Prevalence and treatment of pain in EDs in the United States, 2000 to 2010

Chronic Opioid Prescribing After Common Otolaryngology Procedures in Adults

OBJECTIVE

(1) Describe short and long-term opioid prescribing patterns and variation after common otolaryngologic procedures and (2) assess risk factors for chronic opioid use in this cohort.

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective cohort.

SETTING

Optum's deidentified Integrated Claims-Clinical data set.

METHODS

An adult cohort of patients undergoing common otolaryngology procedures from 2010 to 2017 was identified. Associations between procedure and other covariates with any initial opioid prescription and continuous opioid prescriptions were assessed with multivariable modeling. Opioid use was defined as continuous if a new prescription was filled within 30 days of the previous prescription. A time-to-event analysis assessed continuous prescriptions from the index procedure to end of the last continuous opioid prescription.

RESULTS

Among a cohort of 19,819 patients undergoing predominately laryngoscopy procedures (12,721, 64.2%), 2585 (13.0%) received an opioid prescription with variation in receiving a prescription, daily dose, and total initially prescribed dose varying by procedure, patient demographics, provider characteristics, and facility type. Opioids were prescribed most frequently after tonsillectomy (45.4%) and least frequently after laryngoscopy with interventions (3.9%), which persisted in the multivariable models. Overall rates of continuous use at 180 and 360 days were 0.48% and 0.27%, respectively. Among patients receiving an initial opioid prescription, maintaining continuous prescriptions was associated with tonsillectomy procedures, age (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR]: 0.997 per year, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.993-0.999), opioid prescriptions 6 months preprocedure (aHR: 0.42, 95% CI: 0.37-0.47), and nonotolaryngology initial prescribers (aHRs: <1, P < .05).

CONCLUSION

There is substantial variation in initial prescribing practices and continuous opioid prescriptions after common Otolaryngology procedures, but the overall rate of maintaining a continuous prescription starting after these procedures is very low.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level 3.

An Adaptive Pragmatic Randomized Controlled Trial of Emergency Department Acupuncture for Acute Musculoskeletal Pain Management

STUDY OBJECTIVE

Acute musculoskeletal pain in emergency department (ED) patients is frequently severe and challenging to treat with medications alone. The purpose of this study was to determine the feasibility, acceptability, and effectiveness of adding ED acupuncture to treat acute episodes of musculoskeletal pain in the neck, back, and extremities.

METHODS

In this pragmatic 2-stage adaptive open-label randomized clinical trial, Stage 1 identified whether auricular acupuncture (AA; based on the battlefield acupuncture protocol) or peripheral acupuncture (PA; needles in head, neck, and extremities only), when added to usual care was more feasible, acceptable, and efficacious in the ED. Stage 2 assessed effectiveness of the selected acupuncture intervention(s) on pain reduction compared to usual care only (UC). Licensed acupuncturists delivered AA and PA. They saw and evaluated but did not deliver acupuncture to the UC group as an attention control. All participants received UC from blinded ED providers. Primary outcome was 1-hour change in 11-point pain numeric rating scale.

RESULTS

Stage 1 interim analysis found both acupuncture styles similar, so Stage 2 continued all 3 treatment arms. Among 236 participants randomized, demographics and baseline pain were comparable across groups. When compared to UC alone, reduction in pain was 1.6 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.7 to 2.6) points greater for AA+UC and 1.2 (95% CI: 0.3 to 2.1) points greater for PA+UC patients. Participants in both treatment arms reported high satisfaction with acupuncture.

CONCLUSION

ED acupuncture is feasible and acceptable and can reduce acute musculoskeletal pain better than UC alone.

The association between specific narrative elements and patient perspectives on acute pain treatment

BACKGROUND

Narratives are effective tools for communicating with patients about opioid prescribing for acute pain and improving patient satisfaction with pain management. It remains unclear, however, whether specific narrative elements may be particularly effective at influencing patient perspectives.

METHODS

This study was a secondary analysis of data collected for Life STORRIED, a multicenter RCT. Participants included 433 patients between 18 and 70 years-old presenting to the emergency department (ED) with renal colic or musculoskeletal back pain. Participants were instructed to view one or more narrative videos during their ED visit in which a patient storyteller discussed their experiences with opioids. We examined associations between exposure to individual narrative features and patients' 1) preference for opioids, 2) recall of opioid-related risks and 3) perspectives about the care they received.

RESULTS

Participants were more likely to watch videos featuring storytellers who shared their race or gender. We found that participants who watched videos that contained specific narrative elements, for example mention of prescribed opioids, were more likely to recall having received information about pain treatment options on the day after discharge (86.3% versus 72.9%, p = 0.02). Participants who watched a video that discussed family history of addiction reported more participation in their treatment decision than those who did not (7.6 versus 6.8 on a ten-point scale, p = 0.04).

CONCLUSIONS

Participants preferentially view narratives featuring storytellers who share their race or gender. Narrative elements were not meaningfully associated with patient-centered outcomes. These findings have implications for the design of narrative communication tools.

Paediatric hospitalisation related to medications administration errors of non-opioid analgesics, antipyretics and antirheumatics in England and Wales: a longitudinal ecological study

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to explore paediatric hospitalisation related to medication administration errors (MAEs) of non-opioid analgesics, antipyretics and antirheumatics in England and Wales.

DESIGN

An ecological study.

SETTING

A population-based study on hospitalised patients in England and Wales. Hospital admission data were extracted from the Hospital Episode Statistics database in England and the Patient Episode Database for Wales for the period between April 1999 and April 2020. Admissions cause was confirmed using the diagnostic codes T39.0-T39.9.

PARTICIPANTS

Paediatric patients aged 15 years and below who were hospitalised at all National Health Service (NHS) trusts and any independent sector funded by NHS trusts.

PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURE

Hospitalisation rates related to MAEs of non-opioid analgesics, antipyretics and antirheumatics.

RESULTS

The yearly number of admissions for MAEs associated with non-opioid analgesics, antipyretics and antirheumatics experienced a notable growth of 21.7% over the span of two decades, rising from 4574 cases in 1999 to 5568 cases in 2020. The observed increase demonstrates a significant upward trend in hospital admissions rate, with a 12.3% growth from 46.16 per 100 000 individuals in 1999 to 51.83 per 100 000 individuals in 2020 (95% CIs 44.83 to 47.50 and 50.47 to53.19, respectively, trend test, p<0.05). The therapeutic categories that exhibited the highest frequency of MAEs were '4-aminophenol derivatives' and 'other non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs', accounting for 79.3% and 16.0% of cases, respectively. It is worth noting that there was a significant increase of 28.9% in hospitalisations linked to MAEs specifically associated with '4-aminophenol derivatives.'

CONCLUSION

The research revealed a notable rise in the overall yearly number of hospital admissions associated with MAEs within the paediatric population. This study emphasises the necessity for additional research aimed at mitigating the potential hazards associated with the ingestion of these medications, particularly within susceptible demographics, such as young children.

Comparative Effectiveness of Ketorolac Dosing Strategies for Emergency Department Patients With Acute Pain

STUDY OBJECTIVES

Ketorolac is a commonly used nonopioid parenteral analgesic for treating emergency department (ED) patients with acute pain. Our systematic review aims to summarize the available evidence by comparing the efficacy and safety of differing ketorolac dosing strategies for acute pain relief in the ED.

METHODS

The review was registered on PROSPERO (CRD42022310062). We searched MEDLINE, PubMed, EMBASE, and unpublished sources from inception through December 9, 2022. We included randomized control trials of patients presenting with acute pain to the ED, comparing ketorolac doses less than 30 mg (low dose) to ketorolac doses more than or equal to 30 mg (high dose) for the outcomes of pain scores after treatment need for rescue analgesia, and incidence of adverse events. We excluded patients in non-ED settings, including postoperative settings. We extracted data independently and in duplicate and pooled them using a random-effects model. We assessed the risk of bias using the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 tool and the overall certainty of the evidence for each outcome using the Grading Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach.

