Impact of an Australian/New Zealand organisational position statement on extended-release opioid prescribing among surgical inpatients: a dual centre before-and-after study

Tapentadol Versus Oxycodone for Opioid-Related Adverse Drug Events and Clinical Outcomes After Inpatient Surgery

Oxycodone is a commonly prescribed opioid for postoperative pain. However, there has been a marked increase in the use of tapentadol over the previous decade due to a perceived superior safety profile of tapentadol compared to oxycodone. There is limited real-world evidence on the safety of tapentadol compared to oxycodone after surgery. The primary objective was to examine the impact of tapentadol compared to oxycodone use on the incidence of opioid-related adverse drug events after surgery. Data for adult surgical patients receiving tapentadol or oxycodone during hospitalization between January 1, 2018, and December 31, 2021, were collected from electronic medical records of 3 tertiary metropolitan hospitals in Australia. The primary outcome was the incidence of opioid-related adverse events. Patients receiving tapentadol or oxycodone were matched using nearest-neighbour propensity score matching. In the matched cohorts (n = 1,530 vs n = 2,775; mean [standard deviation] age 62.3 [17.0] years vs 61.9 [standard deviation 17.9] years; 43% vs 45% male for the tapentadol vs oxycodone groups, respectively), patients given tapentadol experienced a similar incidence of adverse events overall (14.4%, 220/1,530 vs 12.6%, 349/2,775; P = .100; 95% CI -.35% to 3.95%). Secondary outcomes included an increased risk of delirium (2.7%, 41/1,530 vs 1.3%, 37/2,775), arrhythmias (3.4%, 52/1,530 vs 2.2%, 62/2,775), and length of hospital stay (5 [range 1-201] vs 4 [range 1-226] days) compared with oxycodone use. Further real-world studies are warranted to determine the impact of tapentadol use on a broad range of patient outcomes. PERSPECTIVE: This study provides an early signal that tapentadol use may be associated with an increased risk of some adverse events and a longer length of stay. Further research is needed to examine the impact of tapentadol use on a broad range of patient outcomes in clinical practice settings.

Impact of modified-release opioid use on clinical outcomes following total hip and knee arthroplasty: a propensity score-matched cohort study

Modified-release opioids are often prescribed for the management of moderate to severe acute pain following total hip and knee arthroplasty, despite recommendations against their use due to increasing concerns regarding harm. The primary objective of this multicentre study was to examine the impact of modified-release opioid use on the incidence of opioid-related adverse events compared with immediate-release opioid use, among adult inpatients following total hip or knee arthroplasty. Data for total hip and knee arthroplasty inpatients receiving an opioid analgesic for postoperative analgesia during hospitalisation were collected from electronic medical records of three tertiary metropolitan hospitals in Australia. The primary outcome was the incidence of opioid-related adverse events during hospital admission. Patients who received modified with or without immediate-release opioids were matched to those receiving immediate-release opioids only (1:1) using nearest neighbour propensity score matching with patient and clinical characteristics as covariates. This included total opioid dose received. In the matched cohorts, patients given modified-release opioids (n = 347) experienced a higher incidence of opioid-related adverse events overall, compared with those given immediate-release opioids only (20.5%, 71/347 vs. 12.7%, 44/347; difference in proportions 7.8% [95%CI 2.3-13.3%]). Modified-release opioid use was associated with an increased risk of harm when used for acute pain during hospitalisation after total hip or knee arthroplasty.

