Dataset Information

Attitudes Toward Naloxone Prescribing in Clinical Settings: A Qualitative Study of Patients Prescribed High Dose Opioids for Chronic Non-Cancer Pain.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Over the last 2 decades, medical providers have increasingly prescribed pharmaceutical opioids for chronic non-cancer pain, while opioid overdose death rates have quadrupled. Naloxone, an opioid antagonist, can be prescribed to patients with chronic pain to reverse an opioid overdose, yet little is known about how patients perceive this emerging practice.

Objective

This study assessed the knowledge and attitudes toward naloxone prescribing among non-cancer patients prescribed opioids in primary care.

Design

Qualitative study design using semi-structured interviews.

Participants

Adults (N?=?24) prescribed high-dose (?100 morphine mg equivalent daily dose) chronic opioid therapy in eight primary care internal medicine, family medicine and HIV practices in three large Colorado health systems.

Approach

Inductive and deductive methods were used to analyze interview transcripts.

Key results

Themes emerged related to knowledge of and benefits, barriers and facilitators to naloxone in primary care. Patients reported receiving limited education about opioid medication risks from providers and limited knowledge of naloxone. When provided with a description of naloxone, patients recognized its ability to reverse overdoses. In addition to pragmatic barriers, such as medication cost, barriers to naloxone acceptance included the perception that overdose risk stems from medication misuse and that providers might infer that they were misusing their opioid medication if they accepted a naloxone prescription, prompting an opioid taper. Facilitators to the acceptance of naloxone included medical providers' using empowering, non-judgmental communication practices, framing naloxone for use in "worst case scenarios" and providing education and training about opioids and naloxone.

Conclusions

While patients recognized the utility of naloxone prescribing, we identified important barriers to patient acceptance of naloxone prescribing. To improve the naloxone prescribing acceptability in primary care practice, medical providers and health systems may need to enhance patient education, employ empowering, non-judgmental communication styles and adequately frame discussions about naloxone to address patients' fears.

SUBMITTER: Mueller SR

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5331002 | biostudies-literature | 2017 Mar

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Attitudes Toward Naloxone Prescribing in Clinical Settings: A Qualitative Study of Patients Prescribed High Dose Opioids for Chronic Non-Cancer Pain.

Mueller Shane R SR Koester Stephen S Glanz Jason M JM Gardner Edward M EM Binswanger Ingrid A IA

Journal of general internal medicine 20161031 3

<h4>Background</h4>Over the last 2 decades, medical providers have increasingly prescribed pharmaceutical opioids for chronic non-cancer pain, while opioid overdose death rates have quadrupled. Naloxone, an opioid antagonist, can be prescribed to patients with chronic pain to reverse an opioid overdose, yet little is known about how patients perceive this emerging practice.<h4>Objective</h4>This study assessed the knowledge and attitudes toward naloxone prescribing among non-cancer patients pres ...[more]

PMID: 27798775

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundOpioid prescribing for a range of health issues is increasing globally. The risk of fatal and non-fatal overdose is increased among people prescribed strong opioids: in high doses in the context of polypharmacy (the use of multiple medications at the same time), especially with other sedatives; and among people with multiple morbidities including cardiorespiratory, hepatic and renal conditions. This study described and quantified the prescribing of strong opioids, comorbidities and other overdose risk factors among those prescribed strong opioids, and factors associated with high/very high opioid dosage in a regional health authority in Scotland as part of a wider service improvement exercise.MethodsParticipating practices ran searches to identify patients prescribed strong opioids and their characteristics, polypharmacy, and other overdose risk factors. Data were anonymised before being analysed at practice and patient-level. Morphine Equivalent Doses were calculated for patients based on drug/dose information and classed as Low/Medium/High/Very High. Descriptive statistics were generated on the strong opioid patient population and overdose risk factors. The relationship between the prescribing of strong opioids and practice/patient-level factors was investigated using linear and logistic regression models.ResultsEighty-five percent (46/54) of GP practices participated. 12.4% (42,382/341,240) of individuals in participating practices were prescribed opioids and, of these, one third (14,079/42,382) were prescribed strong opioids. The most common comorbidities and overdose risk factors among strong opioid recipients were pain (67.2%), cardiovascular disease (43.2%), and mental health problems (39.3%). There was a positive significant relationship between level of social deprivation among practice caseload and level of strong opioid prescribing (p < 0.001). People prescribed strong opioids tended to be older (mean 59.7 years) and female (8638, 61.4%) and, among a subset of patients, age, gender and opioid drug class were significantly associated with prescribing of High/Very High doses.ConclusionsOur findings have identified a large population at potential risk of prescription opioid overdose. There is a need to explore pragmatic models of tailored interventions which may reduce the risk of overdose within this group and clinical practice may need to be tightened to minimise overdose risk for individuals prescribed high dose opioids.

