Utilization of pain medications and its effect on quality of life, health care utilization and associated costs in individuals with chronic back pain

The Role and Applications of Artificial Intelligence in the Treatment of Chronic Pain

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This review aims to explore the interface between artificial intelligence (AI) and chronic pain, seeking to identify areas of focus for enhancing current treatments and yielding novel therapies.

RECENT FINDINGS

In the United States, the prevalence of chronic pain is estimated to be upwards of 40%. Its impact extends to increased healthcare costs, reduced economic productivity, and strain on healthcare resources. Addressing this condition is particularly challenging due to its complexity and the significant variability in how patients respond to treatment. Current options often struggle to provide long-term relief, with their benefits rarely outweighing the risks, such as dependency or other side effects. Currently, AI has impacted four key areas of chronic pain treatment and research: (1) predicting outcomes based on clinical information; (2) extracting features from text, specifically clinical notes; (3) modeling 'omic data to identify meaningful patient subgroups with potential for personalized treatments and improved understanding of disease processes; and (4) disentangling complex neuronal signals responsible for pain, which current therapies attempt to modulate. As AI advances, leveraging state-of-the-art architectures will be essential for improving chronic pain treatment. Current efforts aim to extract meaningful representations from complex data, paving the way for personalized medicine. The identification of unique patient subgroups should reveal targets for tailored chronic pain treatments. Moreover, enhancing current treatment approaches is achievable by gaining a more profound understanding of patient physiology and responses. This can be realized by leveraging AI on the increasing volume of data linked to chronic pain.

Interdisciplinary strategies to prevent long-term and detrimental opioid use following trauma: a stakeholder consensus study

OBJECTIVE

Prolonged opioid use is common following traumatic injuries. Although preventive strategies have been recommended, the evidence supporting their use is low. The objectives of this study were to select interdisciplinary strategies to prevent long-term, detrimental opioid use in trauma patients for further evaluation and to identify implementation considerations.

DESIGN

A consensus study using the nominal group technique.

SETTING

Four trauma systems in Canada.

SUBJECTS

Participants included expert clinicians and decision makers, and people with lived experience.

METHODS

Participants had to discuss the relevance and implementation of 15 strategies and then rank them using a 7-point Likert scale. Implementation considerations were identified through a synthesis of discussions.

RESULTS

A total of 41 expert stakeholders formed the nominal groups. Overall, eight strategies were favored: 1) using multimodal approach for pain management, 2) professional follow-up in physical health, 3) assessment of risk factors for opioid misuse, 4) physical stimulation, 5) downward adjustment of opioids based on patient recovery, 6) educational intervention for patients, 7) training offered to professionals on how to prescribe opioids, and 8) optimizing communication between professionals working in different settings. Discussions with expert stakeholders revealed the rationale for the selected strategies and identified issues to consider when implementing them.

CONCLUSION

This stakeholder consensus study identified, for further scientific study, a set of interdisciplinary strategies to promote appropriate opioid use following traumatic injuries. These strategies could ultimately decrease the burden associated with long-term opioid use.

Strategies to prevent long-term opioid use following trauma: a Canadian practice survey

PURPOSE

To evaluate how Canadian clinicians involved in trauma patient care and prescribing opioids perceive the use and effectiveness of strategies to prevent long-term opioid therapy following trauma. Barriers and facilitators to the implementation of these strategies were also assessed.

METHODS

We conducted a web-based cross-sectional survey. Potential participants were identified by trauma program managers and directors of the targeted departments in three Canadian provinces. We designed our questionnaire using standard health survey research methods. The questionnaire was administered between April 2021 and November 2021.