RESULTS

This review included 5 randomized controlled trials (n=627 patients). Low-dose parenteral ketorolac (15 to 20 mg), as compared to high-dose ketorolac (≥30 mg), probably has no effect on pain scores (mean difference 0.05 mm lower on 100 mm visual analog scale, 95% confidence interval [CI] -4.91 mm to +5.01 mm; moderate certainty). Further, low-dose ketorolac at 10 mg may have no effect on pain scores compared to high-dose ketorolac (mean difference 1.58 mm lower on 100 mm visual analog scale, 95% CI -8.86 mm to +5.71 mm; low certainty). Low-dose ketorolac may increase the need for rescue analgesia (risk ratio 1.27, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.87; low certainty) and may have no difference on rates of adverse events (risk ratio 0.84, 95% CI 0.54 to 1.33; low certainty).

CONCLUSION

In adult ED patients with acute pain, parenteral ketorolac given at doses of 10 mg to 20 mg is probably as effective in relieving pain as doses of 30 mg or higher. Low-dose ketorolac may have no effect on adverse events, but these patients may require more rescue analgesia. This evidence is limited by imprecision and is not generalizable to children or those at higher risk of adverse events.

Emergency Department Pain Management in the Older Adult

Pain assessment and management in older adults is complex and requires evaluation and consideration of the type of pain, the acuity of the condition, comorbidities, and medications. Many older adults do not receive appropriate therapy for painful conditions in the emergency department (ED). This brief review article is focused on pharmacologic agents, drug-drug interactions, drug-disease interactions, and approaches in the management of painful conditions seen in older adults in the emergency department. Recommendations for specific painful conditions such as fragility fractures are discussed.

Associations Between Management Pathway and Opioid Prescriptions for Patients Entering the Emergency Department With Neck and Back Pain

Objective

To determine associations between post-emergency department (ED) management pathways and downstream opioid prescriptions in patients seeking care for incident neck and/or back pain.

Patients and Methods

We identified patients seeking first-time ED care for neck and/or back pain from January 1, 2013, through November 6, 2017. We reported demographic characteristics and opioid prescriptions across management pathways using descriptive statistics and assessed the relative risk of any opioid prescription 12 months post-ED visit among 5 different post-ED management pathways using Poisson regression adjusted for patient demographic characteristics.

Results

Within 12 months after the index ED visit, 58.0% (n=10,949) were prescribed an opioid, with most patients prescribed an opioid within the first week (average daily morphine milligram equivalents of 6.8 mg (SD 9.6 mg). The morphine milligram equivalents decreased to 0.7 mg (SD 8.2 mg) by week 4 and remained consistently less than 1 mg between week 4 and 12 months. Compared with the ED to primary care provider pathway, the relative risk of opioid prescription between 7 days and 12 months after the index ED visit was similar for the ED to physical therapy pathway, higher for both the ED to hospital admission or repeat ED visit pathway (30% increase; relative risk (RR), 1.3; 95% CI, 1.17-1.44) and the ED to specialist pathway (19% increase; RR, 1.19; 95% CI, 1.07-1.33), and lower in the ED with no follow-up visits pathway (41% decrease; RR, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.54-0.65).

Conclusion

In general, more conservative care was associated with lower opioid prescription rates, and escalated care was associated with higher opioid prescription rates.

Mobile Phone-Based Telemonitoring for Improving Adherence to Analgesic Treatment in Trauma Patients After Emergency Department Discharge: A Randomized Controlled Trial

OBJECTIVE

To determine the impact of mobile-phone telemonitoring on patients' adherence and satisfaction with posttrauma pain treatment.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We conducted a prospective randomized clinical trial including patients with minor trauma discharged from the emergency department (ED) with analgesic treatment. Patients were randomized to one of 3 groups, the control group, where patients received a phone call on day-7, the short message service (SMS) group, where patients received a daily text message to remind them to take their treatment during 7 days, and the mobile-phone based telemonitoring (TLM) group. Patients' adherence to analgesic treatments using the Morisky Medication Adherence Scale, current pain by using a visual analogue scale, and patients' satisfaction were assessed. For the TLM group, the assessment was performed at day-2, 4 and 7.

RESULTS

Good adherence was observed in 418 patients (92.9%) in the TLM group versus 398 patients (88.6%) in the SMS group and 380 patients (84.8%) in the control group ( P <0.001). The factor mostly associated with adherence was telemonitoring (OR 2.40 95% CI 1.55-3.71). The decrease in pain visual analogue scale was highest in the TLM group compared with SMS and control groups ( P <0.001). The percentage of patients' satisfaction at 7 days post-ED discharge was 93% in the TLM group versus 88% in the SMS group and 84% in the standard group ( P =0.02).

DISCUSSION

Our findings suggest that mobile-phone-based telemonitoring is beneficial in the treatment of pain in trauma patients after ED discharge. This approach improved patients' adherence and satisfaction.

Factors that affect pain management in adults diagnosed with acute appendicitis in the emergency department: A retrospective study

BACKGROUND

Analgesic treatment, including with opioids, can safely be given to patients who are suspected of having appendicitis. The study examined factors which may influence the treatment of pain in appendicitis in the adult emergency department (ED). A secondary objective was to determine if analgesia affected clinical outcomes.

METHODS

This single-center retrospective study examined medical records of all adult patients with a discharge diagnosis of appendicitis. Patients were categorized based on the type of analgesia received in the ED. Variables included the day of week and staffing shift of presentation, gender, age, and triage pain scale, as well as time to ED discharge, imaging, operation, and hospital discharge. Univariable and multivariable logistic regression models were performed to determine which factors influenced treatment and affected outcomes.

RESULTS

Records of 1839 patients were categorized into three groups - 883 (48%) did not receive analgesia, 571 (31%) received only non-opioid medications, and 385 (21%) received at least one opioid. Patients with a higher triage pain level were significantly more likely to receive analgesia (4-6: OR = 1.85; 95% CI = 1.2-2.84, 7-9: OR = 3.36; 95% CI = 2.18-5.17, 10: OR = 10.78; 95% CI = 6.38-18.23) and at least one opioid (4-6: OR = 2.88; 95% CI = 1.13-7.34, 7-9: OR = 4.36; 95% CI = 1.73-11.01, 10: OR = 6.23; 95% CI = 2.42-16.09). Male gender was associated with a significantly lower likelihood of receiving analgesia (OR = 0.74; 95% CI = 0.61-0.9), but a significantly greater likelihood of receiving at least one opioid given that they received any pain medication (OR = 1.87; 95% CI = 1.41-2.48). Patients aged 25-64 years old were significantly more likely to receive at least one opioid if they received any pain medication (25-44: OR = 1.47; 95% CI = 1.08-2.02, 45-64: OR = 1.78; 95% CI = 1.15-2.76). Presentation to the ED on Sundays was associated with lower rates of opioid treatment (OR = 0.63; 95% CI = 0.42-0.94). Regarding clinical outcomes, patients who received analgesia waited longer for imaging (+0.58 h; 95% CI = 0.31-0.85), stayed longer in the ED (+2.2 h; 95% CI = 1.60-2.79), and had a slightly longer hospitalization (+0.62d; 95% CI = 0.34-0.90).

CONCLUSIONS

Almost half of patients with appendicitis didn't receive analgesia, with most of those treated receiving only non-opioid analgesia. Older age and Sunday presentations were associated with less opioid treatment. Patients who received analgesia waited longer for imaging, stayed longer in the ED, and had a longer hospitalization.

A systematic review of sufentanil for the management of adults with acute pain in the emergency department and pre-hospital setting

BACKGROUND

Pain is commonly encountered in the Emergency Department (ED) and pre-hospital setting and often requires opioid analgesia. We sought to synthesize the available evidence on the effectiveness of sufentanil for acute pain relief for adult patients in the pre-hospital or ED setting.

METHODS

This systematic review was conducted in accordance with PRISMA guidelines. Medline, Embase, Cochrane CENTRAL, and CINAHL were searched from inception to February 1, 2022. The grey literature was also searched. We included randomized controlled trials of adult patients with acute pain who were treated with sufentanil. Two reviewers independently completed screening, full text review, and data extraction. Primary outcome was reduction in pain. Secondary outcomes included adverse events, need for rescue analgesia, and patient and provider satisfaction. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 tool. A meta-analysis was not performed due to heterogeneity.

