Dataset Information

Prevalence and determinants of cannabinoid prescription for the management of chronic noncancer pain: a postal survey of physicians in the Abitibi-Temiscamingue region of Quebec.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Few studies have been conducted to explore physicians' prescription practices and attitudes toward the use of cannabinoids in Canada.We measured the prevalence and identified determinants of cannabinoid prescription for the management of chronic noncancer pain among physicians in southwestern Quebec.

Methods

In February 2013, we conducted a postal survey using a modified Dillman method that involved physicians practising in the Abitibi-Témiscamingue region of Quebec. We used multivariate logistic regression models to identify determinants of cannabinoid prescription.

Results

A total of 166 physicians of 318 practising in the region participated in the survey (response rate 52.2%). The prevalence of cannabinoid prescription was 27.3% (45/165) for any indication and 23.0% (38/165) for the management of chronic noncancer pain; 91.1% (41/45) of the physicians prescribed cannabinoids to 5 or fewer patients. Of the 38 physicians who prescribed cannabinoids for chronic noncancer pain, 35 (92.1%) prescribed nabilone, 7 (18.4%) medical marijuana and 2 (5.3%) nabiximols. The principal determinant of cannabinoid prescription was the physician's level of comfort with prescribing cannabinoids (adjusted odds ratio 1.25, 95% confidence interval 1.01-1.55, per 1-point increase in comfort level measured on 10-point scale). Respondents reported that continuing medical education (CME) activities could increase their comfort level. They also indicated a need for guidelines or algorithms that included cannabinoid use as well as more studies about the efficacy and safety of cannabinoids for the management of chronic noncancer pain.

Interpretation

We found that cannabinoids were not often prescribed for the management of chronic noncancer pain and that survey respondents were not comfortable with prescribing this drug class. This degree of discomfort could be addressed by CME activities, more effective dissemination of guidelines and more evidence regarding cannabinoid use for the management of chronic noncancer pain.

SUBMITTER: St-Amant H

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4565172 | biostudies-literature | 2015 Apr-Jun

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Prevalence and determinants of cannabinoid prescription for the management of chronic noncancer pain: a postal survey of physicians in the Abitibi-Témiscamingue region of Quebec.

St-Amant Huguette H Ware Mark A MA Julien Nancy N Lacasse Anaïs A

CMAJ open 20150402 2

<h4>Background</h4>Few studies have been conducted to explore physicians' prescription practices and attitudes toward the use of cannabinoids in Canada.We measured the prevalence and identified determinants of cannabinoid prescription for the management of chronic noncancer pain among physicians in southwestern Quebec.<h4>Methods</h4>In February 2013, we conducted a postal survey using a modified Dillman method that involved physicians practising in the Abitibi-Témiscamingue region of Quebec. We ...[more]