Project description:BACKGROUND:After decades of increased opioid pain reliever prescribing, providers are rapidly reducing prescribing. We hypothesized that reduced access to prescribed opioid pain relievers among patients previously reliant upon opioid pain relievers would result in increased illicit opioid use. METHODS AND FINDINGS:We conducted a retrospective cohort study among 602 publicly insured primary care patients who had been prescribed opioids for chronic non-cancer pain for at least three consecutive months in San Francisco, recruited through convenience sampling. We conducted a historical reconstruction interview and medical chart abstraction focused on illicit substance use and opioid pain reliever prescriptions, respectively, from 2012 through the interview date in 2017-2018. We used a nested-cohort design, in which patients were classified, based on opioid pain reliever dose change, into a series of nested cohorts starting with each follow-up quarter. Using continuation-ratio models, we estimated associations between opioid prescription discontinuation or 30% increase or decrease in dose, relative to no change, and subsequent frequency of heroin and non-prescribed opioid pain reliever use, separately. Models controlled for demographics, clinical and behavioral characteristics, and past use of heroin or non-prescribed opioid pain relievers. A total of 56,372 and 56,484 participant-quarter observations were included from the 597 and 598 participants available for analyses of heroin and non-prescribed opioid pain reliever outcomes, respectively. Participants discontinued from prescribed opioids were more likely to use heroin (Adjusted Odds Ratio (AOR) = 1.57, 95% CI: 1.25-1.97) and non-prescribed opioid pain relievers (AOR = 1.75, 1.45-2.11) more frequently in subsequent quarters compared to participants with unchanged opioid prescriptions. Participants whose opioid pain reliever dose increased were more likely to use heroin more frequently (AOR = 1.67, 1.32-2.12). Results held throughout sensitivity analyses. The main limitations were the observational nature of results and limited generalizability beyond safety-net settings. CONCLUSIONS:Discontinuation of prescribed opioid pain relievers was associated with more frequent non-prescribed opioid pain reliever and heroin use; increased dose was also associated with more frequent heroin use. Clinicians should be aware of these risks in determining pain management approaches.

Project description:BackgroundCurrent guideline-recommended monitoring of patients prescribed long-term opioid therapy (LTOT) for chronic pain will likely result in increased identification of behaviors of concern for misuse and addiction, but there is a dearth of empiric evidence about how these behaviors should be managed.ObjectiveTo establish expert consensus about treatment approaches for common and challenging concerning behaviors that arise among patients on LTOT.DesignWe used a Delphi approach, which allows for generation of consensus.ParticipantsParticipants were clinical experts in chronic pain and opioid prescribing recruited from professional societies and other expert groups.Main measuresThe Delphi process was conducted online, and consisted of an initial brainstorming round to identify common and challenging behaviors, a second round to identify management strategies for each behavior, and two rounds to establish consensus and explore disagreement/uncertainty.Key resultsForty-two participants completed round 1, 22 completed round 2, 30 completed round 3, and 28 completed round 4. Half of round 1 participants were female (52%), and the majority were white (83%). Most (71%) were physicians, and most participants practiced in academic primary (40%) or specialty care (19%).The most frequently cited common and challenging behaviors were missing appointments, taking opioids for symptoms other than pain, using more opioid medication than prescribed, asking for an increase in opioid dose, aggressive behavior, and alcohol and other substance use. Across behaviors, participants agreed that patient education and information gathering were important approaches. Participants also agreed that stopping opioids is not important initially, but if initial approaches do not work, tapering opioids and stopping opioids immediately may become important approaches.ConclusionsThis study presents clinical expert consensus on how to manage concerning behaviors among patients on LTOT. Future research is needed to investigate how implementing these management strategies would impact patient outcomes, practice and policy.

