Opioid prescribing rates from the emergency department: Down but not out

Opioid use, prescribing and fatal overdose patterns among racial/ethnic minorities in the United States: A scoping review and conceptual risk environment model

ISSUES

To date, there has been no synthesis of research addressing the scale and nuances of the opioid epidemic in racial/ethnic minority populations in the United States that considers the independent and joint impacts of dynamics such as structural disadvantage, provider bias, health literacy, cultural norms and various other risk factors.

APPROACH

Using the "risk environment" framework, we conducted a scoping review on PubMed, Embase and Google Scholar of peer-reviewed literature and governmental reports published between January 2000 and February 2024 on the nature and scale of opioid use, opioid prescribing patterns, and fatal overdoses among racial/ethnic minorities in the United States, while also examining macro, meso and individual-level risk factors.

KEY FINDINGS

Results from this review illuminate a growing, but fragmented, literature lacking standardisation in racial/ethnic classification and case reporting, specifically in regards to Indigenous and Asian subpopulations. This literature broadly illustrates racial/ethnic minorities' increasing nonmedical use of opioids, heightened burdens of fatal overdoses, specifically in relation to polydrug use and synthetic opioids, with notable elevations among Black/Latino subgroups, in addition uneven opioid prescribing patterns. Moreover, the literature implicates a variety of unique risk environments corresponding to dynamics such as residential segregation, provider bias, overpolicing, acculturative stress, patient distrust, and limited access to mental health care services and drug treatment resources, including medications for opioid use disorder.

IMPLICATIONS

There has been a lack of rigorous, targeted study on racial/ethnic minorities who use opioids, but evidence highlights burgeoning increases in usage, especially polydrug/synthetic opioid use, and disparities in prescriptions and fatal overdose risk-phenomena tied to multi-level forms of entrenched disenfranchisement.

CONCLUSION

There is a need for further research on the complex, overlapping risk environments of racial/ethnic minorities who use opioids, including deeper inclusion of Indigenous and Asian individuals, and efforts to generate greater methodological synergies in population classification and reporting guidelines.

Leveraging a Learning Collaborative Model to Develop and Pilot Quality Measures to Improve Opioid Prescribing in the Emergency Department

The American College of Emergency Physicians (ACEP) Emergency Medicine Quality Network (E-QUAL) Opioid Initiative was launched in 2018 to advance the dissemination of evidence-based resources to promote the care of emergency department (ED) patients with opioid use disorder. This virtual platform-based national learning collaborative includes a low-burden, structured quality improvement project, data benchmarking, tailored educational content, and resources designed to support a nationwide network of EDs with limited administrative and research infrastructure. As a part of this collaboration, we convened a group of experts to identify and design a set of measures to improve opioid prescribing practices to provide safe analgesia while reducing opioid-related harms. We present those measures here, alongside initial performance data on those measures from a sample of 370 nationwide community EDs participating in the 2019 E-QUAL collaborative. Measures include proportion of opioid administration in the ED, proportion of alternatives to opioids as first-line treatment, proportion of opioid prescription, opioid pill count per prescription, and patient medication safety education among ED visits for atraumatic back pain, dental pain, or headache. The proportion of benzodiazepine and opioid coprescribing for ED visits for atraumatic back pain was also evaluated. This project developed and effectively implemented a collection of 6 potential measures to evaluate opioid analgesic prescribing across a national sample of community EDs, representing the first feasibility assessment of opioid prescribing-related measures from rural and community EDs.

Impact of vitamin C on the reduction of opioid consumption after an emergency department visit for acute musculoskeletal pain: a double-blind randomised control trial protocol

INTRODUCTION

Recent evidence has shown that vitamin C has some analgesic properties in addition to its antioxidant effect and can, therefore, reduce opioid use during recovery time. Vitamin C analgesic effect has been explored mostly during short-term postoperative context or in disease-specific chronic pain prevention, but never after acute musculoskeletal injuries, which are often seen in the emergency department (ED). The protocol's primary aim is to compare the total morphine 5 mg pills consumed during a 2-week follow-up between patients receiving vitamin C or a placebo after ED discharge for an acute musculoskeletal pain complaint.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

