The Impact of Opioid Risk Reduction Initiatives on High-Dose Opioid Prescribing for Patients on Chronic Opioid Therapy

Defining key deprescribing measures from electronic health data: A multisite data harmonization project

BACKGROUND

Stopping or reducing risky or unneeded medications ("deprescribing") could improve older adults' health. Electronic health data can support observational and intervention studies of deprescribing, but there are no standardized measures for key variables, and healthcare systems have differing data types and availability. We developed definitions for chronic medication use and discontinuation based on electronic health data and applied them in a case study of benzodiazepines and Z-drugs in five diverse US healthcare systems.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective cohort study of adults age 65+ from 2017 to 2019 with chronic benzodiazepine or Z-drug use. We determined whether sites had access to medication orders and/or dispensings. We developed definitions for chronic use and discontinuation using both data types. Discontinuation definitions were based on (1) gaps in medication availability during follow-up or (2) not having medication available at a fixed time point. We examined the impact of varying the gap length and requiring a 30-day period without orders/dispensings ("halo") around the fixed time point. We compared results derived from orders versus dispensings at one site.

RESULTS

Approximately 1.6%-2.6% of older adults had chronic benzodiazepine/Z-drug use (total N = 6775, ranging from 431 to 2122 across sites). Depending on the definition and site, the proportion discontinuing use during 12 months ranged from 6% to 49%. Requiring a longer gap or a 30-day "halo" resulted in lower estimates. At one site, only 56% of those with chronic use defined from orders also qualified based on dispensings, and the discontinuation rate at 180 days was 20% from orders versus 32% from dispensings.

CONCLUSIONS

Requiring a gap of ≥90 days or a "halo" around a time point may more accurately capture discontinuation than using a shorter gap or no halo. Orders data underestimate discontinuation compared to dispensings. Work is needed to adapt these definitions for other drug classes and settings.

Fall Outcomes in Older Adults Following Benzodiazepine/Z-Drug Discontinuation: A Retrospective Cohort Study in an Academic Health System

BACKGROUND

Benzodiazepines and z-drugs increase the fall risk in older adults. There is a lack of real-world data examining the association between falls and deprescribing medications.

OBJECTIVE

In a retrospective cohort study of older adults with chronic benzodiazepine or z-drug use receiving care at an academic health system from January 2017 to December 2020, we explored the association between medication discontinuation and falls.

METHODS

Chronic use was defined as ≥ 3 medication dispensings and cumulative days' supply ≥ 45 days within 100 days in 2018. Discontinuation was defined as a dispensing gap of ≥ 180 days within 1 year of chronic use eligibility, with a secondary definition requiring a gap of ≥ 90 days. Non-discontinuers (n = 524) were matched 4:1 to discontinuers (n = 131) if they had a fill in the same month as the matched discontinuation index date. The association between discontinuation and a fall during 2.25-year follow-up was assessed using Cox proportional hazards models. The analysis was repeated using a gap of ≥ 90 days (n = 279 discontinuers; 1116 matched non-discontinuers).

RESULTS

The cumulative incidence of falls-related acute visits was 6.9% for discontinuers and 9.7% for non-discontinuers [adjusted hazard ratio (HR) 0.65, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.31-1.31]. Using the 90-day-gap definition, the cumulative incidence was 9.3% for discontinuers and 8.5% for non-discontinuers (HR 1.12, 95% CI 0.70-1.77).

CONCLUSION

Benzodiazepine/z-drug discontinuation was not associated with reduced risk of falls. However, the relationship between discontinuation and falls varies depending on the definitions used. It is essential to examine different discontinuation definitions in larger studies while considering other relevant clinical outcomes.

STRategies to Improve Pain and Enjoy life (STRIPE): results of a pragmatic randomized trial of pain coping skills training and opioid medication taper guidance for patients on long-term opioid therapy

ABSTRACT

Because long-term opioid therapy (LtOT) for chronic pain has uncertain benefits and dose-dependent harms, safe and effective strategies for opioid tapering are needed. Adapting a promising pilot study intervention, we conducted the STRategies to Improve Pain and Enjoy life (STRIPE) pragmatic clinical trial. Patients in integrated health system on moderate-to-high dose of LtOT for chronic noncancer pain were randomized individually to usual care plus intervention (n = 79) or usual care only (n = 74). The intervention included pain coping skills training and optional support for opioid taper, delivered in 18 telephone sessions over a year, with pharmacologic guidance provided to participants' primary care providers by a pain physician. Coprimary outcomes were daily opioid dose (morphine milligram equivalent [MME]), calculated using pharmacy dispensing data, and the self-reported Pain, Enjoyment of Life and General Activity scale at 12 months (primary time point) and 6 months. Secondary outcomes included opioid misuse, opioid difficulties, opioid craving, pain self-efficacy, and global impression of change, depression, and anxiety. Only 41% randomized to the intervention completed all sessions. We did not observe significant differences between intervention and usual care for MME (adjusted mean difference: -2.3 MME; 95% confidence interval: -10.6, 5.9; P = 0.578), the Pain, Enjoyment of Life, General Activity scale (0.0 [95% confidence interval: -0.5, 0.5], P = 0.985), or most secondary outcomes. The intervention did not lower opioid dose or improve pain or functioning. Other strategies are needed to reduce opioid doses while improving pain and function for patients who have been on LtOT for years with high levels of medical, mental health, and substance use comorbidity.

Effect of a Predictive Analytics-Targeted Program in Patients on Opioids: a Stepped-Wedge Cluster Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

Risk of overdose, suicide, and other adverse outcomes are elevated among sub-populations prescribed opioid analgesics. To address this, the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) developed the Stratification Tool for Opioid Risk Mitigation (STORM)-a provider-facing dashboard that utilizes predictive analytics to stratify patients prescribed opioids based on risk for overdose/suicide.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the impact of the case review mandate on serious adverse events (SAEs) and all-cause mortality among high-risk Veterans.

DESIGN

A 23-month stepped-wedge cluster randomized controlled trial in all 140 VHA medical centers between 2018 and 2020.

PARTICIPANTS

A total of 44,042 patients actively prescribed opioid analgesics with high STORM risk scores (i.e., percentiles 1% to 5%) for an overdose or suicide-related event.

INTERVENTION

A mandate requiring providers to perform case reviews on opioid analgesic-prescribed patients at high risk of overdose/suicide.

MAIN MEASURES

Nine serious adverse events (SAEs), case review completion, number of risk mitigation strategies, and all-cause mortality.

KEY RESULTS

Mandated review inclusion was associated with a significant decrease in all-cause mortality within 4 months of inclusion (OR: 0.78; 95% CI: 0.65-0.94). There was no detectable effect on SAEs. Stepped-wedge analyses found that mandated review patients were five times more likely to receive a case review than non-mandated patients with similar risk (OR: 5.1; 95% CI: 3.64-7.23) and received more risk mitigation strategies than non-mandated patients (0.498; CI: 0.39-0.61).

CONCLUSIONS

Among VHA patients prescribed opioid analgesics, identifying high risk patients and mandating they receive an interdisciplinary case review was associated with a decrease in all-cause mortality. Results suggest that providers can leverage predictive analytic-targeted population health approaches and interdisciplinary collaboration to improve patient outcomes.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ISRCTN16012111.

Impacts of an Opioid Safety Initiative on US Veterans Undergoing Cancer Treatment

BACKGROUND

There is limited research on how the opioid epidemic and consequent risk reduction policies have affected pain management among cancer patients. The purpose of this study was to analyze how the Opioid Safety Initiative (OSI) implemented at the Veterans Health Administration affected opioid prescribing patterns and opioid-related toxicity.

METHODS

We performed an interrupted time series analysis of 42 064 opioid-naïve patients treated at the Veterans Health Administration for prostate, lung, breast, and colorectal cancer from 2011 to 2016. Segmented regression was used to evaluate the impact of the OSI on the incidence of any new opioid prescriptions, high-risk prescriptions, persistent use, and pain-related emergency department (ED) visits. We compared the cumulative incidence of adverse opioid events including an opioid-related admission or diagnosis of misuse before and after the OSI. All statistical tests were 2-sided.

