Cohort protocol paper: the Pain and Opioids In Treatment (POINT) study

Baseline Characteristics From a New Longitudinal Cohort of Patients With Noncancer Pain and Chronic Opioid Use in the United States

Retrospective cohort studies have consistently observed that long-term prescription opioid use is a risk factor for new major depressive episodes. However, prospective studies are needed to confirm these findings and establish evidence for causation. The Prescription Opioids and Depression Pathways cohort study is designed for this purpose. The present report describes the baseline sample and associations between participant characteristics and odds of daily versus nondaily opioid use. Second, we report associations between participant characteristics and odds of depression, dysthymia, anhedonia, and vital exhaustion. Patients with noncancer pain were eligible if they started a new period of prescription opioid use lasting 30 to 90 days. Participants were 54.8 (standard deviation ± 11.3) years of age, 57.3% female and 73% White race. Less than college education was more common among daily versus nondaily opioid users (32.4% vs 27.3%; P = .0008), as was back pain (64.2% vs 51.3%; P < .0001), any nonopioid substance use disorder (12.8% vs 4.8%; P < .0001), and current smoking (30.7% vs 18.4% P < .0001). High pain interference (50.9% vs 28.4%; P < .0001) was significantly associated with depression, as was having more pain sites (6.9 ± 3.6 vs 5.7 ± 3.6; P < .0001), and benzodiazepine comedication (38.2% vs 23.4%; P < .0001). High pain interference was significantly more common among those with anhedonia (46.8% vs 27.4%; P < .0001), and more pain sites (7.0 ± 3.7 vs 5.6 ± 3.6; P < .0001) were associated with anhedonia. Having more pain sites (7.9 ± 3.6 vs 5.5 ± 3.50; P < .0001) was associated with vital exhaustion, as was back pain (71.9% vs 56.8%; P = .0001) and benzodiazepine comedication (42.8% vs 22.8%; P < .0001). Patients using prescription opioids for noncancer pain have complex pain, psychiatric, and substance use disorder comorbidities. Longitudinal data will reveal whether long-term opioid therapy leads to depression or other mood disturbances such as anhedonia and vital exhaustion. PERSPECTIVE: This study reports baseline characteristics of a new prospective, noncancer pain cohort study. Risk factors for adverse opioid outcomes were most common in those with depression and vital exhaustion and less common in dysthymia and anhedonia. Baseline data highlight the complexity of patients receiving long-term opioid therapy for noncancer pain.

Use of pharmacological and nonpharmacological treatments for chronic noncancer pain among people using opioids: a longitudinal cohort study

ABSTRACT

Although multimodal management of chronic noncancer pain (CNCP) is recommended, long-term treatment utilization patterns among people using opioids are not well known. The Pain and Opioids IN Treatment study recruited Australian adults receiving opioids for CNCP for more than 6 weeks from community pharmacies. Pharmacological (opioid and nonopioid analgesics and psychotropic medicines) and nonpharmacological (physical, mental health, and specialized) treatments used in the previous 12 months and 30 days were collected annually over 4 years (2015-2018). Associations were explored between 30-day treatment use and sociodemographic characteristics and pain measures. Overall, 1334 participants completed at least one annual follow-up. The median pain severity (5.0, interquartile range [IQR] 3.8 to 6.3) and pain interference scores (5.7, IQR 3.9-7.3) indicated moderate pain throughout the study period, despite most participants reporting the use of nonopioid pharmacological (12 month: 97.6% and 30 day: 96.8%) and nonpharmacological treatments (12 month: 91.8% and 30 day: 66.1%). Some treatment use was inconsistent with guidelines: ongoing nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and sedative-hypnotic use were common, whereas fewer people engaged with pain management programs (12 month: 22.3%). Private health insurance was associated with using physical (adjusted odds ratio 1.61, 99.5% confidence intervals 1.15-2.24) and specialized nonpharmacological treatments (adjusted odds ratio 1.47, 99.5% confidence intervals 1.14-1.91). This study demonstrates that many Australians taking opioids long-term for CNCP also use nonopioid pharmacological and nonpharmacological treatments. The use of pharmacological treatments including nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, psychotropic medicines, and gabapentinoids, outside guidelines, warrants review. Furthermore, despite Australia's universal healthcare scheme subsidising some nonpharmacological treatments, overall use of these treatments was associated with having private health insurance, highlighting a need for more equitable service provision.

A prospective cohort study evaluating the impact of upscheduling codeine in Australia among frequent users of codeine

AIM

To evaluate and document the impacts of re-scheduling codeine to a prescription-only medication in Australia in February 2018.

DESIGN

Prospective cohort study. Participants completed an on-line survey with a range of outcome measures at four time-points, once before codeine was re-scheduled (November 2017) and three times after the event: 1 month after (February 2018), 4 months after (June 2018) and 12 months after (February 2019).

SETTING

Australia.

PARTICIPANTS

Participants were 260 Australians aged 18 years and above who reported regular over-the-counter (OTC) codeine use and, at the time of the study, were not engaged in treatment for codeine dependence.

MEASUREMENTS

Survey measures included estimates of daily average codeine use (mg) and overall daily average opioid use [calculated using an oral morphine equivalent daily dose (OMEDD, mg)], opioid use disorder with regard to codeine use (using a modified Alcohol Use Disorder and Associated Disabilities Interview Schedule-IV), pain and pain self-efficacy, anxiety and depression and health service use.

FINDINGS

A reduction in total daily codeine use (mg) from 64.3 mg [95% confidence interval (CI) = 46.7-81.9] in November 2017 (baseline) to 27.6 mg (95% CI = 19.2-36.0) in February 2019 (final time-point) was observed. A decline in the proportion of participants who met criteria for an opioid use disorder was also evident, with 51.2% (n = 133) at baseline relative to 33.3% (n = 58) at the 12-month follow-up. This study had an overall participant retention rate of 67% at the final time-point.

CONCLUSION

Re-scheduling codeine in Australia has been accompanied by significant reductions in codeine use and prevalence rates of opioid use disorder in a cohort of individuals who regularly use the medication, without apparent adverse impacts on pain or measures of anxiety and depression.

Exploring the comorbidity between personality and musculoskeletal disorders among adults: A scoping review

INTRODUCTION

There is growing awareness of the comorbidity between mental and musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs) and their associated burden. We aimed to explore what is known regarding the existing epidemiological clinical-and population- based literature on the comorbidity between personality disorders (PDs) and MSDs specifically. In addition, we aimed to investigate their associated burden by examining a range of outcomes including morbidity/mortality, patient- and clinical-reported outcomes, work-related outcomes, hospital admissions, and financial costs. Finally, we sought to identify gaps in the literature and provide recommendations for further research.