RESULTS

Of 1120 unique citations, four studies (3 ED and 1 pre-hospital) met full inclusion criteria (n = 467 participants). The overall quality of the included studies was high. Intranasal (IN) sufentanil was superior to placebo for pain relief at 30 min (difference 20.8%, 95% CI 4.0-36.2%, p = 0.01). Both IN (two studies) and IV sufentanil (one study) were comparable to IV morphine. Mild adverse events were common and there was a higher propensity for minor sedation in patients receiving sufentanil. There were no serious adverse events requiring advanced interventions.

CONCLUSION

Sufentanil was comparable to IV morphine and was superior to placebo for rapid relief of acute pain in the ED setting. The safety profile of sufentanil is similar to IV morphine in this setting, with minimal concern for serious adverse events. The intranasal formulation may provide an alternative, rapid, non-parenteral route that could benefit our unique emergency department and pre-hospital patient population. Due to the overall small sample size of this review, larger studies are required to confirm safety.

Intravenous acetaminophen with morphine versus intravenous morphine alone for acute pain in the emergency room: protocol for a multicenter, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blinded study (ADAMOPA)

BACKGROUND

In emergency medicine, pain is a frequent reason for consultation. However, there is a great variation in its management which is often insufficient. The use intravenous morphine alone or multimodal analgesia with paracetamol is recommended for severe pain. But robust data are lacking to justify the association of paracetamol with morphine versus morphine alone for pain management in the emergency room (ER). The aim of our study is therefore to assess if in patients with acute pain of moderate to severe intensity with a numerical verbal scale (NVS) ≥5 in the ER, the intravenous administration of morphine alone is not inferior to the administration of intravenous morphine combined with paracetamol at 30 min from the first administration of the study drug.

METHODS

ADAMOPA is a prospective, non-inferiority, multicenter, placebo-controlled, parallel-group, randomized (1:1), double-blind trial. Subjects will be enrolled in the ER if they experience moderate to severe, acute, non-traumatic, and traumatic pain, defined as an NVS ≥5. The primary endpoint will be the between-group difference in mean change in NVS pain scores among patients receiving the combination of intravenous morphine plus paracetamol or intravenous morphine given alone, measured from the time before administration of the study medication to 30 min later.

DISCUSSION

This trial will determine the clinical utility of the association of paracetamol with morphine for pain management in the emergency room. The ADAMOPA trial will be conducted in accordance with the International Council on Harmonization Good Clinical Practices.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

EudraCT number: 2019-002149-39.

CLINICALTRIALS

gov identifier: NCT04148495. Date of trial registration: November 1, 2019.

Prophylactic antiemetics for adults receiving intravenous opioids in the acute care setting

BACKGROUND

Physicians often prescribe opioids for pain in the acute care setting. Nausea and vomiting are well-described adverse events, occurring in over one-third of patients. Prophylactic antiemetics may be one option to reduce opioid-associated nausea and vomiting. However, these medications also have their own adverse effects, so it is important to understand their efficacy and safety prior to routine use. This is a review of randomized controlled trials comparing prophylactic antiemetics versus placebo or standard care for preventing opioid-associated nausea and vomiting.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of prophylactic antiemetics for nausea and vomiting in adults (aged 16 years or older) receiving intravenous opioids in the acute care setting.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL (the Cochrane Library), MEDLINE (OVID), Embase (OVID) from inception to January 2022, and Google Scholar (17 January 2022). We also searched the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) and screened reference lists.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials of prophylactic antiemetics versus placebo or standard care in adults prior to receiving an intravenous opioid.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors (MG, JNC) independently determined the eligibility of each study according to the inclusion criteria. Two review authors (MG, GDP) then independently extracted data, assessed risk of bias, and determined the certainty of evidence using GRADE. Our primary outcomes were the occurrence of nausea, vomiting, and adverse events. Secondary outcomes included nausea severity, number of vomiting episodes, and number of participants requiring antiemetic rescue therapy. We presented outcomes as risk ratios (RR) for dichotomous data (e.g. presence of vomiting, presence of nausea, number of participants requiring rescue medication, adverse events) and mean difference (MD) or standardized mean difference for continuous data (e.g. number of vomiting episodes, nausea severity) with 95% confidence intervals (CI).

MAIN RESULTS

We included three studies involving 527 participants (187 women and 340 men) with a mean age of 42 years.  All studies used intravenous metoclopramide (10 mg) as the intervention and a placebo for the comparator. No studies assessed any other antiemetic or compared the intervention to standard care. Compared to placebo, metoclopramide did not reduce vomiting (RR 1.18, 95% CI 0.26 to 5.32; low-certainty evidence) or nausea (RR 0.55; 95% CI 0.15 to 2.03; low-certainty evidence) and there was no difference in adverse events (RR 2.34, 95% CI 0.47 to 11.61; low-certainty evidence).  No data were available regarding the number of vomiting episodes. Metoclopramide did reduce the severity of nausea compared with placebo (MD -0.49, 95% CI -0.75 to -0.23; low-certainty evidence) but did not reduce the need for rescue medication (RR 1.86, 95% CI 0.17 to 20.16; low-certainty evidence).  Two studies were at unclear risk of bias for random sequence generation, one for blinding of outcome assessors, one for incomplete outcome data, and two for selective reporting. The studies were at low risk of bias for all remaining components.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There was no evidence that prophylactic metoclopramide affected the risk of vomiting, nausea, or the need for rescue medication when provided prior to intravenous opioids in the acute care setting. There was a clinically insignificant difference in nausea severity when comparing prophylactic metoclopramide with placebo. Overall, the evidence was of low certainty. Future research could better delineate the effects of prophylactic antiemetics on specific populations, and new studies are needed to evaluate the use of other prophylactic antiemetic agents, for which there were no data.

Patient Pain Experiences and the Emergency Department Encounter: A Qualitative Analysis

BACKGROUND

Legislation, practice recommendations, and the likely link between therapeutic opioid exposure and iatrogenic opioid use disorder (OUD) have led to reduced opioid prescribing. The effects of this change on unrelieved pain and the overdose crisis are not well-characterized.

AIM

We explored emergency department (ED) patients' beliefs and experiences involving pain and emergency care to inform the development of future psychosocial interventions that balance the need for acute pain management with risks from opioid exposure.

METHODS

Qualitative, semi-structured interviews were conducted after discharge from an urban, academic Level 1 trauma center ED from September 2020 to May 2021 with 18 adult patients presenting with acute pain. After transcription of audio recording, common themes were identified using framework analysis. Thematic hierarchy was validated with Pearson correlation coefficients for cluster analysis of word similarity.

RESULTS

Of the 18 participants, most were Black (n = 11, 61%) and male (n = 12, 66.7%). Analysis identified one overarching theme: locus of control with an emergency pain encounter. Four themes were identified surrounding internal and external influences on pain management: (1) accessing healthcare for acute pain; (2) managing the pain after discharge; (3) seeking opioids: self-medicating and misuse; and (4) opioid crisis makes people in pain suffer.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients discharged from the ED reported unrelieved pain, factors that influence their pain management, and an ability to seek opioids from non-medical sources. There is a significant disconnect between patients and providers in terms of priorities in pain management and the importance of individualized care.

Outcomes of a controlled trial with visiting therapy dog teams on pain in adults in an emergency department

CONTEXT

Pain is a primary reason individuals attend an Emergency Department (ED), and its management is a concern.

OBJECTIVES

Change in symptoms and physiologic variables at 3 time points pre-post a ten-minute St. John Ambulance therapy dog team visit compared to no visit in ED patients who experienced pain.

DESIGN, SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

Using a controlled clinical trial design, pain, anxiety, depression and well-being were measured with the Edmonton Symptom Assessment System (revised version) (ESAS-r) 11-point rating scales before, immediately after, and 20 minutes post- therapy dog team visit with Royal University Hospital ED patients participating in the study (n = 97). Blood pressure and heart rate were recorded at the time points. Control data was gathered twice (30 minutes apart) for comparison (n = 101). There were no group differences in age, gender or ethnicity among the control and intervention groups (respectively mean age 59.5/57.2, ethnicity 77.2% Caucasian/87.6%, female 43.6% /39.2%, male 56.4%/60.8%,).

