Discontinuation of psychotropic medication: a synthesis of evidence across medication classes

Pharmacotherapy is an effective treatment modality across psychiatric disorders. Nevertheless, many patients discontinue their medication at some point. Evidence-based guidance for patients, clinicians, and policymakers on rational discontinuation strategies is vital to enable the best, personalized treatment for any given patient. Nonetheless, there is a scarcity of guidelines on discontinuation strategies. In this perspective, we therefore summarize and critically appraise the evidence on discontinuation of six major psychotropic medication classes: antidepressants, antipsychotics, benzodiazepines, mood stabilizers, opioids, and stimulants. For each medication class, a wide range of topics pertaining to each of the following questions are discussed: (1) Who can discontinue (e.g., what are risk factors for relapse?); (2) When to discontinue (e.g., after 1 year or several years of antidepressant use?); and (3) How to discontinue (e.g., what's the efficacy of dose reduction compared to full cessation and interventions to mitigate relapse risk?). We thus highlight how comparing the evidence across medication classes can identify knowledge gaps, which may pave the way for more integrated research on discontinuation.

Clinical practice guideline for deprescribing opioid analgesics: summary of recommendations

INTRODUCTION

Long term opioids are commonly prescribed to manage pain. Dose reduction or discontinuation (deprescribing) can be challenging, even when the potential harms of continuation outweigh the perceived benefits. The Evidence-based clinical practice guideline for deprescribing opioid analgesics was developed using robust guideline development processes and Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology, and contains deprescribing recommendations for adults prescribed opioids for pain.

MAIN RECOMMENDATIONS

Eleven recommendations provide advice about when, how and for whom opioid deprescribing should be considered, while noting the need to consider each person's goals, values and preferences. The recommendations aim to achieve: implementation of a deprescribing plan at the point of opioid initiation; initiation of opioid deprescribing for persons with chronic non-cancer or chronic cancer-survivor pain if there is a lack of overall and clinically meaningful improvement in function, quality of life or pain, a lack of progress towards meeting agreed therapeutic goals, or the person is experiencing serious or intolerable opioid-related adverse effects; gradual and individualised deprescribing, with regular monitoring and review; consideration of opioid deprescribing for individuals at high risk of opioid-related harms; avoidance of opioid deprescribing for persons nearing the end of life unless clinically indicated; avoidance of opioid deprescribing for persons with a severe opioid use disorder, with the initiation of evidence-based care, such as medication-assisted treatment of opioid use disorder; and use of evidence-based co-interventions to facilitate deprescribing, including interdisciplinary, multidisciplinary or multimodal care.

CHANGES IN MANAGEMENT AS A RESULT OF THESE GUIDELINES

To our knowledge, these are the first evidence-based guidelines for opioid deprescribing. The recommendations intend to facilitate safe and effective deprescribing to improve the quality of care for persons taking opioids for pain.

Efficacy of interventions to reduce long term opioid treatment for chronic non-cancer pain: systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To review interventions to reduce long term opioid treatment in people with chronic non-cancer pain, considering efficacy on dose reduction and discontinuation, pain, function, quality of life, withdrawal symptoms, substance use, and adverse events.

DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials and non-randomised studies of interventions.

DATA SOURCES

Medline, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL, and the Cochrane Library searched from inception to July 2021. Reference lists and previous reviews were also searched and experts were contacted.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR STUDY SELECTION

Original research in English. Case reports and cross sectional studies were excluded.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Two authors independently selected studies, extracted data, and used the Cochrane risk-of-bias tools for randomised and non-randomised studies (RoB 2 and ROBINS-I). Authors grouped interventions into five categories (pain self-management, complementary and alternative medicine, pharmacological and biomedical devices and interventions, opioid replacement treatment, and deprescription methods), estimated pooled effects using random effects meta-analytical models, and appraised the certainty of evidence using GRADE (grading of recommendations, assessment, development, and evaluation).