Project description:BackgroundDespite escalating opioid overdose death rates, addiction medicine is underrepresented in residency curricula. Providing naloxone to at-risk patients, relatives, and first responders reduces overdose deaths, but rates of naloxone prescribing remain low. The goal of this study is to examine the impact of a brief curricular intervention for internal medicine residents on naloxone prescribing rates, knowledge, and attitudes.MethodsInternal medicine residents (N = 160) at an urban, tertiary care medical center received two 1-hour didactic sessions addressing overdose prevention, including intranasal naloxone. The number of naloxone prescriptions generated by residents was compared to faculty, who received no similar intervention, in the 3-month periods before and after the curriculum. Resident knowledge and attitudes, as assessed by pre- and post-intervention surveys, were compared.ResultsThe resident naloxone prescribing rate increased from 420 to 1270 per 100,000 inpatient discharges (P = .01) and from 0 to 370 per 100,000 ambulatory visits (P < .001) post-intervention. Similar increases were not observed among inpatient faculty, whose prescribing rate decreased from 1150 to 880 per 100,000 discharges (P = .08), or among outpatient faculty, whose rate increased from 30 to 180 per 100,000 ambulatory visits (P < .001) but was lower than the post-intervention resident rate (P = .01). Residents demonstrated high baseline knowledge about naloxone, but just 13% agreed that they were adequately trained to prescribe pre-intervention. Post-intervention, residents were more likely to agree that they were adequately trained to prescribe (Likert mean 2.5 vs. 3.9, P < .001), to agree that treating addiction is rewarding (Likert mean 2.9 vs. 3.3, P = .03), and to attain a perfect score on the knowledge composite (57% vs. 33%, P = .05).ConclusionsA brief curricular intervention improved resident knowledge and attitudes regarding intranasal naloxone for opioid overdose reversal and significantly increased prescribing rates.

Project description:ImportanceIn 2016, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) released the evidence-based Guideline for Prescribing Opioids for Chronic Pain. How the release of this guideline coincided with changes in nonopioid pain medication prescribing rates remains unknown.ObjectiveTo evaluate changes in nonopioid pain medication prescribing after the 2016 CDC guideline release and to assess the heterogeneity in these changes as a function of patient demographic and clinical characteristics.Design, setting, and participantsThis cohort study constructed 7 (4 preguideline and 3 postguideline) annual cohorts using claims data from the national Optum Clinformatics Data Mart Database for the period January 1, 2011, through December 31, 2018. The cohorts included adults with commercial insurance, no cancer or palliative care claims, and 2 years of continuous insurance enrollment. Individuals could qualify for inclusion in multiple cohorts. Each cohort covered a 2-year period, with year 1 as the baseline period used to calculate opioid exposure and other clinical characteristics and year 2 as the follow-up period used to calculate prescribing outcomes. Data were analyzed in March 2022.ExposuresThe CDC guideline, which was released in March 2016.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary outcome was receipt of any nonopioid pain medication prescriptions (analgesics or antipyretics, anticonvulsants, antidepressants, and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs) during the follow-up period. This postguideline prescribing pattern was compared with estimates based on the preguideline prescribing pattern, and then the differences were stratified by patient clinical characteristics (chronic pain, recent opioid exposure, substance use disorder, anxiety disorder, and mood disorder).ResultsA total of 15 879 241 individuals (2015 mean [SD] age, 50.2 [18.6] years; 8 298 271 female patients [52.3%]) qualified for inclusion in 1 or more cohorts. Logistic regression models showed that nonopioid pain medication prescribing odds were higher by 3.0% (95% CI, 2.6%-3.3%) in postguideline year 1, by 8.7% (95% CI, 8.3%-9.2%) in postguideline year 2, and by 9.7% (95% CI, 9.2%-10.3%) in postguideline year 3 than the preguideline pattern-based estimates. The magnitude of the postguideline departures from the preguideline pattern varied by several clinical characteristics (chronic pain, recent opioid exposure, anxiety disorder, and mood disorder). The largest departure was found among those with chronic pain, with postguideline prescribing being higher than estimated in postguideline year 2 (13.6%; 95% CI, 12.7%-14.6%) and postguideline year 3 (14.9%; 95% CI, 13.8%-16.0%).Conclusions and relevanceResults of this study showed increases in nonopioid pain medication prescribing after the release of the 2016 CDC guideline, suggesting that the guideline may be associated with an increase in guideline-concordant care, but additional studies are needed to understand the role of other secular changes in the opioid policy landscape and other sources of nonopioid medication use.

