (HRU), comorbidities and probable dependence within a large, US population-based sample of persons with migraine.

BACKGROUND

Opioids are used in the acute treatment of migraine. However, their use is controversial.

METHODS

Data from the 2009 American Migraine Prevalence and Prevention (AMPP) study were used to categorize persons with migraine into 4 groups based on reported opioid use: nonusers (between 2005 and 2009), previous users (history of use between 2005 and 2008 but no-use in 2009), and current opioid users (those reporting use of opioids in the 3 months preceding the 2009 American Migraine Prevalence and Prevention survey). Current opioid users were divided into nondependent and probable dependence users according to criteria for dependence adapted for inclusion in the survey from the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders-4th edition. All opioid-use groups were contrasted by sociodemographics, headache characteristics, medical and psychiatric comorbidities (depression [measured by the Patient Health Questionnaire-9], anxiety [measured by the Primary Care Evaluation of Mental Health Disorders, PRIME-MD], and cardiovascular events and risk factors), and headache-related HRU.

RESULTS

In a sample of 5796 migraineurs, 4076 (70.3%) were opioid nonusers, 798 (13.8%) were previous users, and 922 (15.9%) were current opioid users. Among current opioid users, 153 (16.6%) met criteria for probable dependence and 769 (83.4%) did not. Headache-related disability (Migraine Disability Assessment sum scores) increased across groups as follows: nonusers: 7.8, previous users: 13.3, current nondependent users: 19.1, and current probable dependence users: 44.4, as did monthly headache frequency: nonusers: 3.2 days/month, previous users: 4.3 days/month, current nondependent users: 5.6 days/month, and current probable dependence users: 8.6 days/month. The prevalence of depression and anxiety was highest among current users with probable dependence. Rates of headache-related HRU were higher for all opioid-use groups for emergency department/urgent care, primary care, and specialty care visits compared to nonusers.

CONCLUSIONS

Opioid use for migraine is associated with more severe headache-related disability, symptomology, comorbidities (depression, anxiety, and cardiovascular disease and events), and greater HRU for headache. Longitudinal studies are needed to further assess the directionality and causality between opioid use and the outcomes we examined.

Integrating psychosocial care into cancer services

Despite substantial evidence that patients with cancer commonly have significant psychosocial problems, for which we have evidence-based treatments, many patients still do not receive adequate psychosocial care. This means that we risk prolonging life without adequately addressing the quality of that life. There are many challenges to improving the current situation, the major one of which is organizational. Many cancer centers lack a system of psychosocial care that is integrated with the cancer care of the patient. Psychosocial care encompasses a range of problems (emotional, social, palliative, and logistical). The integration must occur with the cancer care of the patient at all stages (from screening to palliative care) and across all clinical sites of care (inpatient and outpatient cancer services as well as primary care). In this article, we consider the challenges we face if we are to provide such integrated psychosocial services. We focus on the collaborative care service model. This model comprises systematic identification of need, integrated delivery of care by care managers, appropriate specialist supervision, and the stepping of care based on systematic measurement of outcomes. Several trials of this approach to the management of depression in patients with cancer have found it to be both feasible to deliver and effective. It provides a model for services to meet other psychosocial needs. We conclude by proposing the key components of an integrated psychosocial service that could be implemented now and by considering what we need to do next if we are to succeed in providing better and more comprehensive care to our patients.

Canadian guideline for safe and effective use of opioids for chronic noncancer pain: clinical summary for family physicians. Part 2: special populations

OBJECTIVE

To provide family physicians with a practical clinical summary of opioid prescribing for specific populations based on recommendations from the Canadian Guideline for Safe and Effective Use of Opioids for Chronic Non-Cancer Pain.

QUALITY OF EVIDENCE

Researchers for the guideline conducted a systematic review of the literature, focusing on reviews of the effectiveness and safety of opioids in specific populations.

MAIN MESSAGE

Family physicians can minimize the risks of overdose, sedation, misuse, and addiction through the use of strategies tailored to the age and health status of patients. For patients at high risk of addiction, opioids should be reserved for well-defined nociceptive or neuropathic pain conditions that have not responded to first-line treatments. Opioids should be titrated slowly, with frequent dispensing and close monitoring for signs of misuse. Suspected opioid addiction is managed with structured opioid therapy, methadone or buprenorphine treatment, or abstinence-based treatment. Patients with mood and anxiety disorders tend to have a blunted analgesic response to opioids, are at higher risk of misuse, and are often taking sedating drugs that interact adversely with opioids. Precautions similar to those for other high-risk patients should be employed. The opioid should be tapered if the patient's pain remains severe despite an adequate trial of opioid therapy. In the elderly, sedation, falls, and overdose can be minimized through lower initial doses, slower titration, benzodiazepine tapering, and careful patient education. For pregnant women taking daily opioid therapy, the opioids should be slowly tapered and discontinued. If this is not possible, they should be tapered to the lowest effective dose. Opioid-dependent pregnant women should receive methadone treatment. Adolescents are at high risk of opioid overdose, misuse, and addiction. Patients with adolescents living at home should store their opioid medication safely. Adolescents rarely require long-term opioid therapy.