METHODS

Studies with participants 15 years of age were eligible. Categorical PDs/features (DSM-III/IV/5 or ICD 9/10), identified by a health care professional, medical records, diagnostic interviews, or self-administered questionnaires. The definitions/groupings of MSDs were guided by the ICD-10 including conditions of the back, joints, and soft tissue, and disorders of bone density and structure. Published peer-reviewed and gray literature were considered. Eligible study designs were cohort, case-control, and cross-sectional studies, and existing reviews of observational studies. Identification and selection of articles, data extraction and the presentation of the results was conducted according to the Joanna Briggs Institute methodological guidance and the PRISMA extension for scoping reviews.

RESULTS

In total, 57 articles were eligible including 10 reviews and 47 individual studies. Across clinical and population settings, we detected evidence of comorbidity between PDs and chronic back/neck/spine conditions, arthritis, and fibromyalgia, and emerging evidence of associations between PDs and reduced bone mineral density. In terms of knowledge gaps, the burden associated with PDs and MSDs is poorly understood, as is their underlying mechanisms.

DISCUSSION

This scoping review might prompt further research into PDs and MSDs as separate groups of disorders, along with their comorbidity and the mechanisms that may link them.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

https://osf.io/mxbr2/registrations.

Pharmaceutical Opioid Use Patterns and Indicators of Extramedical Use and Harm in Adults With Chronic Noncancer Pain, 2012-2018

IMPORTANCE

Despite concern about harms related to long-term prescribed opioid use among individuals with chronic noncancer pain (CNCP), no study has examined whether the same patients engage in a risky pattern of use consistently for the long term.

OBJECTIVE

To examine the prevalence, incidence, persistence, and cessation of a range of opioid behaviors, indicators of extramedical use, and harm among individuals who are prescribed opioids.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This 5-year prospective cohort study in communities across Australia included 1514 adults who were prescribed opioids for CNCP. Data collection took place from August 2012 to December 2018, and data analysis took place from February to November 2020.

EXPOSURE

Prescription opioid use.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

High-dose opioid use (≥200 oral morphine equivalent [OME] mg/d); requesting an increase in opioid dose; requesting an early prescription renewal; tampering with opioid medication; diversion of medication to others; and International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems, Tenth Revision opioid dependence. Cessation of opioid use was also assessed.

RESULTS

Of the 1514 participants, 672 (44.39%) were men, the mean (SD) age was 58 (19) years, and 737 (48.68%) were unemployed. At each annual interview, approximately 1 in 8 people (10.98% [95% CI, 10.33%-11.63%] to 14.73% [95% CI, 13.98%-15.48%] at any given interview) were taking more than 200 OME mg/d; comparatively more had requested an increased dosage in the previous 3 months (8.46% [95% CI, 7.89%-9.03%] to 23.77% [95% CI, 22.82%-24.73%]); and fewer asked for an early prescription renewal (4.61% [95% CI, 4.19%-5.03%] to 13.97% [95% CI, 13.24%-14.70%]). In any given interview, between 3.06% (95% CI, 2.72%-3.40%) and 7.86% (95% CI, 7.31%-8.41%) of respondents reported tampering and between 0.47% (95% CI, 0.33%-0.60%) and 1.39% (95% CI, 1.16%-1.62%) reported diversion to others. Between 8.28% (95% CI, 7.71%-8.84%) and 13.06% (95% CI, 12.35%-13.77%) met criteria for opioid dependence at each interview. Opioid cessation increased across interviews, from year 1 (9.15% [95% CI, 8.55%-9.74%]) to year 5 (20.02% [19.14%-20.89%]). There was considerable incidence and cessation in all behaviors from 1 interview to the next: most who engaged in any of these behaviors only did so at only 1 interview. For pharmaceutical opioid dependence, between 55.26% (95% CI, 53.81%-56.71%) and 64.44% (95% CI, 62.87%-66.00%) of cases in 1 interview did not meet dependence criteria in the following interview.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

These findings suggest considerable fluidity in opioid use, extramedical behaviors, and opioid dependence among people with CNCP. This reinforces the need for reassessment of the effectiveness and safety of prescription opioid use over time.

Clinical correlates and outcomes associated with pregabalin use among people prescribed opioids for chronic non-cancer pain: A five-year prospective cohort study

AIMS

Pregabalin has become widely used as an alternative to opioids in treating certain types of chronic non-cancer pain, but few studies have examined its clinical efficacy outside trials. We address this gap by examining the utilization, correlates and clinical outcomes of pregabalin use among an Australian community-based cohort of people prescribed opioids for chronic non-cancer pain.

METHODS

Through a five-year prospective cohort study (n = 1514) we examined associations between pregabalin use and pain severity and interference, mental health, opioid dose and past month use of ambulance and emergency department services. We used fixed-effects regression models to examine within-participant differences, and random-effects regression models to examine within- and between-participant differences in clinical outcomes.

RESULTS

In an analysis of cases with complete data over five-years (n = 896), the prevalence of pregabalin use ranged from 16% at cohort entry to 29% at 36- and 48-months, and 46% reported pregabalin use at any time during the five years. Pregabalin use was associated with greater pain severity and interference and greater use of high-risk opioid doses (>90 oral morphine equivalents/day). Pregabalin use was not associated with changes in mental health symptoms, ambulance or emergency department attendance in the fixed or random effects models.

CONCLUSIONS

Pregabalin use was common, but for most people use was not associated with clinically meaningful improvements in pain or functioning.

Validation of the OWLS, a Screening Tool for Measuring Prescription Opioid Use Disorder in Primary Care

OBJECTIVE

The OWLS is a screening tool for prescription opioid use disorder designed for use in primary care. This study aimed to confirm the optimal wording, scoring methods, and cutoff for the OWLS.

DESIGN AND SETTING

Cross-sectional analysis of an online sample.

SUBJECTS

Participants comprised those with chronic noncancer pain who regularly used prescription opioids.

METHODS

Eligible participants self-completed an online version of the OWLS prescription opioid use disorder screening tool and the Composite International Diagnostic Interview Substance Abuse module. Receiver operating characteristics were calculated for three scoring methods for the OWLS, and these were compared with DSM-5 classification of any use disorder and moderate to severe opioid use disorder.

RESULTS

Among the sample (N = 324), utilizing scoring method (i) (i.e., positive endorsement ≥ response option "a little bit") and a cutoff of 3 increased the percentage of correctly classified participants, with concurrent increases in specificity and decreases in false discovery rate, and false positive rate.

