Patient and provider differences in the treatment of opioid-induced constipation: a qualitative study

Recommendations for the management of opioid-induced constipation - how to improve usability in clinical practice

INTRODUCTION

Opioid-induced constipation remains undertreated despite effective and safe treatment options exists. Previous guidelines have only been partially effective in improving management, possibly due to their complexity, and studies suggest that a simple setup of concise and behaviorally-orientated steps improves usability.

AREAS COVERED

This article introduces the concept of opioid-induced constipation and provides an overview of existing guidelines in this field. We also propose simplified recommendations for managing opioid-induced constipation, derived from a synthesis of current guidelines and the principles of optimal guideline design theory.

EXPERT OPINION

Despite standard treatment with laxatives and fluid intake in patients with opioid-induced constipation, escalation of treatment is often needed where μ-opioid receptor antagonists or newer medications such as lubiprostone, linaclotide, or prucalopride are used. Previous guidelines have not been used sufficiently and thus management of the condition is often insufficient. We therefore propose simplified recommendations to management, which we believe can come into broader use. It was validated in primary care for credibility, clarity, relevance, usability, and overall benefit. We believe that this initiative can lead to better management of the substantial proportion of patients suffering from side effects of opioids.

Prevalence of constipation and use of laxatives, and association with risk factors among older patients during hospitalization: a cross sectional study

Background

Many older patients experience constipation as a bothersome symptom with a negative impact on quality of life. During hospitalization, the focus is often on the reason for admission with the risk that other health problems are not prioritized. The aim of the study was to describe the prevalence of constipation and use of laxatives among older hospitalized patients and to investigate the associations with demographic factors, risk assessments and prescribed medications.

Methods

A descriptive retrospective cross-sectional study design was used. This study enrolled patients aged 65 years or older admitted to a geriatric department. Data from electronic health records regarding constipation, demographics, risk assessments, medical diagnoses, prescribed medications and length of stay were extracted. Constipation was assessed using ICD- 10 diagnosis, documented signs and symptoms of constipation, and prescribed laxatives. Data was analyzed using descriptive and comparative analyses, including logistic regression.

Results

In total, 6% of the patients had an ICD-10 diagnosis of constipation, 65% had signs and symptoms of constipation, and 60% had been prescribed laxatives. Only 5% of the patients had constipation documented according to ICD-10, signs and symptoms, and prescribed laxatives. Signs and symptoms of constipation were associated with prescribed opioids (OR = 2.254) and longer length of stay (OR = 1.063). Being prescribed laxatives was associated with longer length of stay (OR = 1.109), prescribed opioids (OR = 2.154), and older age (OR = 1.030).

Conclusions

The prevalence of constipation varies depending on the methods used to identify the condition. There was a discrepancy between the documentation of constipation in relation to sign and symptoms, ICD-10 diagnosis and prescribed laxatives. The documentation of constipation was not consistent for the three methods of assessment.

Swallowing the pill of adverse effects: A qualitative study of patients' and pharmacists' experiences and decision-making regarding the adverse effects of chronic pain medications

Introduction

Pharmacological treatments of chronic pain can lead to numerous and sometimes serious adverse effects. Drawing on a social science approach to chronic illness, this study aimed to understand the experiences of people living with chronic pain and community pharmacists regarding the definition, prevention and management of analgesic adverse effects.

Methods

This qualitative study proceeded through 12 online focus groups (FGs) with people living with chronic pain (n = 26) and community pharmacists (n = 19), conducted between July 2020 and February 2021 in the province of Quebec, Canada. The semistructured discussion guides covered participants' definitions of adverse effects and decision‐making regarding their prevention and management. Discussions were audio‐recorded, transcribed verbatim and analysed using grounded theory.