RESULTS

Our response rate was 47% (350/744), and 52% (181/350) of participants completed the entire survey. Most respondents (71%, 129/181) worked in teaching hospitals. Multimodal analgesia (93%, 240/257), nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory agents (77%, 198/257), and physical stimulation (75%, 193/257) were the strategies perceived to be the most frequently used. Several preventive strategies were perceived to be very effective by over 80% of respondents. Of these, some that were reported as not being frequently used were perceived to be among the most effective ones, including guidelines or protocols, assessing risk factors for opioid misuse, physical health follow-up by a professional, training for clinicians, patient education, and prescription monitoring systems. Staff shortages, time constraints, and organizational practices were identified as the main barriers to the implementation of the highest ranked preventive strategies.

CONCLUSIONS

Several strategies to prevent long-term opioid therapy following trauma are perceived as being effective by those prescribing opioids in this population. Some of these strategies appear to be commonly used in everyday practice and others less so. Future research should focus on which preventive strategies should be given higher priority for implementation before assessing their effectiveness.

Association Between Chiropractic Utilization and Opioid Prescriptions Among People With Back or Neck Pain: Evaluation of the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to assess the association between patients in the United States seeing a chiropractor and receiving an opioid prescription for back or neck pain.

METHODS

Medical Expenditure Panel Survey (Years 2012 to 2015) respondents for longitudinal panels 17 to 19 who participated in all 5 rounds were at least 18 years of age, did not have cancer, and reported back or neck pain. We defined chiropractic users as participants reporting at least 1 chiropractic visit for back or neck pain and opioid users as participants reporting purchase or receipt of a prescription classified as Multum Lexicon "60" and "191" for back or neck pain. We adjusted for socioeconomic and clinical variables using multiple logistic regression.

RESULTS

The sample contained 4686 people, 21% of whom reported an opioid prescription for back or neck pain. Among opioid users, 14% reported a chiropractic visit for back or neck pain compared to 31% of nonopioid users. The adjusted odds ratio for chiropractic use among opioid users compared to nonopioid users was 0.46 (95% confidence interval, 0.36-0.57).

CONCLUSION

Patients with back or neck pain who saw a chiropractor had approximately half the odds of reporting an opioid prescription compared to those who did not see a chiropractor.

Strategies aimed at preventing long-term opioid use in trauma and orthopaedic surgery: a scoping review

Background

Long-term opioid use, which may have significant individual and societal impacts, has been documented in up to 20% of patients after trauma or orthopaedic surgery. The objectives of this scoping review were to systematically map the research on strategies aiming to prevent chronic opioid use in these populations and to identify knowledge gaps in this area.

Methods

This scoping review is reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) Checklist. We searched seven databases and websites of relevant organizations. Selected studies and guidelines were published between January 2008 and September 2021. Preventive strategies were categorized as: system-based, pharmacological, educational, multimodal, and others. We summarized findings using measures of central tendency and frequency along with p-values. We also reported the level of evidence and the strength of recommendations presented in clinical guidelines.

Results

A total of 391 studies met the inclusion criteria after initial screening from which 66 studies and 20 guidelines were selected. Studies mainly focused on orthopaedic surgery (62,1%), trauma (30.3%) and spine surgery (7.6%). Among system-based strategies, hospital-based individualized opioid tapering protocols, and regulation initiatives limiting the prescription of opioids were associated with statistically significant decreases in morphine equivalent doses (MEDs) at 1 to 3 months following trauma and orthopaedic surgery. Among pharmacological strategies, only the use of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and beta blockers led to a significant reduction in MEDs up to 12 months after orthopaedic surgery. Most studies on educational strategies, multimodal strategies and psychological strategies were associated with significant reductions in MEDs beyond 1 month. The majority of recommendations from clinical practice guidelines were of low level of evidence.

Conclusions

This scoping review advances knowledge on existing strategies to prevent long-term opioid use in trauma and orthopaedic surgery patients. We observed that system-based, educational, multimodal and psychological strategies are the most promising. Future research should focus on determining which strategies should be implemented particularly in trauma patients at high risk for long-term use, testing those that can promote a judicious prescription of opioids while preventing an illicit use, and evaluating their effects on relevant patient-reported and social outcomes.