RESULTS

Of 166 studies meeting inclusion criteria, 130 (78%) were considered at critical risk of bias and were excluded from the evidence synthesis. Of the 36 included studies, few had comparable treatment arms and sample sizes were generally small. Consequently, the certainty of the evidence was low or very low for more than 90% (41/44) of GRADE outcomes, including for all non-opioid patient outcomes. Despite these limitations, evidence of moderate certainty indicated that interventions to support prescribers' adherence to guidelines increased the likelihood of patients discontinuing opioid treatment (adjusted odds ratio 1.5, 95% confidence interval 1.0 to 2.1), and that these prescriber interventions as well as pain self-management programmes reduced opioid dose more than controls (intervention v control, mean difference -6.8 mg (standard error 1.6) daily oral morphine equivalent, P<0.001; pain programme v control, -14.31 mg daily oral morphine equivalent, 95% confidence interval -21.57 to -7.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Evidence on the reduction of long term opioid treatment for chronic pain continues to be constrained by poor study methodology. Of particular concern is the lack of evidence relating to possible harms. Agreed standards for designing and reporting studies on the reduction of opioid treatment are urgently needed.

REVIEW REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD42020140943.

How Do We Taper and Discontinue Opioids in Cancer Patients? Considerations from the Activities of a Palliative Care Team at a University Hospital

Background: The more the cancer treatments progress, the more the needs increase to taper and discontinue opioids in cancer patients. Furthermore, opioid dependence of cancer survivors has become a bigger problem. However, a safe opioid tapering and discontinuation method has not yet been established in cancer patients.

Objective: To suggest a safe opioid tapering and discontinuation method in cancer patients.

Design: We reviewed opioid type, dose, administration route, administration duration, reason for tapering and discontinuation, and presence/absence of opioid withdrawal symptoms in cancer patients whose opioids needed to be tapered and discontinued.

Setting/Subjects: We recruited cancer patients referred to the palliative care team of Kyoto University Hospital-Japan whose opioids were tapered and discontinued.

Measurements: Opioid withdrawal symptoms were assessed by two physicians, one nurse, and one pharmacist of palliative care team.

Results: Opioids were tapered and discontinued in 25 out of 145 cancer patients (17%). Opioid withdrawal symptoms were observed in 3 of the 25 cases (12%). In withdrawal symptom cases and nonwithdrawal symptom cases, the mean maximum oral morphine-equivalent doses of opioids were 352.0 and 55.7 mg/day, and the mean administration duration of opioid were 82.3 and 28.7 days, respectively. Withdrawal symptoms occurred in patients receiving higher-dose opioids with longer administration duration and their symptoms tended to appear at approximately 10% of the maximum dose.

Conclusions: We suggest that withdrawal symptoms may be prevented by using a two-stage method rather than a monotonous tapering method in cancer patients whose higher-dose opioid with longer administration duration needed to be tapered and discontinued.

Opioid Tapering/Detoxification Protocols, A Compendium: Narrative Review

OBJECTIVES

The opioid epidemic has put pressure on clinicians to taper their chronic pain patients (CPPs) from opioids. This has resulted in rapid or forced tapers and opioid discontinuation. Partially responsible is lack of information on how to taper (tapering protocols).The objectives of this narrative review were then the following: compile all the published opioid tapering/detoxification protocols from the pain/drug rehabilitation/psychiatric literature whether for inpatient or outpatient use; organize these into general types; compare the types for advantages/disadvantages for use by a clinician in an outpatient setting; and answer some commonly asked questions relating to opioid tapering.

METHODS

Relevant references were identified by a search strategy utilizing the terms tapering, tapering protocols, detoxification, detoxification protocols, withdrawal, dependence, addiction, and drug rehabilitation. These were explored with the term opioids. Identified abstract were reviewed for any study relating to the objectives of this review. Those studies were then included in this review. As this is a narrative review, no quality ratings of these references were performed.

RESULTS

Of 1,922 abstracts identified by this search strategy, 301 were reviewed in detail for potential inclusion. Of these, 104 were utilized in this review. Nine types of opioid tapering protocols were identified and compared in tabular form. Twenty-two questions in reference to opioid tapering were addressed.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on this review, the protocol utilizing the opioid of current use is the simplest to use as it requires no rotation to another opioid and thereby avoids rotation errors. It also has behavior advantages.

