Navigating Challenging Conversations About Nonmedical Opioid Use in the Context of Oncology

Opioid Risk Mitigation Practices of Interprofessional Oncology Personnel: Results From a Cross-Sectional Survey

BACKGROUND

This study explored the risk mitigation practices of multidisciplinary oncology health-care personnel for the nonmedical use of opioids in people with cancer.

METHODS

An anonymous, cross-sectional descriptive survey was administered via email to eligible providers over 4 weeks at The Ohio State University's Arthur G. James Cancer Hospital. The survey asked about experiences and knowledge related to opioid use disorders.

RESULTS

The final sample of 773 participants included 42 physicians, 213 advanced practice providers (APPs consisted of advanced practice nurses, physician assistants, and pharmacists), and 518 registered nurses. Approximately 40% of participants responded feeling "not confident" in addressing medication diversion. The most frequent risk reduction measure was "Checking the prescription drug monitoring program" when prescribing controlled medications, reported by physicians (n = 29, 78.4%) and APPs (n = 164, 88.6%).

CONCLUSION

People with cancer are not exempt from the opioid epidemic and may be at risk for nonmedical opioid use (NMOU) and substance use disorders. Implementing risk reduction strategies with every patient, with a harm reduction versus abstinence focus, minimizes harmful consequences and improves. This study highlights risk mitigation approaches for NMOU, representing an opportunity to improve awareness among oncology health-care providers. Multidisciplinary oncology teams are ideally positioned to navigate patients through complex oncology and health-care journeys.

Care Throughout the Journey-The Interaction Between Primary Care and Palliative Care

Palliative care is no longer synonymous with end-of-life care, and because supply has been well outstripped by demand, much of the practice of palliative care early in a patient's illness journey will take place in the primary care clinic-referred to as primary palliative care. Referral to specialty palliative care for complex symptom management or clarification on decision-making is appropriate, and can facilitate hospice referral, if indicated and in line with patient/family goals.

The Stigma Surrounding Opioid Use as a Barrier to Cancer-Pain Management: An Overview of Experiences with Fear, Shame, and Poorly Controlled Pain in the Context of Advanced Cancer

Cancer-related pain affects a majority of patients with advanced cancer and is often undertreated. The treatment of this pain is largely reliant on the use of opioids, which are essential medicines for symptom management and the maintenance of quality of life (QoL) for patients with advanced cancer. While there are cancer-specific guidelines for the treatment of pain, widespread publication and policy changes in response to the opioid epidemic have drastically impacted perceptions of opioid use. This overview therefore aims to investigate how manifestations of opioid stigma impact pain management in cancer settings, with an emphasis on the experiences of patients with advanced cancer. Opioid use has been widely stigmatized in multiple domains, including public, healthcare, and patient populations. Physician hesitancy in prescribing and pharmacist vigilance in dispensing were identified as barriers to optimal pain management, and may contribute to stigma in the context of advanced cancer. Evidence in the literature suggests that opioid stigma may result in patient deviations from prescription instructions, which generally leads to pain undertreatment. Patients reflected on experiencing shame and fear surrounding their prescription opioid use and feeling uncomfortable communicating with their healthcare providers on these topics. Our findings indicate that future work is required to educate patients and providers in order to de-stigmatize opioid use. Through alleviating stigma, patients may be better able to make decisions regarding their pain management which lead to freedom from cancer-related pain and improved QoL.

Interdisciplinary intervention for the management of nonmedical opioid use among patients with cancer pain

BACKGROUND

Few studies have assessed interventions aimed at managing nonmedical opioid use (NMOU) behavior among patients with cancer. The authors developed the Compassionate High-Alert Team (CHAT) intervention to manage patients receiving opioids for cancer pain who demonstrate NMOU behavior. The objective of this study was to determine the change in frequency of NMOU behaviors, pain intensity, and opioid requirements among those who received the intervention.

METHODS

A total of 130 patients receiving opioids for cancer pain that had documented evidence of NMOU and received the CHAT intervention were reviewed. Demographic and clinical information such as NMOU behaviors, pain scores, and morphine equivalent daily dose at baseline, 3, and 6 months post-intervention was obtained.

RESULTS

NMOU behaviors significantly decreased from a median (interquartile range) of 2 (1-3) at baseline to 0 (0-1) at both 3 and 6 months post-intervention (p < .001). A total of 45 of 75 (60%) and 31 of 50 (62%) of CHAT recipients achieved complete response to the intervention at 3 and 6 months, respectively. Higher baseline number of NMOU behaviors was independently associated with patient response to the intervention (odds ratio [OR], 1.97; 95% confidence interval [CI],1.09-4.28, p = .049 at 3 months; OR, 2.5; 95% CI, 1.20-6.47, p = .03 at 6 months). The median pain score decreased from 7 at baseline to 6 at both 3 and 6 months (p = .01). Morphine equivalent daily dose did not significantly change during that same period (143 mg/day vs. 139 mg/day, p = .13).

CONCLUSIONS

Most patients who received the CHAT intervention improved in their NMOU behaviors and pain intensity scores 3 and 6 months post-intervention. These preliminary findings support the efficacy of CHAT in managing patients receiving opioids for cancer pain who demonstrate NMOU behavior.

Interprofessional Oncology Providers' Experiences and Knowledge of Opioid Use Disorders in Patients With Cancer

OBJECTIVES

To determine oncology providers' experiences and knowledge of opioid use disorders (OUDs) in patients with cancer.

SAMPLE & SETTING

The final sample of 773 participants included 42 physicians, 213 advanced practice providers (APPs), and 518 nurses at a large comprehensive cancer center.

METHODS & VARIABLES

This study used a cross-sectional descriptive survey to describe providers' experiences and knowledge of OUDs.

RESULTS

Nurses and APPs reported personal experiences with addiction and encountering issues with OUDs in patients more often compared to physicians. Knowledge deficits were identified regarding addiction, including evidence-based treatment for OUDs. Overall, OUDs are a topic of concern that the majority of oncology providers are interested in learning more about.

IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING

The opioid epidemic presents an opportunity to improve the knowledge of interprofessional oncology providers addressing OUDs. Nurses and APPs are ideally positioned for the prevention and early recognition of patients with an OUD and cancer.

Evaluating Age as a Predictor of Postoperative Opioid Use and Prescribing Habits in Older Adults With Cancer

OBJECTIVE

To assess the narcotic use of older patients after oncologic resection.

DESIGN

Retrospective review.

SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

Adults with neoplasms undergoing resection at a tertiary academic medical center.

METHODS

Open and minimally invasive resections of the pancreas, bowel, rectum, lung, breast, and skin were included. Emergent procedures, chronic opioid users, and benign pathology were excluded. Narcotic use was measured using morphine equivalents (MEQs, milligrams of morphine) at multiple time points and compared between younger and older (aged ≥65 years) patients. Refill requests were within 30 days of index procedure.

RESULTS

A total of 445 patients were eligible, and 245 were ≥65 years old. Despite longer length of stay (3 vs 2 days, P = .01), older patients used less narcotic medication [39.8 (150) mg vs 84 (229) mg, P = .004], and reported lower pain scores [1.3 (3.3) vs 2.8 (4.5), P = .0001] over the course of their hospitalization. Additionally, older patients had lower normalized narcotic use [15.3 (150) mg vs 77.4 (240) mg, P = .0001] in the last 48 hours of their admission. Following discharge, older patients had a lower median discharge MEQ (DC MEQ) compared with younger patients, 75 (150) mg vs 112.5 (102.5) mg, P = .002. Further stratifying older patients into age cohorts (65-74 years, 75-84 years, ≥85 years) revealed progressively less narcotic use as measured by total inpatient MEQ and final 48 hours. Additionally, progressively older patients were discharged with progressively lower DC MEQ compared with younger patients, 90 (112.5) mg, 50 (131.3) mg, and 0 (60) mg vs 112.5 (102.5) mg, P < .0001, respectively. Finally, older patients requested refills less often than younger counterparts, 6.5% vs 14.5%, P = .006.

CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS

Older patients with cancer reported lower pain scores, consumed less narcotics, were discharged with significantly less narcotics, and called for refills less often compared with younger patients after surgery. These data suggest this population may require less opioids for satisfactory pain control, and development of a guideline targeting postoperative multimodal analgesia in older adults is warranted.

Recommendations for Preventing Medication Diversion and Misuse in Hospice Care: A Modified Delphi Study

CONTEXT

Recommendations are needed to help minimize the risks of medication diversion and misuse in the hospice setting.

OBJECTIVE

To identify recommendations that could help prevent medication diversion and misuse in hospice care.

METHODS

A modified Delphi method was utilized. An interdisciplinary panel of ten experts engaged in three phases of online and in-person voting regarding recommendations. Consensus for recommendations required a minimum of 80% endorsement by the panel experts. After two rounds of voting and several rounds of informal voting, 15 total recommendations were endorsed.

RESULTS

Fifteen recommendations achieved at least 80% endorsement during the final round of voting. Each of the following recommendation topics received ≥ 80% endorsement, the need to balance prevention efforts with quality care, screening clinical job candidates, family education and screening, medication monitoring, responding to missing/diverted medications, and medication disposal. Panelists rated the Patient & Family Education recommendation as most important (M = 9.7; SD = 0.7) followed closely by Responding to Medication Diversion or Misuse (M = 9.5; SD = 1.1).

CONCLUSION

These recommendations were created by experts in the field to reduce the risk of medication diversion and misuse. Further steps towards implementation may appropriately reduce these risks.

Addiction in Patients With Cancer: Challenges and Opportunities

Addiction is complex and multifactorial. Recognition provides the opportunity to provide potentially life-saving treatment. Oncology patients are not excluded from substance use disorders (SUDs) and the opioid epidemic. Patients with current or past SUDs may develop cancer, and an SUD may also develop during cancer treatment. Therefore, this unique subset of patients potentially has two fatal diseases: cancer and an SUD. Most oncology advanced practitioners (APs) are unprepared to care for SUDs in patients with cancer. Pain is one of the most common symptoms in the cancer population, and cancer-related pain is often treated with opioids. Opioid exposure increases the risk of developing an opioid use disorder (OUD). In addition, a cancer diagnosis can have a significant impact on mental health and wellness, and patients may use substances to cope with psychological distress. Drug and alcohol use exists on a continuum and while not all use is problematic, it may have adverse consequences. A cancer diagnosis provides another possibility for patients to engage in services and treatment for their unsafe use and/or addiction. The case study in this article of a patient with cancer and an SUD is an example of the challenges associated with the chronic and relapsing nature of addiction. Oncology advanced practitioners have the opportunity to positively influence outcomes through the assessment of substance use and adoption of harm reduction techniques in all patients with cancer.

Unintended Consequences of Opioid Regulations in Older Adults with Multiple Chronic Conditions

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

The opioid epidemic has led to substantive regulatory and policy changes. Little is known about how these changes have impacted older adults, especially those with chronic pain and multiple chronic conditions (MCC). We sought to understand the experiences of older adults with chronic pain and MCC in the context of the opioid epidemic and policy responses to it.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

Purposive sampling of older adults in a West Coast metropolitan area. Semistructured in-depth interviews lasting 45-120 min were digitally recorded and transcribed. Responses were analyzed using the constant comparative method. Participants were 25 adults aged 65 years and greater with three or more self-reported medical conditions and pain lasting for more than 6 months.

RESULTS

Respondents' accounts revealed numerous unintended consequences of the opioid epidemic and its policy responses. We identified four main themes: changes to the patient-clinician relationship; lack of patient agency and access in pain management; patient ambivalence and anxiety about existing opioid treatment/use; and patient concerns about future use.

DISCUSSION AND IMPLICATIONS

Older adults have high rates of chronic pain and MCC that may reduce their pain management options. The opioid epidemic and policies addressing it have the potential to negatively affect patient-clinician relationships and patients' pain self-management. Clinicians may be able to mitigate these unintended consequences by actively conveying respect to the patient, empowering patients in their pain self-management activities, and proactively addressing worries and fears patients may own related to their current and future pain management regimens.