Systematic review to determine which validated measurement tools can be used to assess risk of problematic analgesic use in patients with chronic pain

Identifying provider, patient and practice factors that shape long-term opioid prescribing for cancer pain: a qualitative study of American and Australian providers

INTRODUCTION

Prescribing long-term opioid therapy is a nuanced clinical decision requiring careful consideration of risks versus benefits. Our goal is to understand patient, provider and context factors that impact the decision to prescribe opioids in patients with cancer.

METHODS

We conducted a secondary analysis of the raw semistructured interview data gathered from 42 prescribers who participated in one of two aligned concurrent qualitative studies in the USA and Australia. We conducted a two-part analysis of the interview: first identifying all factors influencing long-term prescribing and second open coding-related content for themes.

RESULTS

Factors that influence long-term opioid prescribing for cancer-related pain clustered under three key domains (patient-related, provider-related and practice-related factors) each with several themes. Domain 1: Patient factors related to provider-patient continuity, patient personality, the patient's social context and patient characteristics including racial/ethnic identity, housing and socioeconomic status. Domain 2: Provider-related factors centred around provider 'personal experience and expertise', training and time availability. Domain 3: Practice-related factors included healthcare interventions to promote safer opioid practices and accessibility of quality alternative pain therapies.

CONCLUSION

Despite the differences in the contexts of the two countries, providers consider similar patient, provider and practice-related factors when long-term prescribing opioids for patients with cancer. Some of these factors may be categorised as cognitive biases that may intersect in an already disadvantaged patient and exacerbate disparities in the treatment of their pain. A more systematic understanding of these factors and how they impact the quality of care can inform appropriate interventions.

Assessing Opioid Abuse in Chronic Pain Patients: Further Validation of the Prescription Opioid Misuse Index (POMI) Using Item Response Theory

Due the limitations of the previous validations, the purpose of this study was to further validate the Prescription Opioid Misuse Index (POMI) in a larger sample of chronic non-cancer pain (CNCP) patients and to examine differential item functioning (DIF) across sex. Participants (n=225 CNCP patients under long-term opioid therapy) completed patient characteristics, self-reported POMI and DSM-5 prescription opioid use disorder measurements. Reliability and factor structure were assessed using both item response theory and classical test theory. ROC curve analysis was used to establish the optimum cut-off score for detecting the presence of DSM-5 prescription opioid-use disorder. Concurrent validity was also tested. The POMI showed a unidimensional factor structure and acceptable internal consistency (ωcat =0.62). DIF analysis showed that males and females respond similarly to each item of the POMI, supporting unbiased measurement of the latent trait across both groups. A cut-off point of 2 is suggested in order to maximize the accuracy of the instrument as a first-screening tool for opioid misuse (AUC=0.78; p<0.001; CI 95%: 0.72–0.85). Concurrent validity of the POMI was high with DSM-5 moderate to severe opioid-use disorder criteria (OR=7.824, p<0.001). These results indicate that the POMI is a valid and clinically feasible screening instrument for detecting CNCP patients who misuse opioid medications. The short length of the scale could meet the needs of clinical practice as it allows clinicians to precisely identify and monitor prescription opioid misuse in both male and female patients.

U-PAIN cohort study among patients with chronic pain in specialised pain care: a feasibility study

OBJECTIVES

To examine acceptability of study participation and feasibility of (1) recruitment, (2) data collection and (3) outcome measures for the prospective U-PAIN cohort.

DESIGN

Internal feasibility study of a prospective cohort.

PARTICIPANTS AND SETTING

64 patients, >18 years, with chronic pain at a multidisciplinary pain centre at a university hospital in Sweden.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Acceptability of study participation was measured with a study-specific 10-item Likert scale. A score <3 was considered feasible, for the two items that assessed respondent burden a higher score indicated lesser participant burden and a score >3 was feasible. Recruitment was assessed by participation rates at baseline and retention at the 1-year follow-up, with threshold values for feasibility at 75% and 80%, respectively. Data collection and outcome measures were examined by completions rates of study procedures (90% was considered feasible), sample scores, internal consistency (α>0.70 was considered feasible), and agreement between self-reported data and data retrieved from medical records on opioid use (ICC or κ>0.60 was considered feasible).