CONCLUSION

OWLS utilizing scoring method (i) with a cutoff of 3 was shown to be the optimal version and scoring method of this tool. This represents a time-efficient, simple scoring method, allowing for quick and accurate screening for opioid use disorder to occur.

Risk factors for indicators of opioid-related harms amongst people living with chronic non-cancer pain: Findings from a 5-year prospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

The literature suggests patient characteristics and higher opioid doses and long-term duration are associated with problematic opioid behaviours but no one study has examined the role of all these factors simultaneously in a long-term prospective cohort study.

METHODS

Five-year, community-based, prospective cohort of people prescribed opioids for chronic non-cancer pain (CNCP). Logistic mixed effect models with multiple imputation were used to address missing data. Oral morphine equivalent (OME) mg per day was categorised as: 0 mg OME/day, 1-49 mg OME/day (reference), 50-89 mg OME/day, 90-199 mg OME/day and 200mg+ OME/day. Patient risk factors included: age, gender, substance use, mental health history and pain-related factors. Main outcomes included: Prescribed Opioids Difficulties Scale (PODS), Opioid-Related Behaviours In Treatment (ORBIT) scale, and ICD-10 opioid dependence. Multiple confounders for problematic opioid behaviours were assessed.

FINDINGS

Of 1,514 participants 44.4% were male (95%CI 41.9-46.9) and their mean age was 58 years (IQR 48-67). Participants had a mean duration of pain of 10 years (IQR 4.5-20.0) and had been taking strong opioids for a median of four years (IQR 1.0-10.0). At baseline, median OME/day was 73 (IQR 35-148). At 5-years, 85% were still taking strong opioids. PODS moderate-high scores reduced from 59.9% (95%CI 58.8-61.0) at baseline to 51.5% (95%CI 50.0-53.0) at 5-years. Around 9% met criteria for ICD-10 opioid dependence at each wave. In adjusted mixed effect models, the risk factors most consistently associated with problematic opioid use were: younger age, substance dependence, mental health histories and higher opioid doses.

INTERPRETATION

Both patient risk factors and opioid dose are associated with problematic opioid use behaviours.

Antidepressant Use Among People Prescribed Opioids for Chronic Noncancer Pain

OBJECTIVE

Although depression and chronic pain often coexist, few studies have examined antidepressant use among people with pain. This study examines the prevalence and characteristics associated with antidepressant use among people prescribed opioids for chronic noncancer pain (CNCP).

DESIGN

Baseline data from a prospective cohort study.

SETTING

Australian community.

SUBJECTS

A total of 1166 people prescribed opioids for CNCP.

METHODS

Baseline data collection consisted of a self-completed seven-day medication diary and telephone interview to collect information on sociodemographic characteristics and mental/physical health using validated questionnaires. Logistic regression was used to examine characteristics associated with antidepressant use, reporting adjusted odds ratios (AORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs).

RESULTS

Of the 1166 participants, 668 (57.3%) were female, and the median (interquartile range) age was 59 (49-68) years. About half the cohort (N = 637, 54.6%) used antidepressants. Of these, 329 (51.7%) reported moderate to severe depression. Amitriptyline was the most commonly used antidepressant (17.3%). Factors independently associated with antidepressant use were being female (AOR = 1.47, 95% CI = 1.13-1.92), more years lived in pain (AOR = 1.01, 95% CI = 1.00-1.02), and use of nonopioid analgesics (AOR = 1.34, 95% CI = 1.01-1.78), benzodiazepines and related drugs (AOR = 1.84, 95% CI = 1.36-2.49), antiepileptics (AOR = 1.86, 95% CI = 1.38-2.51), and antipsychotics (AOR = 2.15, 95% CI = 1.22-3.77).

CONCLUSIONS

Antidepressant use is common among people with CNCP prescribed opioids. Those using antidepressants were more likely to use other psychotropic medicines concurrently, highlighting that they are a high-risk population requiring comprehensive assessment to optimize outcomes and reduce potential harms from polypharmacy.

An evaluation of opioid use during acute hospital admissions

Long-term opioid use can begin with the treatment of acute pain. However, there is little evidence concerning the impact that better opioid awareness in the acute phase may have on reducing the use of opioids in the long term. This project explored which opioids are routinely prescribed within an acute hospital setting and how these opioids were used over the course of the hospital stay. Codeine and morphine remain the most commonly prescribed opioids. Opioids were prescribed and given to people across the age range, from 16 to 98 years. The project found that 19% of patients were admitted with a pre-existing opioid. Up to 66% of patients were discharged with opioid medication, with almost 20% leaving with more than one opioid. Regular opioid use routinely exposes patients to long-term opioid use and those patients initiated onto opioid medication during admission should have the benefit of planned de-escalation before discharge.

The Prescription Opioids and Depression Pathways Cohort Study

Background

Results from studies using medical record data indicate chronic (>90 days) opioid analgesic use (OAU) is associated with new depressive episodes (NDE), worsening depression and risk for depression recurrence. This body of evidence is based on retrospective cohort studies and medical record data. Limitations of existing research are overcome in a new prospective cohort study of the opioid-depression relationship.

Methods

Prospective cohort of 1500 adult patients recruited from two health care systems. Eligible subjects started a new period of OAU and have 30 to 90 days of OAU at baseline. Diagnostic assessments for psychiatric disorders, structured measures of pain, pain functioning, opioid use, social support, sleep and impulsivity will be obtained at baseline, 6-month and 12-month follow-up. Baseline participants will be invited to 12 monthly brief assessments of pain-related functioning, depression symptoms and opioid use.

Innovation

Robust control for confounding by indication and detailed phenotyping of depression and opioid use disorder.

Anticipated results

Chronic OAU will be associated with new onset of a depression phenotype characterized by anhedonia and somatic symptoms. This relationship will be partly, but not completely explained by impaired functioning and low social support.

Conclusions

Although the annual number of opioid prescriptions in the United States has decreased, over 190 million patients have OAU each year. If chronic OAU leads to a clinically meaningful affective disorder, independent of pain, then we need to consider depression an important adverse effect of chronic OAU and adjust care for chronic pain accordingly.

Impact of Removing Nonprescription Codeine in Australia: Protocol for a Prospective Cohort Study

Background

On February 1, 2018, Australia rescheduled codeine to a prescription-only medication. Many concerns were associated with this change, including increased financial costs, reduced service accessibility, the potential for poorer pain management, and a decline in physical and mental health if codeine could not be accessed. In the research literature, there is limited knowledge about the long-term consequences of rescheduling pharmaceutical opioids and, as Australia has followed many countries in implementing a restriction on codeine, further study of these consequences is critical.

