Incident Functional Limitations Among Community-Dwelling Adults Using Opioids: A Retrospective Cohort Study Using a Propensity Analysis with the Health and Retirement Study

Association between prescription opioid use and heart failure: Cohort studies and Mendelian randomization analysis

BACKGROUND

Prescription opioid use (POU) has been shown to lead to cardiovascular disease (CVD), but its association with heart failure has not been well studied. We investigated the potential causal association between POU and HF using cohort studies and Mendelian Randomization (MR) analysis.

METHODS

Initially, we examined the longitudinal association between POU and HF using the data from the Health and Retirement Study (HRS) and the UK biobank. Next, we employed a two-sample MR analysis using summary statistics from genome-wide association studies (GWAS) to assess the potential causal associations between POU and HF.

RESULTS

During a median of 3.8 and 13.8 years of follow-up, there were 441(8.04 per 1000 person-year) and 16,170 (3.96 per 1000 person-year) HF cases in the HRS and the UK biobank, respectively. After adjusting for covariates, participants who used prescription opioids had a 32% increased risk of developing HF, compared with non-users (HR = 1.32, 95%CI: 1.26-1.38, P < 0.001). In the MR analysis, summary statistics for POU were obtained from 78,808 UK Biobank study participants, and summary data for HF were obtained from 218,792 participants of a European population. A causal effect of genetic liability for POU on an increased risk of HF (OR = 1.16, 95% CI = 1.06, 1.27, P = 0.001) was suggested. The results were generally consistent in the sensitivity analysis, and no pleiotropy or heterogeneity were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

POU is associated with a high risk of HF. Our findings provide new insight into prescription opioid use among populations at risk of heart failure. More studies are needed to validate our results and further investigate the underlying mechanisms.

Pain and incident cognitive impairment in very old Mexican American adults

BACKGROUND

Studies have investigated the association between pain and cognitive impairment among older adults, but the findings are mixed. We assessed the relationship of activity-limiting pain (pain interference) with incident cognitive impairment and the mediating effect of depressive symptoms among Mexican American adults aged ≥80.

METHODS

Data were taken from the Hispanic Established Population for the Epidemiological Study of the Elderly (2010-2016). Pain interference, or pain that limited daily activities in the last 12 months, was categorized into none, untreated pain interference, and treated pain interference. Cognitive impairment was defined as scoring <21 on the Mini-Mental State Examination and difficulty with at least one instrumental activity of daily living. We used general estimation equations to assess this relationship between pain and incident cognitive impairment over the 6-year period (n = 313).

RESULTS

Participants reporting both untreated and treated pain interference had higher odds of incident cognitive impairment than those reporting no pain or pain interference (untreated adjusted odds ratio [aOR]: 2.18; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.09-4.36; treated aOR: 1.99; 95% CI: 1.15-3.44). Depressive symptoms explained 15.0% of the total effect of untreated pain and 25.3% of treated pain.

CONCLUSIONS

Among very old Mexican American adults, both treated and untreated pain interference was associated with incident cognitive impairment. This association was partially mediated by depressive symptoms, underscoring a need for depression screening in patients with chronic pain. Future work is needed to examine mechanistic/causal pathways between pain and subsequent cognitive impairment and the role of pharmacological and non-pharmacological treatments in these pathways.

Inequitable access to nonpharmacologic pain treatment providers among cancer-free U.S. adults

OBJECTIVE

Using evidence-based nonpharmacologic pain treatments may prevent opioid overuse and associated adverse outcomes. There is limited data on the impact of access-promoting social determinants of health (SDoH: education, income, transportation) on use of nonpharmacologic pain treatments. Our objective was to examine the relationship between SDoH and use of nonpharmacologic pain treatment providers. Our goal was to understand policy-actionable factors contributing to inequity in pain treatment.

METHODS

Based on Andersen's Health Utilization Model, this cross-sectional analysis of 2016-2019 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey data evaluated whether use of outpatient nonpharmacologic pain treatment providers is driven by enabling (i.e., advantageous socioeconomic resources) or need (i.e., perceived disability and diagnosed disease) factors. The study sample (unweighted n = 28,188) represented a weighted N = 81,912,730 noninstitutionalized, cancer-free, U.S. adults with pain interference. The primary outcome measured use of nonpharmacologic providers relative to exclusive prescription opioid use or no treatment (i.e., neither opioids nor nonpharmacologic). To quantify equitable access, we compared the variance-between access-promoting enabling factors versus medical need factors-that explained utilization.

RESULTS

Compared to enabling factors, need factors explained twice the variance predicting pain treatment utilization. Still, the adjusted odds of using nonpharmacologic providers instead of opioids alone were 39% lower among respondents identifying as Black (95% Confidence Interval [CI], 0.49-0.76) and respondents residing in the U.S. South (95% CI, 0.51-0.74). Higher education (95% CI, 1.72-2.79) and income (95% CI, 1.68-2.42) both facilitated using nonpharmacologic providers instead of opioids.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings highlight the substantial influence access-promoting SDoH have on pain treatment utilization.