Clinical and psychological factors associated with interdose opioid withdrawal in chronic pain population

BACKGROUND

The DSM-5 diagnostic criteria for Prescription Opioid-Use Disorder (POUD) have undergone some significant changes. One of the most controversial changes has been the elimination of the withdrawal symptoms criterion when opioid use is under appropriate medical supervision. For this reason, the goal of this study was to analyze factors associated with opioid withdrawal in patients with chronic non-cancer pain (CNCP).

METHODS

This cross-sectional descriptive study involved 404 patients who use prescription opioids for long-term treatment (≥90 days) of CNCP. Measures included sociodemographic and clinical characteristics, POUD, withdrawal symptoms, craving, anxiety-depressive symptoms, and pain intensity and interference.

RESULTS

Forty-seven percent (n = 193) of the sample reported moderate-severe withdrawal symptoms, which were associated with lower age, higher daily morphine dose and duration of treatment with opioids, moderate-severe POUD, use of psychotropic drugs, higher anxiety-depressive symptoms, and greater pain intensity and interference (p < .05). Binary logistic regression analysis showed that moderate-severe POUD (OR = 2.82), anxiety (OR = 2.21), depression (OR = 1.81), higher pain interference (OR = 1.05), and longer duration of treatment with opioids were the strongest factors associated with moderate-severe withdrawal symptoms (p < .05).

CONCLUSION

Psychological factors seem to play a key role in the severity of withdrawal symptoms. Since greater intensity of these symptoms increases the risk of developing POUD, knowing the factors associated with withdrawal may be useful in developing preventive psychological interventions.

Benefits and Harms of Long-term Opioid Dose Reduction or Discontinuation in Patients with Chronic Pain: a Rapid Review

BACKGROUND

Many clinicians are reevaluating the use of long-term opioid therapy (LTOT) for chronic pain in response to the opioid crisis and calls from organizations including the Centers for Disease Control & Prevention to limit prescribing of high-dose opioids. However, this practice change is occurring largely in the absence of data regarding patient outcomes. A 2017 systematic review found inconclusive evidence on the impact of LTOT dose reduction and discontinuation on pain severity and function, quality of life, withdrawal symptoms, substance abuse, and adverse effects. This rapid systematic review provides an updated evidence synthesis of patient outcomes following LTOT dose reduction including serious harms such as overdose and suicide.

METHODS

We systematically searched numerous bibliographic databases from January 2017 (the end search date of the 2017 systematic review) through May 2020. One reviewer used prespecified criteria to assess articles for inclusion, evaluate study quality, abstract data, and grade strength of evidence, with a second reviewer checking.

RESULTS

We included 49 studies-1 systematic review, 34 studies included in that systematic review, and 14 new studies. We prioritized evidence synthesis of 19 studies with the most applicability to the Veteran population and outpatient settings. Among these studies, improvements in mean pain scores were common among patients tapering opioids while participating in intensive multimodal pain interventions and mostly unchanged with less intensive or nonspecific co-interventions. Our confidence in these findings is low due to methodological limitations of the studies. Observational data suggests that serious harms such as opioid overdose and suicidal ideation can occur following opioid dose reduction or discontinuation, but the incidence of these harms at the population level is unknown.

DISCUSSION

The net balance of benefits and harms of LTOT dose reduction for patients with chronic pain is unclear. Clinicians should closely monitor patients during the tapering process given the potential for harm.

Deprescribing long-term opioid therapy in patients with chronic pain

Proposed regulatory changes will limit the access to opioids by Australian patients with chronic pain, many of whom are under the care of consultant physicians. This review summarises points of consensus on opioid deprescribing that emerged from the interaction of an expert panel and the audience at a symposium on the topic held in Sydney in 2019. Each of these consensus points speaks to the need for an individualised, patient-centred approach. In other words, 'treat the patient, not the pill count'.