INTERVENTION

10 minute therapy dog team visit in addition to usual care.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Change in reported pain from pre and post therapy dog team visit and comparison with a control group.

RESULTS

A two-way ANOVA was conducted to compare group effects. Significant pre- post-intervention differences were noted in pain for the intervention (mean changeint. = -0.9, SD = 2.05, p = .004, 95% confidence interval [CI] = [0.42, 1.32], ηp2 = 04) but not the control group. Anxiety (mean changeint. = -1.13, SD = 2.80, p = .005, 95% CI = [0.56, 1.64], ηp2 = .04), depression (mean changeint. = -0.72, SD = 1.71, p = .002, 95% CI = [0.39, 1.11], ηp2 = .047), and well-being ratings (mean changeint. = -0.87, SD = 1.84, p < .001, 95% CI = [0.49, 1.25], ηp2 = .07) similarly improved for the intervention group only. There were no pre-post intervention differences in blood pressure or heart rate for either group. Strong responders to the intervention (i.e. >50% reduction) were observed for pain (43%), anxiety (48%), depression (46%), and well-being (41%).

CONCLUSIONS

Clinically significant changes in pain as well as significant changes in anxiety, depression and well-being were observed in the therapy dog intervention compared to control. The findings of this novel study contribute important knowledge towards the potential value of ED therapy dogs to affect patients' experience of pain, and related measures of anxiety, depression and well-being.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This controlled clinical trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, registration number NCT04727749.

Analgesic Treatment and the Patients' Opinion on the Hospital Emergency Department

Aim: The aim of the study was to analyze whether a patient’s opinion is related to the effect of analgesic treatment. Methods: The study was conducted using a survey questionnaire among adult patients admitted to the hospital emergency department in March 2021. The Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) was used to assess pain. Patients were asked to rate the intensity of pain during their stay in the emergency department in three situations: (1) at admission; (2) during the stay; and (3) upon discharge. The relationships between qualitative variables were assessed by the chi-squared test. Significance was set at p < 0.05. Results: There was no statistical dependence between the patient’s opinion about the medical institution and results of the effectiveness of analgesic treatments (p = 0.056). The highest percentage of patients satisfied with the received treatment were those who did not feel pain during ED discharge (94.12%), and the lowest were those who complained of severe pain during ED discharge (63.91%). The average mark for the functioning and organization of the emergency department was 7.44 (±2.04). Only 54 patients (29.83%) had taken pain medication before deciding to visit ED. Conclusions: No statistical dependency between the effect of the analgesic treatment and the patient’s opinion has been observed. The majority of patients with pain discomfort visit emergency departments without looking for consultation in other locations or without taking analgesics. In the considered institution, patients were satisfied with the analgesic treatment, staff performance, and with the organization of the department.

Evaluating the Risk of Prescription Opioid Misuse among Adult Emergency Department Patients

Background

Pain is the most commonly treated symptom in the emergency department, and opioids are often prescribed from the emergency department to treat pain. The American College of Emergency Physicians recommends that providers assess the patient's risk of abusing opioids prior to prescribing opioids. In this study, we use a validated risk assessment tool to assess the risk of opioid abuse among emergency medicine patients and the patients' perceptions of their potential dangers.

Methods

This is an observational study conducted in an academic emergency department (ED). All adults presenting to ED were eligible to participate in the study. Individuals were randomly selected to complete a survey which included the Opioid Risk Tool (ORT) and perceptions of sharing controlled substances.

Results

There were 300 participants in the study. The 18–45-year age group was the most commonly represented group (58%), and nearly two-thirds (63%) of the population was female. The average opioid risk score was 8 or high risk. Individuals that were at high risk of opioid abuse were less likely to dispose of their additional medications appropriately (19% vs. 12%) and were more likely to share their additional controlled medications with family or friends (18% vs. 3%).

Conclusion

The emergency department population is at high risk to abuse opioids. The introduction of safer pain management options should be considered among this high-risk group.

Alleviating Refractory Abdominal Pain in Cholangiocarcinoma Using Erector Spinae Plane Block in the Emergency Department

BACKGROUND

Acute pain management in the emergency department (ED) is a challenging task, more so in pain due to malignancy. Opioids have life-threatening side effects in ED patients, along with the risk of dependency. Erector spinae plane block (ESPB) is a recently described plane block technique with ease of performance and minimal side effects, making it suitable for emergency settings.

CASE REPORT

A 62-year-old male patient recently diagnosed with cholangiocarcinoma presented to the ED with severe right upper abdominal pain. There was no pain relief with high doses of analgesics. ESPB was administered at T7 vertebrae level. The patient's Defense and Veteran Pain Rating Scale score reduced from 8/10 pre-procedure to 3/10 within 15 min, and 2/10 1 h after the procedure. He reported that he had an uninterrupted pain-free sleep after 4 days. WHY SHOULD AN EMERGENCY PHYSICIAN BE AWARE OF THIS?: ESPB is a novel regional analgesia that may help in management of uncontrolled severe pain not relieved with analgesics in patients with cholangiocarcinoma in the ED.

Studies on local anesthetic lidocaine hydrochloride delivery via photo-triggered implantable polymeric microneedles as a patient-controlled transdermal analgesia system

This study aimed to develop photo-triggered implantable polymeric microneedles (MNs) for successful drug delivery in a transdermal analgesia system. The prepared iron oxide nanoparticles (Fe₃O₄NPs) were coated with polydopamine (PDA) followed by polyvinylpyrrolidone (PVP) and polycaprolactone (PCL). While the PCL/PVP-Fe₃O₄NPs synthesis, the absorption band of PVP at 1656 cm^-1 shifted to 1665 cm^-1 which indicate the presence of interaction between Fe⁺ and C = O groups. The size and morphology of PCL/PVP-Fe₃O₄NPs were examined by scanning electron microscope and transmission electron microscope (SEM and TEM) analysis. The results confirmed that the prepared PCL/PVP-Fe₃O₄NPs were spherical with sizes ranging from 9 to 11 nm. The lidocaine hydrochloride content in the microneedles was 3.72 ± 0.31 mg and A + 2.2S ≤ L representing that the drug was uniformly distributed. The insertion ability of lidocaine hydrochloride@PCL/PVP-Fe₃O₄NPs-DMNs was tested by porcine skin. The results demonstrated outstanding insertion ability and potential for drug delivery. In addition, near-infrared (NIR) irradiation has the potential to penetrate the skin and enhance lidocaine hydrochloride-releasing activity. The in vivo experimental data confirmed that lidocaine hydrochloride@PCL/PVP-Fe₃O₄NPs-DMNs allowed for painless drug delivery by breaking the barrier of the stratum corneum. To conclude, lidocaine hydrochloride can be safely delivered through the transdermal analgesic system, with a quick onset time.

Pain management in the emergency department: a clinical review

Pain is one of the most common reasons for patients to visit the emergency department. The ever-growing research on emergency department analgesia has challenged the current practices with respect to the optimal analgesic regimen for acute musculoskeletal pain, safe and judicious opioid prescribing, appropriate utilization of non-opioid therapeutics, and non-pharmacological treatment modalities. This clinical review is set to provide evidence-based answers to these challenging questions.

Shame Mediates the Relationship Between Pain Invalidation and Depression

The experience of pain is subjective, yet many people have their pain invalidated or not believed. Pain invalidation is associated with poor mental health, including depression and lower well-being. Qualitative investigations of invalidating experiences identify themes of depression, but also social withdrawal, self-criticism, and lower self-worth, all of which are core components of shame. Despite this, no studies have quantitatively assessed the interrelationship between pain invalidation, shame, and depression. To explore this relationship, participants recounted the frequency of experienced pain invalidation from family, friends, and medical professionals, as well as their feelings of internalized shame and depressive symptoms. As shame has been shown to be a precursor for depression, we further explored the role of shame as a mediator between pain invalidation and depressive symptoms. All sources of pain invalidation were positively associated with shame and depressive symptoms, and shame fully mediated the relationship between each source of pain invalidation and depression. Relative to other sources, pain invalidation from family was most closely tied to shame and depression. Overall, findings indicate that one mechanism by which pain invalidation may facilitate depression is via the experience of shame. Future research may explore shame as a potential upstream precursor to depression in the context of pain. Findings provide more insight into the harmful influence of pain invalidation on mental health and highlight the impact of interpersonal treatment on the experiences of people in pain.