CONCLUSION

Family physicians must take into consideration the patient's age, psychiatric status, level of risk of addiction, and other factors when prescribing opioids for chronic pain.

Adherence to clinical guidelines for opioid therapy for chronic pain in patients with substance use disorder

BACKGROUND

Patients with chronic non-cancer pain (CNCP) have high rates of substance use disorders (SUD). SUD complicates pain treatment and may lead to worse outcomes. However, little information is available describing adherence to opioid treatment guidelines for CNCP generally, or guideline adherence for patients with comorbid SUD.

OBJECTIVE

Examine adherence to clinical guidelines for opioid therapy over 12 months, comparing patients with SUD diagnoses made during the prior year to patients without SUD.

DESIGN

Cohort study.

PARTICIPANTS

Administrative data were collected from veterans with CNCP receiving treatment within a Veterans Affairs regional healthcare network who were prescribed chronic opioid therapy in 2008 (n = 5814).

KEY RESULTS

Twenty percent of CNCP patients prescribed chronic opioid therapy had a prior-year diagnosis of SUD. Patients with SUD were more likely to have pain diagnoses and psychiatric comorbidities. In adjusted analyses, patients with SUD were more likely than those without SUD to have had a mental health appointment (29.7% versus 17.2%, OR = 1.49, 95% CI = 1.26-1.77) and a urine drug screen (UDS) (47.0% versus 18.2%, OR = 3.53, 95% CI = 3.06-4.06) over 12 months. There were no significant differences between groups on receiving more intensive treatment in primary care (63.4% versus 61.0%), long-acting opioids (26.9% versus 26.0%), prescriptions for antidepressants (88.2% versus 85.8%, among patients with depression), or participating in physical therapy (30.6% versus 28.6%). Only 35% of patients with SUD received substance abuse treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

CNCP patients with SUD were more likely to have mental health appointments and receive UDS monitoring, but not more likely to participate in other aspects of pain care compared to those without SUD. Given data suggesting patients with comorbid SUD may need more intensive treatment to achieve improvements in pain-related function, SUD patients may be at high risk for poor outcomes.

Association between urine drug test results and treatment outcome in high-risk chronic pain patients on opioids

OBJECTIVE

: How to best use urine drug test (UDT) results in the management of opioid pharmacotherapy has not been elucidated. The purpose of this study was to describe how the results of UDTs gathered from a group of chronic pain patients in a high-risk monitored opioid pharmacotherapy program apply to treatment outcome.

METHODS

: Retrospective review of the medical records of 335 primary care patients on chronic opioids more than 22 months.

RESULTS

: Patients with a UDT containing unprescribed opioids were more likely to demonstrate resolution of aberrant behavior (P = 0.02) and less likely to be discharged from treatment (P = 0.04). Patients with cocaine, alone or in combination, in the UDT were less likely to resolve aberrant behavior (P = 0.007 and 0.001), and were more likely to be electively or administratively discharged from treatment (P = 0.012 and 0.001).

DISCUSSION

: In this group of high-risk pain patients on chronic opioids, information gained from UDT results can be used to predict treatment outcomes and inform appropriate interventions. Patients on chronic opioids who have a UDT positive for an illicit opioid or unprescribed opioids alone are more likely to respond to monitored opioid pharmacotherapy. Patients with a UDT positive for cocaine, alone or in combination, are less likely to resolve aberrant behavior within the structure of a monitored opioid pharmacotherapy program and are more likely to be discharged electively or administratively from the program without significant transition to addiction treatment. Further studies are needed to investigate which patient responded best to structured opioid pharmacotherapy programs and how to appropriately handle abnormal UDT results to improve the management and engagement in appropriate treatment for this population.

Prescription drug abuse: epidemiology, regulatory issues, chronic pain management with narcotic analgesics

The epidemic of prescription drug abuse has reached a critical level, which has received national attention. This article provides insight into the epidemiology of prescription drug abuse, explains regulatory issues, and provides guidelines for the assessment and management of pain, particularly with long-term opioid therapy. Using informed consent forms, treatment agreements, and risk documentation tools and regularly monitoring the 4 A's help to educate patients and guide management based on treatment goals. By using universal precautions, and being aware of aberrant behaviors, physicians may feel more confident in identifying and addressing problematic behaviors.