Results

Both people with chronic pain and pharmacists provided varying definitions of analgesic adverse effects depending on patients' social and clinical characteristics. Present quality of life and serious long‐term risks related to treatment were described as key dimensions influencing adverse effect appraisal. Dilemmas and discrepancies occurred between patients and pharmacists when choosing to prioritize pain relief or adverse effect prevention. Some patients lacked information about their medications and wanted to be more involved in decisions, while many pharmacists were concerned by patients' self‐management of adverse effects. Preventing opioid‐related overdoses often led pharmacists to policing practices. Despite most pharmacists wishing they could have a key role in the management of pain and adverse effects face organizational and financial barriers.

Conclusion

Defining, preventing and managing adverse effects in the treatment of chronic pain requires a person‐centred approach and shared decision‐making. Clinical training improvements and healthcare organization changes are needed to support pharmacists in providing patients with community‐based follow‐up and reliable information about the adverse effects of chronic pain treatments.

Patient or Public Contribution

A person with lived experience of chronic pain was involved as a coinvestigator in the study. He contributed to shaping the study design and objectives, including major methodological decisions such as the choice of pharmacists as the most appropriate professionals to investigate. In addition, 26 individuals with chronic pain shared their experiences extensively during the FGs.

Impact and Consequences of Opioid-Induced Constipation: A Survey of Patients

INTRODUCTION

Opioids are a valuable tool to help achieve control of pain. However, opioid-induced constipation (OIC) is an important limitation of treatment with this class of drugs.

METHODS

To better understand the impact of OIC on patient-reported outcomes, we carried out a survey involving patients being treated with opioids. Both ad hoc questions and the PROMIS and PAC-SYM and PAC-QOL scores were used.

RESULTS

Of the 597 participants, 150 (25%) had cancer-related pain, and 447 (75%) had non-cancer pain; 66% experienced OIC. PROMIS pain interference questions indicated that pain is more likely to interfere with a patient's life when they have OIC. PAC-QOL and PAC-SYM revealed that 58% of patients with non-cancer pain and OIC reported at least one "severe" or "very severe" constipation symptom, compared to 83% with cancer-related pain. Younger age and less time on opioids were associated with greater impact of OIC on quality of life. Only 41% of patients were satisfied with how their constipation was managed. Over 50% of those with non-cancer pain said that they modified their opioid regimen due to constipation, vs. 6% of those with cancer pain. Constipation had been discussed with the healthcare provider (HCP) in 48% of non-cancer patients and in 73% of cancer patients. In those with chronic pain and OIC, 24% expressed varying degrees of dissatisfaction with the healthcare system, vs. 37% in those with cancer pain and OIC.

CONCLUSION

Our results provide additional evidence that management of OIC is inadequate in many cases. Moreover, they indicate that there is a definite need for better education about OIC among HCPs.

Impact of opioid-induced constipation on opioid substitution therapy management: the patient perspective

Background

Although opioid-induced bowel dysfunction is a well-known and frequent adverse event correlated with opioids, it is scarcely investigated in patients on opioid substitution treatment (OST) and no standard of care is currently available for this population. We aimed to explore the opinion of patients on the impact of constipation on the management of OST and quality of life (QoL).

Methods

We performed a survey that was directed to opioid-dependent patients treated with OST and followed-up in a Service for Addiction Treatment in Italy. The questionnaire included questions about sociodemographic characteristics, the experience of constipation, general QoL, OST management, interference of opioid-induced constipation (OIC) with opioid management, the experience of OIC treatment in the health system, and risk factors for constipation.

Results

Constipation at the moment of the survey (n=105) was reported by 81% of patients and was the most frequent adverse event of OST; 73% of respondents reported at least one severe or very severe symptom of constipation in the last 2 weeks. OIC was reported to hinder adherence to OST by 33% of respondents and 38% of them felt that control of craving had been more difficult since initiation of constipation. Overall, 34% of patients interfered with their OST by changing the schedule on their own in an attempt to improve constipation. Patients were proactive in looking for a solution for constipation but reported poor help from the healthcare system.

Conclusion

Our patient-based survey suggests that careful and efficient management of constipation could increase adherence to OST and improve patient satisfaction and QoL.