RESULTS

The incidence of new opioid prescriptions was 26.7% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 25.0% to 28.4%) in 2011 and increased to 50.6% (95% CI = 48.3% to 53.0%) by 2013 before OSI implementation (monthly rate of change: +3.3%, 95% CI = 1.3% to 4.2%, P < .001). After the OSI, there was a decrease in the monthly rate of change for new prescriptions (-3.4%, 95% CI = -3.9 to -2.9%, P < .001). The implementation of the OSI was associated with a decrease in the monthly rate of change of concomitant benzodiazepines and opioid prescriptions (-2.5%, 95% CI = -3.2% to -1.8%, P < .001), no statistically significant change in high-dose opioids (-1.2%, 95% CI = -3.2% to 0.9%, P = .26), a decrease in persistent opioid use (-5.7%, 95% CI = -6.8% to -4.7%, P < .001), and an increase in pain-related ED visits (+3.0%, 95% CI = 1.0% to 5.0%, P = .003). The OSI was associated with a decreased incidence of opioid-related admissions (3-year cumulative incidence: 0.9% [95% CI = 0.7% to 1.0%] vs 0.5% [95% CI = 0.4% to 0.6%], P < .001) and no statistically significant change in the incidence of opioid misuse (3-year cumulative incidence: 1.2% [95% CI = 1.0% to 1.3%] vs 1.2% [95% CI = 1.1% to 1.4%], P = .77).

CONCLUSIONS

The OSI was associated with a relative decline in the rate of new, persistent, and certain high-risk opioid prescribing as well as a slight increase in the rate of pain-related ED visits. Further research on patient-centered outcomes is required to optimize opioid prescribing policies for patients with cancer.

Reduction of Long-Term Opioid Prescribing for Back Pain in Community Health Centers After a Medicaid Policy Change

INTRODUCTION

Beginning around 2011, innumerable policies have aimed to improve pain treatment while minimizing harms from excessive use of opioids. It is not known whether changing insurance coverage for specific conditions is an effective strategy. We describe and assess the effect of an innovative Oregon Medicaid back/neck pain coverage policy on opioid prescribing patterns.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study uses electronic health record data from a network of community health centers (CHCs) in Oregon to analyze prescription opioid dose changes among patients on long-term opioid treatment (LOT) affected by the policy.

RESULTS

Of the 1,789 patients on LOT at baseline, 41.6% had an average daily dose of <20 morphine milligram equivalents (MME), 32.3% had ≥20 to <50 MME, 14.5% had ≥50 to <90 MME, and 11.6% ≥90 MME. Around half of each group discontinued opioids within the 18-month policy period. Those who discontinued did so gradually (average of 11 months) regardless of starting dosage. Predictors of discontinuation included: diagnosis of opioid use disorder, older, non-Hispanic white, and less medical complexity.

CONCLUSIONS

Regardless of starting opioid dose, nearly half of patients affected by the 2016 Oregon Medicaid back/neck pain treatment policy no longer received opioid prescriptions by the end of the 18-month study period; another 30% decreased their dose. Gradual dose reduction was typical. These outcomes suggest that the policy impacted opioid prescribing. Understanding patient experiences resulting from such policies could help clinicians and policy makers navigate the complex balance between potential harms and benefits of LOT.

Evaluating the Effects of Opioid Prescribing Policies on Patient Outcomes in a Safety-net Primary Care Clinic

BACKGROUND

After decades of liberal opioid prescribing, multiple efforts have been made to reduce reliance upon opioids in clinical care. Little is known about the effects of opioid prescribing policies on outcomes beyond opioid prescribing.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the combined effects of multiple opioid prescribing policies implemented in a safety-net primary care clinic in San Francisco, CA, in 2013-2014.

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study and conditional difference-in-differences analysis of nonrandomized clinic-level policies.

PATIENTS

273 patients prescribed opioids for chronic non-cancer pain in 2013 at either the treated (n=151) or control clinic (n=122) recruited and interviewed in 2017-2018.

INTERVENTIONS

Policies establishing standard protocols for dispensing opioid refills and conducting urine toxicology testing, and a new committee facilitating opioid treatment decisions for complex patient cases.

MAIN MEASURES

Opioid prescription (active prescription, mean dose in morphine milligram equivalents [MME]) from electronic medical charts, and heroin and opioid analgesics not prescribed to the patient (any use, use frequency) from a retrospective interview.

KEY RESULTS

The interventions were associated with a reduction in mean prescribed opioid dose in the first three post-policy years (year 1 conditional difference-in-differences estimate: -52.0 MME [95% confidence interval: -109.9, -10.6]; year 2: -106.2 MME [-195.0, -34.6]; year 3: -98.6 MME [-198.7, -23.9]; year 4: -72.6 MME [-160.4, 3.6]). Estimates suggest a possible positive association between the interventions and non-prescribed opioid analgesic use (year 3: 5.2 absolute percentage points [-0.1, 11.2]) and use frequency (year 3: 0.21 ordinal frequency scale points [0.00, 0.47]) in the third post-policy year.

CONCLUSIONS

Clinic-level opioid prescribing policies were associated with reduced dose, although the control clinic achieved similar reductions by the fourth post-policy year, and the policies may have been associated with increased non-prescribed opioid analgesic use. Clinicians should balance the urgency to reduce opioid prescribing with potential harms from rapid change.

Characteristics and Network Influence of Providers Involved in the Treatment of Patients With Chronic Back, Neck or Joint Pain in Arkansas

Increasing emphasis on guidelines and prescription drug monitoring programs highlight the role of healthcare providers in pain treatment. Objectives of this study were to identify characteristics of key players and influence of opioid prescribers through construction of a referral network of patients with chronic pain. A retrospective cohort study was performed and patients with commercial or Medicaid coverage with chronic back, neck, or joint pain were identified using the Arkansas All-Payer Claims-Database. A social network comprised of providers connected by patient referrals based on 12-months of healthcare utilization following chronic pain was constructed. Network measures evaluated were indegree and eigen (referrals obtained), betweenness (involvement), and closeness centrality (reach). Outcomes included influence of providers, opioid prescribers, and brokerage status. Exposures included provider demographics, specialties and network characteristics. There were 51,941 chronic pain patients who visited 8,110 healthcare providers. Primary care providers showed higher betweenness and closeness whereas specialists had higher indegree. Opioid providers showed higher centrality compared to non-opioid providers, which decreased with increasing volume of opioid prescribing. Non-pharmacologic providers showed significant brokerage scores. Findings from this study such as primary care providers having better reach, non-central positions of high-volume prescribers and non-pharmacologic providers having higher brokerage can aid interventional physician detailing. PERSPECTIVE: Opioid providers held central positions in the network aiding provider-directed interventions. However, high-volume opioid providers were at the borders making them difficult targets for interventions. Primary care providers had the highest reach, specialists received the most referrals and non-pharmacological providers and specialists acted as brokers between non-opioid and opioid prescribers.

Research approaches for evaluating opioid sparing in clinical trials of acute and chronic pain treatments: Initiative on Methods, Measurement, and Pain Assessment in Clinical Trials recommendations

ABSTRACT

Randomized clinical trials have demonstrated the efficacy of opioid analgesics for the treatment of acute and chronic pain conditions, and for some patients, these medications may be the only effective treatment available. Unfortunately, opioid analgesics are also associated with major risks (eg, opioid use disorder) and adverse outcomes (eg, respiratory depression and falls). The risks and adverse outcomes associated with opioid analgesics have prompted efforts to reduce their use in the treatment of both acute and chronic pain. This article presents Initiative on Methods, Measurement, and Pain Assessment in Clinical Trials (IMMPACT) consensus recommendations for the design of opioid-sparing clinical trials. The recommendations presented in this article are based on the following definition of an opioid-sparing intervention: any intervention that (1) prevents the initiation of treatment with opioid analgesics, (2) decreases the duration of such treatment, (3) reduces the total dosages of opioids that are prescribed for or used by patients, or (4) reduces opioid-related adverse outcomes (without increasing opioid dosages), all without causing an unacceptable increase in pain. These recommendations are based on the results of a background review, presentations and discussions at an IMMPACT consensus meeting, and iterative drafts of this article modified to accommodate input from the co-authors. We discuss opioid sparing definitions, study objectives, outcome measures, the assessment of opioid-related adverse events, incorporation of adequate pain control in trial design, interpretation of research findings, and future research priorities to inform opioid-sparing trial methods. The considerations and recommendations presented in this article are meant to help guide the design, conduct, analysis, and interpretation of future trials.