Racial differences in primary care opioid risk reduction strategies

PURPOSE

Racial disparities in treating pain with opioids are widely reported; however, differences in use of recommended strategies to reduce the risk of opioid misuse by race/ethnicity have not been evaluated.

METHODS

In a retrospective cohort of black and white patients with chronic noncancer pain prescribed opioid analgesics for at least 3 months, we assessed physicians' use of 3 opioid risk reduction strategies: (1) urine drug testing, (2) regular office visits (at least 1 visit per 6 months on opioids and within 30 days of an opioid change), and (3) restricted early opioid refills (receipt of a refill >1 week early less than twice). Nonlinear mixed effect regression models accounted for clustering within physician and adjusted additively for demographics, substance abuse, mental health and medical comorbidities, health care factors, and practice site.

RESULTS

Of the 1,612 patients studied, 62.1% were black. Black patients were more likely than white patients to receive urine drug testing (10.4% vs 4.1%), regular office visits (56.4% vs 39.0%), and restricted early refills (79.4% vs 72.0%) (P <.001 for each). In fully adjusted models, black patients had significantly higher odds than their white counterparts of receiving regular office visits (odds ratio = 1.51; 95% confidence interval, 1.06-2.14) and restricted early refills (odds ratio = 1.55; 95% confidence interval, 1.03-2.32), but not urine drug testing (odds ratio = 1.41; 95% confidence interval, 0.78-2.54).

CONCLUSIONS

In this cohort of primary care patients receiving opioid analgesics on a long-term basis, use of risk reduction strategies was very limited overall; however, black patients were more likely than white patients to receive 2 of 3 guideline-recommended strategies. These data raise questions about lax monitoring, especially for white patients taking opioids long term.

Primary care providers’ judgments of opioid analgesic misuse in a community-based cohort of HIV-infected indigent adults

BACKGROUND

Primary care providers (PCPs) must balance treatment of chronic non-cancer pain with opioid analgesics with concerns about opioid misuse.

OBJECTIVE

We co-enrolled community-based indigent adults and their PCPs to determine PCPs’ accuracy of estimating opioid analgesic misuse and illicit substance use.

DESIGN

Patient-provider dyad study.

PARTICIPANTS

HIV-infected, community-based indigent adults (‘patients’) and their PCPs.

MAIN MEASURES

Using structured interviews, we queried patients on use and misuse of opioid analgesics and illicit substances. PCPs completed patient- and provider-specific questionnaires. We calculated the sensitivity, specificity, and measures of agreement between PCPs’ judgments and patients’ reports of opioid misuse and illicit substance use. We examined factors associated with PCPs’ thinking that their patients had misused opioid analgesics and determined factors associated with patients’ misuse.

KEY RESULTS

We had 105 patient-provider dyads. Of the patients, 21 had misused opioids and 45 had used illicit substances in the past year. The sensitivity of PCPs’ judgments of opioid analgesic misuse was 61.9% and specificity, 53.6% (Kappa score 0.09, p = 0.10). The sensitivity of PCPs’ judgments of illicit substance use was 71.1% and specificity, 66.7% (Kappa score 0.37, p <0.001). PCPs were more likely to think that younger patients (Adjusted odds ratio (AOR) 0.89, 95% CI 0.84-0.97), African American patients (AOR 2.53, 95% CI 1.05-6.07) and those who had used illicit substances in the past year (AOR 3.33, 95% CI 1.35-8.20) had misused opioids. Younger (AOR 0.94, 95% CI 0.86-1.02) and African American (AOR 0.71, 95% CI 0.25-1.97) patients were not more likely to report misuse, whereas persons who had used illicit substances were (AOR 3.01, 95% CI 1.04-8.76).

CONCLUSION

PCPs’ impressions of misuse were discordant with patients’ self-reports of opioid analgesic misuse. PCPs incorrectly used age and race as predictors of misuse in this high-risk cohort.

Collaboration in chronic care: unpacking the relationship of pharmacists and general medical practitioners in primary care

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this research was to gain deeper understanding of the expectations, experiences and perceptions of Australian general medication practitioners (GPs) and pharmacists around collaboration in chronic illness (asthma) management in the primary care setting.

METHODS

A qualitative research methodology utilising a semi-structured interview guide, based on theory and an empirical approach, was used to fulfill the objectives of this study. Face-to-face interviews with pharmacists (n = 18) and GPs (n = 7) were recorded, transcribed and coded for concepts and themes. Relationships between concepts and themes were examined and used to describe the nature of collaborative relationships in the primary care setting.

KEY FINDINGS

A relationship between GPs and pharmacists currently exists although there is minimal collaboration and there are several areas of practice and patient care in which the two professional groups are mismatched. At the same time, this research uncovered key aspects of the GP-pharmacist relationship, which could be used to develop more collaborative relationships in the future. The findings from this study were evaluated in light of the Collaborative Working Relationships model and published literature.