Risks and benefits of oral modified-release compared with oral immediate-release opioid use after surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Prescription of modified-release opioids for acute postoperative pain is widespread despite evidence to show their use may be associated with an increased risk of adverse effects. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to examine the available evidence on the safety and efficacy of modified-release, compared with immediate-release, oral opioids for postoperative pain in adults. We searched five electronic databases from 1 January 2003 to 1 January 2023. Published randomised clinical trials and observational studies on adults who underwent surgery which compared those who received oral modified-release opioids postoperatively with those receiving oral immediate-release opioids were included. Two reviewers independently extracted data on the primary outcomes of safety (incidence of adverse events) and efficacy (pain intensity, analgesic and opioid use, and physical function) and secondary outcomes (length of hospital stay, hospital readmission, psychological function, costs, and quality of life) up to 12 months postoperatively. Of the eight articles included, five were randomised clinical trials and three were observational studies. The overall quality of evidence was low. Modified-release opioid use was associated with a higher incidence of adverse events (n = 645, odds ratio (95%CI) 2.76 (1.52-5.04)) and worse pain (n = 550, standardised mean difference (95%CI) 0.2 (0.04-0.37)) compared with immediate-release opioid use following surgery. Our narrative synthesis concluded that modified-release opioids showed no superiority over immediate-release opioids for analgesic consumption, length of hospital stay, hospital readmissions or physical function after surgery. One study showed that modified-release opioid use is associated with higher rates of persistent postoperative opioid use compared with immediate-release opioid use. None of the included studies reported on psychological function, costs or quality of life.

Acute Pain and Development of Opioid Use Disorder: Patient Risk Factors

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Pharmacological therapy for acute pain carries the risk of opioid misuse, with opioid use disorder (OUD) reaching epidemic proportions worldwide in recent years. This narrative review covers the latest research on patient risk factors for opioid misuse in the treatment of acute pain. In particular, we emphasize newer findings and evidence-based strategies to reduce the prevalence of OUD.

RECENT FINDINGS

This narrative review captures a subset of recent advances in the field targeting the literature on patients' risk factors for OUD in the treatment for acute pain. Besides well-recognized risk factors such as younger age, male sex, lower socioeconomic status, White race, psychiatric comorbidities, and prior substance use, additional challenges such as COVID-19 further aggravated the opioid crisis due to associated stress, unemployment, loneliness, or depression. To reduce OUD, providers should evaluate both the individual patient's risk factors and preferences for adequate timing and dosing of opioid prescriptions. Short-term prescription should be considered and patients at-risk closely monitored. The integration of non-opioid analgesics and regional anesthesia to create multimodal, personalized analgesic plans is important. In the management of acute pain, routine prescription of long-acting opioids should be avoided, with implementation of a close monitoring and cessation plan.

No place for routine use of modified-release opioids in postoperative pain management

Modified-release opioid tablets were introduced into surgical practice in the belief that they provided superior pain relief and reduced nursing workload, and they rapidly became embedded into many perioperative pathways. Although national and international guidelines for the management of postoperative pain now advise against the use of modified-release opioids, they continue to be prescribed in many centres. Recognition that modified-release opioids show lack of benefit and increased risk of harm compared with immediate-release opioids in the acute, postoperative setting has become clear. Their slow onset and offset make rapid and safe titration of these opioids impossible, including down-titration as the patient recovers; pain relief may be less effective; they have been associated with an increased incidence of opioid-related adverse drug events, increased length of hospital stay, and higher readmission rates; and they lead to higher rates of opioid-induced ventilatory impairment and persistent postoperative opioid use. Evidence indicates that modified-release opioids should not be used routinely in the postoperative period.

How to close the gaps between evidence and practice for perioperative opioids

Excellent resources are now available that distil the best evidence around opioid prescribing in the perioperative period, including the list of recommendations provided by the international multidisciplinary consensus statement on the prevention of opioid-related harm in adult surgical patients. While some of the recommendations have been widely accepted as an essential part of postoperative practice, others have had slow and variable adoption. This article focuses on the items where theory and practice still diverge and suggests how best to close that gap. We must also remain mindful that while education is essential, it is on the lowest rung of implementation efficacy and, on its own, is a poor driver of behaviour change. Ongoing structural nudges and the use of local procedure-specific analgesic pathways will also be helpful in addressing the gap between evidence-based recommendations and practice.