RESULTS

Acceptability for study procedures was feasible, but participation rates were low: 25%. The retention rate at 1-year follow-up was 81% for those included in the feasibility study, that is, filling out computerised patient-reported outcome measures, and 65% for those using paper and pencil format. The completion rates for the different data collection methods ranged from 83% to 95%. Agreement between self-reported opioid use and prescribed dose and between opioid use disorder according to Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition (DSM-5), and clinical International Classification of Diseases-10 (ICD-10) diagnoses for opioid dependence were almost perfect (κ=0.91 and κ=0.90, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

This feasibility study has helped to explore and improve methods for recruitment, data collection and use of outcome measures for the U-PAIN cohort. Low participation rate and high refusal rate at baseline is a challenge that needs to be further addressed.

Mindfulness-induced endogenous theta stimulation occasions self-transcendence and inhibits addictive behavior

Self-regulation is instantiated by theta oscillations (4 to 8 Hz) in neurons of frontal midline brain regions. Frontal midline theta (FMΘ) is inversely associated with default mode network (DMN) activation, which subserves self-referential processing. Addiction involves impaired self-regulation and DMN dysfunction. Mindfulness is an efficacious self-regulatory practice for treating addiction, but little is known about the mechanisms by which mindfulness reduces addictive behavior. In this mechanistic study of long-term opioid users (N = 165), we assessed meditation-induced FMΘ as a mediator of changes in opioid misuse. Relative to a supportive psychotherapy control, participants treated with Mindfulness-Oriented Recovery Enhancement (MORE) exhibited increased FMΘ during a laboratory-based meditation session. FMΘ during meditation was associated with self-transcendent experiences characterized by ego dissolution, nondual awareness, and bliss. MORE's effects on decreasing opioid misuse were mediated by increased FMΘ. Given the role of aberrant self-referential processing in addiction, mindfulness-induced endogenous theta stimulation might "reset" DMN dysfunction to inhibit addictive behavior.

Identifying the risk of opioid misuse in a chronic pain population: the utility of the MMPI-2-RF personality psychopathology five (PSY-5-RF) and higher-order scales

Prescription-related opioid misuse, especially in chronic pain populations, is an ongoing problem and is related to increased mortality. The purpose of this study was to assess the utility of two restructured scales of the MMPI-2-RF: the Personality Psychopathology Five (PSY-5-RF) and the Higher-Order Scales to determine which of their subscales may be beneficial for identifying the risk of opioid misuse in a chronic pain population. A sample of 136 patients with chronic disabling occupational musculoskeletal disorders completed the MMPI-2-RF and the Current Opioid Misuse Measure (COMM) upon admission to a functional restoration program. The PSY-5-RF and H-O subscales were correlated with the baseline COMM scores. Correlation analyses, ROC curve analyses, and multiple binary logistic regression models were developed to determine which subscales were most associated with elevated COMM scores. The results of the regression analyses suggest that Scale elevations on two of the PSY-5-RF Scales and two Higher-Order Scales of the MMPI-2-RF demonstrated significant associations with elevated COMM scores, thus exhibiting the utility of these subscales in identifying the risk of opioid misuse among chronic pain patients. These findings are clinically meaningful in underscoring the importance of identifying specific personality traits as potential predictors of opioid misuse, and identifying those at risk through careful screening. Clinical implications based on each of the PSY-5-RF and H-O scales significantly associated with elevated COMM scores are discussed.

Mindfulness-Oriented Recovery Enhancement vs Supportive Group Therapy for Co-occurring Opioid Misuse and Chronic Pain in Primary Care: A Randomized Clinical Trial

IMPORTANCE

Successful treatment of opioid misuse among people with chronic pain has proven elusive. Guidelines recommend nonopioid therapies, but the efficacy of mindfulness-based interventions for opioid misuse is uncertain.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the efficacy of Mindfulness-Oriented Recovery Enhancement (MORE) for the reduction of opioid misuse and chronic pain.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This interviewer-blinded randomized clinical trial enrolled patients from primary care clinics in Utah between January 4, 2016, and January 16, 2020. The study included 250 adults with chronic pain receiving long-term opioid therapy who were misusing opioid medications.

INTERVENTIONS

Treatment with MORE (comprising training in mindfulness, reappraisal, and savoring positive experiences) or supportive group psychotherapy (control condition) across 8 weekly 2-hour group sessions.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Primary outcomes were (1) opioid misuse assessed by the Drug Misuse Index (self-report, interview, and urine screen) and (2) pain severity and pain-related functional interference, assessed by subscale scores on the Brief Pain Inventory through 9 months of follow-up. Secondary outcomes were opioid dose, emotional distress, and ecological momentary assessments of opioid craving. The minimum intervention dose was defined as 4 or more completed sessions of MORE or supportive group psychotherapy.