Objective

The goal of this study was to examine the impact of rescheduling codeine from an over-the-counter (OTC) product to a prescription-only medicine on the primary measures of codeine use and dependence in a prospective cohort of people who are frequent consumers of OTC codeine. Secondary measures included pain and self-efficacy, health service use, and mental health.

Methods

The Codeine Cohort study aimed to recruit 300 participants in Australia who regularly (at least a few times per week for the past 6 months) used OTC codeine. Using an online survey, participants were followed up at three time points (February 2018, June 2018, and February 2019) after codeine was rescheduled.

Results

All four waves of data collection are complete, with the final round of data collection finalized in August 2019. Data analyses are yet to be completed. Information on demographics, codeine use and dependence, physical and mental health, medication use, and health service use will be analyzed using mixed models.

Conclusions

Results of this study will provide insight into the effectiveness of regulatory restriction in curtailing nonmedical use of and harms associated with codeine. Additionally, results will explore positive and negative outcomes of codeine rescheduling for individual patients, which informs health professionals who support patients who use codeine and further community education.

International Registered Report Identifier (IRRID)

DERR1-10.2196/15540

Development of a Brief Patient-Administered Screening Tool for Prescription Opioid Dependence for Primary Care Settings

OBJECTIVE

To develop a short, patient-administered screening tool that will allow for earlier assessment of prescription opioid dependence (often referred to as addiction) in primary care settings.

DESIGN AND SETTING

Cross-sectional analysis (N = 1,134) from the two-year time point of the Pain and Opioids IN Treatment (POINT) cohort was used in the scale development.

SUBJECTS

Participants who completed two-year interviews in the POINT study, a prospective cohort study that followed people with chronic noncancer pain over a five-year period, and who were prescribed strong opioids for a minimum of six weeks at baseline.

METHODS

An advisory committee provided advice on wording and content for screening in primary care settings. Univariate logistic regression identified individual items that were significantly associated with meeting ICD-11 criteria for prescription opioid dependence. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis (EFA and CFA) were conducted, and items were reduced to identify a small item set that were discriminative and shared a simple underlying structure.

RESULTS

Sixty-four variables associated with ICD-11 criteria for prescription opioid dependence were initially identified. Four rounds of EFA were performed, resulting in five items remaining. CFA identified two possible four-item combinations, with the final combination chosen based on greater item endorsement and the results of goodness-of-fit indices.

CONCLUSIONS

Addressing prescription opioid dependence is an important part of the global public health challenge surrounding rising opioid-related harm. This study addresses an important initial requisite step to develop a brief screening tool. Further studies are required to validate the tool in 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.

Concerns and Help-Seeking Among Patients Using Opioids for Management of Chronic Noncancer Pain

BACKGROUND

The safety and efficacy of long-term opioid treatment for chronic noncancer pain (CNCP) remains controversial. This study examined whether patients who report problematic opioid use sought help and/or perceived barriers to help-seeking.

METHODS

Data were collected from 1,086 people prescribed opioids for CNCP via a large prospective cohort called the Pain and Opioids IN Treatment (POINT) study. Patients' characteristics and help-seeking were examined according to scores on the Prescribed Opioids Difficulties Scale (PODS).

RESULTS

Participants scoring "intermediate" (17%) or "high" (30%) on the PODS were younger and reported more complex pain presentations, higher opioid doses, poorer physical health, moderate to severe anxiety and depression, aberrant behavior, past month opioid use disorder and help-seeking (compared with the "low" PODS group, 53%). One-quarter (26%) had sought help, most commonly from a primary care physician, specialist pain clinic, family member/partner, counselor/psychologist, and the Internet. Participants in the "high" PODS group were more likely to have sought help from an alcohol or other drug service, addiction specialist, or drug information helpline. Common barriers to help-seeking were desire for self-management and concern that their opioid treatment may be discontinued. Although 35% met criteria for likely opioid use disorder, only 4.8% reported lifetime treatment with methadone or buprenorphine; participants' ratings indicated significant perceived stigma associated with these medications.

CONCLUSIONS

The PODS is effective in identifying patients who are concerned about their opioid use. Strategies to address stigma related to drug treatment, including better integration of primary health, specialist pain, and addiction services, are important in reducing opioid-related harm.

Effect of cannabis use in people with chronic non-cancer pain prescribed opioids: findings from a 4-year prospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Interest in the use of cannabis and cannabinoids to treat chronic non-cancer pain is increasing, because of their potential to reduce opioid dose requirements. We aimed to investigate cannabis use in people living with chronic non-cancer pain who had been prescribed opioids, including their reasons for use and perceived effectiveness of cannabis; associations between amount of cannabis use and pain, mental health, and opioid use; the effect of cannabis use on pain severity and interference over time; and potential opioid-sparing effects of cannabis.

METHODS

The Pain and Opioids IN Treatment study is a prospective, national, observational cohort of people with chronic non-cancer pain prescribed opioids. Participants were recruited through community pharmacies across Australia, completed baseline interviews, and were followed up with phone interviews or self-complete questionnaires yearly for 4 years. Recruitment took place from August 13, 2012, to April 8, 2014. Participants were asked about lifetime and past year chronic pain conditions, duration of chronic non-cancer pain, pain self-efficacy, whether pain was neuropathic, lifetime and past 12-month cannabis use, number of days cannabis was used in the past month, and current depression and generalised anxiety disorder. We also estimated daily oral morphine equivalent doses of opioids. We used logistic regression to investigate cross-sectional associations with frequency of cannabis use, and lagged mixed-effects models to examine temporal associations between cannabis use and outcomes.

FINDINGS

1514 participants completed the baseline interview and were included in the study from Aug 20, 2012, to April 14, 2014. Cannabis use was common, and by 4-year follow-up, 295 (24%) participants had used cannabis for pain. Interest in using cannabis for pain increased from 364 (33%) participants (at baseline) to 723 (60%) participants (at 4 years). At 4-year follow-up, compared with people with no cannabis use, we found that participants who used cannabis had a greater pain severity score (risk ratio 1·14, 95% CI 1·01-1·29, for less frequent cannabis use; and 1·17, 1·03-1·32, for daily or near-daily cannabis use), greater pain interference score (1·21, 1·09-1·35; and 1·14, 1·03-1·26), lower pain self-efficacy scores (0·97, 0·96-1·00; and 0·98, 0·96-1·00), and greater generalised anxiety disorder severity scores (1·07, 1·03-1·12; and 1·10, 1·06-1·15). We found no evidence of a temporal relationship between cannabis use and pain severity or pain interference, and no evidence that cannabis use reduced prescribed opioid use or increased rates of opioid discontinuation.