Project description:IMPORTANCE:Primary care clinicians find managing chronic pain challenging. Evidence of long-term efficacy of opioids for chronic pain is limited. Opioid use is associated with serious risks, including opioid use disorder and overdose. OBJECTIVE:To provide recommendations about opioid prescribing for primary care clinicians treating adult patients with chronic pain outside of active cancer treatment, palliative care, and end-of-life care. PROCESS:The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) updated a 2014 systematic review on effectiveness and risks of opioids and conducted a supplemental review on benefits and harms, values and preferences, and costs. CDC used the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) framework to assess evidence type and determine the recommendation category. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS:Evidence consisted of observational studies or randomized clinical trials with notable limitations, characterized as low quality using GRADE methodology. Meta-analysis was not attempted due to the limited number of studies, variability in study designs and clinical heterogeneity, and methodological shortcomings of studies. No study evaluated long-term (?1 year) benefit of opioids for chronic pain. Opioids were associated with increased risks, including opioid use disorder, overdose, and death, with dose-dependent effects. RECOMMENDATIONS:There are 12 recommendations. Of primary importance, nonopioid therapy is preferred for treatment of chronic pain. Opioids should be used only when benefits for pain and function are expected to outweigh risks. Before starting opioids, clinicians should establish treatment goals with patients and consider how opioids will be discontinued if benefits do not outweigh risks. When opioids are used, clinicians should prescribe the lowest effective dosage, carefully reassess benefits and risks when considering increasing dosage to 50 morphine milligram equivalents or more per day, and avoid concurrent opioids and benzodiazepines whenever possible. Clinicians should evaluate benefits and harms of continued opioid therapy with patients every 3 months or more frequently and review prescription drug monitoring program data, when available, for high-risk combinations or dosages. For patients with opioid use disorder, clinicians should offer or arrange evidence-based treatment, such as medication-assisted treatment with buprenorphine or methadone. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE:The guideline is intended to improve communication about benefits and risks of opioids for chronic pain, improve safety and effectiveness of pain treatment, and reduce risks associated with long-term opioid therapy.