RESULTS

Among 250 participants (159 women [63.6%]; mean [SD] age, 51.8 [11.9] years), 129 were randomized to the MORE group and 121 to the supportive psychotherapy group. Overall, 17 participants (6.8%) were Hispanic or Latino, 218 (87.2%) were White, and 15 (6.0%) were of other races and/or ethnicities (2 American Indian, 3 Asian, 1 Black, 2 Pacific Islander, and 7 did not specify). At baseline, the mean duration of pain was 14.7 years (range, 1-60 years), and the mean (SD) morphine-equivalent opioid dose was 101.0 (266.3) mg (IQR, 16.0-90.0 mg). A total of 203 participants (81.2%) received the minimum intervention dose (mean [SD], 5.7 [2.2] sessions); at 9 months, 92 of 250 participants (36.8%) discontinued the study. The overall odds ratio for reduction in opioid misuse through the 9-month follow-up period in the MORE group compared with the supportive psychotherapy group was 2.06 (95% CI, 1.17-3.61; P = .01). At 9 months, 36 of 80 participants (45.0%) in the MORE group were no longer misusing opioids compared with 19 of 78 participants (24.4%) in the supportive psychotherapy group. Mixed models demonstrated that MORE was superior to supportive psychotherapy through 9 months of follow-up for pain severity (between-group effect: 0.49; 95% CI, 0.17-0.81; P = .003) and pain-related functional interference (between-group effect: 1.07; 95% CI, 0.64-1.50; P < .001). Participants in the MORE group reduced their opioid dose to a greater extent than those in the supportive psychotherapy group. The MORE group also had lower emotional distress and opioid craving.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

In this randomized clinical trial, among adult participants in a primary care setting, the MORE intervention led to sustained improvements in opioid misuse and chronic pain symptoms and reductions in opioid dosing, emotional distress, and opioid craving compared with supportive group psychotherapy. Despite attrition caused by the COVID-19 pandemic and the vulnerability of the sample, MORE appeared to be efficacious for reducing opioid misuse among adults with chronic pain.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02602535.

Risk for opioid misuse in chronic pain patients is associated with endogenous opioid system dysregulation

µ-Opioid receptors (MOR) are a major target of endogenous and exogenous opioids, including opioid pain medications. The µ-opioid neurotransmitter system is heavily implicated in the pathophysiology of chronic pain and opioid use disorder and, as such, central measures of µ-opioid system functioning are increasingly being considered as putative biomarkers for risk to misuse opioids. To explore the relationship between MOR system function and risk for opioid misuse, 28 subjects with chronic nonspecific back pain completed a clinically validated measure of opioid misuse risk, the Pain Medication Questionnaire (PMQ), and were subsequently separated into high (PMQ > 21) and low (PMQ ≤ 21) opioid misuse risk groups. Chronic pain patients along with 15 control participants underwent two separate [¹¹C]-carfentanil positron emission tomography scans to explore MOR functional measures: one at baseline and one during a sustained pain-stress challenge, with the difference between the two providing an indirect measure of stress-induced endogenous opioid release. We found that chronic pain participants at high risk for opioid misuse displayed higher baseline MOR availability within the right amygdala relative to those at low risk. By contrast, patients at low risk for opioid misuse showed less pain-induced activation of MOR-mediated, endogenous opioid neurotransmission in the nucleus accumbens. This study links human in vivo MOR system functional measures to the development of addictive disorders and provides novel evidence that MORs and µ-opioid system responsivity may underlie risk to misuse opioids among chronic pain patients.

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.

NIH's Helping to End Addiction Long-termSM Initiative (NIH HEAL Initiative) Clinical Pain Management Common Data Element Program

The Helping to End Addiction Long-term Initiative (NIH HEAL Initiative) is an aggressive trans-NIH effort to speed solutions to stem the national opioid public health crisis, including through improved pain management. Toward this end, the NIH HEAL Initiative launched a common data element (CDE) program to ensure that NIH-funded clinical pain research studies would collect data in a standardized way. NIH HEAL Initiative staff launched a process to determine which pain-related core domains should be assessed by every clinical pain study and what questionnaires are required to ensure that the data is collected uniformly. The process involved multiple literature reviews, and consultation with experts inside and outside of NIH and the investigators conducting studies funded by the initiative. Ultimately, 9 core pain domains, and questionnaires to measure them, were chosen for studies examining acute pain and chronic pain in adults and pediatric populations. These were augmented with dozens of study-specific supplemental questionnaires to enable uniform data collection methods of outcomes outside of the core domains. The selection of core domains will ensure that valuable clinical pain data generated by the initiative is standardized, useable for secondary data analysis, and useful for guiding future research, clinical practice decisions, and policymaking. PERSPECTIVE: The NIH HEAL Initiative launched a common data element program to ensure that NIH-funded clinical pain research studies would collect data in a standardized way. Nine core pain domains and questionnaires to measure them were chosen for studies examining acute pain and chronic pain in adults and pediatric populations.

Clinical Practice Guideline: Opioid Prescribing for Analgesia After Common Otolaryngology Operations

OBJECTIVE

Opioid use disorder (OUD), which includes the morbidity of dependence and mortality of overdose, has reached epidemic proportions in the United States. Overprescription of opioids can lead to chronic use and misuse, and unused narcotics after surgery can lead to their diversion. Research supports that most patients do not take all the prescribed opioids after surgery and that surgeons are the second largest prescribers of opioids in the United States. The introduction of opioids in those with OUD often begins with prescription opioids. Reducing the number of extra opioids available after surgery through smaller prescriptions, safe storage, and disposal should reduce the risk of opioid use disorder in otolaryngology patients and their families.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this specialty-specific guideline is to identify quality improvement opportunities in postoperative pain management of common otolaryngologic surgical procedures. These opportunities are communicated through clear actionable statements with explanation of the support in the literature, evaluation of the quality of the evidence, and recommendations on implementation. Employing these action statements should reduce the variation in care across the specialty and improve postoperative pain control while reducing risk of OUD. The target patients for the guideline are any patients treated for anticipated or reported pain within the first 30 days after undergoing common otolaryngologic procedures. The target audience of the guideline is otolaryngologists who perform surgery and clinicians who manage pain after surgical procedures. Outcomes to be considered include whether the patient has stopped using opioids, has disposed of unused opioids, and was satisfied with the pain management plan.The guideline addresses assessment of the patient for OUD risk factors, counseling on pain expectations, and identifying factors that can affect pain duration and/or severity. It also discusses the use of multimodal analgesia as first-line treatment and the responsible use of opioids. Last, safe disposal of unused opioids is discussed.This guideline is intended to focus on evidence-based quality improvement opportunities judged most important by the guideline development group. It is not a comprehensive guide on pain management in otolaryngologic procedures. The statements in this guideline are not intended to limit or restrict care provided by clinicians based on their experiences and assessments of individual patients.

ACTION STATEMENTS

The guideline development group made strong recommendations for the following key action statements: (3A) prior to surgery, clinicians should identify risk factors for opioid use disorder when analgesia using opioids is anticipated; (6) clinicians should advocate for nonopioid medications as first-line management of pain after otolaryngologic surgery; (9) clinicians should recommend that patients (or their caregivers) store prescribed opioids securely and dispose of unused opioids through take-back programs or another accepted method.The guideline development group made recommendations for the following key action statements: (1) prior to surgery, clinicians should advise patients and others involved in the postoperative care about the expected duration and severity of pain; (2) prior to surgery, clinicians should gather information specific to the patient that modifies severity and/or duration of pain; (3B) in patients at risk for OUD, clinicians should evaluate the need to modify the analgesia plan; (4) clinicians should promote shared decision making by informing patients of the benefits and risks of postoperative pain treatments that include nonopioid analgesics, opioid analgesics, and nonpharmacologic interventions; (5) clinicians should develop a multimodal treatment plan for managing postoperative pain; (7) when treating postoperative pain with opioids, clinicians should limit therapy to the lowest effective dose and the shortest duration; (8A) clinicians should instruct patients and caregivers how to communicate if pain is not controlled or if medication side effects occur; (8B) clinicians should educate patients to stop opioids when pain is controlled with nonopioids and stop all analgesics when pain has resolved; (10) clinicians should inquire, within 30 days of surgery, whether the patient has stopped using opioids, has disposed of unused opioids, and was satisfied with the pain management plan.

Improving Outpatient Management of Patients On Chronic Opioid Therapy

Managing patients with chronic pain on chronic opioid therapy (COT) can be challenging if done mainly by an individual clinician. A stepwise, systematic approach to managing patients on COT includes centering the discussion around safety for the patient. Treatment agreements and monitoring plans are important to safe prescribing. With a team-based care approach programs can be implemented, which optimize the benefits of opioid therapy and mitigate the risk. In these settings COT can be prescribed adhering to current guidelines in order to help achieve pain management, optimize function, and advance the patients' quality of life goals.

Identification of a sex-stratified genetic algorithm for opioid addiction risk

The opioid epidemic has had a devastating impact on our country, with wide-ranging effects on healthcare, corrections, employment, and social systems. Programs have been put in place for monitoring prescriptions, initiating and expanding medications for opioid use disorder, and harm reduction (i.e., naloxone distribution, needle exchanges). However, opportunities for personalization of opioid therapy based on addiction risk have been limited. The goal of the present study was to develop an objective risk assessment algorithm based on genetic markers that are correlated with opioid use disorder (OUD). A total of 180 single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) were tested in patients with and without OUD. SNPs selected for testing were associated with opioid metabolism and drug reward pathways based on previous studies. Of the 394 patients recruited, 200 had OUD and 194 served as controls without OUD but with prior opioid exposure. Logistic regression analyses stratified by sex identified ten unique SNPs in females and nine unique SNPs in males that were significantly associated with OUD. A Genetics Opioid Risk Score (GenORs) was calculated by counting the number of OUD risk-associated SNPs/genotypes for each patient. To evaluate the discrimination of the GenORs, a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve for each sex was generated and determined to be sensitive and specific. This represents the first published example of a sex-based genetic risk score with potential to predict OUD, and the first OUD algorithm to include opioid-associated pharmacokinetic genes.

Pain Catastrophizing, Opioid Misuse, Opioid Use, and Opioid Dose in People With Chronic Musculoskeletal Pain: A Systematic Review

The objective of this study was to analyze the cross-sectional and longitudinal association between pain catastrophizing and opioid misuse, opioid use, and opioid dose in people with chronic musculoskeletal pain. For this systematic review, CINAHL, Embase, PsycINFO, PubMed, manual searches, and grey literature were searched from inception to May 2020. Observational studies were included if they evaluated the association between pain catastrophizing and opioid dose, opioid use, and/or opioid misuse in people with chronic musculoskeletal pain. Two reviewers independently performed the study selection, data extraction, risk of bias assessment, and the certainty of the evidence judgment. Seven observational studies (all cross-sectional designs) satisfied the eligibility criteria, with a total sample of 2,160 participants. Pain catastrophizing was associated with opioid misuse. The results were inconsistent regarding the association between pain catastrophizing and opioid use. A lack of association was found considering pain catastrophizing and the opioid dose. However, the presence of risk of bias and imprecision was serious across the included studies, and therefore, the overall certainty of the evidence was judged as very low for all the outcome measures. This report concludes that pain catastrophizing seem to be associated with opioid misuse in people with chronic musculoskeletal pain. However, the very low certainty of the current evidence confers to interpret the finding of this review as exclusively informative. PERSPECTIVE: This article shows that pain catastrophizing seem to be associated with opioid misuse in people with chronic musculoskeletal pain. The overall certainty of the evidence was judged to be very low, thus, these results should be interpreted with caution.

How to Measure Pain

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Pain is a multi-faceted symptom. Effective pain assessment involves properly defining the pain syndrome, utilizing various assessment tools, and recognizing different conditions which may affect the expression and the management of pain.

RECENT FINDINGS

Pain results from multiple physical and psychosocial etiological interplay. It has traditionally been categorized as acute or chronic with chronic pain having been categorized further into 6 categories in ICD 11. At the same time, the opioid epidemic and the recent surge in cannabis popularity further complicates pain assessment and effective pain management. Adequate management of pain begins with proper assessment including conducting extensive medical and psychosocial history and physical examination, and utilizing various pain and substance risk assessment tools. An interdisciplinary team approach may be more effective in managing complex pain behaviors compared to a solo approach.

Prescription opioid misuse and its correlates among veterans and military in the United States: A systematic literature review

BACKGROUND

Prescription opioid misuse (POM) has become a critical public health issue in the United States (US), with veteran and military population being especially vulnerable to POM. However, limited behavioral interventions have been developed for veterans and military to reduce POM risk due to the lack of an adequate understanding of POM andrelated factors among veterans and military. The current study aims to review and synthesize empirical findings regarding POM and its correlates among US veterans and military.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review of 17 empirical studies (16 quantitative studies and one qualitative study) from 1980 to 2019 that reported POM statistics (e.g., prevalence) and examined correlates of POM in veterans and military.

RESULTS

The prevalence of POM in veterans and military ranged from 6.9%-77.9% varying by study samples, individual POM behaviors, and recalled time periods. Several factors were identified to be associated with POM in veterans and military. These factors included socio-demographic factors (age, race/ethnicity, education, relationship status, and military status), pain-related factors (pain symptoms, severity, interference, and cognitions), other physical factors (e.g., common illness), opioid-medication-related factors (receipt of opioid medications and quantity of opioid medications), behavioral factors (substance use disorder, alcohol use, cigarette use, and other prescription drug use), and psychological factors (psychiatric symptoms and cognitive factors).

CONCLUSIONS

POM was prevalent in veterans and military and could be potentially influenced by multiple psycho-behavioral factors. Future research guided by a theoretical framework is warranted to examine psycho-behavioral influences on POM and their mechanisms and to inform effective psychosocial POM interventions in veterans and military.

Many Opportunities to Record, Diagnose, or Treat Injection Drug-related Infections Are Missed: A Population-based Cohort Study of Inpatient and Emergency Department Settings

BACKGROUND

Injection drug use (IDU) and IDU-related infections have increased dramatically. However, the incidence of IDU-related infections may be underreported because drug use is not recorded in diagnostic records where associated infections are identified. Our goal was to estimate a more accurate incidence of IDU-related infections by including IDU-related infections not recorded at the time infections are diagnosed.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective cohort study using inpatient and emergency department visits from the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project for California, Florida, and New York. We identified all patients diagnosed with bacteremia or sepsis, endocarditis, osteomyelitis or septic arthritis, and skin or soft tissue infection. We estimated the incidence of IDU-related infections by identifying cases where drug use was recorded at the time of an infection and cases where drug use was not recorded at the time of infection but within 6 months before or after the infection diagnosis. We also analyzed factors associated with unrecorded IDU.

RESULTS

There has been an increasing trend in the number of IDU-related infections. The annual number of IDU-related infections increased between 105% and 218% after incorporating infections in which drug use was unrecorded. Factors associated with drug use being unrecorded included emergency department diagnosis, the level of hospital experience treating drug use, age <18 years, and having Medicare as the primary payer.

CONCLUSIONS

More than half of all IDU-related infections may be unrecorded in existing surveillance estimates. There may be many missed opportunities to record, diagnose, or treat underlying drug abuse among patients presenting with IDU-related infections.

Consensus Statement for the Prescription of Pain Medication at Discharge after Elective Adult Surgery

This Consensus Statement provides recommendations on the prescription of pain medication at discharge from hospital for opioid-naïve adult patients who undergo elective surgery. It encourages health care providers (surgeons, anesthesiologists, nurses/nurse practitioners, pain teams, pharmacists, allied health professionals, and trainees) to (1) use nonopioid therapies and reduce the prescription of opioids so that fewer opioid pills are available for diversion and (2) educate patients and their families/caregivers about pain management options after surgery to optimize quality of care for postoperative pain. These recommendations apply to opioid-naïve adult patients who undergo elective surgery. This consensus statement is intended for use by health care providers involved in the management and care of surgical patients. A modified Delphi process was used to reach consensus on the recommendations. First, the authors conducted a scoping review of the literature to determine current best practices and existing guidelines. From the available literature and expertise of the authors, a draft list of recommendations was created. Second, the authors asked key stakeholders to review and provide feedback on several drafts of the document and attend an in-person consensus meeting. The modified Delphi stakeholder group included surgeons, anesthesiologists, residents, fellows, nurses, pharmacists, and patients. After multiple iterations, the document was deemed complete. The recommendations are not graded because they are mostly based on consensus rather than evidence.

French-Canadian translation of a self-report questionnaire to monitor opioid therapy for chronic pain: The Opioid Compliance Checklist (OCC-FC)

Context: Chronic noncancer pain (CNCP) is a frequent condition among Canadians. The psychosocial and economic costs of CNCP for individuals, their families, and society are substantial. Though opioid therapy is often used to manage CNCP, it is also associated with risks of misuse. The Opioid Compliance Checklist (OCC) was developed to monitor opioid misuse in patients taking opioids for CNCP. The objective of the present study was to provide a French-Canadian translation of the eight-item OCC, the OCC-FC. Methods: The eight-item OCC was translated for use in Québec using published guidelines for the translation and adaptation of self-report measures, including an expert committee and a double forward-backward translation process. A pretest of the adapted eight-item OCC was also conducted among 30 patients with CNCP. Results: A French-Canadian version of the OCC was generated. When ambiguity in the items was detected during expert committee consultation or pretest administration, modifications made were kept to a strict minimum to facilitate future comparisons across studies using the original English and translated French-Canadian version. Discussion: This study provides a culturally adapted tool that will contribute to identifying French-Canadian patients with CNCP who misuse opioids over the course of opioid therapy. This translation of the OCC has the strong potential to be useful in research and clinical settings.

Correlates of indicators of potential extra-medical opioid use in people prescribed opioids for chronic non-cancer pain

INTRODUCTION AND AIMS

The opioid-related behaviours in treatment (ORBIT) scale are a measure of recent indicators of potential extra-medical opioid use. Indicators of potential extra-medical opioid use are divergent practices among people prescribed opioids that may place them at risk of harm. This study aimed to examine the correlates of indicators of potential extra-medical opioid use in people prescribed opioids for chronic non-cancer pain (CNCP).

DESIGN AND METHODS

The Pain and Opioids IN Treatment (POINT) study is a prospective cohort study of people prescribed opioids for CNCP in Australia. People prescribed opioids solely for opioid dependence were excluded. This cross-sectional study utilised logistic regression to determine the characteristics associated with reporting any indicators of potential extra-medical opioid use.

RESULTS

Of the 1505 participants, 38% reported at least one indicator of potential extra-medical opioid use, most commonly asking for an increase in prescribed opioid dose (21%) and early prescription renewal (12%). Indicators of potential extra-medical opioid use were associated with younger age (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] = 0.98; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.92, 0.99), male sex (AOR = 1.53; 95% CI = 1.15, 2.04), lifetime pharmaceutical opioid use disorder (AOR = 1.87; 95% CI = 1.31, 2.66) and lifetime illicit drug use disorder (AOR = 1.72; 95% CI = 1.18, 2.52).

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS

Over one-third of the POINT cohort reported one or more indicators of potential extra-medical opioid use. Lifetime substance use disorders were associated these divergent practices, highlighting the importance of clinical monitoring and patient education for this patient group. Longitudinal studies are needed to investigate whether indicators of potential extra-medical opioid use predict opioid use disorders in this population.

Balancing opioid analgesia with the risk of nonmedical opioid use in patients with cancer

The current opioid crisis has brought renewed attention and scrutiny to opioid prescriptions. When patients receiving opioid therapy for pain engage in nonmedical opioid use (NMOU) or diversion, untoward consequences can occur. New evidence suggests that patients with cancer might be at a higher risk of NMOU than was previously thought, but clinical evidence still supports the use of opioid analgesics as the gold standard to treat cancer-related pain, creating a dilemma in patient management. Clinicians are encouraged to adopt a universal precautions approach to patients with cancer receiving opioids, which includes screening all patients; discussing the risks, benefits, adverse effects and alternatives of opioid therapy; and providing education on safe use, storage and disposal. Use of urine drug tests, prescription drug monitoring programmes and close observation of behaviours related to opioid use help to ensure treatment adherence, detect NMOU and support therapeutic decision-making. These measures can optimize the risk-benefit ratio while supporting safe opioid use. In this Review, we examine the role of opioids in cancer pain, the risk of substance use disorder and methods to achieve the right balance between the two in order to ensure safe opioid use.

The prescription opioid crisis: role of the anaesthesiologist in reducing opioid use and misuse

Reports of strategies to prevent and treat the opioid epidemic are growing. Significant attention has been paid to the benefits of opioid addiction research, clinical prescribing, and public policy initiatives in curbing the epidemic. However, the role of the anaesthesiologist in minimising opioid use and misuse remains underexplored. For many patients with an opioid use disorder, the perioperative period represents the source of initial exposure. As perioperative physicians, anaesthesiologists are in the unique position to manage pain effectively while simultaneously decreasing opioid consumption. Multiple opportunities exist for anaesthesiologists to minimise opioid exposure and prevent subsequent persistent opioid use. We present a global strategy for decreasing perioperative opioid use and misuse among surgical patients. A historical perspective of the opioid epidemic is presented, together with an analysis of opioid supply and demand forces. We then present specific temporal strategies for opioid use reduction in the perioperative period. We emphasise the importance of preoperative identification of patients at risk for long-term opioid use and misuse, review the evidence supporting the opioid sparing capacity of individual multimodal analgesic agents, and discuss the benefits of regional anaesthesia for minimising opioid consumption. We describe postoperative and post-discharge tools, including effective multimodal analgesia and the role of a transitional pain service. Finally, we offer general institutional strategies that can be led by anaesthesiologists, identify gaps in knowledge, and offer directions for future research.

Strategies to Identify Patient Risks of Prescription Opioid Addiction When Initiating Opioids for Pain: A Systematic Review

Importance

Although prescription opioid use disorder is associated with substantial harms, strategies to identify patients with pain among whom prescription opioids can be safely prescribed have not been systematically reviewed.