INTERPRETATION

Cannabis use was common in people with chronic non-cancer pain who had been prescribed opioids, but we found no evidence that cannabis use improved patient outcomes. People who used cannabis had greater pain and lower self-efficacy in managing pain, and there was no evidence that cannabis use reduced pain severity or interference or exerted an opioid-sparing effect. As cannabis use for medicinal purposes increases globally, it is important that large well designed clinical trials, which include people with complex comorbidities, are conducted to determine the efficacy of cannabis for chronic non-cancer pain.

FUNDING

National Health and Medical Research Council and the Australian Government.

Sex differences in prescription opioid use

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Recent literature focused on prescription opioids has neglected sex differences in use. Here, we evaluated the recent literature (since 2015) examining sex differences in prescription opioid use.

RECENT FINDINGS

Between 2015 and 2016, our review found only eight articles addressing sex differences in prescription opioid use mostly opioid misuse in North America among individuals with chronic pain. Risk factors included depression, pain, and polydrug use. In addition to that review, we had the opportunity to further address sex differences in, and risk factors for, prescription opioid use through a community engagement program, HealthStreet. Among the sample (n = 8525, Mage = 43.7 years, 58.6% women), approximately half reported use of prescription opioids. Women were significantly more likely to report lifetime use (54.9 vs. 42.2%; P < 0.0001) and report cancer compared with men, yet, women with cancer had a significantly reduced risk of using opioids compared with men with cancer (odds ratio: 0.46; 95% confidence interval, 0.36-0.59).

SUMMARY

Only a few recently published studies analyzed sex differences related to prescription opioid use. Findings from the literature and our data suggest women are more likely to use prescription opioids compared with men. There is limited information on sex differences in opioid use risk factors and outcomes and more research in this area is warranted.

Defined daily doses (DDD) do not accurately reflect opioid doses used in contemporary chronic pain treatment

OBJECTIVE

To assess how well the defined daily dose (DDD) metric reflects opioid utilisation among chronic non-cancer pain patients.

DESIGN

Descriptive, cross-sectional study, utilising a 7-day medication diary.

SETTING

Community-based treatment settings, Australia.

SUBJECTS

A sample of 1101 people prescribed opioids for chronic non-cancer pain.

METHODS

Opioid dose data was collected via a self-completed 7-day medication diary capturing names, strengths and doses of each medication taken in the past week. Median daily dose was calculated for each opioid. Comparisons were made to the World Health Organization's (WHO) DDD metric.

RESULTS

WHO DDDs ranged from 0.6 to 7.1 times the median opioid doses used by the sample. For transdermal fentanyl and oral hydromorphone, the median dose was comparable with the DDD. The DDD for methadone was 0.6 times lower than the median doses used by this sample of chronic pain patients. In contrast, the DDD for oxycodone and transdermal buprenorphine, the most commonly used strong opioids for chronic pain in Australia, was two to seven times higher than actual doses used.

CONCLUSIONS

For many opioids, there are key differences between the actual doses used in clinical practice and the WHO's DDDs. The interpretation of opioid utilisation studies using population-level DDDs may be limited, and a recalibration of the DDD for many opioids or the reporting of opioid utilisation in oral morphine equivalent doses is recommended. Copyright © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Prevalence and Correlates of Suicidal Thoughts and Suicide Attempts in People Prescribed Pharmaceutical Opioids for Chronic Pain

OBJECTIVES

The main objectives of the paper were (1) to examine the prevalence of suicidality in a large community-based chronic pain sample taking prescribed opioids for chronic pain; and (2) to examine general and pain-specific factors that predict such ideation, and the transition from ideation to making a suicide attempt (ideation-to-action).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Baseline data from the Pain and Opioids IN Treatment (POINT) study with a cohort of 1514 community-based people prescribed opioids for chronic noncancer pain across Australia.

RESULTS

Past 12-month suicidal ideation was reported by 36.5% of the cohort and 16.4% had made a lifetime suicide attempt (2.5% in the last 12 mo), after the onset of their pain condition. Suicidal ideation in the past 12 months was independently associated with a past suicide attempt [adjusted odds ratio (AOR)=4.82; 95% confidence interval, 2.43-9.56] and past 12-month depression (AOR=4.07, 95% confidence interval, 1.88-8.78). Only a lower pain self-efficacy score was independently associated with past 12-month ideation-to-action (AOR=0.98, 95%CI0.88-0.99). Notably, only general-suicide risk factors were associated with 12-month suicidal ideation; but for past year ideation-to-action, pain-specific factors also had independent associations.

DISCUSSION

The study is one of the first to comprehensively examine general and pain-specific risk factors for suicidality in a large chronic pain sample in which suicidal ideation was common. A low pain self-efficacy score was the only factor independently associated past 12-month ideation-to-action.

Geographic Variation in Health Service Use and Perceived Access Barriers for Australian Adults with Chronic Non-Cancer Pain Receiving Opioid Therapy

OBJECTIVE

Rates of chronic non-cancer pain are increasing worldwide, with concerns regarding poorer access to specialist treatment services in remote areas. The current study comprised the first in-depth examination of use and barriers to access of health services in Australia according to remoteness.

METHODS

A cohort of Australian adults prescribed pharmaceutical opioids for chronic non-cancer pain (n = 1,235) were interviewed between August 2012 and April 2014, and grouped into 'major city' (49%), 'inner regional' (37%), and 'outer regional/remote' (14%) according to the Australian Standard Geographical Classification based on postcode. Multinomial logistic regression analyses were conducted to determine geographical differences in socio-demographic and clinical characteristics, health service use, and perceived barriers to health service access.

RESULTS

The 'inner regional group' and 'outer regional/remote group' were more likely to be male (relative risk ratio (RRR)=1.38,95%CI 1.08-1.77 and RRR = 1.60, 95%CI 1.14-2.24) and have no private health insurance (RRR = 1.53, 95%CI 1.19-1.97 and RRR = 1.65, 95%CI 1.16-2.37) than the 'major city group' (49%). However, the 'inner regional group' reported lower pain severity and better mental health relative to the 'major city group' = 0.92, 95%CI 0.86-0.98 and RRR = 1.02, 95%CI 1.01-1.03, respectively). Although rates of health service access were generally similar, the 'outer regional/remote group' were more likely to report client-practitioner communication problems (RRR = 1.57, 95%CI 1.03-2.37), difficulties accessing specialists (RRR = 1.56, 95%CI 1.01-2.39), and perception of practitioner lack of confidence in prescribing pain medication (RRR = 1.73, 1.14-2.62), relative to both groups.