A Comprehensive, Multimodal, Interdisciplinary Approach to Chronic Non-Cancer Pain Management in a Family Medicine Clinic: A Retrospective Cohort Review

INTRODUCTION

The complexity of chronic non-cancer pain in the setting of regulatory efforts to curb opioid usage presents a novel challenge for the medical community. Much of this burden falls on primary care clinics. We retrospectively quantified the reduction of opioid usage by patients in a multimodal, interdisciplinary, primary care clinic for chronic pain.

METHODS

A multimodal, interdisciplinary, chronic pain clinic embedded in a large academic military family medicine clinic operated one-half day weekly to address referrals from within the clinic at large. Appointment times were longer than typical primary care appointments. The clinic was equipped with support staff, ancillary specialty providers, and non-pharmacologic complementary treatment resources. A retrospective cohort review was conducted on 78 patients referred to this clinic from March 1, 2015 (the inception date of the clinic) through December 31, 2015.

RESULTS

Fifty-four of 78 patients met inclusion criteria. Overall mean morphine equivalent daily dosing (MEDD) dropped from 31.5 MEDD to 20.5 MEDD (p = 0.0005) 12 months post-intervention and from 31.5 MEDD to 9.5 MEDD (p < 0.0001) 36 months post-intervention. Four patients with a high mean baseline opioid dose of 185.2 MEDD dropped to 29.9 MEDD 36 months post-intervention. The mean 0-10 pain score decreased from 5.3 ± 2.2 to 4.0 ± 2.5 (p = 0.001).

CONCLUSION

A multimodal, interdisciplinary, primary care-based, chronic pain clinic equipped with extended appointment times, non-pharmacologic treatment resources, and specialty access can curb opioid usage. Leadership support for protracted appointment duration, complementary treatment resources, and interdisciplinary personnel is crucial to success.

American Society of Hematology 2020 guidelines for sickle cell disease: management of acute and chronic pain

BACKGROUND

The management of acute and chronic pain for individuals living with sickle cell disease (SCD) is a clinical challenge. This reflects the paucity of clinical SCD pain research and limited understanding of the complex biological differences between acute and chronic pain. These issues collectively create barriers to effective, targeted interventions. Optimal pain management requires interdisciplinary care.

OBJECTIVE

These evidence-based guidelines developed by the American Society of Hematology (ASH) are intended to support patients, clinicians, and other health care professionals in pain management decisions for children and adults with SCD.

METHODS

ASH formed a multidisciplinary panel, including 2 patient representatives, that was thoroughly vetted to minimize bias from conflicts of interest. The Mayo Evidence-Based Practice Research Program supported the guideline development process, including updating or performing systematic reviews. Clinical questions and outcomes were prioritized according to importance for clinicians and patients. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach was used, including GRADE evidence-to-decision frameworks, to assess evidence and make recommendations, which were subject to public comment.

RESULTS

The panel reached consensus on 18 recommendations specific to acute and chronic pain. The recommendations reflect a broad pain management approach, encompassing pharmacological and nonpharmacological interventions and analgesic delivery.

CONCLUSIONS

Because of low-certainty evidence and closely balanced benefits and harms, most recommendations are conditional. Patient preferences should drive clinical decisions. Policymaking, including that by payers, will require substantial debate and input from stakeholders. Randomized controlled trials and comparative-effectiveness studies are needed for chronic opioid therapy, nonopioid therapies, and nonpharmacological interventions.

Chronic Opioid Therapy: A Scoping Literature Review on Evolving Clinical and Scientific Definitions

The management of chronic noncancer pain (CNCP) with chronic opioid therapy (COT) is controversial. There is a lack of consensus on how COT is defined resulting in unclear clinical guidance. This scoping review identifies and evaluates evolving COT definitions throughout the published clinical and scientific literature. Databases searched included PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science. A total of 227 studies were identified from 8,866 studies published between January 2000 and July 2019. COT definitions were classified by pain population of application and specific dosage/duration definition parameters, with results reported according to PRISMA-ScR. Approximately half of studies defined COT as "days' supply duration >90 days" and 9.3% defined as ">120 days' supply," with other days' supply cut-off points (>30, >60, or >70) each appearing in <5% of total studies. COT was defined by number of prescriptions in 63 studies, with 16.3% and 11.0% using number of initiations or refills, respectively. Few studies explicitly distinguished acute treatment and COT. Episode duration/dosage criteria was used in 90 studies, with 7.5% by Morphine Milligram Equivalents + days' supply and 32.2% by other "episode" combination definitions. COT definitions were applied in musculoskeletal CNCP (60.8%) most often, and typically in adults aged 18 to 64 (69.6%). The usage of ">90 days' supply" COT definitions increased from 3.2 publications/year before 2016 to 20.7 publications/year after 2016. An increasing proportion of studies define COT as ">90 days' supply." The most recent literature trends toward shorter duration criteria, suggesting that contemporary COT definitions are increasingly conservative. PERSPECTIVE: This study summarized the most common, current definition criteria for chronic opioid therapy (COT) and recommends adoption of consistent definition criteria to be utilized in practice and research. The most recent literature trends toward shorter duration criteria overall, suggesting that COT definition criteria are increasingly stringent.

The Effect of Opioid Stewardship Interventions on Key Outcomes: A Systematic Review

OBJECTIVES

We sought to identify potential patient safety practices to reduce high-risk opioid prescribing.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review of the literature to identify opioid stewardship (OS) strategies implemented in primary care and other settings. Included studies evaluated an OS strategy or a multicomponent OS initiative to address potential harms of opioids and used experimental or quasi-experimental designs.

RESULTS

We identified 14 studies and 1 systematic review that met inclusion criteria. Most studies examined multicomponent OS interventions, which often consisted of guideline-recommended clinical interventions or care processes (e.g., use urine drug screening, check Prescription Drug Monitoring Program), as well as implementation strategies (e.g., dashboards, audit and feedback). Most studies examined the effect of OS interventions on reducing the potential risks of opioids with judicious prescribing and guideline-concordant care (e.g., reduce inappropriate high opioid dosages, avoid co-prescribing opioids and benzodiazepines, use urine drug screening, treatment agreements).

CONCLUSIONS

The strength of the evidence is low to moderate that OS efforts decrease numbers of opioid prescriptions, proportion of patients on long-term opioids, or days' supply. The strength of the evidence for OS initiatives producing significant reductions in opioid dosages was moderate. Future research is needed on the effectiveness of OS interventions, particularly studies with experimental designs and in diverse settings within the health care system.

Study protocol for evaluating Six Building Blocks for opioid management implementation in primary care practices

Background

The Six Building Blocks for improving opioid management (6BBs) is a program for improving the management of patients in primary care practices who are on long-term opioid therapy for chronic pain. The 6BBs include building leadership and consensus; aligning policies, patient agreements, and workflows; tracking and monitoring patient care; conducting planned, patient-centered visits; tailoring care for complex patients; and measuring success. The Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality funded the development of a 6BBs implementation guide: a step-by-step approach for independently implementing the 6BBs in a practice. This mixed-method study seeks to assess practices’ use of the implementation guide to implement the 6BBs and the effectiveness of 6BBs implementation on opioid management processes of care among practices using the implementation guide.