CONCLUSIONS

A model for the development of GP-pharmacist relationship has been postulated which articulates the dynamic nature of professional relationship in primary care and highlights a pathway to more collaborative practice. Future research should focus on further developing this model.

Systematic review of prevalence, correlates, and treatment outcomes for chronic non-cancer pain in patients with comorbid substance use disorder

Recent data suggest that comorbid substance use disorders (SUDs) are common among chronic non-cancer pain (CNCP) patients; however, prevalence rates vary across studies and findings are limited regarding treatment options for CNCP patients with comorbid SUD. The purpose of this systematic review is to assess the prevalence, associated demographic and clinical characteristics, and treatment outcomes for CNCP patients with comorbid SUD. We conducted searches from Ovid MEDLINE, PsychINFO, and PubMED from 1950 through February 2010 and retrieved the references. Thirty-eight studies met inclusion criteria and provided data that addressed our key questions. Three to forty-eight percent of CNCP patients have a current SUD. There are no demographic or clinical factors that consistently differentiate CNCP patients with comorbid SUD from patients without SUD, though SUD patients appear to be at greater risk for aberrant medication-related behaviors. CNCP patients with SUD are more likely to be prescribed opioid medications and at higher doses than CNCP patients without a history of SUD. CNCP patients with comorbid SUD do not significantly differ in their responses to treatment compared to CNCP patients without SUD, though the quality of this evidence is low. Limited data are available to identify predictors of treatment outcome. Although clinical experience and research suggests that SUDs are common among CNCP patients, only limited data are available to guide clinicians who treat this population. Research is needed to increase understanding of the prevalence, correlates, and responses to treatment of CNCP patients with comorbid SUDs.

Risks for opioid abuse and dependence among recipients of chronic opioid therapy: results from the TROUP study

OBJECTIVE

To estimate the prevalence of and risk factors for opioid abuse/dependence in long-term users of opioids for chronic pain, including risk factors for opioid abuse/dependence that can potentially be modified to decrease the likelihood of opioid abuse/dependence, and non-modifiable risk factors for opioid abuse/dependence that may be useful for risk stratification when considering prescribing opioids.

METHODS

We used claims data from two disparate populations, one national, commercially insured population (HealthCore) and one state-based, publicly insured (Arkansas Medicaid). Among users of chronic opioid therapy, we regressed claims-based diagnoses of opioid abuse/dependence on patient characteristics, including physical health, mental health and substance abuse diagnoses, sociodemographic factors, and pharmacological risk factors.

RESULTS

Among users of chronic opioid therapy, 3% of both the HealthCore and Arkansas Medicaid samples had a claims-based opioid abuse/dependence diagnosis. There was a strong inverse relationship between age and a diagnosis of opioid abuse/dependence. Mental health and substance use disorders were associated with an increased risk of opioid abuse/dependence. Effects of substance use disorders were especially strong, although mental health disorders were more common. Concerning opioid exposure; lower days supply, lower average doses, and use of Schedule III-IV opioids only, were all associated with lower likelihood of a diagnosis of opioid abuse/dependence.

CONCLUSION

Opioid abuse and dependence are diagnosed in a small minority of patients receiving chronic opioid therapy, but this may under-estimate actual misuse. Characteristics of the patients and of the opioid therapy itself are associated with the risk of abuse and dependence.

The prescribed opioids difficulties scale: a patient-centered assessment of problems and concerns

OBJECTIVES

Chronic opioid therapy for chronic noncancer pain has increased dramatically in recent years. Research on associated risks has typically focused on opioid abuse and dependence, and opioid misuse or aberrant drug use behaviors, but these risks have been defined from the providers' perspective. The aim of this article was to develop a psychometrically sound method for assessing difficulties patients attribute to chronic opioid therapy.

METHODS

A cross-sectional, observational study of patients prescribed opioids for chronic noncancer pain was conducted in a large integrated service delivery network in Washington State. Data were obtained from a phone interview and electronic health records including pharmacy data. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses were conducted using a split sample design.

RESULTS

The interview response rate was 56.5% and a total of 1144 patients were included in analyses. A 2 factor solution was obtained and replicated with excellent fit statistics. Two correlated factors were identified-opioid control concerns and psychosocial problems-with 50% of the sample reporting difficulties with prescribed opioids: 24% reported elevated psychosocial problems and 36% reported elevated concerns about controlling their use of prescribed opioids.

DISCUSSION

The Prescribed Opioid Difficulties Scale identifies common difficulties that patients ascribe to chronic opioid therapy. This scale may provide both an entry point and a framework for a patient-centered clinical dialog about the pros and cons of use of opioid medicines for managing chronic pain.