CONCLUSION

Perceived communication, access, and financial barriers to healthcare indicate the need for increased efforts to address geographic inequality in pain treatment.

Pain, alcohol use disorders and risky patterns of drinking among people with chronic non-cancer pain receiving long-term opioid therapy

BACKGROUND

The utilisation of pharmaceutical opioids has increased internationally, and there is evidence of increasing risky alcohol consumption with ageing. This study examines the patterns and correlates of risky drinking among people with chronic non-cancer pain (CNCP) prescribed opioids, and the associations between alcohol consumption and pain.

METHODS

The Pain and Opioids IN Treatment cohort comprises 1514 people in Australia prescribed pharmaceutical opioids for CNCP. Participants reported lifetime, past year and past month alcohol use, as well as mental and physical health, other substance use, pain characteristics, and current opioid dose.

RESULTS

Less than one-tenth of the sample were 'lifetime abstainers' (7%); 34% were 'former drinkers'; 34% were 'non-risky drinkers' (i.e., past 12 month use ≤4 standard drinks); 16% were 'occasional risky drinkers'; and 8% were 'regular risky drinkers' (i.e., ≥weekly use of >4 standard drinks). Males reported greater levels of alcohol use, and a third (33%) of the total sample reported a lifetime alcohol use disorder. Controlling for demographics, mental health, physical health and substance use disorder history, 'former drinkers' (cf. 'non-risky drinkers') reported higher pain severity and interference ratings, and lower pain coping. 'Occasional risky drinkers' and 'regular risky drinkers' (cf. 'non-risky drinkers') reported higher levels of pain interference.

CONCLUSIONS

Among people with CNCP, those who abstained from alcohol or drank at risky levels reported poorer pain outcomes compared with moderate drinkers. Early identification and intervention for risky drinking among people is critical, particularly given the risks associated with co-administration of alcohol and opioids.

Development of a brief tool for monitoring aberrant behaviours among patients receiving long-term opioid therapy: The Opioid-Related Behaviours In Treatment (ORBIT) scale

BACKGROUND

Early identification of problems is essential in minimising the unintended consequences of opioid therapy. This study aimed to develop a brief scale that identifies and quantifies recent aberrant behaviour among diverse patient populations receiving long-term opioid treatment.

METHOD

40 scale items were generated via literature review and expert panel (N=19) and tested in surveys of: (i) N=41 key experts, and (ii) N=426 patients prescribed opioids >3 months (222 pain patients and 204 opioid substitution therapy (OST) patients). We employed item and scale psychometrics (exploratory factor analyses, confirmatory factor analyses and item-response theory statistics) to refine items to a brief scale.

RESULTS

Following removal of problematic items (poor retest-reliability or wording, semantic redundancy, differential item functioning, collinearity or rarity) iterative factor analytic procedures identified a 10-item unifactorial scale with good model fit in the total sample (N=426; CFI=0.981, TLI=0.975, RMSEA=0.057), and among pain (CFI=0.969, TLI=0.960, RMSEA=0.062) and OST subgroups (CFI=0.989, TFI=0.986, RMSEA=0.051). The 10 items provided good discrimination between groups, demonstrated acceptable test-retest reliability (ICC 0.80, 95% CI 0.60-0.89; Cronbach's alpha=0.89), were moderately correlated with related constructs, including opioid dependence (SDS), depression and stress (DASS subscales) and Social Relationships and Environment domains of the WHO-QoL, and had strong face validity among advising clinicians.

CONCLUSIONS

The Opioid-Related Behaviours In Treatment (ORBIT) scale is brief, reliable and validated for use in diverse patient groups receiving opioids. The ORBIT has potential applications as a checklist to prompt clinical discussions and as a tool to quantify aberrant behaviour and assess change over time.

Health service utilisation by people living with chronic non-cancer pain: findings from the Pain and Opioids IN Treatment (POINT) study

Objective The aims of the present study were to describe the use, and barriers to the use, of non-medication pain therapies and to identify the demographic and clinical correlates of different non-opioid pain treatments. Methods The study was performed on a cohort (n=1514) of people prescribed pharmaceutical opioids for chronic non-cancer pain (CNCP). Participants reported lifetime and past month use of healthcare services, mental and physical health, pain characteristics, current oral morphine equivalent daily doses and financial and access barriers to healthcare services. Results Participants reported the use of non-opioid pain treatments, both before and after commencing opioid therapy. Services accessed most in the past month were complementary and alternative medicines (CAMs; 41%), physiotherapy (16%) and medical and/or pain specialists (15%). Higher opioid dose was associated with increased financial and access barriers to non-opioid treatment. Multivariate analyses indicated being younger, female and having private health insurance were the factors most commonly associated with accessing non-opioid treatments. Conclusions Patients on long-term opioid therapy report using multiple types of pain treatments. High rates of CAM use are concerning given limited evidence of efficacy for some therapies and the low-income status of most people with CNCP. Financial and insurance barriers highlight the importance of considering how different types of treatments are paid for and subsidised. What is known about the topic? Given concerns regarding long-term efficacy, adverse side-effects and risk of misuse and dependence, prescribing guidelines recommend caution in prescribing pharmaceutical opioids in cases of CNCP, typically advising a multidisciplinary approach to treatment. There is a range of evidence supporting different (non-drug) treatment approaches for CNCP to reduce pain severity and increase functioning. However, little is known about the non-opioid treatments used among those with CNCP and the demographic and clinical characteristics that may be associated with the use of different types of treatments. Understanding the use of non-drug therapy among people with CNCP is crucial given the potential to improve pain control for these patients. What does this paper add? The present study found that a wide range of non-opioid treatments was accessed by the study sample, both before and after commencing opioids, indicating that in this sample opioids were not the sole strategy used for pain management. The most common treatment (other than opioids) was CAM, reported by two-fifths of the sample. Having private health insurance was associated with increased use of non-opioid treatments for pain, highlighting the importance of considering how treatments are paid for and potential financial barriers to effective treatments. What are the implications for practitioners? Patients' beliefs and financial barriers may affect the uptake of different treatments. Many patients may be using complementary and alternative approaches with limited evidence to support their use, highlighting the need for clinicians to discuss with patients the range of prescribed and non-prescribed treatments they are accessing and to help them understand the benefits and risks of treatments that have not been tested sufficiently, or have inconsistent evidence, as to their efficacy in improving pain outcomes.