Methods

Data collection is guided by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research, Proctor’s taxonomy of implementation outcomes, and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s Guideline for Prescribing Opioids for Chronic Pain. A diverse group of health care organizations with primary care clinics across the USA will participate in the study over 15 months. Qualitative data collection will include semi-structured interviews with stakeholders at each organization at two time points, notes from routine check-in calls, and document review. These data will be used to understand practices’ motivation for participation, history with opioid management efforts, barriers and facilitators to implementation, and implementation progress. Quantitative data collection will consist of a provider and staff survey, an implementation milestones assessment, and quarterly opioid prescribing quality measures. These data will supplement our understanding of implementation progress and will allow us to assess changes over time in providers’ opioid prescribing practices, prescribing self-efficacy, challenges to providing guideline-driven care, and practices’ opioid prescribing quality measures. Qualitative data will be coded and analyzed for emergent themes. Quantitative data will be analyzed using descriptive statistics and clustered multivariate regression.

Discussion

This study contributes to the knowledge of the implementation and effectiveness of a team-based approach to opioid management in primary care practices. Information gleaned from this study can be used to inform efforts to curtail opioid prescribing and assist primary care practices considering implementing the 6BBs.

Treatment Outcomes in Patients With Opioid Use Disorder Who Were First Introduced to Opioids by Prescription: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

OBJECTIVE

Prescription opioid misuse has led to a new cohort of opioid use disorder (OUD) patients who were introduced to opioids through a legitimate prescription. This change has caused a shift in the demographic profile of OUD patients from predominantly young men to middle age and older people. The management of OUD includes medication-assisted treatment (MAT), which produces varying rates of treatment response. In this study, we will examine whether the source of first opioid use has an effect on treatment outcomes in OUD. Using a systematic review of the literature, we will investigate the association between source of first opioid introduction and treatment outcomes defined as continuing illicit opioid use and poly-substance use while in MAT.

METHODS

Medline, EMBASE, CINHAL, and PsycInfo were searched from inception to December 31st, 2019 inclusive using a comprehensive search strategy. Five pairs of reviewers conducted screening and data extraction independently in duplicate. The review is conducted and reported according to the PRISMA guidelines. A random-effects model was used for meta analyses assuming heterogeneity among the included studies.

RESULTS

The initial search results in 27,345 articles that were screened, and five observational studies were included in the qualitative and quantitative analyses. Our results found that those who were introduced to opioids through a legitimate prescription were significantly less likely to have illicit opioid use (0.70, 95% CI 0.50, 0.99) while on MAT. They were also less likely to use cannabis (0.54, 95% CI 0.32, 0.89), alcohol (0.75, 95% CI 0.59, 0.95), cocaine (0.50, 95% CI 0.29, 0.85), and injection drug use (0.25, 95% CI 0.14, 0.43) than those introduced to opioids through recreational means.

CONCLUSION

This study shows that the first exposure to opioids, whether through a prescription or recreationally, influences prognosis and treatment outcomes of opioid use disorder. Although the increased pattern of prescribing opioids may have led to increased OUD in a new cohort of patients, these patients are less likely to continue to use illicit drugs and have a different prognostic and clinical profile that requires a tailored approach to treatment.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD42017058143.

Strengths and weaknesses of existing data sources to support research to address the opioids crisis

Better opioid prescribing practices, promoting effective opioid use disorder treatment, improving naloxone access, and enhancing public health surveillance are strategies central to reducing opioid-related morbidity and mortality. Successfully advancing and evaluating these strategies requires leveraging and linking existing secondary data sources. We conducted a scoping study in Fall 2017 at RAND, including a literature search (updated in December 2018) complemented by semi-structured interviews with policymakers and researchers, to identify data sources and linking strategies commonly used in opioid studies, describe data source strengths and limitations, and highlight opportunities to use data to address high-priority public health research questions. We identified 306 articles, published between 2005 and 2018, that conducted secondary analyses of existing data to examine one or more public health strategies. Multiple secondary data sources, available at national, state, and local levels, support such research, with substantial breadth in data availability, data contents, and the data's ability to support multi-level analyses over time. Interviewees identified opportunities to expand existing capabilities through systematic enhancements, including greater support to states for creating and facilitating data use, as well as key data challenges, such as data availability lags and difficulties matching individual-level data over time or across datasets. Multiple secondary data sources exist that can be used to examine the impact of public health approaches to addressing the opioid crisis. Greater data access, improved usability for research purposes, and data element standardization can enhance their value, as can improved data availability timeliness and better data comparability across jurisdictions.

The Impact of Substance Abuse on Heart Failure Hospitalizations

BACKGROUND

The burden of substance abuse among patients with heart failure and its association with subsequent emergency department visits and hospital admissions are poorly characterized.

METHODS

We evaluated the medical records of patients with a diagnosis of heart failure treated at the University of California-San Diego from 2005 to 2016. We identified substance abuse via diagnosis codes or urine drug screens. We used Poisson regression to evaluate the incidence rate ratios (IRR) of substance abuse for emergency department visits or hospitalizations with a primary diagnosis of heart failure, adjusted for age, sex, race, medical insurance status, and medical diagnoses.

RESULTS

We identified 11,268 patients with heart failure and 15,909 hospital encounters for heart failure over 49,712 person-years of follow-up. Substance abuse was diagnosed in 15.2% of patients. Disorders such as methamphetamine abuse (prevalence 5.2%, IRR 1.96, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.85-2.07), opioid use and abuse (8.2%, IRR 1.54, 95% CI 1.47-1.61), and alcohol abuse (4.5%, IRR 1.51, 95% CI 1.42-1.60) were associated with a greater number of hospital encounters for heart failure, with associations that were comparable to diagnoses such as atrial fibrillation (37%, IRR 1.78, 95% CI 1.73-1.84), ischemic heart disease (24%, IRR 1.67, 95% CI 1.62-1.73), and chronic kidney disease (26%, IRR 1.57, 95% CI 1.51-1.62).

CONCLUSIONS

Although less prevalent than common medical comorbidities in patients with heart failure, substance-abuse disorders are significant sources of morbidity that are independently associated with emergency department visits and hospitalizations for heart failure. Greater recognition and treatment of substance abuse may improve outcomes among patients with heart failure.

Chronic pain diagnoses and opioid dispensings among insured individuals with serious mental illness

BACKGROUND

Individuals with major depressive disorder (MDD) and bipolar disorder (BD) have particularly high rates of chronic non-cancer pain (CNCP) and are also more likely to receive prescription opioids for their pain. However, there have been no known studies published to date that have examined opioid treatment patterns among individuals with schizophrenia.

METHODS

Using electronic medical record data across 13 Mental Health Research Network sites, individuals with diagnoses of MDD (N = 65,750), BD (N = 38,117) or schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder (N = 12,916) were identified and matched on age, sex and Medicare status to controls with no documented mental illness. CNCP diagnoses and prescription opioid medication dispensings were extracted for the matched samples. Multivariate analyses were conducted to evaluate (1) the odds of receiving a pain-related diagnosis and (2) the odds of receiving opioids, by separate mental illness diagnosis category compared with matched controls, controlling for age, sex, Medicare status, race/ethnicity, income, medical comorbidities, healthcare utilization and chronic pain diagnoses.

RESULTS

Multivariable models indicated that having a MDD (OR = 1.90; 95% CI = 1.85-1.95) or BD (OR = 1.71; 95% CI = 1.66-1.77) diagnosis was associated with increased odds of a CNCP diagnosis after controlling for age, sex, race, income, medical comorbidities and healthcare utilization. By contrast, having a schizophrenia diagnosis was associated with decreased odds of receiving a chronic pain diagnosis (OR = 0.86; 95% CI = 0.82-0.90). Having a MDD (OR = 2.59; 95% CI = 2.44-2.75) or BD (OR = 2.12; 95% CI = 1.97-2.28) diagnosis was associated with increased odds of receiving chronic opioid medications, even after controlling for age, sex, race, income, medical comorbidities, healthcare utilization and chronic pain diagnosis; having a schizophrenia diagnosis was not associated with receiving chronic opioid medications.