A Comparison of Tertiary Drug Resources' Consistency Regarding Drug-Drug Interactions of Adjunctive Analgesics

Background: Health care providers routinely rely on tertiary drug information resources to affirm knowledge or proactively verify the safety and efficacy of medications. Though all patient care areas are affected, the reliability of these resources is perhaps nowhere as poignant as it is in high-acuity settings, including the emergency department and the intensive care unit. As providers seek to identify adjunctive analgesics for acute pain in these areas, they must be able to rely on the integrity to whichever resource their institution has granted access. Objective: To determine the congruency of drug-drug interaction information found on 3 tertiary drug resources. Methods: A drug-drug interaction analysis was conducted on Micromedex, Lexicomp, and Medscape. Adjunctive analgesics included dexmedetomidine and ketamine, which were compared with the intravenous opioid products morphine, fentanyl, and hydromorphone. Results: Significant discrepancies were appreciated with regard to the severity of drug-drug interactions. In addition, the heterogeneity in which reaction severity and likelihood are described by each respective resource makes direct comparisons difficult. Interaction warnings for dexmedetomidine and fentanyl included a "major interaction" from Micromedex, whereas Lexicomp did not identify a risk and Medscape only recommended increased monitoring on the grounds of respiratory and central nervous system depression. Conclusions: Health care providers must remain vigilant when reviewing tertiary drug information resources. Pharmacists possess the training and skills necessary to assist interdisciplinary medical teams in providing optimal patient care through evaluating and applying the information gleaned from these resources.

Moving toward patient-centered care in the emergency department: Patient-reported expectations, definitions of success, and importance of improvement in pain-related outcomes

OBJECTIVES

Musculoskeletal pain is a common emergency department (ED) presentation, and patient-centered care may improve quality of life, treatment satisfaction, and outcomes. Our objective was to investigate the expectations, definitions of success, and priorities of ED patients with musculoskeletal pain.

METHODS

We conducted a cross-sectional survey of the demographic, clinical, and psychosocial characteristics of adult ED patients (n = 210) with musculoskeletal pain. Patients completed the Patient-Centered Outcomes Questionnaire to quantify usual, desired, expected, and successful levels of pain and interference with daily activities, fatigue, and emotion from 0 (none) to 100 (worst imaginable). They also reported the importance of improvement in each domain. Cluster analysis identified subgroups by importance ratings. Patients were asked their willingness to try various pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic treatments. Fully completed surveys were analyzed (n = 174).

RESULTS

Most patients desired 100% resolution in each domain and defined treatment success as substantial (median = 63.2%-76.5%) reductions but expected only moderate (median = 45%-53.7%) improvements across all domains. Patients with previous pain episodes had similar desired levels but less stringent definitions of success and expectations for improvement. Cluster analysis identified three patient subgroups by importance ratings of each domain: (1) multiple domains important (n = 118) with high importance attached to all four domains, (2) pain and function important (n = 34) with high importance primarily for pain and interference with daily activities, and (3) only pain important (n = 22). Regardless of subgroup, there was a high willingness to use a variety of pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic treatments.

DISCUSSION

ED patients with musculoskeletal pain have expectations and goals that include addressing impairments in function, improving quality of life, and reducing pain.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings indicate that: (1) patient subgroups by outcome priorities may exist that could inform multimodal, personalized approaches from the ED and (2) patients are flexible in which treatments they are willing to try to meet their individual goals.

A 13-Year National Monitoring Study to Assess Narcotic Prescriptions and Indications (2007-2019)

INTRODUCTION

Analgesics are among the most widely used drugs worldwide. This study describes the population treated with narcotic analgesics, their therapeutic indications and how the data have evolved over a decade.

METHODS

A cross-sectional, national, multicentre survey study was conducted that included surveys taken every year from 2007 to 2019 in a national sample of 1500 randomly selected dispensing pharmacies.

RESULTS

The mean age of patients, mostly women (around 60%), remained stable over the study period (63.2 ± 17.1 years in 2007, 68.2 ± 17.2 years in 2019). The proportion of patients treated for more than 3 months increased from 2007 to 2019. Most prescriptions involved morphine, oxycodone and fentanyl (98.5% of all prescriptions in 2019). Morphine prescriptions dropped dramatically from 49.6% (2007) to 32.3% (2019) of the total narcotic analgesics. Fentanyl prescriptions varied from 40.1% in 2007 to 32.2% in 2019. Prescriptions of oxycodone, regardless of the indication, increased steadily from 2007, from 8.3 to 34% in 2019, becoming the most prescribed narcotic analgesic for the first time since the beginning of the survey.

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrates how narcotic opioids are prescribed, thanks to the active participation of health professionals, and confirms the striking increase in the prescription of oxycodone.

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.

Telemedicine and current clinical practice trends in the COVID-19 pandemic

Telemedicine is the medical practice of caring for and treating patients remotely. With the spread of the coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, telemedicine has become increasingly prevalent. Although telemedicine was already in practice before the 2020 pandemic, the internet, smartphones, computers, and video-conferencing tools have made telemedicine easily accessible and available to almost everyone. However, there are also new challenges that health care providers may not be prepared for, including treating and diagnosing patients without physical contact. Physician adoption also depends upon reimbursement and education to improve the telemedicine visits. We review current trends involving telemedicine, how pandemics such as COVID-19 affect the remote treatment of patients, and key concepts important to healthcare providers who practice telemedicine.

Efficacy and Safety of Intranasal Ketamine for Acute Pain Management in the Emergency Setting: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Due to overcrowding, personnel shortages, or problematic intravenous (IV) cannulation, acute pain management is often sub-optimal in emergency departments (EDs). The objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of intranasal (IN) ketamine for adult acute pain in the emergency setting. We searched and identified studies up to 21 May 2021 via PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, Cochrane Database, and Google Scholar. The random-effects model with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) was used to estimate mean differences (MDs) and odds ratios (ORs). The I² statistic and Cochran’s Q test were used to determine heterogeneity. The protocol was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42020213391). Seven randomised controlled trials were included with a total of 1760 patients. There was no significant difference in pain scores comparing IN ketamine with IV analgesics or placebo at 5 (MD 0.94, p = 0.26), 15 (MD 0.15, p = 0.74), 25 (MD 0.24, p = 0.62), 30 (MD −0.05, p = 0.87), and 60 (MD −0.42, p = 0.53) minutes. There was also no significant difference in the need for rescue analgesics between IN ketamine and IV analgesics (OR 1.66, 95% CI: 0.57−4.86, p = 0.35, I² = 70%). Only mild adverse effects were observed in patients who received IN ketamine. Our results suggest that IN ketamine is non-inferior to IV analgesics and may have a role in acute pain management among adults in the ED.

Epidemiology of paediatric pain-related visits to emergency departments in the USA: a cross-sectional study

OBJECTIVE

To describe the epidemiology of paediatric pain-related visits to emergency departments (EDs) across the USA.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional study.

SETTING

A representative sample of US ED visits using data from the National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Care Survey (NHAMCS).

PARTICIPANTS

Paediatric (age ≤18 years) ED visits in the 2017 NHAMCS data set.

DATA ANALYSIS

Each visit was coded as pain-related or non-pain-related using the 'reason for visit' variable. Weighted proportions were calculated with 95% CIs. Logistic regression was used to compare odds of pain-related visits.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Prevalence of pain-related visits among paediatric ED visits.

RESULTS

There were an estimated 35 million paediatric ED visits in the USA in 2017, 55.6% (CI 53.3% to 57.8%) were pain related, which equates to 19.7 million annual visits. The prevalence of pain-related visits reached more than 50% of visits at age 6-7 and plateaued at relatively high proportions. Children of races other than white or black had lower odds of having a pain-related visit (OR 0.48, CI 0.29 to 0.81) than white children, as did children who were black, though the difference was not statistically significant (OR 0.88, CI 0.73 to 1.06). Relative to children covered by private insurance, children with Medicaid or CHIP (Children's Health Insurance Program) coverage had lower odds of a pain-related visit (OR 0.75, CI 0.60 to 0.93). Injuries represented 46.5% (CI 42.0% to 51.0%) of pain-related visits. Pain scores were reported in less than 50% of pain-related visits.