The use of paracetamol (acetaminophen) among a community sample of people with chronic non-cancer pain prescribed opioids

BACKGROUND

The regular use of simple analgesics in addition to opioids such as paracetamol (or acetaminophen) is recommended for persistent pain to enhance analgesia. Few studies have examined the frequency and doses of paracetamol among people with chronic non-cancer pain including use above the recommended maximum daily dose.

AIMS

To assess (i) the prevalence of paracetamol use among people with chronic non-cancer pain prescribed opioids, (ii) assess the prevalence of paracetamol use above the recommended maximum daily dose and (iii) assess correlates of people who used paracetamol above the recommended maximum daily dose including: age, gender, income, education, pain severity and interference, use of paracetamol/opioid combination analgesics, total opioid dose, depression, anxiety, pain self-efficacy or comorbid substance use, among people prescribed opioids for chronic non-cancer pain.

METHODS

This study draws on baseline data collected for the Pain and Opioids IN Treatment (POINT) study and utilises data from 962 interviews and medication diaries. The POINT study is national prospective cohort of people with chronic non-cancer pain prescribed opioids. Participants were recruited from randomly selected pharmacies across Australia.

RESULTS

Sixty-three per cent of the participants had used paracetamol in the past week (95% CI = 59.7-65.8). Among the paracetamol users 22% (95% CI = 19.3-24.6) had used paracetamol/opioid combination analgesics and 4.8% (95% CI = 3.6-6.3) had used paracetamol above the recommended maximum daily dose (i.e. > 4000 mg/day). Following binomial logistic regression (χ(2) = 25.98, df = 10, p = 0.004), people who had taken above the recommended maximum daily dose were less likely to have low income (AOR = 0.52, 95% CI = 0.27-0.99), more likely to use paracetamol/opioid combination analgesics (AOR = 2.01, 95% CI = 1.02-3.98) and more likely to take a higher opioid dose (AOR = 1.00, 95% CI = 1.00-1.01).

CONCLUSION

The majority of people with chronic non-cancer pain prescribed opioids report using paracetamol appropriately. High income, use of paracetamol/opioid combination analgesics and higher opioid dose were independently associated with paracetamol use above the recommended maximum daily dose.

The Pain and Opioids IN Treatment study: characteristics of a cohort using opioids to manage chronic non-cancer pain

There has been a recent increase in public and professional concern about the prescription of strong prescription opioids for pain. Despite this concern, research to date has been limited because of a number of factors such as small sample sizes, exclusion of people with complex comorbidities, and studies of short duration. The Pain and Opioids IN Treatment is a 2-year prospective cohort study of 1500 people prescribed with pharmaceutical opioids for their chronic pain. This article provides an overview of the demographic and clinical characteristics of the cohort using the baseline data of 1514 community-based people across Australia. Participants had been in pain for a period of 10 years and had been on prescription opioids for approximately 4 years. One in 10 was on a daily morphine equivalent dose of ≥200 mg. Employment and income levels were low, and two-thirds of the sample reported that their pain had impacted on their employment status. Approximately 50% screened positive for current moderate-to-severe depression, and 1 in 5 had made a lifetime suicide attempt. There were a number of age-related differences. The younger groups experienced higher levels of pain and pain interference, more mental health and substance use issues, and barriers to treatment, compared with the older group. This study found that the people who have been prescribed strong opioids for chronic pain have very complex demographic and clinical profiles. Major age-related differences in the experiences of pain, coping, mental health, and substance use suggest the necessity of differential approaches to treatment.

Factors associated with the development of depression in chronic non-cancer pain patients following the onset of opioid treatment for pain

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Pharmaceutical opioid prescription rates are increasing globally, however knowledge of their long-term effects on mental health, in particular depression remains limited. This study aimed to identify factors associated with the onset of depression post-opioid use that differ to factors associated with depression post-pain.

METHOD

Participants (N = 1418) were a national sample prescribed opioids for chronic non-cancer pain. Age at onset of depression, pain and commencement of opioid medications were collected via structured interview.

RESULTS

Six in 10 (61%) reported lifetime depression; of those, almost half developed depression after pain and after they started opioid medications (48%). Variables associated with post-opioid depression included lower pain self-efficacy and poorer social support, younger onset of opioid use, and difficulties and concerns with opioid medications.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings highlight the importance of monitoring for the emergence of mood dysfunction, particularly for those starting opioids for pain at a younger age, and consideration of psychological treatments that address self-efficacy that appears to be associated with post-opioid depression.

Associations of borderline personality with pain, problems with medications and suicidality in a community sample of chronic non-cancer pain patients prescribed opioids for pain

OBJECTIVE

Borderline personality disorder (BPD) is common in patients with chronic non-cancer pain (CNCP). BPD patients often report worse pain and are more likely to abuse opioid medication. Although the prevalence of suicidality is high in both CNCP patients and those with BPD, no studies have examined the interrelationship of BPD, CNCP and suicidality. This article aims to examine the prevalence and associations of BPD in a large community sample of CNCP patients and the association with medication problems and suicidality.

METHODS

Data from a national sample of 978 CNCP patients prescribed pharmaceutical opioids for CNCP. The screener from the International Classification of Diseases, version 10, International Personality Disorder Examination was used to identify patients with symptoms of BPD.

RESULTS

One in five CNCP patients (19.1%) screened positive for BPD. BPD was associated with a number of demographic and clinical features, such as daily benzodiazepine use, and was independently associated with lifetime pharmaceutical opioid dependence [odds ratio (OR) 2.49, 95% confidence interval (95% CI) 1.42-4.38], past 12-month suicidal thoughts (OR 2.9, 95% CI 1.90-4.39) and lifetime suicide attempts (OR 3.19, 95% CI 2.16-4.72).

CONCLUSIONS

BPD symptoms were prevalent among people prescribed opioids for CNCP and are associated with a number of adverse consequences. Further, those screening positive were at elevated risk of suicidal behaviors. Careful opioid prescription monitoring and appropriate referrals by clinicians are warranted in BPD with CNCP.

Persistence with opioid treatment in Germany in patients suffering from chronic non-malignant or cancer pain

BACKGROUND

The aim of the present study was to assess factors influencing opioid persistence in a large patient cohort of 32,158 patients receiving opioid treatment for either chronic non-malignant or cancer pain.

METHODS

Data from 32,158 patients with first-time prescription of an opioid in the timeframe from January 2009 until December 2013 treated in 115 orthopedic, 104 neurological and 1129 general practitioner practices were retrospectively analyzed (Disease Analyzer database Germany). A Cox proportional hazards regression model was used to estimate the relationship between non-persistence and the demographic and clinical variables described previously for a maximum follow-up period of 1 year.