PMID: 26389104

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportanceInitiation of injection drug use may be more frequent among people dispensed prescription opioid therapy for noncancer pain, potentially increasing the risk of hepatitis C virus (HCV) acquisition.ObjectiveTo assess the association between medically dispensed long-term prescription opioid therapy for noncancer pain and HCV seroconversion among individuals who were initially injection drug use-naive.Design, setting, and participantsA population-based, retrospective cohort study of individuals tested for HCV in British Columbia, Canada, with linkage to outpatient pharmacy dispensations, was conducted. Individuals with an initial HCV-negative test result followed by 1 additional test between January 1, 2000, and December 31, 2017, and who had no history of substance use at baseline (first HCV-negative test), were included. Participants were followed up from baseline to the last HCV-negative test or estimated date of seroconversion (midpoint between HCV-positive and the preceding HCV-negative test).ExposuresEpisodes of prescription opioid use for noncancer pain were defined as acute (<90 days) or long-term (≥90 days). Prescription opioid exposure status (long-term vs prescription opioid-naive/acute) was treated as time-varying in survival analyses. In secondary analyses, long-term exposure was stratified by intensity of use (chronic vs. episodic) and by average daily dose in morphine equivalents (MEQ).Main outcomes and measuresMultivariable Cox regression models were used to assess the association between time-varying prescription opioid status and HCV seroconversion.ResultsA total of 382 478 individuals who had more than 1 HCV test were included, of whom more than half were female (224 373 [58.7%]), born before 1974 (201 944 [52.8%]), and younger than 35 years at baseline (196 298 [53.9%]). Participants were followed up for 2 057 668 person-years and 1947 HCV seroconversions occurred. Of the participants, 41 755 people (10.9%) were exposed to long-term prescription opioid therapy at baseline or during follow-up. The HCV seroconversion rate per 1000 person-years was 0.8 among the individuals who were prescription opioid-naive/acute (1489 of 1947 [76.5%] seroconversions; 0.4% seroconverted within 5 years) and 2.1 with long-term prescription opioid therapy (458 of 1947 [23.5%] seroconversions; 1.1% seroconverted within 5 years). In multivariable analysis, exposure to long-term prescription opioid therapy was associated with a 3.2-fold (95% CI, 2.9-3.6) higher risk of HCV seroconversion (vs prescription opioid-naive/acute). In separate Cox models, long-term chronic use was associated with a 4.7-fold higher risk of HCV seroconversion (vs naive/acute use 95% CI, 3.9-5.8), and long-term higher-dose use (≥90 MEQ) was associated with a 5.1-fold higher risk (vs naive/acute use 95% CI, 3.7-7.1).Conclusions and relevanceIn this cohort study of people with more than 1 HCV test, long-term prescription opioid therapy for noncancer pain was associated with a higher risk of HCV seroconversion among individuals who were injection drug use-naive at baseline or at prescription opioid initiation. These results suggest injection drug use initiation risk is higher among people dispensed long-term therapy and may be useful for informing approaches to identify and prevent HCV infection. These findings should not be used to justify abrupt discontinuation of long-term therapy, which could increase risk of harms.

Project description:ImportanceLong-acting opioids increase the risk of unintentional overdose deaths but also may increase mortality from cardiorespiratory and other causes.ObjectiveTo compare all-cause mortality for patients with chronic noncancer pain who were prescribed either long-acting opioids or alternative medications for moderate to severe chronic pain.Design, setting, and participantsRetrospective cohort study between 1999 and 2012 of Tennessee Medicaid patients with chronic noncancer pain and no evidence of palliative or end-of-life care.ExposuresPropensity score-matched new episodes of prescribed therapy for long-acting opioids or either analgesic anticonvulsants or low-dose cyclic antidepressants (control medications).Main outcomes and measuresTotal and cause-specific mortality as determined from death certificates. Adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) and risk differences (difference in incidence of death) were calculated for long-acting opioid therapy vs control medication.ResultsThere were 22,912 new episodes of prescribed therapy for both long-acting opioids and control medications (mean [SD] age, 48 [11] years; 60% women). The long-acting opioid group was followed up for a mean 176 days and had 185 deaths and the control treatment group was followed up for a mean 128 days and had 87 deaths. The HR for total mortality was 1.64 (95% CI, 1.26-2.12) with a risk difference of 68.5 excess deaths (95% CI, 28.2-120.7) per 10,000 person-years. Increased risk was due to out-of-hospital deaths (154 long-acting opioid, 60 control deaths; HR, 1.90; 95% CI, 1.40-2.58; risk difference, 67.1; 95% CI, 30.1-117.3) excess deaths per 10,000 person-years. For out-of-hospital deaths other than unintentional overdose (120 long-acting opioid, 53 control deaths), the HR was 1.72 (95% CI, 1.24-2.39) with a risk difference of 47.4 excess deaths (95% CI, 15.7-91.4) per 10,000 person-years. The HR for cardiovascular deaths (79 long-acting opioid, 36 control deaths) was 1.65 (95% CI, 1.10-2.46) with a risk difference of 28.9 excess deaths (95% CI, 4.6-65.3) per 10,000 person-years. The HR during the first 30 days of therapy (53 long-acting opioid, 13 control deaths) was 4.16 (95% CI, 2.27-7.63) with a risk difference of 200 excess deaths (95% CI, 80-420) per 10,000 person-years.Conclusions and relevancePrescription of long-acting opioids for chronic noncancer pain, compared with anticonvulsants or cyclic antidepressants, was associated with a significantly increased risk of all-cause mortality, including deaths from causes other than overdose, with a modest absolute risk difference. These findings should be considered when evaluating harms and benefits of treatment.