CONCLUSION

Pain is the reason for visit in 55.6% of paediatric ED visits across the USA. The prevalence of pain-related visits peak before adolescence and it continues relatively high until the age 18. Injury, racial disparities in pain and poor pain score reporting should remain major topics of study in the paediatric population.

Distress Tolerance Among Emergency Department Patients in Acute Pain: Associations with Substance Use Treatment

Managing acute pain in individuals with a history of substance use disorders (SUD) is complex. Distress tolerance (DT) (e.g., the ability to handle uncomfortable sensations) may serve as an ideal non-pharmacological intervention target in this population. Among 293 emergency department (ED) patients seeking treatment for pain (M_age  = 41; 42% Female; 43% Black), we examined rates of SUD treatment and DT, whether an objective DT task is feasible to conduct in the ED, and relationships between DT and SUD. Patients completed a self-report DT survey, an objective DT task, and brief surveys of pain, drug use, current or past SUD treatment, and depression/anxiety. Average DT was 18.50 (SD = 9.4) out of 50; patients with past or current SUD treatment (n = 43; 14.7%) reported lower DT than patients with no SUD treatment history (n = 250; 85.3%). Controlling for demographics, depression/anxiety, and pain severity, lower subjective DT (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 1.05) and objective DT (aOR = 1.02) was associated a current or past history or SUD treatment. Assessing subjective and objective DT in ED patients with acute pain is feasible; interventions aimed at boosting DT may improve outcomes among patients with acute pain and SUD.

Emergency Nurse Perceptions of Pain and Opioids in the Emergency Department

The opioid crisis is a national health emergency with immense morbidity, mortality, and socioeconomic cost. Emergency department (ED) pain management is tightly linked to the issue of opioid use disorder (OUD), because opioid exposure is necessary for development of OUD. Emergency nurses are on the frontlines of this complex problem, yet little, if any, attention has been paid to the role they play in the prevention and management of either pain or OUD in this unique and important setting. A framework that conceptualizes and optimizes emergency nurses as change agents in the opioid epidemic is urgently needed. While ED pain management and OUD prevention is dependent on the entire care team, this innovative study qualitatively characterizes emergency nurse perceptions of pain management, OUD prevention, and their potential role in each. Content analysis produced 14 categories that were clustered into two themes, "nurses influence ED pain management" and "adjustments in ED pain management", and an overarching message that "pain management depends on the care team." By generating a more comprehensive and nuanced understanding of the role played by emergency nurses, our findings provide essential insights into potential interventions and frameworks.

COVID-19 and the Opioid Epidemic: Two Public Health Emergencies That Intersect With Chronic Pain

The COVID-19 pandemic has affected the entire world and catapulted the United States into one of the deepest recessions in history. While this pandemic rages, the opioid crisis worsens. During this period, the pandemic has resulted in the decimation of most conventional medical services, including those of chronic pain management, with the exception of virtual care and telehealth. Many chronic pain patients have been impacted in numerous ways, with increases in cardiovascular disease, mental health problems, cognitive dysfunction, and early death. The epidemic has also resulted in severe economic and physiological consequences for providers. Drug deaths in America, which fell for the first time in 25 years in 2018, rose to record numbers in 2019 and are continuing to climb, worsened by the coronavirus pandemic. The opioid epidemic was already resurfacing with a 5% increase in overall deaths from 2018; however, the preliminary data show that prescription opioid deaths continued to decline, while at the same time deaths due to fentanyl, methamphetamine, and cocaine climbed, with some reductions in heroin deaths. The health tracker data also showed that along with an almost 88% decline in elective surgeries, pain-related prescriptions declined 15.1%. Despite increases in telehealth, outpatient services declined and only began returning towards normal at an extremely slow pace, accompanied by reduced productivity and increased practice costs. This review, therefore, emphasizes the devastating consequences of concurrent epidemics on chronic pain management and the need to develop best practice efforts to preserve access to treatment for chronic pain.

Study of Haloperidol for Abdominal Pain in the Emergency Department (SHAPE)

Introduction

Intravenous haloperidol has been shown to decrease milligram morphine equivalents (MME) of analgesia and reduce hospital admissions for diabetic gastroparesis. The objective of this study was to evaluate whether haloperidol decreases MME for the treatment of non-specific abdominal pain diagnoses in the emergency department (ED), including gastroparesis, cyclic vomiting, cannabinoid hyperemesis syndrome, and unspecified abdominal pain. The primary outcome compared the difference in MME between encounters. Secondary outcomes included admission rate, pain scores, length of stay, rescue therapy administration, and adverse effects.

Methods

This retrospective chart review included patients ≥ 18 years old who presented to the ED. Patients must have had ≥ 2 ED encounters for abdominal pain, one in which they received conventional therapy with opioids (C-encounter), and the other in which they received haloperidol (H-encounter). Agitated patients were excluded. Seventy-five patients were needed to detect a 3 MME difference with 80% power and two-sided alpha of 0.05.

Results

We analyzed 107 patients with self-matched encounters. The median dose of haloperidol administered was 5.0 milligrams (mg) (interquartile range [IQR] 2.0 – 5.0). C-encounters had significantly more MME administered than H-encounters (median 5.7 mg [IQR 4.0 – 8.0] vs 0.0 mg [IQR 0.0 – 2.5], P < 0.001). These results remained significant despite route of haloperidol administration. C-encounters had higher rates of rescue therapy administration than H-encounters, (56% vs 33.6%, P < 0.001). There were higher rates of ketorolac administration in the H-encounter (P = 0.02).

Conclusion

Encounters in which patients received haloperidol and ketorolac for abdominal pain had a statistically significant reduction in MME administered and lower rates of rescue therapy administration than encounters in which patients were treated with opioids.

The protocol of the Application of Economics & Social psychology to improve Opioid Prescribing Safety Trial 1 (AESOPS-1): Electronic health record nudges

BACKGROUND

There is a lack of evidence that long-term opioid use offers benefit for noncancer pain and an abundance of evidence of harm. Despite clinical guidelines and education, prescribing continues at a higher rate than before the opioids crisis. The objective of trial 1 of the Application of Economics & Social psychology to improve Opioid Prescribing Safety (AESOPS-1) is to discourage unnecessary opioid prescribing in primary care by applying "behavioral insights"-empirically-tested social and psychological interventions that affect choice.

METHODS

AESOPS-1 randomizes primary care clinics in Illinois and California to behavioral intervention or control. Both arms receive opioid guideline education. Clinics randomized to the behavioral intervention arm receive nudges within the electronic health record (EHR) including: 1) an "accountable justification" entered in the chart, 2) a precommitment to address high-risk prescriptions, and 3) a "PainTracker" that broadens discussions about pain. The control arm receives no EHR-based intervention. The primary outcome is the change in weekly milligram morphine equivalents (MME) prescribed. The secondary outcome is the change in the proportion of patients prescribed at least 50 daily MME. To evaluate these outcomes, we will use a difference-in-differences mixed-effects regression model on clinician MME weekly or daily dose. The analysis will be "intent-to-treat." The intervention period is 18-months, with a 6-month follow-up period to measure persistence of effects.

DISCUSSION

The AESOPS-1 trial will evaluate the effect of EHR-based interventions in reducing noncancer opioid prescribing in primary care. AESOPS-1 may demonstrate practical and scalable strategies to lower unnecessary population exposure to opioids.

Mining social media for prescription medication abuse monitoring: a review and proposal for a data-centric framework

Objective

Prescription medication (PM) misuse and abuse is a major health problem globally, and a number of recent studies have focused on exploring social media as a resource for monitoring nonmedical PM use. Our objectives are to present a methodological review of social media–based PM abuse or misuse monitoring studies, and to propose a potential generalizable, data-centric processing pipeline for the curation of data from this resource.

Materials and Methods

We identified studies involving social media, PMs, and misuse or abuse (inclusion criteria) from Medline, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar. We categorized studies based on multiple characteristics including but not limited to data size; social media source(s); medications studied; and primary objectives, methods, and findings.