Common Clinical Practice for Opioid-Induced Constipation: A Physician Survey

Background

Opioid-induced constipation (OIC) remains an important clinical obstacle despite the availability of several guidelines and pharmacological options for its management. Here, we surveyed common practices and perceptions about OIC among physicians who prescribe opioids in Italy.

Methods

The online survey included 26 questions about OIC. Responses were analyzed descriptively and aggregated by physician specialty.

Results

A total of 501 physicians completed the survey. Most respondents (67%) did not feel adequately educated about OIC despite general consensus regarding interest in the topic. Overall, 62–75% of physicians regularly evaluated intestinal function or OIC symptoms in patients receiving opioid therapy. The most common method for assessment was patient diary; few physicians used a validated instrument such as the Rome IV criteria. Psychiatrists and addiction specialists showed the lowest interest and poorest practices. Most respondents (78%) preferred macrogol prophylaxis followed by macrogol plus another laxative for first-line treatment of OIC symptoms. Peripheral-acting mu opioid receptor antagonists (PAMORAs) were not widely used among physicians; 61% had never prescribed a PAMORA for OIC.

Conclusion

Our findings reveal important differences in clinical practice for OIC across physician specialties. Additional formative efforts are necessary to improve awareness about best practices in OIC.

Management of Opioid-Induced Constipation and Bowel Dysfunction: Expert Opinion of an Italian Multidisciplinary Panel

The prescribing and use of opioid analgesics is increasing in Italy owing to a profusion in the number and types of opioid analgesic products available, and the increasing prevalence of conditions associated with severe pain, the latter being related to population aging. Herein we provide the expert opinion of an Italian multidisciplinary panel on the management of opioid-induced constipation (OIC) and bowel dysfunction. OIC and opioid-induced bowel dysfunction are well-recognised unwanted effects of treatment with opioid analgesics that can profoundly affect quality of life. OIC can be due to additional factors such as reduced mobility, a low-fibre diet, comorbidities, and concomitant medications. Fixed-dose combinations of opioids with mu (μ) opioid receptor antagonists, such as oxycodone/naloxone, have become available, but have limited utility in clinical practice because the individual components cannot be independently titrated, creating a risk of breakthrough pain as the dose is increased. A comprehensive prevention and management strategy for OIC should include interventions that aim to improve fibre and fluid intake, increase mobility or exercise, and restore bowel function without compromising pain control. Recommended first-line pharmacological treatment of OIC is with an osmotic laxative (preferably polyethylene glycol [macrogol]), or a stimulant laxative such as an anthraquinone. A second laxative with a complementary mechanism of action should be added in the event of an inadequate response. Second-line treatment with a peripherally acting μ opioid receptor antagonist (PAMORA), such as methylnaltrexone, naloxegol or naldemedine, should be considered in patients with OIC that has not responded to combination laxative treatment. Prokinetics or intestinal secretagogues, such as lubiprostone, may be appropriate in the third-line setting, but their use in OIC is off-label in Italy, and should therefore be restricted to settings such as specialist centres and clinical trials.

ONS Guidelines™ for Opioid-Induced and Non-Opioid-Related Cancer Constipation

PURPOSE

This evidence-based guideline intends to support clinicians, patients, and others in decisions regarding the treatment of constipation in patients with cancer.

METHODOLOGIC APPROACH

An interprofessional panel of healthcare professionals with patient representation prioritized clinical questions and patient outcomes for the management of cancer-related constipation. Systematic reviews of the literature were conducted. The GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) approach was used to assess the evidence and make recommendations.

FINDINGS

The panel agreed on 13 recommendations for the management of opioid-induced and non-opioid-related constipation in patients with cancer.

IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING

The panel conditionally recommended a bowel regimen in addition to lifestyle education as first-line treatment for constipation. For patients starting opioids, the panel suggests a bowel regimen as prophylaxis. Pharmaceutical interventions are available and recommended if a bowel regimen has failed. Acupuncture and electroacupuncture for non-opioid-related constipation are recommended in the context of a clinical trial.

SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL CAN BE FOUND AT HTTPS

//bit.ly/30y29sI.