We will conduct a two-centre double-blind randomised placebo-controlled trial with 464 participants distributed in two arms, one group receiving 1000 mg of vitamin C two times a day for 14 days and another one receiving a placebo. Participants will be ≥18 years of age, treated in ED for acute musculoskeletal pain present for less than 2 weeks and discharged with an opioid prescription for home pain management. Total morphine 5 mg pills consumed during the 2-week follow-up will be assessed via an electronic (or paper) diary. In addition, patients will report their daily pain intensity, pain relief, side effects and other types of pain medication or other non-pharmacological approach used. Three months after the injury, participants will also be contacted to evaluate chronic pain development. We hypothesised that vitamin C, compared with a placebo, will reduce opioid consumption during a 14-day follow-up for ED discharged patients treated for acute musculoskeletal pain.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This study has received approval from the Ethics Review Committee from the 'Comité d'éthique de la recherche du CIUSSS du Nord-de-l'Île-de-Montréal (No 2023-2442)'. Findings will be disseminated through scientific conferences and peer-reviewed journal publication. The data sets generated during the study will be available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT05555576 ClinicalTrials.Gov PRS.

Emergency department opioid discharge instructions: a multidisciplinary national Delphi study

OBJECTIVES

Currently, there are no Canadian guidelines for discharge instruction to be given to patients receiving an opioid prescription in the ED. This likely contributes to inadequate discharge instructions for these potentially dangerous medications. The principal goal of this study was to develop an interdisciplinary Canadian consensus regarding important concepts to be included in written opioid discharge instructions within the ED setting.

METHODS

We conducted a modified Delphi study between May and August 2021. The national multidisciplinary panel consisted of 23 healthcare professionals and one patient partner. The survey consisted of 19 initial concepts developed after a review of the literature and a meeting with local experts. The panel added four new concepts after the first survey round. Three rounds of online surveys were distributed in total. Panel consensus was defined a priori as a disagreement index score less than 1, in accordance with the RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method.

RESULTS

We achieved a 100% response rate in round one and a 96% response rate in rounds two and three of our Delphi study. There was group consensus (disagreement index = 0.66, median importance = 9) that all patients receiving opioid prescriptions from the ED should receive written discharge instructions. The interdisciplinary panel arrived at a consensus on 21/23 concepts for ED opioid discharge instructions. The concepts with the highest level of agreement were related to minimizing the use of the prescribed opioid medication and opioid use safety (mixing with drugs/alcohol, storage, and impairment).

CONCLUSION

This Delphi study with a national, multidisciplinary panel achieved consensus on 21 concepts that should be included in written discharge instructions to patients receiving an opioid prescription upon discharge from the ED.

Changes in Prescribing by Provider Type Following a State Prescription Opioid Restriction Law

BACKGROUND

Many states have implemented opioid days' supply restriction policies, leading to reductions in opioid prescribing. Although research within certain provider types exist, no study has evaluated a restriction policy by various provider types.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate changes in opioid utilization following a days' supply restriction policy stratified by provider type: surgery, emergency medicine, primary care, specialty care, and dentistry.

DESIGN

Interrupted time series (ITS) PARTICIPANTS: Opioid prescription claims of patients in a private health plan serving a large Florida employer from 1/1/2015 to 3/31/2019. Provider types were determined using the Healthcare Provider Taxonomy Code associated with the national provider identifier (NPI).

INTERVENTIONS

Florida's opioid restriction policy implemented on July 1, 2018.

MAIN MEASURES

Changes in mean morphine milligram equivalent (MMEs), mean days' supply, and mean number of units dispensed per opioid prescription before and after policy implementation.

KEY RESULTS

There were 10,583 opioid initial prescriptions dispensed. Treating providers were classified as surgery (16.4%; n = 1732), emergency care (14.3%; n = 1516), primary care (21.2%; n = 2241), specialty care (11.4%; n = 1207), and dentistry providers (23.7%; n = 2511). Significant reductions in mean days' supply were observed across most provider types ranging from 14% reduction for dentistry providers to 41% reduction for specialty care providers. Significant changes were observed for emergency care and specialty care providers with a 30% (p = 0.001)and 29% (p < 0.001) reduction in mean MME, respectively, and a 27% (p = 0.040) reduction in mean number of units dispensed in emergency care providers, after implementation. Pre-implementation trends in opioid prescribing varied by provider type impacting the effects of the opioid days' supply restriction policy.

