Patient Preference for Pain Medication in the Emergency Department Is Associated with Non-fatal Overdose History

Changes in daily dose in open-label compared to double-blind: The role of clients' expectations in injectable opioid agonist treatment

Introduction

Though double-blind studies have indicated that hydromorphone and diacetylmorphine produce similar effects when administered through injectable opioid agonist treatment (iOAT) programs, participant preference may influence some aspects of medication dispensation such as dose.

Methods

 This is a retrospective longitudinal analysis. Participants (n = 131) were previously enrolled in a double-blind clinical trial for iOAT who continued to receive treatment in an open-label follow up study. Data included medication dispensation records from 2012 to 2020. Using linear regression and paired t-tests, average daily dose totals of hydromorphone and diacetylmorphine were examined comparatively between double-blind and open-label periods. A subgroup analysis explored dose difference by preference using the proxy, blinding guess, a variable used to facilitate the measurement of treatment masking during the clinical trial by asking which medication the participant thought they received.

Results

During the open-label period, participants prescribed diacetylmorphine received 49.5 mg less than during the double-blind period (95% CI -12.6,-86.4). Participants receiving hydromorphone did not see a significant dose decrease. Participants who guessed they received hydromorphone during the clinical trial, but learned they were on diacetylmorphine during the open-label period, saw a decrease in total daily dose of 78.3 mg less (95% CI -134.3,-22.4) during the open-label period.

Conclusion

If client preference is considered in the treatment of chronic opioid use disorder, clients may be able to better moderate their dose to suit their individual needs. Together with their healthcare providers, clients can participate in their treatment trajectories collaboratively to optimize client outcomes and promote person-centered treatment options.

Opioid-Related Risk Screening Measures for the Emergency Care Setting

Efforts to minimize the impact of prescribed opioids on future adverse outcomes are reliant on emergency care providers' ability to screen and detect opioid use disorder (OUD). Many prescriptions are initiated in the emergency department (ED) for acute pain; thus, validated measures are especially needed. Our systematic review describes the available opioid-related screening measures identified through search of the available literature. Measures were categorized by intent and applied clinical setting. We found 44 articles, identifying 15 screening measures. Of these, nine were developed to screen for current opioid misuse and five to screen for risk of future opioid misuse. None were created for use outside of a chronic pain setting. Many measures were applied differently from intended purpose. Although several measures are available, screening for adverse opioid outcomes in the ED is hampered by lack of validated instruments. Development of clarified conceptual models and ED-specific research is necessary to limit OUD.