Results

A total of 39 studies met our inclusion criteria, with 31 (∼79.5%) published since 2015. Twitter has been the most popular resource, with Reddit and Instagram gaining popularity recently. Early studies focused mostly on manual, qualitative analyses, with a growing trend toward the use of data-centric methods involving natural language processing and machine learning.

Discussion

There is a paucity of standardized, data-centric frameworks for curating social media data for task-specific analyses and near real-time surveillance of nonmedical PM use. Many existing studies do not quantify human agreements for manual annotation tasks or take into account the presence of noise in data.

Conclusion

The development of reproducible and standardized data-centric frameworks that build on the current state-of-the-art methods in data and text mining may enable effective utilization of social media data for understanding and monitoring nonmedical PM use.

We Need to Talk About Codeine: an Implementation Study to reduce the number of Emergency Department patients discharged on high-strength co-codamol using the Behaviour Change Wheel

BACKGROUND

The crisis of prescription opioid addiction in the USA is well-documented. Though opioid consumption per capita is lower in the UK, prescribing has increased dramatically in recent decades with an associated increase in deaths from prescription opioid overdose. At one Scottish Emergency Department high rates of prescribing of take-home co-codamol (30/500 mg) were observed, including for conditions where opioids are not recommended by national guidelines. An Implementation Science approach was adopted to investigate this.

METHODS

A Behaviour Change Wheel analysis suggested several factors contributing to high opioid prescribing: poor awareness of codeine addiction risk, poor knowledge of NICE (National Institute for Health and Care Excellence) guidelines on common painful conditions, mistaken assumptions about patient expectations and ready access to a large stock of take-home co-codamol. Based on this analysis a combined Education/Persuasion intervention was implemented over a 1-month period (January 2019) reaching 93% of prescribers. An Environmental Restructuring intervention was introduced at 4 months, and co-codamol prescriptions were monitored over a 12-month follow-up period. Unplanned re-attendances and complaints related to analgesia were monitored as balancing measures.

RESULTS

The Education/Persuasion intervention was associated with a 59% reduction in co-codamol prescribing that was maintained over 12 months. The Environmental Restructuring intervention was not associated with any further reduction in prescribing. No increase in unplanned re-attendances occurred during the study period and no complaints were received relating to pain control.

CONCLUSIONS

The increasing incidence of prescription opioid addiction in the UK suggests the need for all clinicians who write opioid prescriptions to re-evaluate their practice. This study suggests that knowledge of addiction risk and prescribing guidelines is poor among Emergency Department prescribers. We show that a rapid and sustained reduction in prescribing of take-home opioids is feasible in a UK Emergency Department, and that this reduction was not associated with any increase in unplanned re-attendances or complaints related to analgesia.

The impact of COVID-19 on acute urinary stone presentations: a single-centre experience

Background

The COVID-19 pandemic has seen a change in the numbers of patients presenting to the emergency department (ED) with non-COVID symptoms, resulting in delayed presentations of many medical and surgical conditions.

Aims

To examine the impact of COVID-19 on acute urolithiasis presentations to the ED.

Methods

In this retrospective, single-centre, observational study, we reviewed all CT KUBs (and their corresponding cases) ordered in ED for possible acute urolithiasis in a 100-day period immediately prior to COVID-19 and in a 100-day period immediately afterwards. We sought to establish the number of CT KUBs performed and the number confirming urolithiasis. We recorded patients’ age, gender, stone size and location. We also analysed CRP, WCC and creatinine as well as the duration of patients’ pain and the management strategy adopted for each case.

Results

One hundred ninety-eight CT KUBs were performed, 94 pre-COVID and 104 intra-COVID. A total of 70.2% (n = 66) and 66.3% (n = 69) were positive for urolithiasis pre-COVID and intra-COVID respectively (p = 0.56). There was a significantly higher percentage of females pre-COVID compared with intra-COVID (54% vs 36%, p = 0.012). There was no difference in median ureteric stone size seen between the groups (4.7 mm pre-COVID vs 4.0 mm intra-COVID, p = 0.179). There were no significant differences in WCC, CRP or creatinine levels. One patient in the pre-COVID group and two in the intra-COVID groups required percutaneous nephrostomies.

Conclusion

The COVID-19 pandemic did not result in fewer or sicker patients presenting with acute ureteric colic cases to the ED.

Opioid Prescription Patterns for Discharged Patients from the Emergency Department

Objectives

It is important to analyze the types of etiologies and provider demographics that drive opioid prescription in our emergency departments. Our study aimed to determine which patients in the ED are receiving opioid prescriptions, as well as their strength and quantity. Secondary outcomes included identifying difference in prescribing between provider classes.

Methods

We conducted a retrospective study at a tertiary care university-based, level-one trauma ED from November 2017 to October 2018. We identified and analyzed data from 2,259 patients who were sent home with an opioid prescription. We retrieved patient and provider demographics, diagnosis, etiologies, and prescription information.

Results

The mean age of a patient receiving an opioid prescription was 45, and 72.7% of patients were white. The most common diagnosis groups associated with an opioid prescription were abdominal pain (18.5%), nonfracture extremity pain (18.4%), and back/neck pain (12.5%). Hydrocodone-acetaminophen 5-325 mg was the most commonly prescribed (67.4%). The median total prescribed milligram morphine equivalent (MME) was highest for extremity fracture (75.0; IQR 54.0-100.0). The median total prescribed amount of pills was highest for patients with extremity fractures (15.0; IQR 12.0-20.0).

Conclusions

Our study elucidates the prescribing patterns of an academic level 1 trauma center and should pave the way for future studies looking to maximize effectiveness at ways to curb ED opioid prescription.

Knowledge and Attitude of Saudi Emergency Medical Services Students Regarding Pain Management: A Cross-Sectional Study

The most common reason people seek emergency medical services is pain, either from a severe injury or a life-threatening illness emergency medical services (EMS). Few studies on analgesic administration and pain management assessments are available for EMS students to read (as potential EMS professionals). Therefore, the goal of this study is to find out the knowledge and attitude of EMS students about pain management. Saudi EMS students were asked to complete a survey on their knowledge and attitudes about pain management. As a result, the KASRP scale was used. A t-test was performed to assess the statistical descriptive and independent sampling findings. Data collection started in October 2020 and lasted for one month. EMS students completed 79 questionnaires (response rate of 53%). According to the findings, EMS students demonstrate inadequate fundamental knowledge and attitudes in pain management. The mean correct count for the entire scale was 47% (SD=.09). The findings showed that no major variations were observed in the scores of students associated with demographic features. There are potential opportunities in the program to improve the content and student competencies in pain management.

Antinociceptive Effects of Kappa-Opioid Receptor Agonists

Preclinical models that assess "pain" in rodents typically measure increases in behaviors produced by a "pain stimulus." A large literature exists showing that kappa opioid receptor (KOR) agonists can decrease these "pain-stimulated behaviors" following many different pain stimuli. Despite showing apparent antinociceptive properties in these preclinical models, KOR agonists failed as analgesics in clinical trials. Recent studies that assessed decreases in behavior due to a pain stimulus show that KOR agonists are not effective in restoring these "pain-depressed behaviors" to normal levels, which agrees with the lack of effectiveness for KOR agonists in clinical trials. One current explanation for the failure of previous KOR agonists in clinical trials is that those agonists activated beta-arrestin signaling and that KOR agonists with a greater bias for G protein signaling will be more successful. However, neither G protein-biased agonists nor beta-arrestin-biased agonists are very effective in assays of pain-depressed behavior, which suggests that novel biased agonists may still not be effective analgesics. This review provides a concise account of the effectiveness of KOR agonists in preclinical models of pain-stimulated and pain-depressed behaviors following the administration of different pain stimuli. Based on the previous results, it may be appropriate to include both behaviors when testing the analgesic potential of KOR agonists.

Pain During COVID-19: A Comprehensive Review and Guide for the Interventionalist

BACKGROUND

Chronic pain, the leading cause of disability in the world, imposes limitations on activities of daily living and diminishes quality of life leading to unnecessary patient suffering. The personal and socioeconomic costs of chronic pain cannot be overstated. Physicians are at the crux of the pandemic and must attempt to limit the spread of the virus while maintaining their professional responsibility to their patients and staff members.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this review is to analyze the existing literature to develop consensus recommendations for treating pain during the current COVID-19 pandemic.