Project description:ImportanceOpioid-related mortality and national prescribing guidelines have led to tapering of doses among patients prescribed long-term opioid therapy for chronic pain. There is limited information about risks related to tapering, including overdose and mental health crisis.ObjectiveTo assess whether there are associations between opioid dose tapering and rates of overdose and mental health crisis among patients prescribed stable, long-term, higher-dose opioids.Design, setting, and participantsRetrospective cohort study using deidentified medical and pharmacy claims and enrollment data from the OptumLabs Data Warehouse from 2008 to 2019. Adults in the US prescribed stable higher doses (mean ≥50 morphine milligram equivalents/d) of opioids for a 12-month baseline period with at least 2 months of follow-up were eligible for inclusion.ExposuresOpioid tapering, defined as at least 15% relative reduction in mean daily dose during any of 6 overlapping 60-day windows within a 7-month follow-up period. Maximum monthly dose reduction velocity was computed during the same period.Main outcomes and measuresEmergency or hospital encounters for (1) drug overdose or withdrawal and (2) mental health crisis (depression, anxiety, suicide attempt) during up to 12 months of follow-up. Discrete time negative binomial regression models estimated adjusted incidence rate ratios (aIRRs) of outcomes as a function of tapering (vs no tapering) and dose reduction velocity.ResultsThe final cohort included 113 618 patients after 203 920 stable baseline periods. Among the patients who underwent dose tapering, 54.3% were women (vs 53.2% among those who did not undergo dose tapering), the mean age was 57.7 years (vs 58.3 years), and 38.8% were commercially insured (vs 41.9%). Posttapering patient periods were associated with an adjusted incidence rate of 9.3 overdose events per 100 person-years compared with 5.5 events per 100 person-years in nontapered periods (adjusted incidence rate difference, 3.8 per 100 person-years [95% CI, 3.0-4.6]; aIRR, 1.68 [95% CI, 1.53-1.85]). Tapering was associated with an adjusted incidence rate of 7.6 mental health crisis events per 100 person-years compared with 3.3 events per 100 person-years among nontapered periods (adjusted incidence rate difference, 4.3 per 100 person-years [95% CI, 3.2-5.3]; aIRR, 2.28 [95% CI, 1.96-2.65]). Increasing maximum monthly dose reduction velocity by 10% was associated with an aIRR of 1.09 for overdose (95% CI, 1.07-1.11) and of 1.18 for mental health crisis (95% CI, 1.14-1.21).Conclusions and relevanceAmong patients prescribed stable, long-term, higher-dose opioid therapy, tapering events were significantly associated with increased risk of overdose and mental health crisis. Although these findings raise questions about potential harms of tapering, interpretation is limited by the observational study design.

Project description:AimsTo assess whether naloxone prescribing in clinical contexts targeted pain patients most at risk for opioid overdose.DesignA retrospective cohort study using data from the Health Facts Database.SettingOver 600 United States healthcare facilities.ParticipantsThree patient groups were followed for 2 years during 2009 to 2017: individuals with shoulder or long bone fractures (n = 252 424), chronic pain syndrome (CPS) (n = 76 141), or non-traumatic low back pain (n = 792 956) who received an opioid prescription. Groups were chosen based on previous work.MeasurementsThe outcome was opioid overdose identified by International Classification of Diseases codes (ICDs) and the primary predictor was number of naloxone prescriptions identified by National Drug Codes (NDCs).FindingsOpioid overdoses occurred among 0.16% of fracture patients (average follow-up time to overdose [AFU] = 240 days), 1.28% of CPS patients (AFU = 244 days), and 0.30% low back pain patients (AFU = 264 days). A total of 58 083 bone fracture patients received naloxone prescriptions, and naloxone prescription was associated with subsequent opioid overdose (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.87, 95% CI = 1.68-2.09), and number of subsequent overdoses (incidence rate ratio [IRR] = 1.89, 95% CI = 1.69-2.12). A total of 19 529 CPS patients received naloxone prescriptions, and naloxone prescription was associated with subsequent opioid overdose (HR = 1.69, 95% CI = 1.61-1.78) and number of subsequent overdoses (IRR = 1.74, 95% CI = 1.67-1.83). A total of 110 608 low back pain patients received naloxone prescriptions, and naloxone prescription was associated with subsequent opioid overdose (HR = 1.33, 95% CI = 1.27-1.40) and number of subsequent overdoses (IRR = 1.35, 95% CI = 1.29-1.41).ConclusionsReceiving a naloxone prescription appears to be associated with increased risk of subsequent opioid overdose among patients with acute and chronic pain, suggesting prescribers often identify patients most in need of naloxone.

Dataset Information

Attitudes Toward Naloxone Prescribing in Clinical Settings: A Qualitative Study of Patients Prescribed High Dose Opioids for Chronic Non-Cancer Pain.

Background

Objective

Design

Participants

Approach

Key results

Conclusions

Publications

Attitudes Toward Naloxone Prescribing in Clinical Settings: A Qualitative Study of Patients Prescribed High Dose Opioids for Chronic Non-Cancer Pain.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets