Work Enabling Opioid Management

Impact of Prescription Medicines on Work-Related Outcomes in Workers with Musculoskeletal Disorders or Injuries: A Systematic Scoping Review

PURPOSE

Medicines are often prescribed to workers with musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs) and injuries to relieve pain and facilitate their recovery and return to work. However, there is a growing concern that prescription medicines may have adverse effects on work function. This scoping review aimed to summarize the existing empirical evidence on prescription medicine use by workers with MSD or injury and its relationship with work-related outcomes.

METHODS

We identified studies through structured searching of MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL Plus, Scopus, Web of Science and Cochrane library databases, and via searching of dissertations, theses, and grey literature databases. Studies that examined the association between prescription medicine and work-related outcomes in working age people with injury or MSDs, and were published in English after the year 2000 were eligible.

RESULTS

From the 4884 records identified, 65 studies were included for review. Back disorders and opioids were the most commonly studied musculoskeletal conditions and prescription medicines, respectively. Most studies showed a negative relationship between prescription medicines and work outcomes. Opioids, psychotropics and their combination were the most common medicines associated with adverse work outcomes. Opioid prescriptions with early initiation, long-term use, strong and/or high dose and extended pre- and post-operative use in workers' compensation setting were consistently associated with adverse work function. We found emerging but inconsistent evidence that skeletal muscle relaxants and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs were associated with unfavorable work outcomes.

CONCLUSION

Opioids and other prescription medicines might be associated with adverse work outcomes. However, the evidence is conflicting and there were relatively fewer studies on non-opioid medicines. Further studies with more robust design are required to enable more definitive exploration of causal relationships and settle inconsistent evidence.

Claims-based measures of prescription opioid utilization: A practical guide for researchers

BACKGROUND

Given the increased attention to the opioid epidemic and the role of inappropriate prescribing, there has been a marked increase in the number of studies using claims data to study opioid use and policies designed to curb misuse. Our objective is to review the medical literature for recent studies that use claims data to construct opioid use measures and to develop a guide for researchers using these measures.

METHODS

We searched for articles relating to opioid use measured in health insurance claims data using a defined set of search terms for the years 2014-2020. Original research articles based in the United States that used claims-based measures of opioid utilization were included and information on the study population and measures of any opioid use, quantity of opioid use, new opioid use, chronic opioid use, multiple providers, and overlapping prescriptions was abstracted.

RESULTS

A total of 164 articles met inclusion criteria. Any opioid use was the most commonly included measure, defined by 85 studies. This was followed by quantity of opioids (68 studies), chronic opioid use (53 studies), overlapping prescriptions (28 studies), and multiple providers (8 studies). Each measure contained multiple, distinct definitions with considerable variation in how each was operationalized.

CONCLUSIONS

Claims-based opioid utilization measures are commonly used in research, but definitions vary significantly from study to study. Researchers should carefully consider which opioid utilization measures and definitions are most appropriate for their study and recognize how different definitions may influence study results.

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.

Variations in Long-term Opioid Therapy Definitions: A Systematic Review of Observational Studies Using Routinely Collected Data (2000-2019)

Routinely collected data have been increasingly used to assess long-term opioid therapy (LTOT) patterns, with very little guidance on how to measure LTOT from these data sources. We conducted a systematic review of studies published between January 2000 and July 2019 to catalogue LTOT definitions, the rationale for definitions and LTOT rates in observational research using routinely collected data in nonsurgical settings. We screened 4056 abstracts, 210 full-text manuscripts and included 128 studies, mostly from the United States (81%) and published between 2015 and 2019 (69%). We identified 78 definitions of LTOT, commonly operationalised as 90 days of use within a year (23%). Studies often used multiple criteria to derive definitions (60%), mostly based on measures of duration, such as supply days/days of use (66%), episode length (21%) or prescription fills within specified time periods (12%). Definitions were based on previous publications (63%), clinical judgment (16%) or empirical data (3%); 10% of studies applied more than one definition. LTOT definition was not provided with enough details for replication in 14 studies and 38 studies did not specify the opioids evaluated. Rates of LTOT within study populations ranged from 0.2% to 57% according to study design and definition used. We observed a substantial rise in the last 5 years in studies evaluating LTOT with large variability in the definitions used and poor reporting of the rationale and implementation of definitions. This variation impacts on research reproducibility, comparability of findings and the development of strategies aiming to curb therapy that is not guideline-recommended.

Work Environment Factors and Prevention of Opioid-Related Deaths

Opioid use disorder (OUD) and opioid overdose deaths (OODs) are prevalent among US workers, but work-related factors have not received adequate attention as either risk factors or opportunities for OOD prevention. Higher prevalence of OOD in those with heavy physical jobs, more precarious work, and limited health care benefits suggest work environment and organizational factors may predispose workers to the development of OUD.Organizational policies that reduce ergonomic risk factors, respond effectively to employee health and safety concerns, provide access to nonpharmacologic pain management, and encourage early substance use treatment are important opportunities to improve outcomes. Organizational barriers can limit disclosure of pain and help-seeking behavior, and opioid education is not effectively integrated with workplace safety training and health promotion programs.Policy development at the employer, government, and association levels could improve the workplace response to workers with OUD and reduce occupational risks that may be contributing factors.