Pain and Prescription Opioid Use Among US Construction Workers: Findings From the 2011‒2018 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey

Objectives. To examine prescription opioid and nonopioid analgesic use among US construction workers and their associations with pain conditions and sociodemographic factors. Methods. We analyzed data for about 9000 (weighted 11.5 million per year) construction workers who responded to the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey from 2011 to 2018. We applied both descriptive statistics and multiple logistic regression procedures in the analyses. Results. An estimated 1.2 million (10.0%) of construction workers used prescription opioid analgesics annually. The adjusted odds of prescription opioid use were significantly higher for workers suffering from work-related injuries (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] = 3.82; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 2.72, 5.37), non‒work-related injuries (AOR = 3.37; 95% CI = 2.54, 4.46), and musculoskeletal disorders (AOR = 2.31; 95% CI = 1.80, 2.95) after we controlled for potential confounders. Adjusted odds of prescription opioid use were also higher among workers with poorer physical health (AOR = 1.95; 95% CI = 1.42, 2.69) or mental health disorders (AOR = 1.95; 95% CI = 1.41, 2.68). Conclusions. Work- and non‒work-related injuries and musculoskeletal disorders significantly increased prescription opioid use among construction workers. To prevent opioid use disorders, multipronged strategies should be approached. (Am J Public Health. 2022;112(S1):S77-S87. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2021.306510).

Tapering Opioid Prescription Program for High-Risk Trauma Patients: A Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

Chronic opioid use has been documented in up to 20% of patients with traumatic injuries. Hence, we developed the Tapering Opioids Prescription Program for high-risk Trauma (TOPP-Trauma) patients.

AIMS

To assess the feasibility and acceptability of TOPP-Trauma, examine the feasibility of the research methods, and describe its potential efficacy in reducing long-term opioid use.

DESIGN

A two-arm pilot randomized controlled trial.

METHODS

Fifty participants discharged home were assigned to TOPP-Trauma or an educational pamphlet. Feasibility was assessed based on ability to provide the program components. The acceptability was assessed with the Treatment Acceptability and Preference Questionnaire. The feasibility of the research methods was evaluated according to standard parameters. Self-reported morphine equivalent dose (MED) and MEDs supplied by pharmacies were measured at 6 and 12 weeks.

RESULTS

Eighty percent or more of TOPP-Trauma components were delivered as planned, and the program was deemed highly acceptable. Approximately 10% of screened patients were eligible. Eighty-five percent of eligible patients agreed to participate with 20% attrition rates. TOPP-Trauma participants used less MED/day compared to the control group at 6 and 12 weeks (1.2. vs. 12.2 mg; 0.4. vs 4.0 mg), and pharmacies supplied less than half of cumulative MEDs to those who received the program at 12 weeks, but the differences were not statistically significant.

CONCLUSIONS

Some challenges need to be addressed before testing TOPP-Trauma. These include creating strategies to decrease attrition, offering the program throughout the care continuum to higher risk patients, and evaluating the impacts of reduced opioid use.

Nationally Representative Health Care Expenditures of Community-Based Older Adults with Pain in the United States Prescribed Opioids vs Those Not Prescribed Opioids

OBJECTIVE

To compare health care expenditures between older US adults (≥50 years) with pain who were prescribed opioid medications and those who were not.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional.

SETTING

Community-based adults in the 2015 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey (MEPS).

SUBJECTS

Nationally representative sample of US adults alive for the calendar year, aged 50 years or older, who reported having pain in the past four weeks.

METHODS

Older US adults (≥50 years) with pain in the 2015 MEPS data were identified. The key independent variable was opioid prescription status (prescribed opioid vs not prescribed opioid). Hierarchical linear regression models assessed health care expenditures (inpatient, outpatient, office-based, emergency room, prescription medications, other, and total) in US dollars for opioid prescription status from a community-dwelling US population perspective, adjusting for covariates.