CONCLUSIONS

Pre-policy opioid prescribing varied by provider type with a differential impact on mean MMEs, mean days' supply, and mean number of units dispensed per prescription following implementation.

Emergency Medicine Physicians Would Prefer Using Cannabis Over Opioids for First-Line Treatment of a Medical Condition if Provided With Medical Evidence: A National Survey

Objective: To determine emergency medicine (EM) physicians’ preferences for using medical cannabis versus opioids if medical cannabis was legalized.

Methods: We surveyed US physicians at the largest national EM conference (American College of Emergency Physicians’ Annual Conference) held in San Diego, CA from October 1 to 4, 2018. Of the thousands of conference participants approached, 539 US physicians completed the anonymous written survey, which represented 15.2% of the US physicians attending the conference.

Results: The mean age of the participants was 39.6 ± 10.9 years, men composed 57.5% of the participants, and whites made up 72.8% of the respondents. Participants practicing in medically legal (54.8%) and medically plus adult-use legal cannabis states (23.1%) totaled 77.9%. A majority (70.7%) of the participants believed that cannabis has medical value. EM physicians preferred cannabis over opioids as a first-line treatment addressing a medical condition provided that medical studies found that cannabis was equally effective (p < 0.001, X² = 36.8 [95% CI 2, 415]), and overwhelmingly preferred cannabis over opioids if it were more effective (p < 0.001, X² = 90.8 [95% CI 2, 415]). Physicians appeared to prefer opioids over cannabis if medical studies found that cannabis was less effective though it was not significant (p > 0.05). Subgroup analyses showed that belief in the medical value of cannabis significantly increased the odds ratio of choosing cannabis over opioids if cannabis was equally or more effective than opioids.

Conclusion: Our study shows that EM physicians believe cannabis has medical value and would prefer using cannabis over opioids if provided with equivalent findings. We believe our findings reflect EM physicians’ experience of the opioid epidemic and suggest the need for further study of this potential therapeutic.

Association between 1-year patient outcomes and opioid-prescribing group of emergency department clinicians: A cohort study with Army active-duty soldiers

OBJECTIVE

The objective was to examine the association between clinicians' opioid prescribing group and patients' outcomes among patients treated in the emergency department (ED).

METHODS

This was a retrospective cohort study. The setting was the EDs of the U.S. Military Health System (MHS). Patients were 181,557 Army active-duty opioid-naïve (no fill in past 180 days) patients with an index encounter to the ED between October 2010 and September 2016. Exposure was patients classified by opioid prescribing tier of the treating ED clinician: top, middle, or bottom third relative to the clinician's peers in the same ED. Follow-up measurement was from 31 to 365 days after the index encounter. The primary outcome was long-term opioid prescriptions (LTOPs) defined as 180 (or more) days' supply within the follow-up window. We also computed the total morphine milligram equivalents (MME) and total opioid days' supply. Secondary measures were any repeat ED encounter, any hospitalization, any sick leave, and any military-duty restriction.

RESULTS

We found a 2.5-fold variation in opioid prescribing rates among clinicians in the same MHS ED. Controlling for sample demographics, reason for encounter, and military background, in multivariate analyses the odds of receiving a 180-day opioid supply during follow-up were 1.19 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.01 to 1.40, p < 0.05) for the top opioid exposure group and 1.37 (95% CI = 1.19 to 1.57, p < 0.001) for the middle opioid exposure group compared to the bottom exposure group, and there were significant increases in total opioid days' supply and total MME. There were no differences in secondary outcome measures.

CONCLUSION

In a relatively healthy sample of Army soldiers, variation in opioid exposure defined by clinician's prescribing history was associated with increased odds of LTOP and increase in opioid volume, but not in functional outcomes.

Bedside Evaluation of Early VAS/NRS Based Protocols for Intravenous Morphine in the Emergency Department: Reasons for Poor Follow-Up and Targeted Practices

Intravenous (IV) morphine protocols based on patient-reported scores, immediately at triage, are recommended for severe pain in Emergency Departments. However, a low follow-up is observed. Scarce data are available regarding bedside organization and pain etiologies to explain this phenomenon. The objective was the real-time observation of motivations and operational barriers leading to morphine avoidance. In a single French hospital, 164 adults with severe pain at triage were included in a cross-sectional study of the prevalence of IV morphine titration; caregivers were interviewed by real-time questionnaires on “real” reasons for protocol avoidance or failure. IV morphine prevalence was 6.1%, prescription avoidance was mainly linked to “Pain reassessment” (61.0%) and/or “alternative treatment prioritization” (49.3%). To further evaluate the organizational impact on prescription decisions, a parallel assessment of “simulated” prescription conditions was simultaneously performed for 98/164 patients; there were 18 titration decisions (18.3%). Treatment prioritization was a decision driver in the same proportion, while non-eligibility for morphine was more frequently cited (40.6% p = 0.001), with higher concerns about pain etiologies. Anticipation of organizational constraints cannot be excluded. In conclusion, IV morphine prescription is rarely based on first pain scores. Triage assessment is used for screening by bedside physicians, who prefer targeted practices to automatic protocols.

Survey of opioid prescribing among dentists indicates need for more effective education regarding pain management

BACKGROUND

Dentists commonly prescribe opioids and are the highest prescribers of opioids to patients 18 years and younger. Little is known about dentists' beliefs regarding opioids and other analgesics.

METHODS

The authors conducted a national survey of dentists about their opioid prescribing habits, perceptions regarding opioid effectiveness, beliefs about patient behaviors, and relationships with drug and equipment manufacturers.

RESULTS

The authors received 291 responses from 30 states and 2 territories and analyzed 269 completed surveys. Although 84% of respondents reported believing that nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID)-acetaminophen combinations are equally as effective or more effective than opioids, 43% of respondents also reported regularly prescribing opioid medications. Of those who reported prescribing opioids, 9 of 10 reported they were less likely to prescribe opioids to adolescents aged 11 through 18 years, but only 48% reported they were less likely to prescribe opioids to young adults aged 19 through 25 years. One-half of those who reported prescribing opioids reported prescribing in amounts that would result in unused medication, and 69% reported having had patients divert or misuse opioids. Few dentists reported industry interactions.

CONCLUSIONS

The continued prescription of opioids contradicts mounting evidence about the superiority of NSAIDs over opioids in dentistry. Continuing dental education, increased use of prescription drug monitoring programs, and the development of national guidelines are necessary to align clinical practice with current evidence.

PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS

Dentists should seek to minimize opioid prescribing and pill counts and instead opt for safer, more effective NSAID-acetaminophen combinations. Dentists also should refrain from prescribing opioids to patients younger than 25 years because of the high risk of experiencing addiction in this population.

Opioid Overdose Risk in Patients Returning to the Emergency Department for Pain

OBJECTIVE

Using the Risk Index for Overdose or Serious Opioid-induced Respiratory Depression (CIP-RIOSORD) in patients returning to the emergency department (ED) for pain and discharged with an opioid prescription, we assessed overall opioid overdose risk and compared risk in opioid naive patients to those who are non-opioid naive.

DESIGN

This was a secondary analysis from a prospective observational study of patients ≥ 18 years old returning to the ED within 30 days. Data were collected from patient interviews and chart reviews. Patients were categorized as Group 1 (not using prescription opioids) or Group 2 (consuming prescription opioids). Statistical analyses were performed using Fisher's exact and Wilcoxon's rank sum tests. Risk class and probability of overdose was determined using Risk Index for Overdose or Serious Opioid-induced Respiratory Depression (CIP-RIOSORD).

RESULTS

Of the 389 enrollees who returned to the ED due to pain within 30 days of an initial visit, 67 (17%) were prescribed opioids. The majority of these patients were in Group 1 (60%). Both Group 1 (n = 40) and Group 2 (n = 27) held an average CIP-RIOSORD risk class of 3. Race significantly differed between groups; the majority of Group 1 self-identified as African American (80%) (P = .0267). There were no differences in age, gender, or CIP-RIOSORD risk class between groups. However, Group 2 had nearly double the number of predictive factors (median = 1.93) as Group 1 (median = 1.18) (P = .0267).

CONCLUSIONS

A substantial proportion of patients (25%) were high risk for opioid overdose. CIP-RIOSORD may prove beneficial in risk stratification of patients discharged with prescription opioids from the ED.

Association of Medication-Assisted Treatment and Age With Treatment Completion Among Veterans Seeking Non-VA Treatment for Opioid use Disorder at Non-Veterans Health Administration Facilities

BACKGROUND

Medication-assisted treatment has been shown to be effective in treating opioid use disorder among both older adults and veterans of U.S. Armed Forces. However, limited evidence exists on MAT's differential effect on treatment completion across age groups. This study aims to ascertain the role of MAT and age in treatment completion among veterans seeking treatment in non-Department of Veterans Affairs healthcare facilities for opioid use disorder.

METHODS

We used the Treatment Episode Data Set-Discharges (TEDS-D; 2006-2017) to examine trends in treatment and MAT usage over time and TEDS-2017 to determine the role of age and MAT in treatment completion. We examined a subset of those who self-identified as veterans and who sought treatment for an opioid use disorder.

RESULTS

Veterans presented in treatment more often as heroin users than prescription opioid users, and older veterans were more likely to get MAT than younger veterans. We found that before propensity score matching, MAT initially appeared to be associated with a lower likelihood of treatment completion in inpatient ($\beta $ = -1.47, 95% CI -1.56 to -1.39) and outpatient ($\beta $ = -1.40, 95% CI -2.21 to -0.58) settings, and age (50+ years) appeared to mediate the effect of MAT on treatment completion ($\beta $ = -0.54, 95% CI -0.87 to -0.21). After matching, older veterans were more likely to complete substance use disorder treatment ($\beta $ = 0.21, 95% CI 0.01-0.42), while age no longer mediated the effect of MAT, and MAT had a significant positive impact on treatment completion in detox settings ($\beta $ = 1.36, 95% CI 1.15-1.50) and inpatient settings ($\beta $ = 1.54, 95% CI 1.37 -1.71).

CONCLUSION

The results show that age plays an important role in outpatient treatment completion, while MAT plays an important role in inpatient treatment completion. Implications for veterans are discussed.

A randomized, noninferiority, controlled trial of two doses of intravenous subdissociative ketamine for analgesia in the emergency department

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to determine if 0.15 mg/kg intravenous (IV) subdissociative ketamine is noninferior to 0.3 mg/kg in emergency department (ED) patients with acute pain.

METHODS

This randomized, prospective, double-blinded, noninferiority trial included patients' age 18 to 59 years presenting to the ED with acute moderate to severe pain. Subjects were randomized to IV subdissociative ketamine, 0.15 mg/kg ("low" dose) or 0.30 mg/kg ("high" dose), over 15 minutes. The primary endpoint was the 11-point numeric rating scale (NRS) pain score between groups at 30 minutes. Secondary endpoints included NRS pain scores at 15 and 60 minutes; change in NRS at 15, 30, and 60 minutes; rescue analgesia; and adverse effects. The noninferiority limit, δ₀ , was set to 1.3.

RESULTS

Forty-nine patients were included in each group. After the differences in the baseline NRS score were adjusted for, the mean NRS score at 30 minutes was 4.7 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 3.8 to 5.5) in the low-dose group and 5.0 (95% CI = 4.2 to 5.8) in the high-dose group (mean difference = 0.4, 95% CI = -0.8 to 1.5), indicating that the low-dose subdissociative ketamine was noninferior to the high dose (lower limit of 95% CI = -0.8 to ≥1.3 = -δ₀ ). Adverse effects were similar at 30 minutes. At 15 minutes, the high-dose group experienced greater change in NRS; however, more adverse effects occurred.

CONCLUSION

Our data did not detect a large difference in analgesia or adverse effect profile between 0.15 mg/kg IV ketamine and 0.30 mg/kg in the short-term treatment of acute pain in the ED.

Effect of a Prescription Drug Monitoring Program on Emergency Department Opioid Prescribing

INTRODUCTION

Our goal was to determine whether implementation of a prescription drug monitoring program (PDMP) altered emergency department (ED) opioid prescription rates overall and in patients of different pain severities.

METHODS

We conducted this single-center, retrospective review at an academic ED. The study examined patients discharged from the ED who received opioid prescriptions, before and after the state's implementation of a PDMP (August 25, 2016). The monthly rate was a ratio of the patients given ≥ 1 opioid prescription to the ED patients with a numeric pain rating scale (NPRS) > 0. We performed an interrupted time series analysis on each demographic.

RESULTS

The overall ED opioid prescription rate decreased from 51.3% (95% confidence interval [Cl], 50.4%-52.2%) to 47.9% (95% Cl, 47.0%-48.7%). For males, this decreased from 51.1% to 46.7% (P < 0.0001), while in females it did not significantly change (51.6% to 49.7% [P = 0.0529]). For those with mild pain, the rate increased from 27.5% to 34.3% (P < 0.0001), while for those with moderate pain, it did not significantly change (42.8% to 43.5% [P = 0.5924]). For those with severe pain, the rate decreased from 66.1% to 59.6% (P < 0.0001).

CONCLUSION

We found that PDMP implementation was associated with an overall decrease in opioid prescription rates, and that patients with mild pain were prescribed opioids more often while severe pain patients were prescribed opioids less often.

Assessment of Controlled Substance Distribution to U.S. Veterinary Teaching Institutions From 2006 to 2019

Objective: To evaluate the changing pattern of distribution of Schedule II and III opioids, barbiturates, and stimulants to veterinary educational institutions in the United States.

Design: Longitudinal study.

Sample: Veterinary teaching institutions that use Schedule II and III drugs.

Procedures: Distribution of controlled substances to veterinary teaching institutions was obtained from the Drug Enforcement Administration's Automated Reports and Consolidated Orders System (ARCOS) for opioids (e.g., methadone, fentanyl, codeine), barbiturates (pentobarbital, butalbital), and stimulants (amphetamine, methylphenidate, lisdexamfetamine) from 2006–2019. Opioids were converted to their morphine milligram equivalents (MME) for evaluation over time.

Results: Controlled substance distribution to veterinary schools exhibited dynamic, and agent specific, changes. The total MME for 11 opioids peaked in 2013 and decreased by 17.3% in 2019. Methadone accounted for two-fifths (42.3%) and fentanyl over one-third (35.4%) of the total MME in 2019. Pentobarbital distribution was greatest by weight of all substances studied and peaked in 2011 at 69.4 kg. Stimulants underwent a pronounced decline and were very modest by 2014.

Conclusions and Clinical Relevance: Opioids by total MME in veterinary teaching practice have undergone more modest changes than opioids used with humans. Hydrocodone, codeine and recently fentanyl use have declined while methadone increased. Stimulant distribution decreased to become negligible. Together, this pattern of findings warrant continued monitoring.

Trends in Acute Pain Management for Renal Colic in the Emergency Department at a Tertiary Care Academic Medical Center

Introduction: Renal colic secondary to kidney stone disease is a common reason for emergency department (ED) visits and often leads to patients receiving narcotic medications. The objective of this study was to describe longitudinal analgesia prescribing patterns for kidney stone patients acutely managed in the ED. Methods: This was a retrospective chart review of patients who presented to the ED between 2013 and 2018 and were subsequently diagnosed with a kidney stone. Encounters during which opioids and nonopioids were administered in the ED and prescribed at discharge were stratified by year, race, ethnicity, insurance status, gender, and location of ED (main academic campus and community-based campus). Patients were excluded if they required hospital admission or a stone-related procedure related to the ED encounter. Results: We reviewed 1620 total encounters for 1376 unique patients. Frequency of patients receiving opioids in the ED decreased from 81% in 2013 to 57% in 2018 (p < 0.001). During the same time period, nonopioid administration in the ED remained relatively unchanged (64% vs 67%). The proportion of patients prescribed opioids at discharge decreased from 77% to 59% (p < 0.001), while nonopioid prescriptions at discharge increased from 32% to 41% (p = 0.010). Frequency of administering both a narcotic and non-narcotic during the same ED encounter decreased over the 5-year period from 27% to 8% (p < 0.001). Conclusion: Opioids are being given less both during the ED encounter and at discharge for acute renal colic, while nonopioid prescribing is increasing. These trends may be due to increasing physician awareness to opioid addiction, or as a result of stricter legislation prohibiting opioid prescribing.