RESULTS

After 1 year of follow-up, 69% of patients treated with opioids had stopped medication intake (refill gap of 90 days). There was a significantly increased risk of treatment discontinuation for younger patients (<40 years HR: 1.45; 41-50 years HR: 1.37; 51-60 years HR: 1.23; 61-70 years HR: 1.22) as compared with patients aged >70. Cancer pain was associated with a significantly lower risk of therapy discontinuation (HR: 0.69), whereas persistence was considerably less probable for diagnoses such as various kinds of back pain (HR: 1.26), osteoarthritis (HR: 1.14) and spondylarthritis (HR: 1.09). Chronic comorbidities such as diabetes, hypertension, heart insufficiency, and dementia were associated with a decreased risk of treatment discontinuation.

CONCLUSION

Our study showed that persistence with opioid treatment is associated with cancer pain, chronic comorbidities and depression, while younger age and chronic non-malignant pain (especially due to back pain) increase the possibility of opioid discontinuation. It will be the task of future studies to assess reasons for opioid discontinuation in more detail, which is an important step towards improving patient care and health outcomes.

Pharmaceutical Opioid Use and Dependence among People Living with Chronic Pain: Associations Observed within the Pain and Opioids in Treatment (POINT) Cohort

OBJECTIVE

There is increasing concern about the appropriateness of prescribing pharmaceutical opioids for chronic non-cancer pain (CNCP), given the risks of problematic use and dependence. This article examines pharmaceutical opioid dose and dependence and examines the correlates of each.

DESIGN

Baseline data were obtained from a national sample of 1,424 people across Australia (median 58 years, 55% female and experiencing pain for a median of 10 years), who had been prescribed opioids for CNCP. Current opioid consumption was estimated in oral morphine equivalent (OME; mg per day), and ICD-10 pharmaceutical opioid dependence was assessed using the Composite International Diagnostic Interview.

RESULTS

Current opioid consumption varied widely: 8.8% were taking <20 mg OME per day, 52.1% were taking 21-90 mg OME, 24.3% were taking 91-199 mg OME, and 14.8% were taking >= 200 mg OME. Greater daily OME consumption was associated with higher odds of multiple physical and mental health issues, aberrant opioid use, problems associated with opioid medication and opioid dependence. A significant minority, 8.5%, met criteria for lifetime ICD-10 pharmaceutical opioid dependence and 4.7% met criteria for past year ICD-10 pharmaceutical opioid dependence. Multivariate analysis found past-year dependence was independently associated with being younger, exhibiting more aberrant behaviors and having a history of benzodiazepine dependence.

CONCLUSIONS

In this population of people taking opioids for CNCP, consumption of higher doses was associated with increased risk of problematic behaviors, and was more likely among people with a complex profile of physical and mental health problems.

Agreement between definitions of pharmaceutical opioid use disorders and dependence in people taking opioids for chronic non-cancer pain (POINT): a cohort study

BACKGROUND

Classification of patients with pharmaceutical opioid use disorder and dependence varies depending on which definition is used. We compared how WHO's ICD-10 and proposed ICD-11 and the American Psychiatric Association's DSM-IV and DSM-5 classified individuals in a community-based sample of Australians with chronic non-cancer pain for which opioids have been prescribed.

METHODS

We studied participants in the Pain and Opioid IN Treatment (POINT) cohort, a 2 year prospective cohort study of 1514 people prescribed pharmaceutical opioids for their chronic pain who were recruited in 2012-13 from community-based pharmacies across Australia. After giving patients the Composite International Diagnostic Interview about their opioid use, we assessed which patients would be categorised as having disorders of pharmaceutical opioid use by ICD-10, the draft ICD-11, DSM-IV, and DSM-5. We examined agreement between classification systems, and tested the unidimensionality of the syndrome with confirmatory factor analysis.

FINDINGS

We included 1422 participants (median time of pain disorder 10 years [IQR 5-20]; median length of strong opioid prescription 4 years [IQR 1·5-10·0]; mean age 58 years). Similar proportions of individuals met lifetime criteria for dependence with DSM-IV (127; 8·9%), ICD-10 (121; 8·5%), and ICD-11 (141; 9·9%). Criteria in DSM-5 classified 127 (8·9%) participants with moderate or severe use disorder. There was excellent agreement between ICD-10, ICD-11 and DSM-IV dependence (κ>0·90). However, there was only fair to moderate agreement between ICD-10 and DSM-IV dependence diagnoses, and DSM-5 use disorder (mild, moderate, or severe). There was only good agreement between moderate to severe use disorder in DSM-5 and the other definitions. Criteria for all definitions loaded well on a single factor; the best model fit was for the definition for dependence in the draft ICD-11, the worst was in DSM-5.

INTERPRETATION

Classification of problematic pharmaceutical opioid use varies across editions of ICD and DSM. The much lower levels of agreement between DSM-5 and other definitions than between other definitions might be attributed to DSM-5 containing an increased number of criteria and treating dependence and problematic use as a continuum. The more parsimonious ICD-11 dependence definition showed excellent model fit and excellent agreement with previous classificatory systems.

FUNDING

Australian National Health and Medical Research Council.

Experience of adjunctive cannabis use for chronic non-cancer pain: findings from the Pain and Opioids IN Treatment (POINT) study

BACKGROUND

There is increasing debate about cannabis use for medical purposes, including for symptomatic treatment of chronic pain. We investigated patterns and correlates of cannabis use in a large community sample of people who had been prescribed opioids for chronic non-cancer pain.

METHODS

The POINT study included 1514 people in Australia who had been prescribed pharmaceutical opioids for chronic non-cancer pain. Data on cannabis use, ICD-10 cannabis use disorder and cannabis use for pain were collected. We explored associations between demographic, pain and other patient characteristics and cannabis use for pain.

RESULTS

One in six (16%) had used cannabis for pain relief, 6% in the previous month. A quarter reported that they would use it for pain relief if they had access. Those using cannabis for pain on average were younger, reported greater pain severity, greater interference from and poorer coping with pain, and more days out of role in the past year. They had been prescribed opioids for longer, were on higher opioid doses, and were more likely to be non-adherent with their opioid use. Those using cannabis for pain had higher pain interference after controlling for reported pain severity. Almost half (43%) of the sample had ever used cannabis for recreational purposes, and 12% of the entire cohort met criteria for an ICD-10 cannabis use disorder.

CONCLUSIONS

Cannabis use for pain relief purposes appears common among people living with chronic non-cancer pain, and users report greater pain relief in combination with opioids than when opioids are used alone.