CONCLUSIONS

Individuals with serious mental illness, who are most at risk for developing opioid-related problems, continue to be prescribed opioids more often than their peers without mental illness. Mental health clinicians may be particularly well-suited to lead pain assessment and management efforts for these patients. Future research is needed to evaluate the effectiveness of involving mental health clinicians in these efforts.

Characteristics Associated With U.S. Outpatient Opioid Analgesic Prescribing and Gabapentinoid Co-Prescribing

INTRODUCTION

A considerable burden of prescription and illicit opioid-related mortality and morbidity in the U.S. is attributable to potentially unnecessary or excessive opioid prescribing, and co-prescribing gabapentinoids may increase risk of harm. Data are needed regarding physician and patient characteristics associated with opioid analgesic and opioid analgesic-gabapentinoid co-prescriptions to elucidate targets for reducing preventable harm.

METHODS

Multiple logistic regression was utilized to examine patient and physician predictors of opioid analgesic prescriptions and opioid analgesic-gabapentinoid co-prescriptions in adult noncancer patients using the National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey 2015 public use data set. Potential predictors were selected based on literature review, clinical relevance, and random forest machine learning algorithms.

RESULTS

Among the 11.8% (95% CI=9.8%, 13.9%) of medical encounters with an opioid prescription, 16.2% (95% CI=12.6%, 19.8%) had a gabapentinoid co-prescription. Among all gabapentinoid encounters, 40.7% (95% CI=32.6%, 48.7%) had an opioid co-prescription. Predictors of opioid prescription included arthritis (OR=1.87, 95% CI=1.30, 2.69). Predictors of new opioid prescription included physician status as an independent contractor (OR=3.67, 95% CI=1.38, 9.81) or part owner of the practice (OR=3.34, 95% CI=1.74, 6.42). Predictors of opioid-gabapentinoid co-prescription included patient age (peaking at age 55-64 years; OR=35.67, 95% CI=4.32, 294.43).

CONCLUSIONS

Predictors of opioid analgesic prescriptions with and without gabapentinoid co-prescriptions were identified. These predictors can help inform and reinforce (e.g., educational) interventions seeking to reduce preventable harm, help identify populations for elucidating opioid-gabapentinoid risk-benefit profiles, and provide a baseline for evaluating subsequent public health measures.

Evidence for state, community and systems-level prevention strategies to address the opioid crisis

BACKGROUND

Practitioners and policy makers need evidence to facilitate the selection of effective prevention interventions that can address the ongoing opioid overdose epidemic in the United States.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review of publications reporting on rigorous evaluations of systems-level interventions to address provider and patient/public behavior and prevent prescription and illicit opioid overdose. A total of 251 studies were reviewed. Interventions studied included 1) state legislation and regulation, 2) prescription drug monitoring programs (PDMPs), 3) insurance strategies, 4) clinical guideline implementation, 5) provider education, 6) health system interventions, 7) naloxone education and distribution, 8) safe storage and disposal, 9) public education, 10) community coalitions, and 11) interventions employing public safety and public health collaborations.

RESULTS

The quality of evidence supporting selected interventions was low to moderate. Interventions with the strongest evidence include PDMP and pain clinic legislation, insurance strategies, motivational interviewing in clinical settings, feedback to providers on opioid prescribing behavior, intensive school and family-based programs, and patient education in the clinical setting.

CONCLUSIONS

Although evidence is growing, further high-quality research is needed. Investigators should aim to identify strategies that can prevent overdose, as well as influence public, patient, and provider behavior. Identifying which strategies are most effective at addressing prescription compared to illicit opioid misuse and overdose could be fruitful, as well as investigating synergistic effects and unintended consequences.

Evidence for state, community and systems-level prevention strategies to address the opioid crisis

BACKGROUND

Practitioners and policy makers need evidence to facilitate the selection of effective prevention interventions that can address the ongoing opioid overdose epidemic in the United States.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review of publications reporting on rigorous evaluations of systems-level interventions to address provider and patient/public behavior and prevent prescription and illicit opioid overdose. A total of 251 studies were reviewed. Interventions studied included 1) state legislation and regulation, 2) prescription drug monitoring programs (PDMPs), 3) insurance strategies, 4) clinical guideline implementation, 5) provider education, 6) health system interventions, 7) naloxone education and distribution, 8) safe storage and disposal, 9) public education, 10) community coalitions, and 11) interventions employing public safety and public health collaborations.

RESULTS

The quality of evidence supporting selected interventions was low to moderate. Interventions with the strongest evidence include PDMP and pain clinic legislation, insurance strategies, motivational interviewing in clinical settings, feedback to providers on opioid prescribing behavior, intensive school and family-based programs, and patient education in the clinical setting.

CONCLUSIONS

Although evidence is growing, further high-quality research is needed. Investigators should aim to identify strategies that can prevent overdose, as well as influence public, patient, and provider behavior. Identifying which strategies are most effective at addressing prescription compared to illicit opioid misuse and overdose could be fruitful, as well as investigating synergistic effects and unintended consequences.

Association Between Preoperative Opioid and Benzodiazepine Prescription Patterns and Mortality After Noncardiac Surgery

Importance

The number of patients prescribed long-term opioids and benzodiazepines and complications from their long-term use have increased. Information regarding the perioperative outcomes of patients prescribed these medications before surgery is limited.

Objective

To determine whether patients prescribed opioids and/or benzodiazepines within 6 months preoperatively would have greater short- and long-term mortality and increased opioid consumption postoperatively.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This retrospective, single-center, population-based cohort study included all patients 18 years or older, undergoing noncardiac surgical procedures at a national hospital in Iceland from December 12, 2005, to December 31, 2015, with follow-up through May 20, 2016. A propensity score-matched control cohort was generated using individuals from the group that received prescriptions for neither medication class within 6 months preoperatively. Data analysis was performed from April 10, 2018, to March 9, 2019.

Exposures

Patients who filled prescriptions for opioids only, benzodiazepines only, both opioids and benzodiazepines, or neither medication within 6 months preoperatively.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Long-term survival compared with propensity score-matched controls. Secondary outcomes were 30-day survival and persistent postoperative opioid consumption, defined as a prescription filled more than 3 months postoperatively.

Results

Among 41 170 noncardiac surgical cases in 27 787 individuals (16 004 women [57.6%]; mean [SD] age, 56.3 [18.8] years), a preoperative prescription for opioids only was filled for 7460 cases (17.7%), benzodiazepines only for 3121 (7.4%), and both for 2633 (6.2%). Patients who filled preoperative prescriptions for either medication class had a greater comorbidity burden compared with patients receiving neither medication class (Elixhauser comorbidity index >0 for 16% of patients filling prescriptions for opioids only, 22% for benzodiazepines only, and 21% for both medications compared with 14% for patients filling neither). There was no difference in 30-day (opioids only: 1.3% vs 1.0%; P = .23; benzodiazepines only: 1.9% vs 1.5%; P = .32) or long-term (opioids only: hazard ratio [HR], 1.12 [95% CI, 1.01-1.24]; P = .03; benzodiazepines only: HR, 1.11 [95% CI, 0.98-1.26]; P = .11) survival among the patients receiving opioids or benzodiazepines only compared with controls. However, patients prescribed both opioids and benzodiazepines had greater 30-day mortality (3.2% vs 1.8%; P = .004) and a greater hazard of long-term mortality (HR, 1.41; 95% CI, 1.22-1.64; P < .001). The rate of persistent postoperative opioid consumption was higher for patients filling prescriptions for opioids only (43%), benzodiazepines only (23%), or both (66%) compared with patients filling neither (12%) (P < .001 for all).

Conclusions and Relevance

The findings suggest that opioid and benzodiazepine prescription fills in the 6 months before surgery are associated with increased short-and long-term mortality and an increased rate of persistent postoperative opioid consumption. These patients should be considered for early referral to preoperative clinic and medication optimization to improve surgical outcomes.

Impact of Opioid Dose Reduction and Risk Mitigation Initiatives on Chronic Opioid Therapy Patients at Higher Risk for Opioid-Related Adverse Outcomes

Objective

We aimed to determine if opioid risk reduction initiatives including dose reduction and risk mitigation strategies for chronic noncancer pain patients receiving chronic opioid therapy (COT) had a differential impact on average daily opioid doses of COT patients at higher risk for opioid-related adverse outcomes compared with lower-risk patients.

Design

Interrupted time series.

Setting

Group Health Cooperative (GH), a health care delivery system and insurance within Washington State, between 2006 and 2014.

Population

GH enrollees on COT defined as receiving a supply of 70 or more days of opioids within 90 days using electronic pharmacy data for filled prescriptions.

Methods

We compared the average daily morphine equivalent doses (MED) of COT patients with and without each of the following higher-risk characteristics: mental disorders, substance use disorders, sedative use, and male gender.

Results

In all four pairwise comparisons, the higher-risk subgroup had a higher average daily MED than the lower-risk subgroup across the study period. Adjusted for covariates, modest differences in the annual rate of reduction in average daily MED were noted between higher- and lower-risk subgroups in three pairwise comparisons: those with mental disorders vs without (-8.2 mg/y vs -5.2 mg/y, P = 0.005), with sedative use vs without (-9.2 mg/y vs -5.8 mg/y, P = 0.004); mg), in men vs women (-8.8 mg/y vs -5.9 mg/y, P = 0.01).

Conclusion

Using clinical policy initiatives in a health care system, dose reductions were achieved among COT patients at higher risk for opioid-related adverse outcomes that were at least as large as those among lower-risk patients.

Team-Based Clinic Redesign of Opioid Medication Management in Primary Care: Effect on Opioid Prescribing

PURPOSE

Six key elements of opioid medication management redesign in primary care have been previously identified. Here, we examine the effect of implementing these Six Building Blocks on opioid-prescribing practices.

METHODS

Six rural-serving organizations with 20 clinic locations received support for 15 months during the period October 2015 to May 2017 to implement the Six Building Blocks. Patients undergoing long-term opioid therapy (LtOT) at these study sites were compared with patients undergoing LtOT enrolled in a regional health plan who did not receive care at the study sites but who resided in the same primary care service areas (control group). Outcomes were monthly trend in the proportion of patients undergoing LtOT prescribed a ≥100 morphine equivalent dose (MED) of opioids daily and the total number of patients receiving an opioid prescription. An interrupted time series using difference-indifference analysis was used for tests of significance.

RESULTS

The proportion of patients prescribed a ≥100 MED of opioids daily decreased 2.2% (11.8% to 9.6%) among patients at the intervention clinics and 1.3% (14.0% to 12.7%) among patients in the control group. The rate of decrease was significantly greater among study patients than among patients in the control group (P = .018). The rate of decrease in the number of patients on LtOT at intervention clinics increased during the intervention period compared with the preintervention period (P <.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Efforts to redesign opioid medication management in primary care resulted in a significant decrease in opioid prescribing. Future research is needed to determine if these results are generalizable to other settings and to assess implications for patient-reported outcomes.

Inappropriate opioid prescribing practices: A narrative review

Purpose

Results of a literature review to identify indicators of inappropriate opioid prescribing are presented.

Summary

While prescription opioids can be effective for the treatment of acute pain, inappropriate prescribing practices can increase the risk of opioid-related harms, including overdose and mortality. To date, little research has been conducted to determine how best to define inappropriate opioid prescribing. Five electronic databases were searched to identify studies (published from database inception to January 2017) that defined inappropriate opioid prescribing practices. Search terms varied slightly across databases but included opioid, analgesics, inappropriate prescribing, practice patterns, and prescription drug misuse. Gray literature and references of published literature reviews were manually searched to identify additional relevant articles. From among the 4,665 identified articles, 41 studies were selected for data extraction and analysis. Fourteen studies identified high-daily-dose opioid prescriptions, 14 studies identified coadministration of benzodiazepines and opioids, 10 studies identified inappropriate opioid prescribing in geriatric populations, 8 studies identified other patient-specific factors, 4 studies identified opioid prescribing for the wrong indication, and 4 studies identified factors such as initiation of long-acting opioids in opioid-naive patients as indicators of inappropriate opioid prescribing.

Conclusion

A literature review identified various indicators of inappropriate opioid prescribing, including the prescribing of high daily doses of opioids, concurrent benzodiazepine administration, and geriatric-related indicators. Given the significant contribution of inappropriate opioid prescribing to opioid-related harms, identification of these criteria is important to inform and improve opioid prescribing practices among healthcare providers.

Risk of second breast cancer events with chronic opioid use in breast cancer survivors

PURPOSE

Opioids may increase cancer risk and progression through multiple pathways. Our objective was to estimate the association between chronic opioid use and risk of second breast cancer events (SBCEs).

METHODS

Cohort study of women greater than or equal to 18 years, diagnosed with early stage breast cancer between January 1, 1990, and December 31, 2008, and enrolled in a large health plan for 1+ years before and after (unless died) diagnosis. SBCEs were defined as evidence of recurrence or second primary breast cancer in the medical chart. Chronic opioid use was defined as 75+ days of use in any moving 90-day window after breast cancer diagnosis and varied to 150+ days in a 180-day window in a sensitivity analysis. Using Cox proportional hazards models, we estimated hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for SBCE and components of SBCE by chronic opioid use.

RESULTS

Almost 10% met the criteria for chronic use and almost a third of users were taking opioids for greater than 3 years. Risk of SBCEs (HR = 1.20; 95% CI, 0.85-1.70), including second primary breast cancer (HR = 1.38; 95% CI, 0.71-2.70), was nonsignificantly higher among chronic users vs nonchronic/nonusers. The HR for recurrence was 1.14 (95% CI, 0.76-2.70). Results of the sensitivity analyses on longer opioid use does support an association with SBCE or recurrence.

CONCLUSION

This first US-based study on chronic opioid use and cancer outcomes provides some reassurance on safety. However, the question warrants further exploration in other populations and settings.

Novel Opioid Safety Clinic Initiative to Deliver Guideline-Concordant Chronic Opioid Therapy in Primary Care

OBJECTIVE

To develop and evaluate a novel Opioid Safety Clinic (OSC) initiative to enhance adherence to guidelines on the assessment and monitoring of patients prescribed chronic opioid therapy (COT).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

The OSC was developed at an urban Federally Qualified Health Center to provide guideline-concordant care for COT, standardize workflows, and efficiently use clinic staff. We evaluated the OSC using a matched cohort study. Five hundred thirty-nine patients participated in the clinic between July 1, 2014, and March 31, 2016. Of these, 472 clinic participants were matched to 472 nonparticipants by sex and age on the date of the OSC visit. The OSC was evaluated by its completion rates of standardized pain assessments, urine toxicology, and naloxone dispensings. We conducted logistic regression comparing OSC participants to OSC nonparticipants.

RESULTS

A total of 539 patients attended an OSC visit, representing approximately 53% of patients in the chronic opioid registry. The OSC participants were more likely than nonparticipants to have completed a pain assessment (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 169.8; 95% CI, 98.3-293.5), completed a urine toxicology (aOR, 46.1; 95% CI, 30.4-69.9), or had naloxone dispensed (aOR, 2.8; 95% CI, 1.9-4.3) over 12 months of follow-up.

CONCLUSION

The OSC model improved adherence to guideline-concordant COT in primary care. Future research is needed to assess the impact of these interventions on pain, quality of life, and adverse events from opioid analgesics.

Impact of initiatives to reduce prescription opioid risks on medically attended injuries in people using chronic opioid therapy

PURPOSE

The purpose of the study is to determine whether initiatives to improve the safety of opioid prescribing decreased injuries in people using chronic opioid therapy (COT).

METHODS

We conducted an interrupted time series analysis using data from Group Health (GH), an integrated health care delivery system in the United States. In 2007, GH implemented initiatives which substantially reduced daily opioid dose and increased patient monitoring. Among GH members age 18 or older receiving COT between 2006 and 2014, we compared injury rates for patients in GH's integrated group practice (IGP; exposed to the initiatives) vs patients cared for by contracted providers (not exposed). Injuries were identified using a validated algorithm. We calculated injury incidence during the baseline (preintervention) period from 2006 to 2007; the dose reduction period, 2008 to 2010; and the risk stratification and monitoring period, 2010 to 2014. Using modified Poisson regression, we estimated adjusted relative risks (RRs) representing the relative change per year in injury rates.

RESULTS

Among 21 853 people receiving COT in the IGP and 8260 in contracted care, there were 2679 injuries during follow-up. The baseline injury rate was 1.0% per calendar quarter in the IGP and 0.9% in contracted care. Risk reduction initiatives did not decrease injury rates: Within the IGP, the RR in the dose reduction period was 1.01 (95% CI, 0.95-1.07) and in the risk stratification and monitoring period, 0.99 (95% CI, 0.95-1.04). Injury trends did not differ between the two care settings.

CONCLUSIONS

Risk reduction initiatives did not decrease injuries in people using COT.

A Model for Improving Adherence to Prescribing Guidelines for Chronic Opioid Therapy in Rural Primary Care

Objective

To describe the steps taken and results obtained by a rural primary care practice to effectively implement opioid prescribing guidelines.

Patients and Methods

Between December 1, 2014, and May 30, 2017, a quality improvement project was undertaken. Elements included prescribing registries, a nurse coordinator, and an Opioid Use Review Panel. Clinic workflow was redesigned to more consistently incorporate these and other guideline recommendations into practice. The effect on opioid prescribing was measured as well as patient outcomes.

Results

There were 462 patients meeting inclusion criteria before implementation. At the conclusion, 16 patients (3%) had died, 9 patients (2%) were no longer seeing clinicians participating in the project, and 2 patients (0.4%) had transitioned to hospice or long-term care facilities. Of the remaining 435 patients, 96 (22.1%; 95% CI, 18.4-26.2) had decreased prescribing below the threshold for inclusion or were no longer receiving opioid prescriptions. Originally, 64 patients (13.9%; 95% CI, 11.0-17.3) were using average daily doses equal to or greater than 90 morphine milligram equivalents. After implementation, 54 of 435 patients (12.4%; 95% CI, 9.6-15.8) were still using equal to or greater than 90 morphine milligram equivalents per day after accounting for death or loss to follow-up.

Conclusion

A change in clinic process to implement guidelines for prescribing of chronic opioid therapy was completed. It was associated with a decrease in the number of patients using chronic opioid therapy, primarily at lower doses. This was accomplished in a rural practice with very limited resources in pain medicine, psychiatry, and addiction medicine.

Impact of Chronic Opioid Therapy Risk Reduction Initiatives on Opioid Overdose

We assessed the effects of opioid dose and risk reduction initiatives on opioid overdose rates among patients on chronic opioid therapy (COT). Using an interrupted time series design, we compared trends in overdose rates. We compared patients on COT in settings that implemented a COT dose reduction initiative and then a COT risk stratification/monitoring initiative to similar patients on COT from control settings. From 2006 to 2014, 31,142 patients on COT (22,673 intervention, 8,469 control) experienced 311 fatal or nonfatal opioid overdoses. In primary analyses, changes in opioid overdose rates among patients on COT did not differ significantly between intervention and control settings with the implementation of either dose reduction or risk stratification/monitoring. In planned secondary analyses, overdose rates decreased significantly (17% per year) during the dose reduction initiative among patients on COT in intervention settings (relative annual change, 0.83; 95% confidence interval, 0.70-0.99), but not in control settings (0.98. 95% confidence interval, 0.70-1.39). We conclude that overdose rates among patients on COT were not decreased by risk stratification and monitoring initiatives. Results were inconsistent for COT dose reduction, with no significant difference between intervention and control settings (primary hypothesis test), but a significant decrease in overdose rates within the intervention setting during dose reduction (secondary hypothesis test). PERSPECTIVE: Risk stratification/monitoring interventions among patients on COT did not decrease opioid overdose rates. The effects of COT dose reduction on opioid overdose rates were inconsistent. Greater decreases in COT dose, a larger control group, or both may have been needed to identify conclusive reductions in opioid overdose rates.

Endogenous Opiates and Behavior: 2016

This paper is the thirty-ninth consecutive installment of the annual review of research concerning the endogenous opioid system. It summarizes papers published during 2016 that studied the behavioral effects of molecular, pharmacological and genetic manipulation of opioid peptides, opioid receptors, opioid agonists and opioid antagonists. The particular topics that continue to be covered include the molecular-biochemical effects and neurochemical localization studies of endogenous opioids and their receptors related to behavior, and the roles of these opioid peptides and receptors in pain and analgesia, stress and social status, tolerance and dependence, learning and memory, eating and drinking, drug abuse and alcohol, sexual activity and hormones, pregnancy, development and endocrinology, mental illness and mood, seizures and neurologic disorders, electrical-related activity and neurophysiology, general activity and locomotion, gastrointestinal, renal and hepatic functions, cardiovascular responses, respiration and thermoregulation, and immunological responses.

The impact of practice guidelines on opioid utilization for injured workers

BACKGROUND

Opioid use is rising in the US and may cause special problems in workers compensation cases, including addiction and preventing a return to work after an injury.

OBJECTIVE

This study evaluates a physician-level intervention to curb opioid usage. An insurer identified patients with out-of-guideline opioid utilization and called the prescribing physician to discuss the patient's treatment protocol.

RESEARCH DESIGN

This study uses a differences-in-differences study design with a propensity-score-matched control group. Medical and pharmaceutical claims data from 2005 to 2011 were used for analyses.

RESULTS

Following the intervention, the use of opioids increased for the intervention group and there is little impact on medical spending.

CONCLUSIONS

Counseling physicians about patients with high opioid utilization may focus more attention on their care, but did not impact short-term outcomes. More robust interventions may be needed to manage opioid use.

PERSPECTIVE

While the increasing use of opioids is of growing concern around the world, curbing the utilization of these powerfully addictive narcotics has proved elusive. This study examines a prescribing guidelines intervention designed to reduce the prescription of opioids following an injury. The study finds that there was little change in the opioid utilization after the intervention, suggesting interventions along other parts of the prescribing pathway may be needed.

Outcome-adaptive lasso: Variable selection for causal inference

Methodological advancements, including propensity score methods, have resulted in improved unbiased estimation of treatment effects from observational data. Traditionally, a "throw in the kitchen sink" approach has been used to select covariates for inclusion into the propensity score, but recent work shows including unnecessary covariates can impact both the bias and statistical efficiency of propensity score estimators. In particular, the inclusion of covariates that impact exposure but not the outcome, can inflate standard errors without improving bias, while the inclusion of covariates associated with the outcome but unrelated to exposure can improve precision. We propose the outcome-adaptive lasso for selecting appropriate covariates for inclusion in propensity score models to account for confounding bias and maintaining statistical efficiency. This proposed approach can perform variable selection in the presence of a large number of spurious covariates, that is, covariates unrelated to outcome or exposure. We present theoretical and simulation results indicating that the outcome-adaptive lasso selects the propensity score model that includes all true confounders and predictors of outcome, while excluding other covariates. We illustrate covariate selection using the outcome-adaptive lasso, including comparison to alternative approaches, using simulated data and in a survey of patients using opioid therapy to manage chronic pain.

Comparing Pain and Depressive Symptoms of Chronic Opioid Therapy Patients Receiving Dose Reduction and Risk Mitigation Initiatives With Usual Care

Dose reduction and risk mitigation initiatives have been recommended to reduce opioid-related risks among patients receiving chronic opioid therapy (COT), but questions remain over whether these initiatives worsen pain control and quality of life. In 2014 to 2015, we interviewed 1,588 adult COT patients within a health care system in Washington State and compared those who received dose reduction and risk mitigation initiatives in primary care clinics (intervention) with patients in comparable health care settings without initiatives (control). The primary outcomes were pain assessed using the pain, enjoyment, and general activity (PEG) scale, a 3-item scale to assess global pain intensity and interference, with secondary measures including depression (Patient Health Questionnaire-8 scale). Generalized estimating equations for linear regression models were used to estimate differences in mean scores between intervention and control sites. Estimated differences, adjusted for patient characteristics and weighted for nonresponse, between patients at intervention and control clinics were not clinically significant for the PEG (-.03, 95% confidence interval = -.25 to .19) or Patient Health Questionnaire-8 (-.64, 95% confidence interval = -1.19 to -.08). We found no evidence that COT patients in clinics with dose reduction and risk mitigation initiatives had clinically meaningful differences in pain intensity, interference with activities and enjoyment of life, or depressive symptoms compared with control health care settings.