Project description:BackgroundOpioid use for chronic non-cancer pain (CNCP) is complex. In the absence of pan-European guidance on this issue, a position paper was commissioned by the European Pain Federation (EFIC).MethodsThe clinical practice recommendations were developed by eight scientific societies and one patient self-help organization under the coordination of EFIC. A systematic literature search in MEDLINE (up until January 2020) was performed. Two categories of guidance are given: Evidence-based recommendations (supported by evidence from systematic reviews of randomized controlled trials or of observational studies) and Good Clinical Practice (GCP) statements (supported either by indirect evidence or by case-series, case-control studies and clinical experience). The GRADE system was applied to move from evidence to recommendations. The recommendations and GCP statements were developed by a multiprofessional task force (including nursing, service users, physicians, physiotherapy and psychology) and formal multistep procedures to reach a set of consensus recommendations. The clinical practice recommendations were reviewed by five external reviewers from North America and Europe and were also posted for public comment.ResultsThe key clinical practice recommendations suggest: (a) first optimizing established non-pharmacological treatments and non-opioid analgesics and (b) considering opioid treatment if established non-pharmacological treatments or non-opioid analgesics are not effective and/or not tolerated and/or contraindicated. Evidence- and clinical consensus-based potential indications and contraindications for opioid treatment are presented. Eighteen GCP recommendations give guidance regarding clinical evaluation, as well as opioid treatment assessment, monitoring, continuation and discontinuation.ConclusionsOpioids remain a treatment option for some selected patients with CNCP under careful surveillance.SignificanceIn chronic pain, opioids are neither a universal cure nor a universally dangerous weapon. They should only be used for some selected chronic noncancer pain syndromes if established non-pharmacological and pharmacological treatment options have failed in supervised pain patients as part of a comprehensive, multi-modal, multi-disciplinary approach to treatment. In this context alone, opioid therapy can be a useful tool in achieving and maintaining an optimal level of pain control in some patients.

Project description:BackgroundMolecular oncology testing (MOT) to detect genomic alterations underlying cancer holds promise for improved cancer care. Yet knowledge limitations regarding the delivery of testing services may constrain the translation of scientific advancements into effective health care.MethodsWe conducted a cross-sectional, self-administered, postal survey of active cancer physicians in Ontario, Canada (N = 611) likely to order MOT, and cancer laboratories (N = 99) likely to refer (i.e., referring laboratories) or conduct (i.e., testing laboratories) MOT in 2006, to assess respondents' perceptions of the importance and accessibility of MOT and their preparedness to provide it.Results54% of physicians, 63% of testing laboratories and 60% of referring laboratories responded. Most perceived MOT to be important for treatment, diagnosis or prognosis now, and in 5 years (61% - 100%). Yet only 45% of physicians, 59% of testing labs and 53% of referring labs agreed that patients in their region were receiving MOT that is indicated as a standard of care. Physicians and laboratories perceived various barriers to providing MOT, including, among 70% of physicians, a lack of clear guidelines regarding clinical indications, and among laboratories, a lack of funding (73% - 100%). Testing laboratories were confident of their ability to determine whether and which MOT was indicated (77% and 82% respectively), and perceived that key elements of formal and continuing education were helpful (75% - 100%). By contrast, minorities of physicians were confident of their ability to assess whether and which MOT was indicated (46% and 34% respectively), and while majorities considered various continuing educational resources helpful (68% - 75%), only minorities considered key elements of formal education helpful in preparing for MOT (17% - 43%).ConclusionPhysicians and laboratory professionals were enthusiastic about the value of MOT for cancer care but most did not believe patients were gaining adequate access to clinically necessary testing. Further, our results suggest that many were ill equipped as individual stakeholders, or as a coordinated system of referral and interpretation, to provide MOT. These challenges should inspire educational, training and other interventions to ensure that developments in molecular oncology can result in optimal cancer care.