METHODS

Relevant literature was located via computer-generated citations between the months of March and May of 2020. Online computer searches of multiple databases including Google Scholar, CINAHL, PubMed, and Cochrane Review were conducted in conjunction with a thorough review of local, state, national, and international governmental and organizational websites to locate research on the area of interest.

RESULTS

The guidelines in this review are meant to offer a framework to pain practitioners and organizations for providing highly effective, ethical, and safe care to patients while maintaining their commitment to mitigating the spread of the COVID-19 pandemic. Specific areas addressed include general and interventional-specific treatment and mitigation recommendations.

CONCLUSIONS

We believe that the recommendations in this review, if used in conjunction with evolving recommendations of Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), World Health Organization (WHO), and federal, state, and local governing bodies, provides a path to not only mitigate the spread of the pandemic but also limit the adverse impact of pain and suffering in chronic pain patients.

Factors associated with the undertriage of patients with abdominal pain in an emergency room

INTRODUCTION

The triage process lasts for a very short time, which can result in over-triage and under-triage. Studies have explored factors related to under-triage among trauma patients. In Korea, the clinical characteristics and severity of cases of under-triaged patients have been investigated. However, there is limited research on the under-triage of patients experiencing abdominal pain. Therefore, this study aimed to determine the under-triage rate of emergency department (ED) patients with abdominal pain, as well as the factors associated with their under-triage.

METHODS

The participants of this retrospective cohort study were 3,030 adult patients at a single tertiary hospital in Korea, who were brought to the ED for abdominal pain as the chief complaint. Participants' general characteristics, pain-related information, and environmental information were obtained from their electronic medical records.

RESULTS

The under-triage rate of ED patients with abdominal pain was 31.0%. Factors related to the under-triage of these patients were sex, age, visit route, time from the onset of the pain to the visit, location of pain, and intensity of pain.

CONCLUSION

These findings provide a foundation for the understanding and mitigation of under-triage in EDs through the identification of factors associated with under-triage in patients with abdominal pain.

The impact of opioid use on human and health care costs in surgical patients

Background

Preoperative narcotic use impacts hospital cost and outcomes in surgical patients, but the underlying reasons are unclear.

Methods

A single-center retrospective analysis was performed on surgical patients admitted with intestinal obstruction (2010–2014). Patients were grouped into active opioid and nonopioid user cohorts. Active opioid use was defined as having an opioid prescription overlapping the date of admission. Chronic opioid use was defined by duration of use ≥ 90 days. Admission or intervention due to opioid-related illness was determined through consensus decision of 2 independent, blinded clinicians. Primary end point was the effect of active opioid use on hospital resource utilization.

Results

During the study period, 296 patients were admitted with a primary diagnosis of intestinal obstruction. Active opioid users accounted for 55 (18.6%) of these patients, with a median length of opioid use of 164 days (interquartile range 54–344 days). Average length of use was 164 days, with the majority of active users (n = 42, 76.4%) meeting criteria for chronic use. A subgroup analysis of active users demonstrated that opioid-related conditions were responsible for 10 admissions (18.2%) and 2 readmissions (3.6%). Among active users requiring surgical intervention, 3 procedures (21.4%) were due to opioid-related illnesses. Median hospital length of stay was 2 days longer (8 vs 6 days) and hospital costs were greater ($12,241 vs $8489) among active users (P < .05 each).

Conclusion

Active opioid users are predisposed to avoidable admissions and interventions for opioid-related illnesses. Efforts to address opioid use in the surgical population may improve patient outcomes and health care spending.

Emergence From the COVID-19 Pandemic and the Care of Chronic Pain: Guidance for the Interventionalist

BACKGROUND:

The current Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19) pandemic led to a significant disruption in the care of pain from chronic and subacute conditions. The impact of this cessation of pain treatment may have unintended consequences of increased pain, reduced function, increased reliance on opioid medications, and potential increased morbidity, due to the systemic impact of untreated disease burden. This may include decreased mobility, reduction in overall health status, and increase of opioid use with the associated risks.

METHODS:

The article is the study of the American Society of Pain and Neuroscience (ASPN) COVID-19 task force to evaluate the policies set forth by federal, state, and local agencies to reduce or eliminate elective procedures for those patients with pain from spine, nerve, and joint disease. The impact of these decisions, which were needed to reduce the spread of the pandemic, led to a delay in care for many patients. We hence review an emergence plan to reinitiate this pain-related care. The goal is to outline a path to work with federal, state, and local authorities to combat the spread of the pandemic and minimize the deleterious impact of pain and suffering on our chronic pain patients.

RESULTS:

The article sets forth a strategy for the interventional pain centers to reemerge from the current pandemic and to set a course for future events.

CONCLUSIONS:

xxx.

Factors associated with early opioid dispensing compared with NSAID and muscle relaxant dispensing after a work-related low back injury

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this historical cohort study was to determine the claimant and prescriber factors associated with receiving opioids at first postinjury dispense compared with non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and skeletal muscle relaxants (SMRs) in a sample of workers' compensation claimants with low back pain (LBP) claims between 1998 and 2009 in British Columbia, Canada.

METHODS

Administrative workers' compensation, prescription and healthcare data were linked. The association between claimant factors (sociodemographics, occupation, diagnosis, comorbidities, pre-injury prescriptions and healthcare) and prescriber factors (sex, birth year, specialty) with drug class(es) at first dispense (opioids vs NSAIDs/SMRs) was examined with multilevel multinomial logistic regression.

RESULTS

Increasing days supplied with opioids in the previous year was associated with increased odds of receiving opioids only (1-14 days OR 1.62, 95% CI 1.51 to 1.75; ≥15 days OR 5.12, 95% CI 4.65 to 5.64) and opioids with NSAIDs/SMRs (1-14 days OR 1.49, 95% CI 1.39 to 1.60; ≥15 days OR 2.82, 95% CI 2.56 to 3.12). Other significant claimant factors included: pre-injury dispenses for NSAIDs, SMRs, antidepressants, anticonvulsants and sedative-hypnotics/anxiolytics; International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems, 9th Revision diagnosis; various pre-existing comorbidities; prior physician visits and hospitalisations; and year of injury, age, sex, health authority and occupation. Prescribers accounted for 25%-36% of the variability in the drug class(es) received, but prescriber sex, specialty and birth year did not explain observed between-prescriber variation.

CONCLUSIONS

During this period in the opioid crisis, early postinjury dispensing was multifactorial, with several claimant factors associated with receiving opioids at first prescription. Prescriber variation in drug class choice appears particularly important, but was not explained by basic prescriber characteristics.

Ten-year trend of opioid and nonopioid analgesic use in the French adult population

AIMS

Analgesics are the most widely used medicines worldwide. In parallel, opioid abuse has increased and is of major concern. The accessibility of pharmacologically powerful medicines and the addictovigilance signals in France about the risk of opiates addiction call for an overview of analgesic use. The objective of this study was to investigate the use of analgesics reimbursed in France over a 10-year period through its prevalence.

METHODS

A cross-sectional study repeated yearly was conducted by using data from the French reimbursement database from 2006 to 2015. Analgesics were classified according to their pharmacological potency: prevalence of use for each category and sociodemographic characteristics of patients treated were analysed.

RESULTS

The annual prevalence of analgesic use was high and increased during the study period (59.8%, 253 976 users in 2015). In 2015, prevalence was always higher in women and increased with age, except for those older than 84 years. Peripheral analgesics were the most used (55.3%, 234 739 users). The prevalence of weak analgesic use decreased (21.3%, 90 257 users), mainly due to the definitive withdrawal of dextropropoxyphene in France in 2011, which was not offset by an increase in the consumption of other weak analgesics. For strong analgesics (1.2%, 5129 users), morphine was the most widely used, with a dramatic increase in oxycodone use, especially in the elderly.

CONCLUSION

The prevalence of analgesic use is high: approximately 31 million adults had at least 1 analgesic reimbursed in 2015. The most widely used analgesics were peripheral analgesics, far ahead of opioid analgesics.