PERSPECTIVE

This article evaluates the effect of dose reduction and risk mitigation initiatives, such as those recently recommended by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, to reduce risks associated with COT on global pain and interference, depressive symptoms, and perceived pain relief and bothersomeness of side effects.

Improving Adherence to Long-term Opioid Therapy Guidelines to Reduce Opioid Misuse in Primary Care: A Cluster-Randomized Clinical Trial

IMPORTANCE

Prescription opioid misuse is a national crisis. Few interventions have improved adherence to opioid-prescribing guidelines.

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether a multicomponent intervention, Transforming Opioid Prescribing in Primary Care (TOPCARE; http://mytopcare.org/), improves guideline adherence while decreasing opioid misuse risk.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

Cluster-randomized clinical trial among 53 primary care clinicians (PCCs) and their 985 patients receiving long-term opioid therapy for pain. The study was conducted from January 2014 to March 2016 in 4 safety-net primary care practices.

INTERVENTIONS

Intervention PCCs received nurse care management, an electronic registry, 1-on-1 academic detailing, and electronic decision tools for safe opioid prescribing. Control PCCs received electronic decision tools only.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Primary outcomes included documentation of guideline-concordant care (both a patient-PCC agreement in the electronic health record and at least 1 urine drug test [UDT]) over 12 months and 2 or more early opioid refills. Secondary outcomes included opioid dose reduction (ie, 10% decrease in morphine-equivalent daily dose [MEDD] at trial end) and opioid treatment discontinuation. Adjusted outcomes controlled for differing baseline patient characteristics: substance use diagnosis, mental health diagnoses, and language.

RESULTS

Of the 985 participating patients, 519 were men, and 466 were women (mean [SD] patient age, 54.7 [11.5] years). Patients received a mean (SD) MEDD of 57.8 (78.5) mg. At 1 year, intervention patients were more likely than controls to receive guideline-concordant care (65.9% vs 37.8%; P < .001; adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 6.0; 95% CI, 3.6-10.2), to have a patient-PCC agreement (of the 376 without an agreement at baseline, 53.8% vs 6.0%; P < .001; AOR, 11.9; 95% CI, 4.4-32.2), and to undergo at least 1 UDT (74.6% vs 57.9%; P < .001; AOR, 3.0; 95% CI, 1.8-5.0). There was no difference in odds of early refill receipt between groups (20.7% vs 20.1%; AOR, 1.1; 95% CI, 0.7-1.8). Intervention patients were more likely than controls to have either a 10% dose reduction or opioid treatment discontinuation (AOR, 1.6; 95% CI, 1.3-2.1; P < .001). In adjusted analyses, intervention patients had a mean (SE) MEDD 6.8 (1.6) mg lower than controls (P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

A multicomponent intervention improved guideline-concordant care but did not decrease early opioid refills.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01909076.

Impact of the Opioid Safety Initiative on opioid-related prescribing in veterans

The Veterans Health Administration (VHA) designed the Opioid Safety Initiative (OSI) to help decrease opioid prescribing practices associated with adverse outcomes. Key components included disseminating a dashboard tool that aggregates electronic medical record data to audit real-time opioid-related prescribing and identifying a clinical leader at each facility to implement the tool and promote safer prescribing. This study examines changes associated with OSI implementation in October 2013 among all adult VHA patients who filled outpatient opioid prescriptions. Interrupted time series analyses controlled for baseline trends and examined data from October 2012 to September 2014 to determine the changes after OSI implementation in prescribing of high-dosage opioid regimens (total daily dosages >100 morphine equivalents [MEQ] and >200 MEQ) and concurrent benzodiazepines. Across VHA facilities nationwide, there was a decreasing trend in high-dosage opioid prescribing with 55,722 patients receiving daily opioid dosages >100 MEQ in October 2012, which decreased to 46,780 in September 2014 (16% reduction). The OSI was associated with an additional decrease, compared to pre-OSI trends, of 331 patients per month (95% confidence interval [CI] -378 to -284) receiving opioids >100 MEQ, a decrease of 164 patients per month (95% CI -186 to -142) receiving opioids >200 MEQ, and a decrease of 781 patients per month (95% CI -969 to -593) receiving concurrent benzodiazepines. Implementation of a national health care system-wide initiative was associated with reductions in outpatient prescribing of risky opioid regimens. These findings provide evidence for the potential utility of large-scale interventions to promote safer opioid prescribing.

A longitudinal study of depression among middle-aged and senior patients initiating chronic opioid therapy

BACKGROUND

Improved understanding how depressive symptoms change with sustained opioid use is needed.

METHODS

We prospectively assessed patients 45 years or older initiating chronic opioid therapy (COT) at baseline and at 4 and 12 months, differentiating recent COT initiators (n=748) and continuing users (n=468). Level of opioid use before 12-month follow-up was classified as regular/higher-dose, intermittent/lower-dose, or minimal/no use. Depressive symptoms were assessed using the Patient Health Questionnaire-8 (PHQ-8).

RESULTS

Depressive symptoms decreased, on average, from baseline to 12 months regardless of level of opioid use. COT patients with regular/higher-dose compared to those with intermittent/lower-dose opioid use (who had similar pain outcomes) did not differ in PHQ-8 scores at 12 months (adjusted mean difference -0.14, 95% CI, -1.07, 0.78 for COT initiators). At 12 months, COT patients with intermittent/lower-dose use had higher adjusted PHQ-8 scores than did those with minimal/no opioid use (adjusted mean difference 0.77, 95% CI, 0.03-1.52 for COT initiators). However, 77% of patients who discontinued opioids cited improved pain as a reason for discontinuation, while 21% cited negative emotional effects of opioids as a reason for discontinuation. Discontinuation was more common among persons who, at baseline, attributed 3 or more depressive symptoms to opioid use.

LIMITATIONS

Results are relevant to older COT patients receiving low to moderate opioid doses.

CONCLUSIONS

Depressive symptoms did not increase with sustained opioid use. Depressive symptoms were not higher with regular/higher-dose compared to intermittent/lower-dose use. Persons who perceived negative effects of opioids on emotions more often discontinued their use.

Primary Care Clinic Re-Design for Prescription Opioid Management

BACKGROUND

The challenge of responding to prescription opioid overuse within the United States has fallen disproportionately on the primary care clinic setting. Here we describe a framework comprised of 6 Building Blocks to guide efforts within this setting to address the use of opioids for chronic pain.

METHODS

Investigators conducted site visits to thirty primary care clinics across the United States selected for their use of team-based workforce innovations. Site visits included interviews with leadership, clinic tours, observations of clinic processes and team meetings, and interviews with staff and clinicians. Data were reviewed to identify common attributes of clinic system changes around chronic opioid therapy (COT) management. These concepts were reviewed to develop narrative descriptions of key components of changes made to improve COT use.

RESULTS

Twenty of the thirty sites had addressed improvements in COT prescribing. Across these sites a common set of 6 Building Blocks were identified: 1) providing leadership support; 2) revising and aligning clinic policies, patient agreements (contracts) and workflows; 3) implementing a registry tracking system; 4) conducting planned, patient-centered visits; 5) identifying resources for complex patients; and 6) measuring progress toward achieving clinic objectives. Common components of clinic policies, patient agreements and data tracked in registries to assess progress are described.

CONCLUSIONS

In response to prescription opioid overuse and the resulting epidemic of overdose and addiction, primary care clinics are making improvements driven by a common set of best practices that address complex challenges of managing COT patients in primary care settings.