RESULTS

The 2015 study cohort provided a national estimate of 50,898,592 noninstitutionalized US adults aged ≥50 years with pain in the past four weeks (prescribed opioid N = 16,757,516 [32.9%], not prescribed opioid N = 34,141,076 [67.1%]). After adjusting for covariates, individuals prescribed an opioid had 61% greater outpatient (β = 0.477, P < 0.0001), 69% greater office-based (β = 0.524, P < 0.0001), 14% greater emergency room (β = 0.131, P = 0.0045), 63% greater prescription medication (β = 0.486, P < 0.0001), 29% greater other (β = 0.251, P = 0.0002), and 105% greater total (β = 0.718, P < 0.0001) health care expenditures. There was no difference in opioid prescription status for inpatient expenditures (P > 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

This study raises awareness of the economic impact associated with opioid use among US older adults with pain. Future research should investigate these variables in greater depth, over longer time periods, and in additional populations.

Hopes and fears before opioid tapering: a quantitative and qualitative study of patients with chronic pain and long-term opioids

Background

It is clear that the risks of opioids in chronic pain outweigh the benefits, creating a drive for clinicians to support patients taper and stop long-term opioids. However, it is not known how patients who have been taking these medicines for months or years feel about reducing them. Using quantitative and qualitative data, this study describes the psychological complexity of these patients and examines their hopes and fears before opioid reduction.

Methods

Sixty patients attending the opioid clinic completed psychological and pain questionnaires, providing quantitative data, just before they commenced opioid tapering. They scored the severity of opioid side effects and completed a free text framework to express their beliefs about stopping or continuing opioids. A phenomenological approach was used to identify common qualitative themes.

Results

Most patients were taking opioid doses above the UK recommended maximum dose and reported severe pain with high pain interference. Over 80% of patients described significant depression and 60% significant anxiety. Negative themes around stopping opioids were more common than positive ones, with 63% patients fearing increased pain. A quarter of patients referred to addiction and 16% feared withdrawal. Five patients hoped for a better quality of life; seven feared a worse one. Opioid side effects were common and severe.

Conclusion

Patients with chronic pain taking long-term opioids demonstrate high psychological distress and low self-efficacy. Their concerns around opioid tapering relate to pain, quality of life and withdrawal. Identifying and addressing patients' individual concerns should increase the likelihood of successful opioid tapering.

Level of self-reported pain’s interference with work, and association with number of prescriptions and healthcare expenditures

Objectives

To examine the associations between pain interfering with work and family income and health status and to quantify the impact of pain on pharmaceutical utilization and cost using data from the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey (MEPS).

Methods

The study population included adult respondents to a MEPS pain question asking how much pain interfered with normal work (including both work outside the home and housework) from 2007 to 2014 (n = 71 593 respondents). Generalized linear models estimated the association between pain and family income, self-reported health status, number of prescriptions and healthcare expenditures (prescription drug and total). Control variables included age, gender, education, marital status, poverty, race, immigration status, region, obesity, work status and insurance coverage.

Key findings

Nearly 43% of respondents reported pain did not interfere at all with their work, 32% responded it did ‘a little bit’, 14% said ‘moderately’, 8% reported ‘quite a bit’, and 3% said ‘extremely’. Older respondents were significantly more likely to report pain interfering with work than younger ones. Women were more likely than men to report pain interfering with work. Obesity was significantly associated with pain, with 5.3% of obese respondents stating pain extremely interfered with work compared to 2.2% of nonobese respondents. Those who reported pain interfered ‘extremely’ had, on average, 46 prescriptions filled per year compared to only 5 prescriptions for those reporting less severe pain. This translated into significantly higher prescription drug and total costs.

Conclusion

Innovative targeted interventions are needed to mitigate the severe consequences of pain on health, well-being and cost.