Objective

To review the evidence examining factors associated with opioid addiction and screening tools for identifying adult patients at high vs low risk of developing symptoms of prescription opioid addiction when initiating prescription opioids for pain.

Data Sources

MEDLINE and Embase (January 1946 to November 2018) were searched for articles investigating risks of prescription opioid addiction.

Study Selection

Original studies that were included compared symptoms, signs, risk factors, and screening tools among patients who developed prescription opioid addiction and those who did not.

Data Extraction and Synthesis

Two investigators independently assessed quality to exclude biased or unreliable study designs and extracted data from higher quality studies. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (PRISMA-DTA) reporting guideline was followed.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Likelihood ratios (LRs) for risk factors and screening tools were calculated.

Results

Of 1287 identified studies, 6 high-quality studies were included in the qualitative synthesis and 4 were included in the quantitative synthesis. The 4 high-quality studies included in the quantitative synthesis were all retrospective studies including a total of 2 888 346 patients with 4470 cases that met the authors' definitions of prescription opioid addiction. A history of opioid use disorder (LR range, 17-22) or other substance use disorder (LR range, 4.2-17), certain mental health diagnoses (eg, personality disorder: LR, 27; 95% CI, 18-41), and concomitant prescription of certain psychiatric medications (eg, atypical antipsychotics: LR, 17; 95% CI, 15-18) appeared useful for identifying patients at high risk of opioid addiction. Among individual findings, only the absence of a mood disorder (negative LR, 0.50; 95% CI, 0.45-0.52) was associated with a lower risk of opioid addiction. Despite their widespread use, most screening tools involving combinations of questions were based on low-quality studies or, when diagnostic performance was assessed among high-quality studies, demonstrated poor performance in helping to identify patients at high vs low risk.

Conclusions and Relevance

While a history of substance use disorder, certain mental health diagnoses, and concomitant prescription of certain psychiatric medications appeared useful for identifying patients at higher risk, few quality studies were available and no symptoms, signs, or screening tools were particularly useful for identifying those at lower risk.

Opioid Prescribing in an Opioid Crisis: What Basic Skills Should an Oncologist Have Regarding Opioid Therapy?

OPINION STATEMENT

Although clinical evidence supports the use of opioids for cancer-related pain, doing so amidst the current opioid crisis remains a challenge. A proportion of opioid-related deaths in the USA are attributable to prescription opioids, which implicates health care providers as one of the major contributors. It is therefore even more important now for all clinicians to follow safe and effective opioid prescribing practices. Oncologists are often in the frontline of cancer pain management. They are encouraged to use validated tools to screen all patients receiving opioids for high risk behaviors. Those identified as high risk for potential abuse of opioids should be monitored closely. When aberrant behavior is detected, the clinician will need to openly discuss the issue and its possible implications. Oncologists may then implement measures such as limiting the dose and quantity of opioids prescribed, shortening interval between follow-ups for refills to allow for increased monitoring, setting boundaries/limitations, weaning off opioid analgesics, or/and referring to a pain or palliative medicine or drug addiction expert for co-management when necessary. These efforts may aid oncologists in safely managing cancer pain in the environment of national opioid crisis.

Risk of behaviour suggestive of opioid abuse: a protocol for a systematic review of validated assessment tools

INTRODUCTION

Opioid use patterns of individuals with non-cancer pain are influenced by the behavioural dynamics of the individual in managing and properly following the prescription. The use of assessment tools for measuring the risk of behaviour suggestive of opioid abuse is important for health professionals who provide care to individuals with non-cancer pain. The aim of the proposed review is to analyse the psychometric properties of tools for measuring the risk of behaviour suggestive of opioid abuse in adults with non-cancer pain.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

The review process will be based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols. The Consensus-Based Standards for the Selection of Health Measurement Instruments will be used to analyse the assessment tools. Two independent reviewers will perform the literature search and analysis procedures. Searches will be performed on PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane, Scopus, and Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature databases, and the 'snowball' strategy will be employed. The inclusion criteria will be (1) validation studies, (2) assessment tools designed exclusively for measuring the risk of behaviour suggestive of opioid abuse and (3) assessment tools designed for evaluation of adults with chronic non-cancer pain. The titles and abstracts of the studies retrieved from the databases will be analysed for the preselection of articles, which will be submitted to a full-text analysis to define the final sample. Divergence of opinion between two reviewers will be resolved by consulting a third reviewer.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The review will offer an overview of assessment tools available for measuring the risk of behaviour suggestive of opioid abuse, which is relevant to reducing the risk of deaths due to abusive consumption and for clinical management of adults with chronic non-cancer pain.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42018081577.